Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Hungary and Slovakia’s leaders support Trump against Zelensky

Remix News | March 3, 2025

National leaders from Hungary and Slovakia are siding with President Donald Trump following his feud with President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance in the Oval Office on Friday.

During the meeting, which had been demanded by Zelensky, Trump and Vance criticized the Ukrainian leader for wanting to continue the war rather than sue for a ceasefire with Russia when he is unable to win on the battlefield. They further castigated him for not being thankful enough for the considerable support from the US that he has received until now.

Reports suggest that hundreds of thousands on both sides have already been killed in the conflict.

The meeting was so contentious that many commentators believe it could signal a complete change in direction in Washington’s approach to the war.

“Strong men make peace, weak men make war,” Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán wrote on X. “Today President Donald Trump stood bravely for peace. Even if it was difficult for many to digest. Thank you, Mr. President!”

The Hungarian government has been urging negotiations rather than continued fighting to end the conflict from its outset.

Balazs Orbán, who is a Hungarian MP as well as Viktor Orbán’s political director, made a more detailed statement on X. “In light of the events yesterday it is helpful to clarify Hungary’s position and the principles on which it is based,” he wrote. He then outlined five points:

“1. Hungary should fight only for the Hungarians, never for anyone else.

2. Hungary should build alliances with those who want peace.

3. If we do not look after our own interests, no one else will represent them.

4. If Europe is doing crazy things, then let’s try to convince them of the nonsense of their chosen strategy.

5. If that fails, then, by all means let us save ourselves, and let our approach be based on our own national interests. (See point 1 et al.)”

He concluded his tweet by referring to the fact that a European Council summit will be held in the coming week to discuss a joint statement by European leaders on the Ukrainian war that is to be made. “A tough week ahead,” Balazs Orbán concluded.

Hungary was not alone in supporting the American President’s tough line with Zelensky. Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico, who, like Orbán, has long encouraged negotiations rather than further violence to end the Ukrainian war, published a lengthy statement on X concerning it.

“Slovakia will not support Ukraine either financially or militarily to enable it to continue the war,” Fico said.

Fico added that “Slovakia has reservations about the ‘peace through strength’,” and that “Ukraine will never be strong enough to negotiate from a position of military power.”

Fico further stated that he believes that the European summit should call for an “immediate ceasefire” in Ukraine, and that “if the summit does not respect that there are other opinions besides simply continuing the war, the European Council may not be able to agree on conclusions regarding Ukraine on Thursday.”

Other leaders of European Union member states, as well as EU politicians, were quick to voice their support for Zelensky and Ukraine. The Vice President of the European Commission, Kaja Kallas, wrote on X that “today, it became clear that the free world needs a new leader.”

After being thrown out of the White House, Zelensky then travelled to London, where he met with Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Saturday. Starmer promised the Ukrainian leader an additional 2.8 billion euros in aid by next week.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, for his part, urged the Ukrainian president to fix his relations with Trump. Rutte told the BBC that it is “important that President Zelensky finds a way to restore his relationship with the American president and with the senior American leadership team.”

Orbán made it clear on Saturday that Hungary is considering blocking any EU resolution on the Ukraine war that does not encourage negotiations aimed at peace. In a letter addressed to European Council President António Costa, Orbán stated that “I am convinced that the European Union – following the example of the United States – should enter into direct discussions with Russia on a ceasefire and sustainable peace in Ukraine.”

“This approach is not reconcilable with the one reflected in the draft conclusions,” he added.

Orbán then said that he is proposing “not to attempt adopting written conclusions on Ukraine” in the upcoming summit, but rather “to limit written conclusions to recalling and supporting UN Security Council Resolution 2774 (2025) adopted on 24 February 2025.” The UN resolution he referenced was put forward by the US, and does not mention Russian aggression as the cause of the war.

“The Resolution signals a new phase in the history of the conflict and renders all previous agreed language by the European Council irrelevant,” Orbán asserted.

March 2, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

To Encourage Talks With Moscow, DoD Will Halt Cyber Attacks on Russia

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | March 2, 2025

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth ordered his agency to halt offensive cyber operations against Russia as the White House is attempting to engage the Kremlin in talks to end the war in Ukraine.

“Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered U.S. Cyber Command to halt offensive operations against Russia, according to a current official and two former officials briefed on the secret instructions,” the New York Times reports. “The move is apparently part of a broader effort to draw President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia into talks on Ukraine and a new relationship with the United States.”

After the invasion of Ukraine, the Joe Biden administration announced a multi-pronged warfare policy to degrade Russia, including arming Ukraine, sanctions, cyber attacks, and seizing Russian assets.

Since returning to office, President Trump has prioritized improving ties with Russia and ending the war in Ukraine. US and Russian officials have agreed to normalize ties and work toward ending the conflict in Ukraine.

The scope of the order is unclear, but it will not apply to the National Security Agency or intelligence collection. Hegseth issued the order before President Zelensky’s heated exchange with President Donald Trump in the Oval Office on Friday. Following the meeting, Trump considered cutting all military aid to Ukraine.

The Times notes that Trump’s decision to halt offensive cyber operations is a policy shift. During his first administration, he expanded cyberwarfare.

March 2, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

OSCE shared intel with Ukraine before 2022 – ex-Greek ambassador

RT | March 2, 2025

During the armed standoff between the Ukrainian government and the two breakaway Donbass republics between 2014 and 2022, observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) secretly shared intelligence with Kiev, former Greek ambassador to Ukraine, Vasilios Bornovas, has claimed.

In an interview with Greece’s Hellas Journal last Monday, Bornovas said that during his visits to the conflict zone he had witnessed the “use of classified information [by Kiev’s forces] sent by observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) regarding the positions of weapons” belonging to the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics. The diplomat recounted that “since these positions were immediately hit by Ukrainian fire, it was obvious that the observers’ reports first went through to the Ukrainian services.”

Commenting on the apparent decision by the US and Russia to sideline the European Union from negotiations on Ukraine, the former envoy argued that the bloc “has reached an impasse” due to multiple internal crises. Bornovas remarked that having long “uncritically” toed Washington’s line on the conflict, Brussels is finding it “extremely difficult to extricate itself from this policy” now that President Donald Trump has apparently changed course.

According to the diplomat, the EU is suffering “from a deficit of visionary leaders with will and personality,” with its foreign policy being largely directed by the Baltic states and Poland.

As for Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s handling of the conflict, Bornovas said that the hostilities with Moscow are “decimating his people and destroying the productive fabric of his country.” The former official argued that the current conflict had been in the making for some time before February 2022, suggesting that Zelensky may have abandoned his original pro-peace platform under pressure from former US President Joe Biden’s administration.

According to Bornovas, the Ukrainian leader may also have hoped to distract his population’s attention from internal problems, such as widespread corruption, with the help of an armed conflict.

Since the escalation of the hostilities, Moscow has called out OSCE’s supposed failings on multiple occasions, both in the conflict zone and further afield.

Last October, Russia claimed that the organization had covered up irregularities in the Moldovan presidential election, which saw pro-Western President Maia Sandu squeak by a relatively small margin.

In March and February 2024, Moscow accused OSCE of failing to denounce the killings of Russian civilians by Ukrainian forces during their raids in border regions in what Russia characterized as hypocrisy that “goes beyond all possible boundaries.”

March 2, 2025 Posted by | Deception | , , , | Leave a comment

Sen. Lee, Rep. Massie, Musk Call for US to Exit NATO

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | March 2, 2025

A pair of Republican lawmakers voiced their support for the US exiting the North Atlantic Alliance. Following a heated White House exchange between President Trump and President Zelensky last week, many members of the bloc voice their support for Ukraine and Zelensky.

On Saturday Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) posed on X, “Get us out of NATO.” He was commenting on a pie chart that showed the breakdown of defense spending by members in the Cold War-era alliance. According to the chart, US military spending is 70% of total defense spending in NATO. The 2024 military budget for the US was $895 billion.

The second highest spender is the UK at $70 billion.

The US has long subsidized the defense of the NATO alliance. Prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, only seven of the bloc’s 30 members met the alliance requirement of spending 2% of GDP on the military. In 2024, NATO projected that 23 of 32 members would meet the minimum spending level.

Posting in support of Sen. Lee, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) wrote, “NATO is a Cold War relic that needs to be relegated to a talking kiosk at the Smithsonian.”

NATO was founded in 1949 with 12 members. After the fall of the USSR, the bloc has slowly expanded eastward across the continent to include former Warsaw Pact members and Soviet republics.

