On Thursday President Donald Trump continued to signal positive feelings about a future relationship with Russia and Putin, telling reporters that he’d like to see Russia invited back in to join the The Group of Seven major economies, or G7, which until 2014 was the G8 when Russia was included.
“I’d love to have them back. I think it was a mistake to throw them out. Look, it’s not a question of liking Russia or not liking Russia. It was the G8,” Trump said from the Oval Office upon announcing new US reciprocal tariffs.
“I said, ‘What are you doing? You guys – all you’re talking about is Russia and they should be sitting at the table.’ And he then added, “I think Putin would love to be back.”
The G7 countries are Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and the US. In 2014 these nations decided to expel Russia over the annexation of Crimea, but Moscow pointed out that Crimeans overwhelmingly voted to become part of the Russian Federation after a popular referendum.
Another highlight from the Oval Office press conference was when the president called on China and Russia to join the United States in agreeing to cut their enormous defense budgets in half. He said in the context of also urging the three major powers to restart nuclear arms control talks.
“One of the first meetings I want to have is with President Xi of China, President Putin of Russia. And I want to say, ‘let’s cut our military budget in half.’ And we can do that. And I think we’ll be able to,” Trump declared.
According to an Associated Press summary of the comments:
Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump lamented the hundreds of billions of dollars being invested in rebuilding the nation’s nuclear deterrent and said he hopes to gain commitments from the U.S. adversaries to cut their own spending.
“There’s no reason for us to be building brand new nuclear weapons, we already have so many,” Trump said. “You could destroy the world 50 times over, 100 times over. And here we are building new nuclear weapons, and they’re building nuclear weapons.”
“We’re all spending a lot of money that we could be spending on other things that are actually, hopefully much more productive,” Trump continued.
Russia and the US have long had the world’s biggest nuclear arsenals, but China has in the last ten years been making strides to greatly bolster its strategic capabilities, which has alarmed the West. Trump warned that any future nuclear use by a global power is “going to be probably oblivion.”
Likely Moscow and Beijing will receive these words positively as an overture, especially on the nuclear front, but neither will actually heed Trump’s call to pledge a 50% reduction in defense spending – especially when Russia is at war in Ukraine and under US-EU sanctions. They might tell the Trump White House instead: ‘your move first’.
February 14, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Militarism | China, Russia, United States |
1 Comment
Cites his childhood polio experience as rationale
Senator Mitch McConnell was the sole Republican to vote against RFK, Jr.’s confirmation as HHS Secretary. As he explained in his statement.
I’m a survivor of childhood polio. In my lifetime, I’ve watched vaccines save millions of lives from devastating diseases across America and around the world. I will not condone the re-litigation of proven cures, and neither will millions of Americans who credit their survival and quality of life to scientific miracles… a record of trafficking in dangerous conspiracy theories and eroding trust in public health institutions does not entitle Mr. Kennedy to lead these important efforts.
A public heath report titled “Incidence of Poliomyelitis in the United States in 1944” reported an above average national incidence of polio that year, with a total of 19,053 cases. However, no outbreak in Alabama was noted, indicating that the two-year-old Mitch McConnell was an exceedingly unlucky isolated case.
Alone among infectious diseases, polio only became a serious problem in the 20th century. The conventional explanation is that—while every other infectious disease was dramatically reduced by improvements in public sanitation—the increasing availability of clean drinking water apparently resulted in fewer children being exposed to the polio virus during their early childhood years (between 6 months and 5 years) when the disease is typically very mild. This, in turn, resulted in fewer mothers acquiring immunity and passing it on to their nursing infants.
The experience of the American South seemed to support this theory. Without widespread electrification or water filtration systems, the South had poor sanitation, which led to mild infant infection and widespread adult immunity. This could explain why the region saw no major polio epidemics until the late 1940s.
As Senator McConnell described his case in his memoir: “The disease struck and weakened my left leg, the worst of it my quadriceps.”
Given that he was two years old at the time—when the disease is usually very mild—and given that it was apparently an isolated case in Alabama that year, his was an especially bad piece of luck.
I wonder how the local doctor in Five Points, Alabama—which currently has a population of 114— obtained a definitive diagnosis in 1944. Laboratory testing for polio was not widespread prior to 1958.
February 13, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | United States |
Leave a comment
US President Donald Trump’s administration has frozen all funding to the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), several media outlets reported on Wednesday. The move is said to have caused a “bloodbath” within the organization, leaving it unable to pay staff or fulfill financial commitments.
The NED, established in 1983, is officially a nonprofit organization that provides grants to support democratic initiatives worldwide. However, over the years, it has faced allegations of covertly influencing political outcomes, with critics arguing that it has taken over covert functions previously handled by the CIA, particularly those aimed at overthrowing foreign governments.
Earlier this month, Elon Musk, who heads Trump’s new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and has been in charge of finding ways to cut federal spending, singled out NED, calling it a ”scam” and an “evil organization” that needs to be dissolved. Since then, the organization has reportedly been “under siege” from Musk’s DOGE, according to Free Press.
