H5N1’S LAB LINK? DR. MCCULLOUGH EXPOSES SHOCKING ORIGINS
The HighWire with Del Bigtree | March 6, 2025
Cardiologist & Epidemiologist, Peter A. McCullough, MD, joins Del with a shocking study linking the origins of the current clade of H1N5 dominating the news cycle and crushing the egg industry can be tracked back to a USDA poultry research lab in Georgia.
Hamas Denounces Israeli Enemy’s Failure to Withdraw from Philadelphi Corridor
Al-Manar | March 10, 2025
Hamas Resistance Movement issued on Monday a statement to condemn and reject the occupation’s violation of the ceasefire agreement and its failure to withdraw from the Salah al-Din (Philadelphi) Corridor area.
The Zionist occupation failed to comply with the gradual pull-out of its troops from the Salah al-Din (Philadelphi) Corridor during the first phase, and also did not begin its withdrawal on the 42nd day, as stipulated in the agreement, Hamas statement added.
“Yesterday marked the 50th day of the agreement, by which the withdrawal was set to be completed, but so far that has not happened.”
Hamas stressed that “this blatant violation is a clear breach of the agreement and an apparent attempt to sabotage it and render it meaningless”.
The continued violations confirm the occupation’s disregard for agreements and its manipulation of international commitments.
These violations place responsibility on the mediators to pressure the occupation into fulfilling its commitments and immediately ending its presence in the Salah al-Din (Philadelphi) Corridor, the statement underscored.
Hamas called on the mediators and the international community to intervene immediately to ensure the occupation’s withdrawal, and resume negotiations for the second phase without further delay.
Adhering to the agreement and completing the negotiations is the only way to secure the release of the prisoners, and any procrastination means tampering their fate and the fealings of their families, Hamas statement concluded.
The Israeli negotiating team left for Qatar Monday for talks aimed at extending the fragile Gaza ceasefire, after ‘Israel’ cut the Palestinian territory’s electricity supply to ramp up pressure on Hamas.
Ahead of the negotiations, ‘Israel’ disconnected the only power line to a water desalination plant in Gaza, a move Hamas denounced as “cheap and unacceptable blackmail”.
We dealt flexibly with Trump’s envoy, awaiting outcome of talks: Hamas

Al Mayadeen | March 10, 2025
Hamas spokesperson Abdul Latif al-Qanou stated that the movement has shown flexibility in responding to mediation efforts, including those led by Egyptian and Qatari officials, as well as US President Donald Trump’s envoy.
He emphasized that Hamas is awaiting the outcome of the upcoming negotiations, urging the occupation to commit to an agreement and advance to the second phase.
Al-Qanou highlighted that the discussions with mediators have centered on ending the war, ensuring a full withdrawal, and initiating reconstruction efforts.
He dismissed the occupation’s threats of resuming military operations in Gaza and its decision to cut electricity, calling these failed tactics that endanger its prisoners. He reiterated that any prisoner releases would only occur through negotiations.
Al-Qanou emphasized, “We have fully adhered to the first phase of the agreement, and our top priority now is to provide shelter and humanitarian aid to our people while ensuring a permanent ceasefire.”
“The movement has agreed to Egypt’s proposal for a community support committee, which will begin its work in the Gaza Strip to bolster the resilience of our people and reinforce their presence on their land.”
Al-Qanou emphasized that “the occupation seeks to tighten the siege, close the crossings, and block aid from reaching the Palestinian people in an attempt to force them into displacement—but this is nothing more than a futile illusion.”
Trump’s envoy for prisoners’ affairs, Adam Boehler, stressed earlier that the meeting with Hamas “was very effective.”
In an interview with “Israel’s” Channel 13, Boehler confirmed that he does not rule out further meetings with Hamas, stating: “We are the United States, and we are not subordinate to Israel—we have our own interests,” adding “I work for Trump, and this is his decision; I implement what he wants.”