Moscow has complained that NATO expansion presented a threat to Russia. While Brussels claims that the bloc is a defensive alliance to protect its members from aggressive attacks, NATO has waged war in Eastern Europe, Afghanistan, and Libya over the past three decades.

On Sunday, Trump adviser Elon Musk wrote on X, the platform he owns, “I always wondered why NATO continued to exist even though its nemesis and reason to exist, The Warsaw Pact, had dissolved.”

The day before, he responded “I agree” to a post that said, “It’s time to leave NATO and the UN.”

March 2, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , | 1 Comment

Scott Ritter: US Had Its fingers in Every Aspect of Ukrainian Pie

Sputnik – 02.03.2025

Aside from preparing Ukraine for guerrilla warfare and conducting anti-Russia propaganda operations, the US and the CIA built 20 bases throughout the country, former US Marine Corps intelligence officer Scott Ritter told Sputnik.

Hunter Biden’s position on the board of the major Ukrainian energy company Burisma also shows that “the United States had its fingers in every aspect of the Ukrainian economic pie.”
Ukraine, Ritter explained, is just a tool US tried using to defeat Russia – a tool that wasn’t even aware of “every aspect of this grand plan.”

“A hammer doesn’t know the intent of an architect. America was the architect of Ukrainian project. Ukraine is just the hammer, just like Europe,” he said.

Commenting on the recent clash between JD Vance and Zelensky, Ritter noted that Vance is “the vice president of the United States, who has received some of the best intelligence there is about the reality of Ukraine.”

“Zelensky is an actor who reads from a script as part of a play that’s being controlled by others,” he remarked.

https://twitter.com/SputnikInt/status/1896272468748435911

March 2, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Pro-Israel Think Tank WINEP Outed as ‘Dark Money’ Operation Driving US Wars

By Robert Inlakesh | MintPress News | February 26, 2025

The AIPAC-aligned Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), which often refers to itself simply as The Washington Institute, was recently outed as a “dark money” think tank for its lack of transparency on donors and is continuing to push the United States to engage in conflicts overseas to Israel’s benefit. Its case raises questions about how the Israel Lobby functions through think tanks across the board, shaping U.S. foreign policy behind closed doors.

WINEP has a long history of shaping U.S. foreign policy. It was deeply involved in the neoconservative push for regime change in Iraq, joining calls for the Clinton administration to topple Saddam Hussein as early as 1998. They also pushed for U.S. military intervention and helped justify the eventual invasion in 2003.

At the beginning of the year, the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft unveiled the “Think Tank Funding Tracker,” a one-of-a-kind project that examined the funding sources of the top 50 U.S. think tanks since 2019 and rated their transparency from 0 to 5. WINEP and 16 others—including the neoconservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD)—received a zero transparency rating, exposing its reliance on “dark money” contributions.

While WINEP claims “to be funded exclusively by U.S. citizens” on its website, it does not publicly disclose its donor list. Its AIPAC roots were first exposed in 2006 by Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer in The London Review of Books, where they described WINEP as an AIPAC cutout advancing Israel’s agenda under the guise of independent research. The pair wrote at the time that “The Lobby created its own think tank in 1985, when Martin Indyk helped found WINEP. Although WINEP plays down its links to Israel and claims instead that it provides a “balanced and realistic” perspective on Middle East issues, this is not the case. In fact, WINEP is funded and run by individuals who are deeply committed to advancing Israel’s agenda.”

This claim that AIPAC created WINEP was later corroborated by former AIPAC official MJ Rosenberg, who wrote in HuffPost : “How do I know? I was in the room when AIPAC decided to establish WINEP.” The now-deceased WINEP co-founder, Martin Indyk, was also the head of the Saban Center for Middle East Studies, funded by Israeli-American billionaire Haim Saban.

Recent U.S. foreign policy developments have only strengthened WINEP’s influence. The Biden administration’s unwavering support for Israel’s war on Gaza, including a $14 billion emergency military aid package, aligns with WINEP’s long-standing push to ensure that U.S. military assistance to Israel remains untouchable. WINEP actively shaped public discourse as the war progressed, with Executive Director Robert Satloff praising Biden’s refusal to support an early ceasefire, calling it “correct and courageous.”