“It’s been a bloodbath,” one NED worker told the outlet, explaining that the organization has been unable to meet payroll and pay basic overhead expenses.
The NED has faced longstanding criticism over its role in supporting political movements to undermine sovereign governments. The Center for Renewing America, a think tank founded by Russell Vought, Trump’s director of the Office of Management and Budget, released a policy paper on February 7, accusing the NED of acting as the “tip of the proverbial spear for heightened CIA and State Department efforts to foster political revolution in Ukraine.”
The report claimed that the NED had funneled tens of millions of dollars to a myriad of Ukrainian political entities and anti-Russian interests and “advanced both the ‘Orange Revolution’ and ‘Maidan Revolution’ that paved the way for the current Ukraine-Russia war.”
The NED has also faced accusations of sponsoring “color revolutions” in Georgia and Kyrgyzstan and of funding opposition groups in Belarus, Serbia, and Egypt.
“The reasons for defunding NED are as numerous as they are imperative,” Vought’s think tank wrote, listing things like “Ukraine warmongering” and “Middle East meddling” as the most clear and pressing rationales for dismantling the agency.
The NED funding freeze comes as part of broader measures by the Trump administration to cut foreign spending. This has already included a crackdown on the US Agency for International Development (USAID), Washington’s primary vehicle for funding political projects abroad. Trump earlier called for the agency to be shut down, claiming it is run by “radical lunatics.”
February 13, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Corruption, Deception | NED, United States |
1 Comment
America has just took the exit ramp off the long, failed highway of disease management towards a better direction to ensure our healthcare system actually promotes health.
How exactly?
We now see the first vestiges of a blueprint emerging in the form of President Trumps first Executive Order with Robert F. Kennedy Jr officially at the helm of U.S. Health and Human Service.
The order, titled Establishing the President’s Make America Healthy Again Commission is now the founding document outlining where we are at, where we need to go, and what directions need to be aimed at to get there.
What’s clear during the first read-through of the document is that the days of petty pot shots and baseless smears upon RFK Jr. the public endured for years, up through and during his confirmation process, are over.
The adults are in the room and are stating their intentions to go to work on the ideals that propelled both Trump and RFK Jr. to populist symbols of change.
The order directs all departments and agencies to “aggressively combat… reversing “… rising rates of mental health disorders, obesity, diabetes, and other chronic diseases.”
Federal funding will now prioritize “gold-standard research on the root causes of why Americans are getting sick.”
The work extends beyond the medical space.
“… agencies shall work with farmers to ensure that United States food is the healthiest, most abundant, and most affordable in the world” states the order. A revolutionary act in and of itself.
The newly-formed council will advise the President on how best to exercise his authority to address the childhood chronic disease crisis.
In order to do this, the council and federal funds will “study the scope of the childhood chronic disease crisis and any potential contributing causes, including the American diet, absorption of toxic material, medical treatments, lifestyle, environmental factors, Government policies, food production techniques, electromagnetic radiation, and corporate influence or cronyism”
Of particular note regarding the assessment and strategy of the council’s assessment and strategy will be the following:
(iii) assess the prevalence of and threat posed by the prescription of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, stimulants, and weight-loss drugs;
(iv) identify and report on best practices for preventing childhood health issues, including through proper nutrition and the promotion of healthy lifestyles;
(v) evaluate the effectiveness of existing educational programs with regard to nutrition, physical activity, and mental health for children;
(vi) identify and evaluate existing Federal programs and funding intended to prevent and treat childhood health issues for their scope and effectiveness;
(vii) ensure transparency of all current data and unpublished analyses related to the childhood chronic disease crisis, consistent with applicable law
The council will also tackle conflicts of interest that have long-hurt public trust – a herculean task in the shadow of the failed pandemic response.
To those ends, a framework for transparency and ethics will be created to review industry-funded projects. Enforcement of this process will be key for its success.
The hopeful work to shift the weary direction of American health is just starting.
Per this Executive Order, an official strategy shall be delivered in 180 days to “address appropriately restructuring the Federal Government’s response to the childhood chronic disease crisis, including by ending Federal practices that exacerbate the health crisis or unsuccessfully attempt to address it, and by adding powerful new solutions that will end childhood chronic disease.”
The public is watching every moment and at every step of this process. Action and accountability will be key.
February 13, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science | United States |
Leave a comment
Let’s be clear: the forced displacement of Palestinians is not a new idea. US President Donald Trump’s latest proposal to take “long-term ownership” of Gaza, to “clean out” the “mess”, and to turn it into a “Riviera of the Middle East” is just the latest iteration of efforts aimed at ethnically cleansing Palestinians from their homeland.
What makes Trump’s comments dangerous is not the immediate threat of US military intervention in Gaza followed by the expulsion of its 2.2 million residents. The real danger lies elsewhere.
First, Israel may interpret Trump’s words as a green light to push Palestinians out of Gaza or the West Bank. Second, the US could tacitly endorse another Israeli offensive under the guise of fulfilling the president’s wishes. Third, Trump’s remarks suggest his foreign policy on Palestine will remain largely unchanged from his predecessor’s.