Hamas approves Gaza governance plan
On Saturday, Hamas’ negotiating team finalized its trip to Egypt, where the delegation discussed pathways for the implementation of the clauses of the ceasefire agreement with mediators.
The delegation, headed by Mohammad Darwish, head of Hamas’ Shura Council and Chairman of its Leadership Council, held talks with the head of Egypt’s General Intelligence Service, Major General Hassan Rashad.
The two sides discussed several crucial issues, including the ceasefire agreement and the prisoner exchange deal.
A statement released by the Hamas Media Office described the talks as “positive and responsible.”
“The Hamas delegation expressed its gratitude and appreciation for Egypt’s efforts, especially in countering displacement plans,” the Palestinian Resistance movement said, referring to United States President Donald Trump’s plot to “take over” the Gaza Strip.
Welcoming the outcomes of the most recent Arab summit, Hamas highlighted Egypt’s Gaza reconstruction plan and the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to statehood.
In further detail, Hamas’ negotiating team emphasized the need to uphold the terms of the multi-phase ceasefire agreement between the Palestinian Resistance and “Israel”.
‘The resistance will not let you stay’: Hezbollah chief addresses Israeli occupation of south Lebanon
The Cradle | March 10, 2025
Hezbollah’s Secretary-General Naim Qassem said on 9 March that Israeli forces currently occupying south Lebanon will inevitably face resistance if they do not withdraw.
“I tell the Israelis, if you remain at these points, this resistance will not let you continue there,” Qassem stated on Sunday.
“If the occupation continues, it must be confronted by the army, the people, and the resistance,” despite some people wanting “liberation through diplomacy,” the resistance leader added.
“We committed to the [ceasefire] agreement while the enemy violates it … it assaults people far from the border in their cars and in their homes,” he went on to say. “The ceasefire agreement is the one announced and distributed, and there is no secret agreement or clauses under the table.”
“The resistance is fine and continuing, but it was wounded and hurt and made great sacrifices … We had a security exposure and some shortcomings, and we are conducting an investigation to learn lessons and hold people accountable,” Qassem said.
The Hezbollah chief commented on the recent entry of hundreds of settlers into south Lebanon under Israeli army protection, calling “it the greatest evidence that we are not facing aggression in a single phase, but rather [an Israeli expansionist] project from the ocean to the Gulf.”
Israeli forces continue to occupy Labbouneh, Mount Blat, Owayda Hill, Aaziyyeh, and Hammamis Hill, despite the ceasefire implementation and withdrawal deadline expiring on 18 February.
Tel Aviv has violated the ceasefire agreement over 1,300 times with non-stop attacks and infiltration of Lebanon’s airspace since the deal was signed in November last year.
Israel claims to be acting on its rights within the deal by preventing Hezbollah from rearming itself. However, the agreement signed by Beirut does not include anything about Israeli forces having the right to attack the country, instead stipulating that the resistance’s presence and military infrastructure must be dismantled by the Lebanese army south of the Litani River in south Lebanon.
Tel Aviv accuses Hezbollah of having not fully withdrawn to the north of the Litani River, as per the agreement. It also accuses the Lebanese resistance of trying to reconstitute its forces.
A Lebanese soldier was killed by Israeli forces on Sunday when they opened fire at citizens in the border town of Kfar Kila. Another Lebanese soldier was shot in the leg and kidnapped on the same day.
On Friday, Israeli warplanes launched more than 20 air raids, targeting valleys and forested areas on the outskirts of Zebqin, Beit Yahoun, Al-Aishiyeh, Al-Rayhan, Ansar, and Al-Bissariya.
Unchecked expansionism: Senior Knesset member calls for ‘full Israeli control of Syria’
Press TV – March 10, 2025
In a brazen declaration of expansionist Zionist ambitions, an Israeli Knesset member has openly called for Syria to be placed under the regime’s full control.
Boaz Bismuth said Israel “will not allow a military force to emerge in Syria after Assad’s fall.”
“Damascus must be under full Israeli control, and we will ensure that it comes under our control.”