When House lawmakers convened hearings in late 2023 to attack the administration’s Iran policy, their rhetoric mirrored WINEP’s narratives, particularly opposition to any sanctions relief. Witnesses from WINEP-adjacent institutions like FDD and JINSA were brought in to reinforce the case for a more aggressive posture toward Iran. Meanwhile, WINEP continues to push for U.S. military leverage in post-Assad Syria, another key policy area where the Biden administration has quietly followed its recommendations by maintaining a military foothold and targeting Iranian assets with airstrikes.

WINEP’s revolving-door relationship with the U.S. government does little to shed its reputation for shaping policy. In May 2023, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan delivered a keynote address at WINEP’s annual Soref Symposium, praising Satloff’s “extraordinary work.” Sullivan’s participation wasn’t just symbolic—it reinforced WINEP’s position as an informal but essential policy hub. This is evident from the administration’s embrace of the Abraham Accords, another WINEP priority.

Former WINEP fellow Dan Shapiro was appointed the State Department’s senior advisor for regional integration, carrying out the think tank’s long-standing vision for Arab normalization with Israel. WINEP is currently led by Michael Singh, Robert Satloff, Dennis Ross, and Dana Stroul. Stroul, who serves as WINEP’s Research Director, returned to the position after serving as the Biden administration’s deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East from 2021 to 2024. During her tenure, she played a central role in Washington’s anti-Iran initiatives, the response to the Gaza war, and shaping U.S. Syria policy.

Beyond WINEP, the broader issue of think tank influence is now facing increasing scrutiny. In 2023, lawmakers introduced the Think Tank Transparency Act, which requires policy organizations to disclose foreign government funding and contractual agreements. While WINEP does not receive direct funding from Israel, watchdogs have highlighted that its pro-Israel agenda is sustained through wealthy American donors closely linked to AIPAC. Using domestic contributions to advance a foreign policy agenda has enabled WINEP to operate without falling under the scrutiny of foreign lobbying laws, even as its “scholars” shape U.S. positions on Iran, Syria, and the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Currently, the two primary issues on WINEP’s agenda are how to best leverage American influence to shape outcomes in post-Assad Syria and how to assure regime change in Iran. Indicative of the think tank’s influence is that not only was its hardline Syria strategy the exact model used by the U.S. to aid regime change in Damascus, but its chief researcher was taken on as a senior official by the previous administration.

As demonstrated by the Quincy Institute’s new report, the lack of transparency over who exactly finances the AIPAC lobby’s “cutout” think tank presents serious questions about who is actually shaping U.S. foreign policy and to whose benefit.

March 2, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Hamas decries as ‘war crime’ Israeli suspension of humanitarian aid to Gaza

The Cradle | March 2, 2025

Israel has accepted a proposal brought by US envoy Steve Witkoff to extend the first phase of the Gaza ceasefire and prisoner exchange agreement for another 42 days, facing rejection from the Hamas movement.

As a result of Hamas’s rejection – which stems from the resistance movement’s insistence on abiding by the terms of what was initially agreed upon – Israel announced on 2 March that it halted the entry of aid and supplies into the Gaza Strip.

“With the end of the first stage of the prisoner swap deal and following Hamas’ rejection of Witkoff’s proposal to continue negotiations – which Israel agreed to – Prime Minister Netanyahu has decided to halt all imports of goods and supplies to the Gaza Strip as of today,” said the office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a statement.

“Israel will not allow a ceasefire without the release of its prisoners. If Hamas continues to refuse, there will be further consequences,” the premier’s office added.

The extension deal agreed to by Netanyahu calls for the release of half of the estimated 22 living captives in Gaza, in exchange for Palestinian prisoners.

According to Netanyahu, the Witkoff plan gives Israel the right to resume the war after the 42-day extension if talks do not progress. Israel’s Channel 12 reported that the prime minister has approved a potential call-up of 400,000 reserve soldiers.

“The decision we made last night to completely halt the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza until Hamas is destroyed or surrenders completely and all our hostages are returned is an important step in the right direction— ‘standing at the gates of hell,’” said Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.

“Now, we must open these gates as quickly and as lethally as possible against the cruel enemy until absolute victory,” he added.

Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid blasted the government’s decision.