Some Democrats have seized this moment to criticise Arab and Palestinian Americans who voted for Trump or abstained from supporting Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris in the last elections. However, the idea of ethnic cleansing was already being floated during the Biden administration.
While then-Secretary of State Antony Blinken reiterated that “Palestinian civilians… must not be pressed to leave Gaza,” Biden created the conditions for displacement through unconditional military support for Israel. This allowed one of the most devastating wars in modern Middle Eastern history to unfold.
Just days into the war, on 13 October 2023, Jordan’s King Abdullah II warned Blinken in Amman against any Israeli attempt to “forcibly displace Palestinians from all Palestinian territories or cause their internal displacement.”
The latter displacement became a reality as most of northern Gaza’s population was crammed into overcrowded refugee encampments in central and southern Gaza, where conditions have been and remain inhumane for over 16 months.
At the same time, another displacement campaign is underway in the West Bank, particularly in its northern regions, accelerating in recent weeks. Thousands of Palestinian families have already been displaced in the Jenin governorate and other areas.
Despite this, the Biden administration has done little to pressure Israel to stop.
Arab concerns over Palestinian expulsion were real from the war’s outset. Almost every Arab leader raised the alarm, often repeatedly.
Egyptian President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi addressed the issue multiple times, warning of Israeli efforts – and possibly US involvement – in a “population transfer” scheme.
“What is happening now in Gaza is an attempt to force civilian residents to seek refuge and migrate to Egypt,” Al-Sisi stated, insisting that such an outcome “should not be accepted.”
Fifteen months later, under Trump, he repeated his rejection, vowing that Egypt would not participate in this “act of injustice.”
A Saudi statement was issued almost immediately after Trump doubled down on the idea during a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on 4 February. The Saudi Foreign Ministry went further than rejecting Trump’s “ownership” of Gaza but articulated a political discourse that summarised Riyadh’s, in fact, the Arab League’s position on Palestine.
“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs affirms that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s position on the establishment of a Palestinian state is firm and unwavering,” the statement said, adding that the Kingdom “also reaffirms its unequivocal rejection of any infringement on the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, whether through Israeli settlement policies, land annexation, or attempts to displace the Palestinian people from their land.”
The new US administration, however, seems oblivious to Palestinian history. Given the mass displacement of Palestinians in 1948, no Arab government – let alone the Palestinian leadership – would support another Israeli-US effort to ethnically cleanse millions into neighbouring states.
Beyond the immorality of expelling an indigenous population, history has shown that such actions destabilise the region for generations. The 1948 Nakba, which saw the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, ignited the Arab-Israeli conflict, whose repercussions continue today.
History also teaches us that the Nakba was not an isolated event. Israel has repeatedly attempted ethnic cleansing, starting with its intense attacks on Palestinian refugee camps in Gaza in the early 1950s, and ever since.
The 1967 war, known as the Naksa or “Setback,” led to the ethnic cleansing of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, both internally and externally. In the years that followed, various US-Israeli initiatives throughout the 1970s sought to relocate the Palestinian population to the Sinai desert. However, these efforts failed due to the steadfastness and collective resistance of the people of Gaza.
Trump’s so-called ‘humanitarian’ ethnic cleansing proposal will similarly go down in history as another failed attempt, particularly as Arab and international solidarity with the steadfast Palestinian people is stronger than it has been in years.
The key question now is whether Arabs and other supporters of Palestine worldwide will go beyond merely rejecting such sinister proposals and take the initiative to push for the restoration of the Palestinian homeland. This requires a justice-based international campaign, rooted in international law and driven by the aspirations of the Palestinian people themselves.
February 13, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | Human rights, Israel, Palestine, United States, Zionism |
1 Comment
Think thanks are making attempts to persuade the reinstated Donald Trump administration to take an iron fist approach to West Asia in light of news that US government bodies are making moves to begin pulling troops out.
The Vandenberg Coalition, an American neoconservative think tank headed by Elliott Abrams, a US politician who held foreign policy positions in the offices of presidents Ronald Reagan, George Bush, and Trump, published a report with their recommendations on how the 47th president should handle the region.
Mainly, the report seeks to have Trump’s administration ensure that the region remains in line with American interests by seeing to it that olive branches are not to be extended to nations like Iran, China, or Russia.
“To protect U.S. security and ensure America has the resources to deter and confront adversaries outside of the Middle East, we must implement new policies toward the region,” the report reads.
The think tank lays out multiple methods as to how the reinstated White House Administration should act towards all of the nations of West Asia, whether they house forces hostile to the US or are Gulf allies.
The report sees Iran as the major roadblock to expanding US power over the region. It calls the Islamic Republic “the greatest threat to American interests in the Middle East and the cause of most of the region’s security problems.”
The coalition calls on Trump to reinstate “maximum pressure” on the Islamic Republic in order to deter it from gaining influence.