The remarks reveal long-standing Israeli objectives to reshape West Asia by force.
“Syria is our bridge to the Euphrates, and in the future we will reach Iraq and Kurdistan.”
The extremist Israeli politician also voiced wishful thinking that the entire region should become subordinate to Israeli policies.
“Syria must be completely subordinate to us, as must Jordan, without any military capabilities.”
“We wake up the King of Jordan in the middle of the night to make him carry out our orders.”
Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently said the regime will not tolerate the presence of the HTS or any other forces affiliated with the new rulers in southern Syria.
He also said the regime’s troops will remain stationed at a so-called “buffer zone,” seized following the fall of President Bashar al-Assad, inside the occupied Golan Heights.
The buffer zone was created by the United Nations after the 1973 Arab-Israeli War. A UN force of about 1,100 troops had patrolled the area since then.
Netanyahu said the regime’s forces will maintain an indefinite military presence at the summit of Mount Hermon, and the adjacent security zone.
Mount Hermon, known as Jabal al-Shaykh in Arabic, is a huge cluster of snowcapped mountain peaks towering above the Syria-Lebanon border.
It overlooks the Damascus countryside as well as the Golan Heights, which Israel occupied during the 1967 Six-Day War.
Following the downfall of Assad, the Israeli military has been launching airstrikes against military installations, facilities, and arsenals belonging to Syria’s now-defunct army.
The strikes were accompanied by ground incursions, as tanks and armored bulldozers penetrated Syrian territory, beyond the Golan Heights to Qatana, barely 30 kilometers from Damascus.
Israel has been condemned for the termination of the 1974 ceasefire agreement with Syria, and exploiting the chaos in the country in the wake of Assad’s downfall to make a land grab.
Former al-Qaeda affiliate the HTS took control of Damascus in early December in a stunning offensive, prompting Israel to move forces into a UN-monitored demilitarized zone within Syria.
The Israeli regime has occupied some 600 kilometers of Syrian territory since the fall of Assad.
The HTS remained conspicuously silent on the unprecedented Israeli aggression, refusing to condemn the land theft, a move seen by regional experts as a sign of internal instability.
Trump’s ingenuity vis-à-vis Russia, Iran
By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | March 10, 2025
Through the past three year period, Moscow claimed that it faced an existential threat from the US-led proxy war in Ukraine. But in the past six weeks, this threat perception has largely dissipated. The US President Donald Trump has made a heroic attempt to change his country’s image to a portmanteau of ‘friend’ and ‘enemy’ with whom Moscow can be friendly despite the backlog of a fundamental dislike or suspicion.
Last week, Trump turned to the Iran question for what could be a potentially similar leap of faith. There are similarities in the two situations. Both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian are quintessential nationalists and modernisers who are open to westernism. Both Russia and Iran face US sanctions. Both seek a rollback of sanctions that may open up opportunities to integrate their economies with the world market.
The Russian and Iranian elites alike can be described as ‘westernists’. Through their history, both Russia and Iran have experienced the West as a source of modernity to ‘upgrade’ their civilisation states. In such a paradigm, Trump is holding a stick in one hand and a carrot on the other, offering reconciliation or retribution depending on their choice. Is that a wise approach? Isn’t a reset without coercion possible at all?
In the Russian perception, the threat from the US has significantly eased lately, as the Trump administration unambiguously signalled a strategy to engage with Russia and normalise the relationship — even holding out the prospects for a mutually beneficial economic cooperation.
So far, Russia has had a roller coaster ride with Trump (who even threatened Russia with more sanctions) whose prescriptions of a ceasefire to bring the conflict in Ukraine to an end creates unease in the Russian mind. However, Trump also slammed the door shut on Ukraine’s NATO membership; rejected altogether any US military deployment in Ukraine; absolved Russia of responsibility for triggering the Ukraine conflict and instead placed the blame squarely on the Biden administration; openly acknowledged Russia’s desire for an end to the conflict; and took note of Moscow’s willingness to enter into negotiations — even conceded that the conflict itself is indeed a proxy war.
