It comes at the end of an episode that, for all intents and purposes, is pure setup. Spike (James Marsters) lounges morosely in his crypt, harmless after having a chip installed in his brain that prevents him from hurting humans. Buffy (Sarah Michelle Gellar) kicks down his door and announces that she’s done with him. She’s killing him once and for all.
… %!s()
“Do it,” Spike says. “End my torment.” It’s standard Spike melodrama. As Buffy gears up to stake him, she holds back, and Spike kisses her. They stare at each other in shock, and Buffy does the unthinkable. She kisses him again and tells him that she wants him. Spike says that he’s in love with her. And then he wakes up, horrified. “Oh God, no. Please, no.” Roll credits.
It’s a dream sequence that foreshadows much of Spike and Buffy’s dynamic, which goes to some of the darkest places in Buffy the Vampire Slayer and rarely runs both ways.
26 years ago, “Out of My Mind” aired on The WB. Written by Rebecca Rand Kirshner and directed by David Grossman, it’s the fourth episode of the fifth season, and it lays the groundwork for many plot threads explored in the coming episodes.
What is “Out of My Mind” about?
Image: The WB
Despite the Spike and Buffy kicker, the episode is about Buffy and Riley (Marc Blucas), her college boyfriend. At the start, Riley interrupts Buffy’s patrolling, recklessly killing vampires as he tries to prove his strength. Spike also crashes the patrol, establishing the trio dynamic at the core of the episode.
Later, Buffy learns that Riley’s at risk for a heart attack due to the drugs he’s been fed by The Initiative, which make him stronger than a regular human. While Buffy tries to find a way to help him, Riley goes into hiding. She reaches out to everyone to help track him down, including Spike, whom she bribes. But Spike, of course, takes the money and kidnaps the doctor who was meant to help Riley. He tries to force the doctor to remove the inhibitor in his brain.
It all leads to a confrontation between Spike, Buffy, and Riley, with Spike learning that his plan failed, and the chip is still in his head. He has no way of sating his desire to kill the Slayer. Meanwhile, the cracks in Buffy and Riley’s relationship start to show.
This is one of Riley’s showcase episodes, and it finds him at his most grating. After searching for Riley for half the episode, Buffy finds him punching rocks in a cave (literally). Their tense exchanges pave the way for their breakup and for Riley’s departure from the show. He tells Buffy that he’s too normal for her. Buffy replies that if she wanted to date a superpowered guy, she would just date Spike (Ha!).
Beyond the kiss, the episode quietly lays out key pieces of the season, among them: Riley’s insecurity, Joyce’s collapse at breakfast that doctors can’t explain, Spike’s slow turn into one of Buffy’s allies, and Willow’s overreliance on magic. But it saves its best for the end, with the series committing to the long-simmering tension between Spike and Buffy, one that writers doled out patiently.
Spike, defanged
Image: 20th Century Fox
In “Out of My Mind,” Spike is at his most lovelorn and pathetic. He’s also at his funniest. "I will know your blood, Slayer. I will make your neck my chalice and drink deep,” he says into the night, only to fall into an open grave. Unable to kill humans, Spike spends his free time watching Dawson’s Creek. (“Oh, Pacey, you blind idiot. Can’t you see she doesn’t love you?”)
Spike becomes a regular in season 5, with this episode introducing his most enduring version. The episode's final twist reveals that Spike’s series-long obsession with Buffy has been more complicated than plain murderous rage. On a 2008 Buffy forum thread, fans recalled their reactions when first watching the kiss, with most describing shock that the show had brought the subtext between Buffy and Spike to the surface.
Series writer David Fury revealed that the moment when Buffy learns of Spike’s feelings 10 episodes later (in “Crush”) developed unexpectedly. In the writers’ room, they simply wanted other characters to learn of Spike’s feelings. “We wound up tipping our hand a little bit. I’d said, ‘This should be the episode where people find out about Spike being in love,’ and it then progressed into Buffy finding out, which was something we were saving for later,” he said in an interview with BBC Cult.