On the economic front, it demands that Washington fully enforce existing US oil sanctions so as to prevent economic growth via business between Iran and China.
Hostile words alluding to military action against Iran are littered throughout the report. It notes that the US should make Iran “pay” in the case that allied Resistance Axis forces carry out operations against an invading American force and considers it an attack carried out by Tehran.
“Any attack on U.S. forces or military assets by proxies must be considered an attack by Iran so as to encourage deterrence,” the report read. “The proxy attacks will not cease until Iran is made to pay a serious price for them. That should be US policy, communicated unequivocally to Iran.”
The Washington Institute, another US neoconservative think tank, also states in a report that the US should increase pressure on Iran. Its author, Michael Singh, outrightly declares that Washington should look towards a military solution as a means to combat Tehran’s nuclear enrichment project in place of complex diplomacy.
“One of the difficulties with diplomatic resolutions to nuclear crises is that they require the sort of domestic buy-in that was not obtained in America for either the Agreed Framework or JCPOA,” Singh wrote. “Given Iran’s vulnerability and the advanced state of its nuclear program, the Trump administration would be remiss not to consider, and indeed prepare seriously for, military strikes against Iran’s nuclear program.”
In regards to other West Asian countries, the Vandenberg coalition says that the US should keep its presence and sphere of influence in Iraq and Syria to prevent Iranian-backed groups from gaining power, as well as to try and cut off growing ties with China and Russia.
It supports the Israeli annexation of Syria’s land and attacks on military sites, adding that Washington should back such military moves by Tel Aviv.
“America must strongly support Israel’s efforts to identify, secure, and destroy the former Assad regime’s military infrastructure and chemical weapons stockpiles,” the Vandenberg Coalition’s report reads. “The United States must continue to allow Israel to obliterate these sites and equipment lest militant groups seize them.”
As for Lebanon, the coalition says that the Lebanese Republic should be treated “as a state captured by Iran” so far as Hezbollah exists.
It claims that “Israel” is the only capable body that can “secure the Israeli-Lebanese border,” and condemns the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) by saying that they and other international organizations are too outspoken about “Israeli defensive actions.”
It wrongly justifies “Israel’s” occupation of Lebanese territory, done so under the guise of border protection, by pinning the blame on Hezbollah for breaking the 27 November ceasefire agreement.
The reality is that during the 60-day ceasefire, Israeli violations were north of 1,300; this includes the imposed ceasefire as well as breaches of UN Resolution 1701, with “Israel” targeting areas north of the Litani River. The counter continues to climb as the Israeli army is still bombing Lebanese territory during this extended ceasefire.
For its part, Hezbollah launched one “initial warning defensive response” against the Israeli army’s Ruwaysat al-Alam site after multiple violations by the Israeli forces.
The claim that “Israel” should stay in Lebanon is also a view held by the Hudson Institute’s Rebeccah Heinrichs, who claims Hezbollah’s presence in the south, generalizing the entire region and not just south of the Litani, is justification for “Israel’s” occupation of Lebanese territory.
When it comes to recommended actions against Palestine, the Vandenberg Coalition says that Gazan sovereignty should be replaced with overseers from volunteer Arab States vetted by the Americans, noting that “American policymakers should prohibit the participation of any entities with longstanding support for Hamas.”
The main goal for US foreign policy regarding Palestine, according to the think tank, is to “prioritize the security of Israel and our Arab partners,” Palestinian rights will only go so far as the Americans will allow them.
“Israel’s” Institute for National Security Studies’ Chuck Freilich gave the opinion that Trump should help with the idea of creating a Jordanian-Palestinian confederation instead of looking at a viable means for Palestinians to stay on their lands.
Trump seems to have taken this view, as he said during a February 5 presser with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that neighboring nations should absorb the Palestinians living in Gaza.
“Being in [Gaza’s] presence just has not been good, and it should not go through a process of rebuilding and occupation by the same people that have really stood there and fought for it and lived there and died there,” Trump said. “Instead, we should go to other countries of interest with humanitarian hearts, […] and build various domains that will ultimately be occupied by the million Palestinians living in Gaza, ending the death and destruction and frankly bad luck.”
The US president failed to mention “Israel” as being the reason for the death and destruction of the besieged enclave, instead, referring to them as “wonderful people.”
Normalization between “Israel” and Arab states is still also a significant goal of these recommendations. Both the American Vandenberg Coalition and the Israeli think tank, The Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, call for an expansion of the Abraham Accords under the guise of creating a strong network to combat Iran.
The coalition also declares that the US should remove “unwarranted” restrictions to arms sales with “Israel”, noting, “Arming Israel in a timely manner shows Iran and its proxies that the United States stands shoulder to shoulder with its ally.”
Even Gulf states that have taken positions very kind to America and “Israel” historically are being targeted as nations in need of American discipline.
Growing ties with China are listed as a reason for cracking down on Saudi Arabian, Qatari, and UAE ambitions, as the three nations have been in talks with Beijing on military matters, a subject which Washington sees as a notable threat.