At a practical level, Trump signalled readiness to restore the normal functioning of the Russian embassy. If reports are to be believed, the two countries have frozen their offensive intelligence activities in cyber space.
Again, during the recent voting on a UN Security Council resolution on Ukraine, the US and Russia found themselves arrayed against Washington’s European allies who joined hands with Kiev. Presumably, Russian and American diplomats in New York made coordinated moves.
It comes as no surprise that there is panic in the European capitals and Kiev that Washington and Moscow are directly in contact and they are not in the loop. Even as the comfort level in Moscow has perceptively risen, the gloom in the European mind is only thickening, embodying the confusion and foreboding that permeated significant moments of their struggle.
All in all, Trump has conceded the legitimacy of the Russian position even before negotiations have commenced. Is an out-of-the-box thinking conceivable with regard to Iran as well?
In substantive terms, from the Russian perspective, the remaining ‘loose ends’ are: first, a regime change in Kiev that ensures the emergence of a neutral friendly neighbour; second, removal of US sanctions; and, third, talks on arms control and disarmament attuned to present-day conditions for ensuring European and global balance and stability.
As regards Iran, these are early days but a far less demanding situation prevails. True, the two countries have been locked in an adversarial relationship for decades. But it can be attributed entirely to the American interference in Iran’s politics, economy, society and culture; an unremitting mutual hostility was never the lodestar, historically.
A constituency of ‘westernists’ exists within Iran who root for normalisation with the US as the pathway leading to the country’s economic recovery. Of course, like in Russia, super hawks and dogmatists in Iran also have vested interests in the status quo. The military-industrial complex in both countries are an influential voice.
The big difference today is that the external environment in Eurasia thrives on US-Russia tensions whereas, the intra-regional alignments in the Gulf region are conducive to US-Iran detente. The Saudi-Iranian rapprochement, a steady and largely mellowing of Iran’s politics of resistance, Saudi Arabia’s abandonment of of jihadi groups as geopolitical tool and its refocus on development and reform as national strategies — all these mould the zeitgeist, which abhors US-Iran confrontation.
This historic transformation renders the old US strategy to isolate and ‘contain’ Iran rather obsolete. Meanwhile, there is a growing realisation within the US itself that American interests in West Asia no longer overlap Israel’s. Trump cannot but be conscious of it.
Equally, Iran’s deterrence capability today is a compelling reality. By attacking Iran, the US can at best score a pyrrhic victory at the cost of Israel’s destruction. Trump will find it impossible to extricate the US from the ensuing quagmire during his presidency, which, in fact, may define his legacy.
The US-Russia negotiations are likely to be protracted. Having come this far, Russia is in no mood to freeze the conflict till it takes full control of Donbass region — and, possibly, the eastern side of Dniepr river (including Odessa, Kharkhov, etc.) But in Iran’s case, time is running out. Something has to give way in another six months when the hourglass empties and the October deadline arrives for the snapback mechanism of the 2015 JCPOA to reimpose UN resolutions to “suspend all reprocessing, heavy water-related, and enrichment-related activities” by Tehran.
Trump will be called upon to take a momentous decision on Iran. Make no mistake, if push comes to shove, Tehran may quit the NPT altogether. Trump said Wednesday that he sent a letter to Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, calling for an agreement to replace the JCPOA. He suggested, without specifics, that the issue could quickly lead to conflict with Iran, but also signalled that a nuclear deal with Iran could emerge in the near future.
Later on Friday, Trump told reporters in the Oval Office that the US is “down to the final moments” negotiating with Iran, and he hoped military intervention would prove unnecessary. As he put it, “It’s an interesting time in the history of the world. But we have a situation with Iran that something is going to happen very soon, very, very soon.
“You’ll be talking about that pretty soon, I guess. Hopefully, we can have a peace deal. I’m not speaking out of strength or weakness, I’m just saying I’d rather see a peace deal than the other. But the other will solve the problem. We’re at final moments. We can’t let them have a nuclear weapon.”