“It turned out to be a good play because we were able to take them to interesting places throughout the rest of the season.”
In hindsight, Spike and Buffy’s first kiss is a good representation of the full arc of their relationship. It’s not a real kiss; it’s a fantasy, one largely projected by Spike. It marked the start of the pair’s complicated dynamic and hinted at where their story would end up: Spike would always love Buffy, but Buffy would always remain emotionally at arm's length. %!s()
The world’s largest glacier is melting much faster and could add twice as much to global sea levels as previously expected over the next century.
New research published this week by a team of glaciologists has found that the Thwaites glacier in West Antarctica is losing mass rapidly because warm seawater is pushing underneath it and melting its core. This could add 1.2 inches (30mm) to water levels even if global warming does not accelerate as predicted.
…
Recommended Stories
list of 4 items
list 1 of 4The Nepal floods question: When the Himalayas collapse, who gets warned?
list 2 of 4India to supply Nepal electricity after floods wrecked hydropower projects
list 3 of 4El Nino reaches super status: Where will it bring rain, drought and heat?
list 4 of 4‘The drought has left its mark’: Slovenia’s potato lovers lament low yields
end of list
The findings, published in the journal Nature Communications, add to a growing body of evidence that shows that the glacier, which has been receding for decades, is now losing mass even faster than scientists thought.
Researchers at the University of California in the United States collaborated with NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory for the study. Here’s what we know about the findings:
This 2022 satellite image from the European Space Agency, annotated by marine geophysicist Robert Larter, shows the positions of research vessels RVIB Nathaniel B Palmer and the RV Araon on ice shelf areas extending from Thwaites glacier in Antarctica. ‘EIS’ indicates the Eastern Ice Shelf, where research was conducted in 2020, and which recently published studies have suggested is likely to break up sometime within the next two decades [File: Robert Larter/British Antarctic Survey, ESA via AP]
What is Thwaites and why is it important?
Nicknamed the “Doomsday Glacier”, Thwaites is the largest glacier on Earth, spanning an area of around 192,000sq km (74,130sq miles) or roughly the size of Senegal – and larger than the US state of Florida.
It is located on the Walgreen Coast of Marie Byrd Land in remote western Antarctica and forms part of the great West Antarctic ice sheet, which includes other glaciers and is 14 times the size of Thwaites.
The glacier was first mapped in 1947 and is named after the late American glaciologist Fredrik T Thwaites, although he never visited it.
In the 1980s, scientists discovered that Thwaites is melting rapidly and have closely monitored its melting process as concerns have grown ever since.
Because it is so big, the glacier’s collapse would sharply raise global sea levels by a catastrophic amount – although researchers don’t project that will happen for many decades, or even a few centuries.
Together, Thwaites and other glaciers such as the Pine Island glacier – an ice stream in West Antarctica which flows into Pine Island Bay in the Amundsen Sea – act as a barrier that holds back the vast and vulnerable West Antarctic ice sheet. If melted, the ice sheet could cause many coastal cities to be submerged around the world.
At present, ice loss from Thwaites contributes around four percent of all global sea-level rise. Studies have calculated that the glacier has lost more than 1,000 billion tonnes of ice since 2000, and continues to lose 50 billion tonnes of ice per year.
Why is the glacier melting?
The main drivers are warm ocean water which is actively melting the Thwaites glacier from underneath it, according to several studies.
Ocean warming is caused by human-induced climate change, in particular from the burning of polluting fossil fuels.
In a 2019 study, the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory discovered a giant underwater cavity beneath the Thwaites glacier that spread across an area two-thirds the size of Manhattan, which researchers said was likely speeding up the glacier’s thinning.
Rising temperatures have caused glaciers to lose about five percent of their ice since 2000, according to the European Space Agency.
What has the latest research found?
Thwaites could add as much as 1.2 inches (30mm) – double the current estimates – to sea levels by 2100, even without any additional global warming, the study found.