Censorship of Saudi Arabian speech is also a part of the recommended acts, noting, “Saudi Arabia should be asked to stop rhetoric about Iran or Israel that creates any confusion about the Kingdom’s allegiances,” highlighting statements made at the 2024 Arab League in which Riyadh called on Washington to respect Iran’s sovereignty.
The Vandenberg coalition called on Trump to revoke Qatar’s Major Non-NATO Ally (MNNA) status due to its “overt support of Hamas and other Iranian-affiliated terrorist groups.”
In Yemen, there are calls for the Americans to conduct operations in the Red Sea to ensure the safe travel of ships, and “destroy Iranian ships,” as a means of fulfilling this goal.
It also calls for the US to discipline UN bodies operating in West Asia, the Vandenberg Coalition outrightly declares that Washington should “immediately cease all funding to UNRWA” and authorize UNIFIL to be able to independently search private property in South Lebanon to find weapon caches.
If UNIFIL doesn’t comply, the recommended act is for the US to halt all voluntary funding to the group.
The coalition states that the US should also “vet potential appointments of senior UN officials” in order to “prevent conflicts of interest.”
What these think tanks desire from Trump’s administration is for it to adopt a Henry Kissinger-esque view of America first policy towards West Asia, meaning that the US and its Israeli ally should always come before the natives of the land by any means necessary.
Trump’s vision of pulling out troops from the region is undesirable to these academic hawks because they view that without the policing of America, the region’s nations will turn their back to Washington and benefit adversaries like China or Iran.
Neoconservatives want a diplomatic strategy from Trump that sees the sovereignty of West Asian nations taking a back seat if they do not comply with America’s vision of the region.
We can expect that Trump will eventually comply in one way or another with the demands brought forward, as policymakers want to ensure that the US stays on the throne it commandeered following the collapse of the USSR by making Trump a Machiavellian prince.
February 13, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, Middle East, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United States, Zionism |
1 Comment
U.S. President Donald Trump has announced that he will impose 25 percent tariffs on foreign steel and aluminum, as well as additional tariffs on several countries.
Polish newspaper Rzeczpospolita writes about nervous movements in Brussels, which is preparing for a response if President Trump decides to go to a trade war with the EU.
“The Polish presidency organized an urgent teleconference of EU ministers on Wednesday afternoon regarding the American announcements of a trade war. No decision has come into effect yet, so there can be no counter-decision from the EU, but in the face of increasingly decisive threats from the U.S. directed by President Trump, Europe must show unity,” one source told Rzeczpospolita.
American tariffs would be a serious blow to EU countries. The EU as a whole exports around €6 billion of steel and aluminum to the US annually, €3 billion for each of these raw materials.
Furthermore, when it comes to automobiles, the EU’s import duties are clearly unfair, with the EU hitting the U.S. with 10 percent duties on U.S.-made cars, while the U.S. rate is only 2.5 percent. Trump has long pointed to this imbalance. In addition, the EU charges VAT, which Washington treats as an additional fee.
The EU is arguing it cannot reduce its tariffs on the U.S. to 2.5 percent because then it would automatically (in accordance with the rules of the most favored nation clause) also have to reduce tariffs on car imports from other member states of the World Trade Organization (WTO), including China. And it is already in serious dispute with them when it comes to electric cars subsidized by Beijing.
With vehicles, the stakes are incredible for the EU compared, as the auto industry accounts for €65 billion in exports to the U.S., with 74 percent of the 920,000 cars sold in the U.S. produced by the three biggest German car manufacturers, Volkswagen, BMW and Mercedes. Car sales have fallen in Europe and sales are also shrinking in China, which means that the German car manufacturers cannot afford to lose the U.S. market either. Behind the scenes, there is heavy lobbying from the U.S. to avoid a trade war.
“We are deeply concerned about the possible imposition of tariffs by the United States. Instead of tit-for-tat tariffs, the EU and the U.S. should work together to reach a grand agreement to avoid a potential trade conflict,” said Sigrid de Vries, secretary general of ACEA, the EU’s automotive industry federation.
Brussels argues that starting a trade war is not in the interests of the U.S.
“The EU sees no justification for imposing tariffs on our exports, which are counterproductive. Tariffs are taxes, bad for businesses, even worse for consumers and harmful to the global trading system,” said Maros Sefcovic, EU trade commissioner.
The EU indicates that it will reduce the trade deficit with the U.S. by boosting purchases of liquified natural gas (LNG), which the EU needs anyway, and American weapons.
However, in the event that Trump slaps the EU with tariffs, there are countermeasures being prepared, including retaliatory tariffs. This already occurred during the previous trade war with Europe under the previous Trump administration, including products produced in states where Trump had substantial support, such as bourbon from Kentucky, Harley Davidson motorcycles from Wisconsin, and orange juice from Florida.