Trump aims at generating peace dividends out of any normalisation with Russia and Iran, two energy superpowers, that could give momentum to his MAGA project. But cobwebs must be swept away first. Myths and misconceptions have shaped contemporary Western thinking on Russia and Iran. Trump should not fall for the phobia of Russia’s ‘imperialistic’ ambitions or Iran’s ‘clandestine’ nuclear programme.
If the first one was the narrative of the liberal-globalist neocon camp, the second one is a fabrication by the Israeli lobby. Both are self-serving narratives. In the process, the difference between westernisation and modernisation got lost. Westernisation is the adoption of western culture and society, whereas, modernisation is the development of one’s own culture and society. Westernisation can at best be only a subprocess of modernisation in countries such as Russia and Iran.
Trump’s ingenuity, therefore, lies in ending the US’ proxy wars with Russia and Iran by creating synergy out of the Russian-Iranian strategic partnership. If the US’ proxy wars only has drawn Russia and Iran closer than ever in their turbulent history as quasi-allies lately, their common interest today also lies in Trump’s ingenuity to take help from Putin to normalise the US-Iran ties. If anyone can pull off such an audacious, magical rope trick, it is only Trump who can,
Poland police state: Conservative MP who waived his immunity was arrested on Friday in dramatic fashion

Remix News – March 10, 2025
Remix News reported last week that on Wednesday, Polish Law and Justice (PiS) MP Dariusz Matecki announced that he was waiving his parliamentary immunity in the face of charges that were being made against him by the Prosecutor’s Office, saying that MPs should not be above the people. He made the announcement in a speech he gave in English before the Sejm, proclaiming his innocence while dramatically wearing handcuffs.
Matecki claimed that he was being persecuted as part of the ruling coalition’s revenge against the opposition. On Thursday, the Sejm approved his arrest and temporary detention.
Matecki has been charged with being fictitiously employed at the Regional Directorate of the State Forests in Szczecin from 2020 to 2023, defrauding state-owned companies of PLN 320,000 (approximately €77,000), and other forms of corruption.
The MP was detained and taken into custody by officers of the Internal Security Agency on Friday morning while en route to the Prosecutor’s Office to turn himself in, according to a report by Do Rzeczy. His arrest was quite dramatic, with officers stopping his car and pulling him out of it in the middle of traffic on a busy street.
The MP was charged with six criminal counts, which together could lead to up to 10 years in prison if he is convicted. Matecki has never before been charged with any crime and maintains his innocence.
Besides Matecki’s own arrest, his wife’s apartment was also searched by the authorities. PiS condemned what they referred to as the state’s efforts to intimidate his family.
On Friday afternoon, Przemysław Nowak, the spokesman for the Prosecutor’s Office, announced that the court had ordered Matecki to be detained for a period of two months.
Kacper Stukan, Matecki’s attorney, announced that he would be filing a complaint against the court’s decision. He explained that his client’s arrest was unnecessary given that there was no flight risk in his case.
Polish Minister of Justice Adam Bodnar ominously took to X to share a copy of the order for Matecki’s arrest with the heading, “To be continued . . .”
Donald Tusk’s left-liberal Civic Coalition government has frequently used the law to punish those associated with the country’s previous right-wing ruling coalition since coming to power in late 2023. Dozens of PiS politicians have been charged with crimes, and two other PiS MPs, Mariusz Kamiński and Maciej Wąsik, were arrested on corruption charges that they had previously been pardoned for. Both have been sentenced to two years’ imprisonment for “abuse of power.”
Similarly, former Deputy Minister of Justice Marcin Romanowski was charged with 11 counts of corruption. He fled to Hungary and was granted asylum there, which has led to tensions between the two governments.
Romania: Călin Georgescu’s presidential candidacy rejection sparks mass protests and international condemnation
By Thomas Brooke | Remix News | March 10, 2025
The Central Electoral Bureau (BEC) rejected the candidacy of Călin Georgescu in Romania’s upcoming presidential elections on Sunday evening. The decision, taken with 10 votes in favor out of the 14-member committee, has ignited widespread protests and drawn sharp international criticism.