The researchers said they used new computer models that paint a clearer picture of melting activity under the threatened glacier at its grounding line – the boundary where it transitions from resting entirely on bedrock to spreading out over the sea in the form of ice shelves.
Where other ice sheet models conclude a grounding line is fixed, the scientists said they developed the concept of a broader “grounding zone” instead. In this scenario, seawater lifts and lowers the ice in a “tidal pumping” process that allows warm water to reach “deep underneath the ice sheets and causing vigorous melting,” lead author Mattia Poinelli, a project scientist at UCLA, told media.
That melting process is accelerating the Thwaites’ “unpinning” from the Mouginot Ridge – an important underwater bedrock currently stabilising the glacier from below. The study concluded that there is a 60 percent chance that Thwaites could unpin from the ridge by the end of the century.
However, experts say more studies are needed to accurately predict the volume of Thwaites’ ice loss.
In separate findings, scientists from the British Antarctic Survey concluded that Thwaites will continue losing ice for at least the next 150 years, even under the most extreme ocean cooling conditions imaginable.
The study, which used computer simulation models that examined the melting effects of the ocean over the next century and a half, was published in Geophysical Research Letters in July. %!s()
'Life on the line' for Dubois & Wardley in rematch
Five months after producing one of the most dramatic heavyweight fights of the year, Daniel Dubois and Fabio Wardley will renew their rivalry in London on Saturday.
… %!s()
Dubois, 29, makes the first defence of his WBO world title after climbing off the canvas twice to stop Wardley in the 11th round of their thrilling encounter in Manchester in May.
Ipswich's Wardley, 31, suffered the first defeat of his professional career that night but immediately activated his rematch clause in a bid to reclaim his world title.
With 41 knockouts between them in 43 combined victories, another explosive contest could be in store at the O2 Arena.
Can Dubois repeat his victory or will Wardley gain revenge and become a two-time world champion?
BBC Sport spoke to figures from across the boxing world to get their predictions.
Barry Jones - former super-featherweight world champion
"It's very hard to pick against the winner of the first fight when there's a rematch. Dubois was so composed, even after being knocked down twice. Wardley can knock out any person at any time, that's what took him from no experience on the white-collar scene to a world champion. You know what you will get with him.
"Dubois' issue has never been power, strength or bravery. It's when he has to think and can't find an answer and the panic occurs. If you whack him with big shots, he knows he can whack you back and hurt you.
"When he was knocked down, his corner played a great role to keep him calm and he knew what he had to do - hit Wardley clean and often.
"I think it will be the same result but Dubois might win a lot earlier this time. Wardley might knock him down and it will still be a thrilling fight while it lasts, but I think it will be Dubois inside five rounds."
Prediction - Dubois
Ade Oladipo - DAZN presenter
"Repeat or revenge? I guess you have to go for repeat. Wardley had his moments in the first fight but Dubois was so dominant. Aside from the two knockdowns, Dubois was bullish, strong and aggressive. Getting up from those two knockdowns showed a lot as well.
"So I favour Dubois. We know Wardley has the knockout power but I think Dubois is the best heavyweight in the world - with Oleksandr Usyk on an island by himself and we'll wait to see what he will do next.
"Dubois is number one - with Wardley top five in the world - and I think he will take a lot of confidence knowing a) he is world champion and b) it's a very quick turnaround for Wardley who took a beating in the first fight five months ago.
"If I had to put money on someone, I'm putting all my chips on Dubois getting the stoppage again."
Prediction - Dubois
Johnny Fisher - British heavyweight
"It's a great fight. Credit to Wardley for going back in there after taking some serious, serious damage and still standing - unbelievable tenacity from the man. And he can hurt Dubois - we saw that in the first minute or so of the fight.
"For me, though, the smart money would be on another Dubois victory."
Prediction - Dubois
Richard Riakporhe - British heavyweight champion
"It's a fascinating fight. Dubois has tremendous power and is dangerous at any moment, but I slightly favour Wardley. I think his resilience, work rate and ability to find a way through tough moments could make the difference.
"I'd give Wardley a 60-40 edge, but I wouldn't be surprised either way."