“The prisoner exchange deal has been halted. Humanitarian aid to Gaza has been stopped. The government has approved the mobilization of 400,000 reserve soldiers. What is the goal? What objective has Israel set for itself? Has the government decided to abandon the prisoners, and if so, why? For what greater national purpose? If we return to war, what is the objective of the war? Who will replace Hamas in the end?” Lapid said.

“Once again, the government is acting without a plan, without a vision. We can only hope things turn out okay—because that seems to be the extent of their planning.”

Phase one of the Gaza ceasefire was due to end on Saturday. Israel has been pushing for the extension in recent days and has continuously delayed the start of negotiations for the second phase, violating the original ceasefire agreement.

“The statement issued by the office of the terrorist occupation Prime Minister Netanyahu, regarding his approval of American proposals to extend the first phase of the agreement under arrangements that violate the ceasefire agreement in Gaza is a blatant attempt to evade the agreement and avoid entering negotiations for its second phase,” Hamas said in a statement.

“Netanyahu’s decision to halt humanitarian aid is a form of blackmail, a war crime, and a blatant violation of the agreement,” it went on to say.

Since the morning of 2 March, Israeli attacks on Gaza have killed at least four Palestinians. Israel has been violating the ceasefire daily since it was reached in January, carrying out deadly attacks and consistently holding up the entry of aid and essentials into Gaza.

March 2, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Hungary accuses EU of violating energy security guarantees – media

RT | March 2, 2025

Hungary has accused the European Union of failing to honor the energy security guarantees it recently gave to Budapest, M1 broadcaster has reported, citing a letter that Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto sent to the EU’s top diplomat Kaja Kallas on Sunday.

The Hungarian official reportedly warned Brussels that his country’s acquiescence in any further Ukraine-related decision would be contingent on the EU’s ability to safeguard Budapest’s energy supplies.

The letter came hard on the heels of a Russian Defense Ministry report that three drones had been shot down near a key compressor station servicing the TurkStream gas pipeline on Friday. Moscow described the incident as a Ukrainian sabotage attempt.

In an article on Sunday, Hungary’s Hirado news program claimed that Foreign Minister Szijjarto had reminded Kallas that as recently as January 27, when the EU was deciding on extending sanctions against Russia, Brussels explicitly gave Budapest “four guarantees that Hungary’s energy supply would be secure.”

Szijjarto reportedly wrote that the bloc’s leadership had pledged to involve his country in negotiations over the resumption of Russian gas transit through Ukraine – an apparent reference to Kiev’s decision in late 2024 to terminate its five-year transit contract with Russian energy giant Gazprom. The diplomat pointed out that despite this promise, Budapest has been excluded from the respective talks, Hirado noted.

“Secondly, the European Commission also gave a guarantee that Ukraine would not attack the infrastructure responsible for energy transport to the EU,” Szijjarto wrote, adding that nonetheless, “Ukraine launched a drone attack on the Russkaya compressor station of the TurkStream on the night of February 28.”

The media outlet quoted the minister as expressing incredulity that an EU candidate nation (Ukraine) would seriously endanger the energy security of a current member state, with Brussels seemingly taking Kiev’s side and not Budapest’s.

The Hungarian diplomat made it clear that his country’s “position will largely be determined by the issues raised in this letter in the decisions regarding Ukraine in the coming period,” Hirado reported.

In a post on Facebook on Saturday, the official wrote that the inoperability of the TurkStream “would seriously endanger our energy security,” and thus encroach on Hungary’s sovereignty.

While Friday’s incident did not result in any damage to the energy infrastructure, a similar attack reported by the Russian Defense Ministry in January saw falling debris impact the facility.

TurkStream delivers Russian natural gas to Turkish customers and several European countries, including Hungary, Serbia, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Greece.

March 2, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Europe’s Reckless Warmongering Pushes Trump Toward NATO Exit

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 02.03.2025

So long as the US provides an expensive and robust support for Europe’s defense, oligarchs based in Europe can continue business as usual, living their lavish lifestyles and provoking their nuclear neighbor, Wall Street analyst Charles Ortel says.

“Our European ‘partners’ seem to want ‘war at all costs,’ believing that America will do the paying and Americans will do the dying,” Wall Street analyst Charles Ortel told Sputnik, commenting on Europe’s demonstrative support for Volodymyr Zelensky, who rejected a Trump-brokered ceasefire in Ukraine.