Since the last trade skirmish with Trump, the EU has also gained other ways to harass American producers. Since December 2023, it has had an instrument against economic coercion (ACI), which allows it to impose tariffs, restrictions on trade in services and trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights, as well as restrictions on access to foreign direct investment or public procurement. It can also attack technology companies that are dear to Trump’s heart. The EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) and Digital Services Act (DSA) contain a wide range of measures to influence large internet platforms, which could hit companies like Google, Amazon, and Meta.
At the same time, there are worries that a trade war could quickly spiral, which could wreak economic havoc on both sides of the Atlantic.
February 13, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Economics | China, European Union, Germany, United States |
Leave a comment
It’s obviously good news for the world that the US has finally ended its perverse policy of anti-diplomacy (its absurd essence: When there’s a really dangerous problem, do not try to solve it by communicating) regarding Russia, the other great power with a massive nuclear arsenal.
But let’s not forget the even bigger picture: US President Donald Trump will not (and cannot) admit it – and Russian President Vladimir Putin is wise enough to not rub it in – but the single most important take-away from yesterday’s phone conversation is that Russia has won a war against the West.
Yes, it was a half-proxy war (that is, by proxy for the West, often half-heartedly, while very direct for both Russia and Ukraine), but that makes little geopolitical difference now. The West has been asking for this defeat. It could have easily been avoided, either by finding a compromise with Russia earlier or by staying out of the fight between Moscow and Kiev. But now things are what they are and the new reality is that the West can be stopped and forced to negotiate on its opponent’s (in this case, Russia’s) terms – and that the whole world knows this now as a tested, empirical fact. This is a historic turning point, and also good news for humanity. The reverberations will be felt for decades.
Ukrainians have been used and sold out. Those few in the West warning that this would happen were systematically maligned and sidelined. But now it will be Ukraine’s false ‘friends’ (and their own US- and Canadian-based diaspora) who should have a reckoning coming. So does the Kiev regime. The tragedy of Ukraine is immense, and it was unnecessary. In Ukraine, this, too, will become a historic turning point, and will have long-lasting consequences.
What will happen between the US and Russia is not yet predictable, but a broader détente is possible. The perversely, self-destructively, treasonously obedient EU elites, in any case, will learn what it feels like to be first used and then ignored, just like Ukraine. The worst thing they could do – and as things currently stand, something they might actually do – is let the US ‘Europeanize’ the war. The Biden administration has done a brilliant job wrecking its EU-NATO vassals. Trump might complete it by luring them into the trap of trying to tangle with Russia on their own – while Washington and Moscow make up, as they should.
Tarik Cyril Amar is a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory.
February 13, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Militarism | European Union, Ukraine, United States |
Leave a comment
Washington presents the terms for a peaceful settlement
US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth presented some realities and conditions for peace that burst the bubble of deception – which has kept the war going. Hegseth argued there would be no NATO membership for Ukraine, Ukraine would not recover its territories, and the US would not offer any security guarantees. Such a position has been criminalised across the West as a betrayal of Ukraine, but the opposite is true as ignoring reality has been the source of destruction. To quote Niccolò Machiavelli: “Men will not look at things as they really are, but as they wish them to be – and are ruined”.
Hegseth outlined a painful reality that is dangerous to ignore. First, regarding territorial losses:
“We want, like you, a sovereign and prosperous Ukraine, but we must start by recognizing that returning to Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders is an unrealistic objective. Chasing this illusionary goal will only prolong the war and cause more suffering”.
Second, NATO expansion was taken off the table:
“the United States does not believe that NATO membership for Ukraine is a realistic outcome of a negotiated settlement”.
Third, the US will not participate in any security guarantees:
“Security guarantees must be backed by capable European and non-European troops. If these troops are deployed as peacekeepers at any point, they should be deployed as part of a non-NATO mission and should not be covered under Article 5… To be clear: As part of any security guarantee, there will not be U.S. troops deployed to Ukraine”.
The End of Dangerous and Immoral Deception
They understand in Ukraine that the war has been lost and that even more men, territory and infrastructure will be lost if the war continues. Yet, there has been a belief that if Ukraine only fights a bit longer, then its determination would convince NATO to enter the war. However, this is a proxy war where Ukrainians are used to fight Russia. The efforts to keep hope alive and speak about future NATO membership have been a NATO deception to keep the long war going.
On the first point, the territorial losses are painful, humiliating and will complicate any future Ukrainian recovery. Yet, the alternative is not between losing the territories currently under Russian control or recovering them, rather it is between losing the territories currently under Russian control or losing even more.
On the second point of removing NATO membership from the table, it was always common sense that any future peace would have to be based on restoring Ukraine’s neutrality. The well-known and well-documented reality is that Russia considers NATO’s incursion into Ukraine to be an existential threat, and Russia would never accept it, much like how the US would not accept Russian military bases and missile systems in Mexico. Any appeal to allowing Ukraine to decide its membership in military alliances or appeal to international law does not change that reality. Threatening the survival of the world’s largest nuclear power was always going to trigger a fierce response, although Russia’s industrial and logistical advantage meant it would win with conventional weapons. We can remain in our bubble and denounce all common sense as Russian propaganda and treason, but refusing to accept how things are instead of how we wish them to be, will result in more devastation.