Shortly after the announcement, demonstrators gathered outside the BEC headquarters in Bucharest, expressing outrage at what they labeled a “theft of democracy.” Supporters of Georgescu clashed with police, waved national flags, and chanted slogans calling for a “revolution.” Law enforcement officers used tear gas to disperse protesters who attempted to force their way into the institution. Several individuals were arrested in the ensuing confrontations.
Marius Militaru, a spokesperson for the Gendarmerie, stated that authorities were “trying to relax the atmosphere through dialogue” and that the situation was under control.
The BEC cited a missing signature on an annex of Georgescu’s declaration of wealth as the reason for his disqualification. Former Constitutional Court judge Tudorel Toader clarified that the annexes are a mandatory component of the documentation and that both substantive and procedural requirements must be met.
Despite the setback, Georgescu retains the option to challenge the decision at the Constitutional Court. If he secures a favorable ruling, he could regain his candidacy, making the upcoming days crucial for his political future.
It is understood that Georgescu has 24 hours to appeal, and any final decision must be made within 48 hours.
Taking to social media, Georgescu condemned the BEC’s decision as an attack on democracy.
“A direct blow to the heart of democracy worldwide! I have one message left! If democracy in Romania falls, the entire democratic world will fall! This is just the beginning. It’s that simple! Europe is now a dictatorship, Romania is under tyranny!” he wrote.
His rejection follows his recent arrest amid an investigation into alleged extremism, a move that had already drawn concern from high-profile figures.
The decision has provoked strong reactions from European and international political figures, some of whom have accused the European Union of political interference in Romania’s democratic process.
Matteo Salvini, Italy’s deputy prime minister and leader of the right-wing Lega party, condemned the rejection, stating: “A Soviet-style Euro-coup. First, they annul the elections he was winning, then they arrest him, and now they exclude him entirely for fear that he will win. Rather than ‘rearm Europe,’ we must refound it to defend democracy.”
U.S. billionaire Elon Musk, a senior adviser to the Trump administration, also weighed in, calling the situation “crazy” and amplifying claims that “Europe has cancelled more elections than Russia.”
Santiago Abascal, leader of Spain’s Vox party, expressed solidarity with Georgescu and Romania’s right-wing Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR) party, accusing “Brussels’ bureaucratic pressure” of being exerted to block his candidacy.
George Simion, president of the AUR, claimed the decision was overtly political with all commission members affiliated with the governing parties voting against Georgescu’s candidacy.
“It was rejected without any reason. All the papers were in good order. We live in a dictatorship. Please help us. Please be on our side to restore democracy in Romania,” Simion implored.
Georgescu previously won the first round of presidential elections before they were controversially annulled last year. His arrest last week — while en route to submit his candidacy — raised further suspicions about the state of democracy in Romania.
Ex-Ukrainian PM outraged by German intel chief’s warning
RT | March 10, 2025
Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Timoshenko has hit out at German intelligence chief Bruno Kahl after he claimed that resolving the conflict with Russia before the end of the decade could pose a security threat to Western Europe.
An end to the Ukraine conflict before 2029 or 2030 could allow Russia to regroup and “increase security risks for Europe,” Kahl told state broadcaster Deutsche Welle.
Kahl’s statement is the first official confirmation that the EU’s security is being prioritized at the expense of Ukraine’s sovereignty and the lives of its citizens, Timoshenko, who leads the opposition Fatherland (Batkivshchyna) party in Ukraine, claimed in a Facebook post on Friday.
“At the cost of Ukraine’s very existence and the cost of the lives of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians, did anyone decide to pay for Russia’s ‘demolition’ for safety in Europe? I didn’t think they would dare to say it so officially and openly…” she wrote.
Kahl’s remarks “explain a lot,” she said, urging the Ukrainian parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, to respond while calling for an immediate end to the conflict.