Prediction - Wardley
Figure caption,
Dubois v Wardley: Relive the First Fight
Liam Gough – boxing content creator and BBC Sounds' Punch Perfect host
"I think Daniel Dubois will come into this fight with enormous confidence, particularly after the way he came through two early knockdowns and went on to dominate thereafter. I struggle to see what Fabio Wardley can do differently this time to change the outcome.
"I expect Dubois to be even more aggressive and menacing from the opening bell. His jab will be sharp, but what makes him so dangerous is that he has more than just a big right hand in his arsenal.
"Wardley is a huge puncher himself, but I believe Dubois has more dimensions to his game, with a Plan B and Plan C if things don't go exactly as planned. I don't think we're going to see a long feeling-out process here.
"Dubois will look to impose himself immediately, put Wardley under pressure and take control of the fight early. This could be explosive from the very first exchange, so don't blink - because I don't think this one is going to last very long."
Prediction - Dubois
Carl Frampton - former two-weight world champion
"I think it's going to be a repeat scenario, and it may even end earlier. I'm not trying to be disrespectful to Wardley but when you're involved in those types of fights and are on the end of a beating like he was, sometimes you're not the same when you come back.
"His nose doesn't look like it's recovered. The only way for Wardley to win is to throw the kitchen sink at Dubois for the first three or four rounds. That gives him a chance. But the longer it goes on, Dubois' jab will do damage and Wardley's nose will be damaged again.
"Wardley is extremely tough but that can sometimes be your downfall. We've seen it in the last fight and in his previous fights. He's been in some wars and that takes something away from you.
"I see Dubois winning between rounds seven and 10."
Prediction - Dubois
Emily Eubank - BBC Sounds' Punch Perfect host
"I'd love Fabio to level the score so we get a trilogy, and he certainly can, but it'll be a tough night's work. My head says Daniel will be too confident and too calculated this time around for Fabio to pose much of a threat, and he'll get taken out again. I think Daniel will pick up where he left off, making it an easier and quicker win than the first fight. But let's see!"
Prediction - Dubois
Darren Barker - former middleweight world champion
"The first fight was called 'don't blink' and I think it should be a legal requirement that you do not blink for this rematch either. It has every single component required to be an absolute barnstormer.
"Wardley was second best last time. He had his moments but he is going to have to up his game. Dubois' confidence now will take him into another stratosphere and makes him a very tough man to beat. I feel his jab and his know-how, and the new-found self belief, will be the difference.
"But - and this is a big but - I'm not completely ruling out Wardley."
Prediction - Dubois
Michael 'Venom' Page - former UFC fighter
"It's interesting because Fabio Wardley landed a big shot very early in the first fight and I think weirdly enough that earlier success messed him up. What he ended up doing was button bashing the same shot he landed right at the beginning and Dubois kept anticipating it after that. Wardley didn't adjust and I'm surprised he didn't.
"If he's able to be smarter, land those kind of shots but also find a few other angles, that's a dangerous fight Wardley can win. But Dubois is a beast and will learn really well, I was impressed in that fight he learned while being hurt which is difficult. He's an aggressive person, a big power puncher. Some small adjustments and Wardley can turn it around but I will have to put my money on Dubois."
Prediction - Dubois
Jeamie TKV - British heavyweight
"My prediction for this is a little bit biased because we are in the same gym so I'm Team Wardley no matter what, even though I've known Dubois since he was 15.
"I do believe Wardley has the capability to get the win this time. It should be a great fight and I hope both men put on a great display for everyone to see and go home happy to their families."
Prediction - Wardley
Paul Smith - former world title challenger
"I fancy Dubois between the middle to late rounds. I think Wardley will come out fast and put it on him and that's his best chance. I wouldn't be surprised if he won early, but I think Dubois has his number.
"Wardley took a lot in that fight and that took a lot out of him. I don't see him trying to box Dubois, the only chance he has is to jump him on early. I think Dubois will match him and weather the storm and use his feet like he did last time to nullify whatever Wardley does."