The UK and EU feel free to provoke Russia – a nuclear power – because they believe their security is guaranteed by Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which would obligate the US to come to their defense, according to the analyst.

Europe’s proxy, Zelensky, “is behaving like an old-fashioned mafia goon, demanding protection money,” Ortel says.

US involvement in the Ukraine conflict would mean increased protection for Europe and further US taxpayer money flowing into European coffers. But that won’t happen under Donald Trump and JD Vance, Ortel underscores.

As Europe’s reckless warmongering continues, the US may have no choice but to leave the transatlantic alliance, he believes.

“The US has no business subsidizing Europe and defending it,” Ortel says. “Indeed, I believe we have a duty to our own citizenry to significantly reduce our defense commitments to Europe and rescind NATO treaty assurances — if not exit NATO altogether under present circumstances.”

March 2, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Trump-Zelensky spat shows who wants peace and who doesn’t – Hungarian FM

RT | March 2, 2025

The public clash between US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has made it clear that, unlike Washington, Kiev is not interested in ending its conflict with Moscow, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said.

Zelensky’s trip to the White House on Friday was abruptly cut short after his meeting with the US president and vice president devolved into a shouting match in front of the media. Trump and J.D. Vance accused the Ukrainian leader of “gambling with World War III” due to his reluctance to negotiate peace with Russia, and of being disrespectful and ungrateful for the substantial military aid provided to Kiev by Washington.

The visit was intended to finalize a minerals agreement between the US and Ukraine, but it was never signed as Zelensky demanded security guarantees and greater involvement in the conflict from the Trump administration.

“It became clearer to everyone than ever before who wants peace and who wants war; who wants to stop the killing and who wants to continue it; who stands on the grounds of common sense and who does not care for either human lives or billions of wasted euros,” Szijjarto wrote in a post on Facebook on Saturday about the heated exchange at the Oval Office, which US Secretary of State Marco Rubio described as a “fiasco.”

The foreign minister made it clear in his message that it is Zelensky, who wants “the war to just continue.”

“Trump’s stand for peace was the greatest moment of the past three years,” he insisted.

The US president told Zelensky on Friday that Ukraine was “running out of soldiers” and had no cards to play in the standoff with Russia. “Look, if you could get a ceasefire right now, I tell you, you take it, so the bullets stop flying and your men stop getting killed,” Trump said.

Szijjarto stressed in his post that the authorities in Budapest, who had been consistently calling for a diplomatic settlement of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, “hope that… Trump will make the US-Russian negotiations a success, because only a US-Russian agreement can bring peace back to our beloved Central Europe.”

Russia’s Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova described Zelensky’s trip to the US as “a diplomatic and political failure” of the Kiev government. “With his outrageously boorish behavior” at the White House, the Ukrainian leader confirmed that he is “an irresponsible instigator of a major war” and “a most dangerous threat to the international community,” she wrote on Telegram on Saturday.

March 2, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

The pro-war lobby in the West needs to come up with new ideas, rather than saying the same old things

By Ian Proud | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 2, 2025

When western pundits resist efforts to bring an end to fighting in Ukraine, they never provide an alternative vision of what they would do differently.

A respected associate of mine asked me today if a ceasefire and peace process in Ukraine would simply embolden China and Russia to further aggression.

This is a line oft repeated among the majority of politicians, journalists and so-called academics in the west, who are opposed to an ending of the war. ‘We can’t stop the war, because if we do, China will invade Taiwan and Russia will invade Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc.’

My view, for what it’s worth, is that an end to the war in Ukraine might embolden China longer-term over Taiwan in particular. I’ve seen no evidence that it will embolden Russia to invade NATO, precisely because Russia sees itself, in large part, as a country of Europe, even if it has been excluded.

However, and critically, if both China and Russia were so emboldened, then should we not ask ourselves how we have ended up in this position?

Russia’s decision to go to war was driven by a belief that it’s core strategic interests in preventing NATO expansion to its border via Ukraine was being ignored, and that it was subject to permanent sanctions with no possibility of removal through any concessions it might make.

That’s my opinion and one I know that many ‘realists’ share.

But, in any case, the ‘what next’ question should have been considered as part of a longer-term strategic assessment when western nations pushed the NATO enlargement agenda.

We have known since at least 2008 that this was a redline for Russia.