The German official’s comments echoed recent remarks by French President Emmanuel Macron, who claimed that Russia poses a direct threat to the rest of Europe and urged EU member states to increase defense spending.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has consistently dismissed Western leaders’ claims that Moscow could attack NATO as “nonsense.”
Divisions remain within the EU on the Ukraine conflict, with some countries advocating a stronger military response from Kiev while others, such as Hungary, call for peace talks. Brussels has continued to push for military aid to Kiev.
In March, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen launched the “rearm Europe” initiative to boost EU defense with up to €800 billion ($870 billion). In February, she announced €3.5 billion ($3.78 billion) in aid to strengthen Ukraine, calling its resilience an EU priority. Moscow has vowed to take measures to protect its security, warning that the EU’s militarization and confrontational rhetoric could escalate tensions.
Timoshenko’s response comes amid reports that she and members of former Ukrainian President Pyotr Poroshenko’s party recently held discussions with the team of US President Donald Trump. According to Politico, Ukrainian opposition figures presented themselves as more open to negotiations than Vladimir Zelensky. Both Timoshenko and Poroshenko, presently sanctioned on suspicion of high treason, confirmed their contacts with Trump’s team.
Much ado about nothing – Macron proposed nuclear umbrella for Europe
By Uriel Araujo | March 10, 2025
France’s President Emmanuel Macron announced last week his intention to extend the French nuclear shield to its European partners, and there are now talks about French-British nuclear deterrence. Germany’s Chancellor-in-waiting Friedrich Merz has urged France and Britain to share their nuclear weapons to “supplement” (not “replace”) the American nuclear shield.
The premise here is that a “pro-Russian” Trump is going to “abandon” Europe and thus leave it vulnerable to Moscow’s “aggression” – and so it is necessary to build an alternative shield. While various analysts and journalists put on serious faces while talking about these issues, underneath the rhetoric, the whole narrative lacks any substantiality, to the point of being laughable.
Let us briefly touch the premisses:
While the situation with borders is indeed far from being a settled matter in the post-Soviet space (with a number of frozen conflicts), there is of course no Russian appetite for attacking, or much less, “conquering” portions of Europe. The whole crisis in Ukraine has in fact more to do with the ethnocratic contradictions of nation-building in the new independent state of Ukraine, and with NATO’s enlargement, a policy denounced by the likes of the late Henry Kissinger himself, George Kennan, and a number of scholars and authorities who predicted it could cause the Ukrainian war since the late nineties.
Albeit partially bent on a kind of “reverse Kissinger” strategy to stop Biden’s dangerous “dual-containment” approach” (of antagonizing both China and Russia simultaneously), Trump is hardly pro-Moscow in any sense beyond that of avoiding an escalation. Moreover, his rhetorical attacks on NATO have more to do with burden sharing than with “ending” the Alliance.
The truth is that Europe embarked on an America’s proxy attrition war, and now that an overburdened Washington is retreating from its very war, puzzled Europeans do not know what to do. Now, let us delve into the idea of European deterrence, as proposed by Macron.
Europe has stayed under Washington’s wings long enough, and Trump does have a point when he says most NATO countries fail to meet the agreed expenses’ goal of using at least 2 percent of their GDP in military spending (which overburdens the US). And now that the Atlantic superpower is really signing its intent on pivoting to the Pacific, partially withdrawing from Eastern Europe, and shifting NATO’s burden onto its European allies, there is weeping and gnashing of teeth amongst Europe and Britain’s political elites.
European powers today are simply not what they once were. Consider the United Kingdom, for instance: it might even lack the capacity to maintain its own nuclear arsenal without American help, as experts have been warning, in the context of Trump’s “burden shift” threats to “abandon” or to leave the American transatlantic allies on their own. In January last, a British “Trident” nuclear missile embarrassingly failed (for the second time) during a test launch, which led to speculations about the realities of Britain’s nuclear deterrence.