Prediction - Dubois
Nick Peet – journalist and broadcaster
"I've never gotten a Dubois pick wrong. I am on record as saying he would be a world champion long before he achieved it, yet had him losing to Joe Joyce and twice against Oleksandr Usyk. However, I did predict he'd stop both Anthony Joshua and Fabio Wardley back in May.
"He's a much better mover and more agile than he's given credit for and now has a level of experience you can't manufacture, as we saw when he wisely took a knee in the first fight.
"In a battle between a puncher and a boxer (who can also punch), always go with the more accomplished fighter. Dubois by TKO, likely a little earlier than last time - as Wardley's corner won't be so brave second time around."
Prediction - Dubois
"It's the rematch of 2026 after one of the greatest heavyweight fights we've seen on our shores. The first encounter had everything – thrills and spills, blood, brutality and boxing at its very best.
"Will it be repeat or revenge? Dubois is the world champion and favourite going in, but can Wardley find the power to keep Dubois down this time? Or does Dubois' confidence and power carry him through?
"Both are predicting wins within five rounds. I see this as a knockout, but I'm not sure which way."
Prediction – 50-50
Tony Bellew - former cruiserweight world champion
"I'm going to be the difference. I am going to back Fabio Wardley by knockout within six rounds. Yep, I said. I'm going for Fab within six."
As the growth of artificial intelligence accelerates, it is already posing significant challenges to society. Companies have started laying off workers whose jobs AI models can now perform. The expansion of data centres has spiked energy consumption and increased the carbon footprint. AI agents are being used by malicious actors to automate the spread of disinformation. Algorithms are demonstrating bias, raising concerns about flawed application and discrimination by human-related technologies that use them. AI is being used to identify targets in warfare, leading to greater loss of human life.
… %!s()
These are complex problems that demand serious regulatory attention. Yet, today’s dominant AI policy conversations are rarely grounded in these immediate challenges.
Instead, the global discourse has been swept by apocalyptic prophecies. We see this doomsday narrative promoted by some within the AI industry and echoed at the highest levels of decision-making: from lawmakers like Senator Bernie Sanders championing bans on superintelligence, to cautionary messages from the Vatican, to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton calling open-source AI a real threat.
It is entirely reasonable for global leaders to take these industry-amplified warnings seriously. However, this chorus of influential voices sounding the alarm about AI “existential risk” has inadvertently pulled our focus away from the multiple crises AI has caused, already affecting labour, the environment and communications.
Worse still, the public panic is being weaponised to enforce a modern regime of digital colonisation – the concentration of power in the hands of a few AI corporations in a handful of countries.
The doomsday narrative provides the perfect justification for regulations that would target open-source AI models, which are free or cheaper to use and allow users to modify them to fit their needs. The logic presented to lawmakers is simple and seductive: if advanced AI is a potential weapon of mass destruction, it can only be developed by a trusted few.
Under the banner of “safety”, tech giants are attempting to write the rules to protect their monopolies by shutting down competition from smaller, cheaper open-source AI models.
This directly mirrors historical colonial tactics: preventing local industry from developing to force total reliance on the “empire’s” exports.
Currently, the entire globe is dependent on these frontier AI systems developed by tech giants, especially the Global South, which lacks the resources to create its own AI models from scratch, now costing upwards of $100m in compute power alone.
The problem with using the dominant AI models is not only that they are costly, but also that they often fail in local contexts. Consider Kenya’s recent rollout of the AI-driven Social Health Authority (SHA) system. Because the imported model was built on assumptions that did not accurately capture the reality of Kenya’s vast informal economy, the system failed spectacularly, systematically overestimating incomes and overcharging the poorest citizens for healthcare premiums.
To be effective, frontier AI systems must be adapted to local data. Since building them from scratch is financially impossible for most, open-source AI serves as the only viable bridge for local innovators. More importantly, preserving open-source AI allows the Global South to step off the West’s treadmill of human-mimicking chatbots.