Did we expect Russia’s position to change and if so, how? If Russia’s position did not change, how far would we go to advance Ukraine’s NATO aspiration, including through direct military confrontation?

I’m not aware that those questions were ever asked or, if they were, considered rather than dismissed. And I was at the heart of British government decision making from the latter part of 2013, before the Ukraine crisis started (and must therefore accept some of the blame).

Without the United States, a war in Ukraine was never going to be sustainable for Europe, financially, politically or militarily.

Yet no one thought this through. Or, if they did, they didn’t factor in the eminent risk of America doing an about face on policy one day, as is now happening.

With America now withdrawing, sustaining a losing war in Ukraine rather than calling a halt to the killing cannot be considered a legitimate strategy if its only goal is to avoid losing face.

That makes us look weaker and more feckless.

If other states are now emboldened by the failure of western policy in Ukraine, that is not a sufficient reason to avoid an end to the bloodshed now.

Our self-righteousness indignation to peace is merely a figleaf covering the deflated genitals of our policy failure.

The west so badly mishandled relations in the eight years between the flashpoint of the Maidan and the start of war, not thinking through the consequences.

Russian actions and reactions in Ukraine have always been predictable.

They were predictable in February 2014.

They were predictable in February 2022.

They were predictable in February 2025.

We were never going to fight for Ukraine.

I have heard senior British Ambassadors say that we were never going to fight for Ukraine. And we are the most hawkish nation in Europe.

Why were we never going to fight?

Because it would never be possible to ensure that the 27 nations of the EU or the 31 nations of NATO would come to a collective agreement to fight.

Someone would always block fighting.

Compromises would be made.

We would pursue a lowest common denominator. That led us to a sanctions-only approach.

As I have said many times before, in the game of geostrategic chess, President Putin always knew that large, chattering teams of politicians around the table couldn’t outmanoeuvre him.

In fact, they would take weeks and months just to agree on the meaning of pawn, let alone whether to move it on the board.

We lost through indecision and have yet to learn the lesson.

You can’t fight wars by committee. But you can make peace in a group.

As Albert Einstein said, ‘we cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them’. That is seen by some as the source of the misattributed saying, ‘the definition of insanity is to do the same thing but expect a different result.’

As the war in Ukraine grinds towards its diplomatic denouement, those people who would like to avoid a negotiated settlement are not coming up with an alternative approach.

They are not introducing new ideas to up the ante, if that is what they want to do. In fact, I don’t know what they want to do, because they’ve been saying exactly the same things for three years and I am epically bored right now.

The problem here, is that neither are they advancing a credible argument against ending the war.

Their position seems to be, the war is bad, it’s all Russia’s fault and if we give in now, Russia will be emboldened to strike elsewhere.

Their defensive position is held together by straplines not substantive arguments.

In a recent speech, the veteran U.S. Democrat politician Bernie Sanders said,

‘Russia started the war, not Ukraine,

Putin is a dictator, not Zelensky.’

While I am sure he may believe that it’s just another banal outburst, intended more to rail against the political leaders in his own country, rather than to bring peace in Ukraine.

Of course, people view the origins of the war differently and people are entitled to their views.

Debate on the war in Ukraine has become reduced to ‘I’m right and you are wrong’ with voices of reason and realism in the west, like mine, stifled by the mainstream.

But we will never reach a position in which there is a universally accepted view of who was at fault and who was not.

Instead, let’s try to accept that every side in this conflict takes some share of the blame, be that Russia, Ukraine, the U.S., UK and everyone else.

Let’s have a frank but polite discussion about a way forward.

President Trump has advanced a new policy proposition that engagement and dialogue is vital if we are to bring an end to the fighting. British and European leaders can’t continue unchallenged, carrying on as if the world hasn’t changed.

They need to come up with genuinely new and constructive ideas, rather than continuing to say the same things. And reengage in dialogue with Russia.

March 2, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

HighWire Dispels Misinformation About Measles

The HighWire with Del Bigtree | February 28, 2025

Del does a deep dive into the science behind the measles virus, dispelling decades of misinformation from public health agencies, as well as what is actually driving the recent measles outbreaks in the U.S. See a shocking scientific equation comparing the number of individual deaths that would occur if the measles vaccine had never been introduced based on pre-vaccine stats to the number of deaths from MMR injury.

March 2, 2025 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | , , , | Leave a comment