On the third point of the US not participating in offering any security guarantees, it is important in any peace agreement to remove all incentives for restarting the conflicts. Security guarantees could incentivise Ukraine to restart the conflict with NATO on its side, which would be reasonable given the humiliating and devastating peace agreement it will have to accept. The US refusing to participate and arguing that NATO’s Article 5 will not apply, suggests that the Europeans would stand alone. European leaders have already been clear that they will not place their troops in Ukraine without assurance of support from the US. In other words, there will be no serious security guarantees.
Is this an unfair and one-sided peace by taking into account Russian security concerns and largely ignoring valid security concerns of Ukraine and its great suffering? Yes, it is. But this is also the consequence of losing a war. A much more favourable peace was available in March 2022, but the US and UK sabotaged it and the Europeans remained quiet. NATO is now out of weapons, Ukraine is out of manpower, and Russia has won the war. Russia has the advantage and rejects any ceasefire in which the fighting can restart in a few years, they want a permanent favourable political settlement. The US did not give Russia “a gift” by accepting these terms as the media now suggests, the alternatives were either to accept the current Russian terms or accept much worse terms as the Ukrainan army collapses.
NATO expansionism was a manifestation of unipolarity after the Cold War. Peace in a unipolar system does not depend on mitigating mutual security concerns, on the contrary peace derives from overwhelming dominance to the extent one does not have to take into account the security concerns of adversaries. Unipolarity is over, and it is therefore necessary for the US to make priorities as it cannot dominate everywhere. Making it abundantly clear that America intends to shift strategic focus away from Europe and towards Asia, Hegseth also argued that the US was no longer “primarily focused” on European security. Shock waves go through a Europe that created an ideological bubble for itself with comfortable narratives of liberal hegemony that are divorced from reality.
The Immorality of Ignoring Reality
The Europeans have learned to speak and frame all issues in the language of morality. While this creates a sense of virtue, it is also the source of intolerance as opposing voices are always scorned as immoral. As the US has popped the bubble, it is worth reflecting on what has been done in the alternative social reality we constructed for ourselves.
The West has championed narratives that were intended to signal support for Ukraine. Fake narratives were created to preserve the war enthusiasm in the West and mobilise public support for a long war. Governments, the media and fake “NGOs” claimed for three years that Ukraine was winning, Russia was taking more losses, the Russians were running out of weapons, the Russian economy would collapse etc. These were all lies, and those who threatened the narratives with facts were smeared, censored and cancelled.
The reality is that only a small minority of Ukrainians wanted NATO membership before 2014, and NATO knew it would likely trigger a war. The Western-backed coup in 2014 that toppled the democratically elected government was unconstitutional and did not have majority support in Ukraine. The CIA, MI6 and the government they installed in Ukraine began covert operations against Russia from the first day after the coup, before Russia took Crimea and a revolt started in Donbas. NATO and Ukraine sabotaged the Minsk peace agreement from 2015 to 2022 even though they had accepted it as the only path to a peaceful settlement of the conflict. Zelensky’s landslide election victory in 2019 based on a peace platform was reversed following threats from Western-funded “NGOs” and right-wing groups. The US and NATO rejected Russian demands for security guarantees in 2021 even as they knew Russia would take military action without it. The US and UK sabotaged the Istanbul negotiations in 2022 in which Russia would have pulled its troops back in return for Ukraine restoring its neutrality – something both Russia and Ukraine agreed to. Then, the NATO countries boycotted all diplomacy and rejected any negotiations to end the war for almost three years as hundreds of thousands of young men died needlessly on the battlefield. Promises of future peace and NATO membership after the war motivated both the Ukrainians and the Russians to keep fighting. Russia can, for example, accept that the historical Russian city of Odessa remains part of a neutral Ukraine, but will annex the region if it risks ending up as NATO territory and a front against Russia. Even now that the war has been lost and a majority of Ukrainians want negotiations, there is still opposition to peace negotiations in Europe. This has all been done under moral slogans and the banner of “supporting Ukraine”.
The people who called for diplomacy, mutual understanding and negotiations over the past 10 years were not propagandists for the Kremlin who had to be smeared and purged from society, they merely rejected NATO’s fake war narratives and recognised the disaster awaiting by refusing to see the world as it is, as opposed how we wish it would be.
If deception destroyed Ukraine, then perhaps reality can save it.
https://twitter.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1889710026325107022
February 13, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Militarism | NATO, Ukraine, United States |
Leave a comment
Ukraine’s ‘anti-disinformation’ center has admitted to spreading disinformation
The Ukrainian Center for Countering Disinformation (CCD) has publicly recognized that it previously disseminated unverified information about Tulsi Gabbard, a former Democratic lawmaker who now serves as the US director of national intelligence.
Established in 2021 under Ukraine’s security council, the center was designed to combat perceived information threats, primarily those attributed to Russia.
The news site Strana.ua reported in November that the CCD took down four of its bulletins mentioning Gabbard from social media, including one from April 2022 that described her as someone who “for several years, has been working for foreign audience for the Kremlin money.”