Developing nations do not necessarily need conversational AI systems; they need AI that can help tackle development challenges in areas such as energy, healthcare, agriculture, manufacturing and climate mitigation.
If we crush open-source AI out of a disproportionate fear of AI agents, developing nations lose the main mechanism they have to build their own sovereign tech ecosystems for development.
Furthermore, AI monopolies lock in users in a cycle of data extraction and severe cognitive dependency. We are already witnessing the early stages of cognitive degradation as users increasingly outsource their critical thinking, creativity, and agency to frontier AI systems.
This dependency creates a feedback loop where our growing reliance fuels more data extraction, which in turn builds even more capable systems that strip away human agency and centralise absolute control.
While the Global South is uniquely vulnerable due to historical inequities, this dependency traps anyone not at the frontier. Even wealthy nations in the Global North face the exact same threat of lock-in and extraction.
So what is the solution? Calls for AI bans are certainly not. Abandoning AI would mean letting go of a technology uniquely positioned to accelerate the discovery of new drugs and new solutions to the energy and climate crises. There is already evidence of this with the development of tools such as AlphaFold and MOFSeq.
Banning open-source AI models is also a bad choice. Safety does not negate equitable access to AI. We can, and must, fund robust safety research and implement rigorous testing for near-term breaches. But we cannot allow the fear of hypothetical futures to justify the deliberate consolidation of power in the present.
Safeguarding the future of AI means ensuring that its development is decentralised, transparent, and globally distributed. It means defending open-source innovation as a public good and a fundamental weapon against digital colonisation. It means proactively addressing the human cognitive toll of the technology, ensuring that AI serves to augment human intelligence rather than erode it. It means anchoring absolute accountability in humans, instead of anthropomorphising AI agents that possess no humanity.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.%!s()
Ukraine is facing increasing uncertainty over its ability to sustain the war against Russia as a series of moves by U.S. President Donald Trump has raised fresh questions about Washington's reliability as Kyiv's most important military partner.
… %!s()
Trump's agreement with Putin to ease sanctions for Russia to provide global markets with diesel, as well as restrictions on U.S. intelligence sharing with Ukrainian forces, has put President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in a difficult position as winter looms.
Higher diesel prices – essential to transporting goods and agricultural production – tend to drive up costs across the wider economy and fuel inflation. With November's U.S. midterm elections approaching, Trump is under pressure to bring fuel costs down.
But experts told CNBC that the diesel deal would deliver only a marginal financial benefit to Russia, and not move the needle much on global energy prices. Its wider political implications may be more significant, potentially reinforcing the Kremlin's belief that it can secure concessions from Washington without making compromises over Ukraine.
"Russia's main gain is political: Trump's decision eases sanctions pressure and undermines Western unity," Sergey Aleksashenko, senior research fellow and head of economics at the NEST Centre, told CNBC.
Diesel deal
Trump's agreement with Putin was for Russia to supply the global market with 4.8 million metric tons of diesel, the equivalent of about ten days of U.S. domestic demand, or about a single day of global demand. Experts say it will do little to affect prices.
"It does not even touch the sides – it is very, very small," Neil Atkinson, former head of the IEA's oil industry and markets division, told CNBC's "Squawk Box Europe" on Monday.
watch now
Aleksashenko estimated that the initial part of the phased agreement that covers 1.8 million metric tons of diesel could generate up to $1.25 billion in additional export revenue over three months, equivalent to around 1% of Russia's commodity export revenues during that period.
However, the benefit to Russia's federal budget would be substantially smaller, at less than $30 million per month, or under 0.07% of monthly federal revenues.
The deal was therefore unlikely to meaningfully strengthen Russia's war finances, Aleksashenko said. Instead, its main benefit to Moscow is political, because it eased sanctions pressure and undermined Western unity without requiring Putin to make concessions over Ukraine, he told CNBC.
The research fellow also argued that the additional Russian diesel entering global markets is not sufficient to produce a noticeable reduction in consumer fuel prices in the short term.
"Funding the war is currently Putin's priority, and he is prepared to increase that funding even if it means cutting all other expenditures," Aleksashenko added, pointing to Russia's draft budget for 2027.
The bigger problem for Ukraine
"Rather than encouraging compromise, the [diesel] deal likely boosts Moscow's belief that continued pressure will eventually yield further Western concessions," Maria Snegovaya, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told CNBC.
Speaking to reporters in Brussels on Friday, Zelenskyy also warned that the diesel agreement could set a precedent for further sanctions relief, while highlighting Ukraine's continued reliance on U.S. military technology and intelligence despite efforts to develop alternatives.
"Sanctions will be lifted after gas," Zelenskyy said. "They will be lifted on something else. Then this will come to the banking system, certain individuals, chemical industry."
Earlier this week, reports emerged that SpaceX's Starlink military application Starshield has been restricted in Ukraine. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk said in a post on X that the U.S. government and president were ultimately responsible for any curbs on the network.
The order to limit Starshield for Ukraine came from inside White House, according to a Reuters report citing three officials familiar with the matter. CNBC has contacted the White House for comment.
The consequences were felt sharply in Ukraine. As Starlink's speed limits were lowered, Ukraine became incapable of shooting down some Russian drones. This week, Ukraine also did not receive advanced warning from partners of incoming ballistic missiles, resulting in civilian deaths, according to Ukrainian officials.
According to Serhiy Derkach, Ukraine's first deputy minister for recovery, infrastructure and transport, Starlink restrictions emboldened Russia to intensify attacks on Ukraine.
"With U.S. limiting the use of Starlinks on the battlefield, Russia feels that this is their moment to try and inflict even more pain and suffering on Ukraine's civilian infrastructure," Derkach told CNBC on Friday.
Russian authorities didn't respond to multiple CNBC requests for comment.
A political blow
The diesel deal was a political and moral blow to Ukraine and the Western coalition, according to Snegovaya. The U.S. sanctions exemption, which runs until April 2027, could facilitate Russian diesel exports beyond the initially announced shipment, potentially increasing Moscow's economic gains, she warned.
"If [the] White House uses its military and intelligence support as leverage to constrain Ukraine's strikes, the implications could become far more significant," Snegovaya said, adding that Ukraine's attacks on Russian oil refineries have inflicted substantial economic costs on Moscow.
Such a move could have far greater consequences for Ukraine's efforts to weaken Russia's war economy, she added.
Read more of CNBC's Russia-Ukraine coverage:
Zelenskyy accuses Russia of violating Trump’s energy ceasefire as drone attacks continue
Trump declares ‘energy ceasefire’ between Russia and Ukraine; Zelenskyy is waiting for details
Ukraine’s surprise robot offensive exposes a vulnerability in Putin’s war machine
Putin orders army expansion as Zelenskyy warns Russia preparing to deploy 10,000 North Korean troops
Russia ‘truly’ appreciates U.S. invite to G20 summit — but hasn’t decided if Putin will go
Zelenskyy says Ukraine ready for ‘energy ceasefire,’ calls for trilateral meeting with Putin, Trump
Putin floats ‘chance’ at peace with Ukraine as NATO chief warns Russia is becoming ‘increasingly reckless’
Russia preparing ‘massive strikes’ on Ukraine’s energy sites after deadliest attack of the year
Russia's economy has defied the skeptics. Cracks are getting harder to hide
'Winter is coming’: Ukraine fears its toughest test since Russia’s full-scale invasion
The diesel deal further undermines Washington's credibility as a mediator in the eyes of Ukraine and its European allies, as it appears to reward Moscow without securing concessions while increasing pressure on Kyiv, she said.
The problem, Snegovaya said, is that achieving military autonomy for Europe and Ukraine is extremely difficult in the short term, and Europe has been slow to develop the necessary capabilities.
"Almost five years into the war, Ukraine and its European partners remain heavily dependent on the U.S. in critical areas, like intelligence and missile defense. These dependencies are unlikely to be overcome during the remaining years of the Trump administration," she told CNBC. %!s()
Image: The WB
Image: 20th Century Fox