A June 2024 bulletin accused Gabbard of spreading disinformation about Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, and a February 2023 post claimed she was “espousing pro-Russian rhetoric,” according to the outlet.
On Thursday, the center admitted to past misjudgments concerning Gabbard, who has just been confirmed by the US Senate as the national intelligence director. The statement added that in 2022 and 2023, the Ukrainian organization released content about her that “had not been properly verified and thus fell short of the Center’s standards.”
An internal investigation initiated by a new CCD head last year uncovered these errors, although the center did not clarify why the findings clearing Gabbard’s name were not disclosed sooner. The CCD said those responsible for the inaccuracies were dismissed around a year ago and can no longer be penalized.
Gabbard, who previously represented Hawaii in the US Congress, rose to prominence in 2016 when she resigned as vice-chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) to endorse Bernie Sanders for president.
She pursued the Democratic nomination for the 2020 presidential election, advocating against American military interventions abroad, which she described as harmful for both service members like herself and national interests. At the time, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton disparaged Gabbard as the candidate favored by Russia.
As her discord with the Democratic Party deepened, Gabbard resigned from it in 2022. After two years as an independent, she switched to the Republican Party and endorsed Donald Trump during last year’s presidential campaign.
Critics raised the alarm over Trump’s selection of Gabbard as the director of national intelligence, labeling it a significant security risk. Nevertheless, her nomination was confirmed this week by a 52-48 vote, with only one Republican, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, opposing her appointment.
In Ukraine, Gabbard was also featured on Mirotvorets, a semi-official database of perceived enemies of the state. This website highlights personal information about targeted individuals, and some public figures in Ukraine have been murdered after their profiles were made available, leading critics to condemn Mirotvorets as a ‘kill list’.
February 13, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | Ukraine |
Leave a comment
Retired Russian Armed Forces Intelligence Colonel Anatoly Matviychuk has come out swinging in the lead-up to the Munich Security Conference, saying the U.S. has compromising information on Zelensky that will force him to compromise, namely, that he has possibly embezzled large amounts of money from the funds sent to Ukraine for its defense against Russia.
In an interview with MK, the retired colonel said that President Trump “has long had a grudge against Zelensky,” since the head of the Kyiv regime supported his persecution and passed on compromising information about him to the previous U.S. administration under Biden.
“Today, Trump is skillfully dealing with everyone who once spoke out against him,” Matviychuk noted. “Among them are Zelensky and Yermak. I am sure that Trump has more than enough dirt on them.”
These may have to do with the embezzlement of money. “It is not surprising that it has now become clear that about 100 billion dollars have sunk into oblivion,” the intelligence officer noted. “I believe that in fact the U.S. knows very well where these billions ended up…”
Matviychuk claims the money ended up in Zelensky’s Spanish, Italian and British real estate. However, he also went after Zelensky’s wife.
“In addition, the million-dollar expenses of the First Lady of Ukraine, Elena Zelenskaya, in European boutiques have been well calculated,” the expert added.
Matviychuk added that Zelensky has also opened himself up to accusations of prolonging the conflict and numerous war crimes.
This is not the first time someone has claimed Zelensky has enriched himself from U.S. taxpayer money sent for his country’s defense against Russia.
The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project found that Zelensky and his partners owned a network of offshore companies dating back to 2012 in the British Virgin Islands, Cyprus and Belize.
The documents also revealed that before Zelenskyy became president in 2019, he gave his stake in an offshore company to a business partner but made an arrangement that the offshore company would continue paying dividends to a company Zelensky’s wife owned, the reporting project said.
In response, USA Today offered up its own “fact check,” stating: “The Pandora Papers – secret records obtained by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists – highlight information about Zelensky’s overseas dealings. However, the papers don’t reveal the exact amount Zelensky or his wife have in overseas accounts. Sullivan said none of the assets claimed in the social media post were in the papers.”
USA Today also cites a 2022 Forbes piece that estimated Zelensky’s real estate portfolio at some $4 million after reports that he purchased his parents an $8 million mansion — although USA Today said the claims about an $8 million mansion were false. Nor did the magazine find any proof to back up claims that Zelensky owned three private jets or five luxury yachts. The original Instagram post targeted by USA Today reportedly stating that Zelenky owned “a 35 million dollar home in Florida and has $1.2 billion in an overseas bank account” is no longer available.
Despite no hard evidence of embezzlement, allegations have continued non-stop, with many saying that now that Donald Trump is in office, a real audit will uncover the truth.
Tucker Carlson headlined a recent episode of his podcast by claiming “Ukrainian military is selling American weapons systems on the black market, including to drug cartels on the (American) border.” His guest U.S. Col. Daniel Davis said that Zelensky had even recently made a point of denying such allegations, and “the media just reports what he says.” The colonel then added that this has been “an open secret for almost the duration of (the war).”
February 13, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Corruption, Deception, Militarism | Ukraine, United States |
Leave a comment
Aletho News 