Long story short, Paris and London are the only nuclear powers in Europe – and it is unclear however to what extent they would be capable of replacing the so-called American “nuclear umbrella”.
According to Astrid Chevreuil (a visiting fellow with the Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies – CSIS – in Washington, D.C.) and Doreen Horschig (a fellow with the Project on Nuclear Issues at CSIS), there are “significant strategic, doctrinal, and logistical obstacles” to that. More to the point, they add: “in the current situation, the French and British nuclear forces are a complement to US extended deterrence, but they would not constitute a viable solution in the event of an abrupt withdrawal of U.S. nuclear forces.” Elaborating on it, Chevreuil and Horschig argue that:
Both the British and French arsenals are designed, in their size, to respond to attacks “based on their vital interests”: Paris counts on less than 300 nuclear warheads, and London, in turn, possesses less than 250 (Washington in contrast has “a total of 1,700 deployed warheads”).
Moreover, American nuclear weapons stored in Europe today are “airborne capabilities” (and not ground-based or seaborne systems). Only France has such an airborne nuclear component, and “replacing” the US would require enormous efforts from European allies.
Finally, the two experts conclude, Britain and France lack a nuclear doctrine compatible with the very idea of “extending their nuclear deterrence through stationing their weapons in other countries.” Paris does not even participate in NATO’s nuclear planning groups, as the French doctrine “insists on the independence of its nuclear decision making.”
I’ve written before on the challenges Europe faces when it comes to “rearming” itself – they range from de-industrialization to lack of a common legal and bureaucratic framework, or a common EU defense market – according to Sophia Besch (a Carnegie Endowment for International Peace fellow), and Max Bergmann (a former member of the US Policy Planning Staff and Director of the Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies).
One should also keep in mind that Paris’ own relationship with NATO is historically complex, to say the least. Under De Gaulle, France withdrew from the organization’s integrated military structure in 1966, and even expelled all of its headquarters and units on French territory. It was French President Nicolas Sarkozy who finally ended Paris “estrangement” from NATO as recently as 2009 – so it took 43 years for Paris to change its course. To this day, France has not given up “nuclear independence” with regards to NATO, as mentioned. It is hard to change things overnight.
In addition, French ambition’s aside, a quick look at Africa is enough to demonstrate how much of a declining power France really is today: one just needs to consider the French failures in Chad, Niger, Mali, and elsewhere – the French military was basically kicked out of their main bases in the African continent.
Lastly, there is also an element of a power struggle going on. If the overburdened American superpower is partially retreating from a number of theaters, the outcome of it could be a local power vacuum (in Europe) and some actors might have an appetite for filling such a void. Even Poland has eyes on that, as I wrote before. Much of the French rhetoric we are now seeing has a lot to do with that.
To sum it up, Macron is offering Europe something he does not have to counter a threat that does not really exist the way he describes it. He is doing so because of something Trump will not actually do. To put it another way, it is “words, words, words”.
Uriel Araujo, PhD, is an anthropology researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts.

Was taking the Covid vaccine Worth a Shot? A new book by Caroline Pover, written on behalf of Brianne Dressen who lives in the USA, chronicles the horrific story of how she was severely injured by the Covid vaccine after enrolling on the AstraZeneca trial in November 2020. Caroline sensitively and professionally tells the heart wrenching, eye-opening account of how Brianne Dressen’s life was turned upside down and irreversibly changed forever the day she chose to volunteer to enroll on the UK-led AstraZeneca clinical trial. This book takes the reader along the rollercoaster ride of the devastating injuries caused by the vaccine and the blatant abuse of power by the healthcare system to denigrate, ignore, and cover up her injuries – along with many others labelled – as ‘misinformation’ spreaders by the medical-industrial-military complex. Every person on the planet was misled by governments, NGOs, regulatory agencies, corporations, Big Pharma, healthcare professionals, along with social and mainstream media. From how clinical trials are conducted to the lack of injury compensation, wide scale censorship, corruption and abuse of power, this book shows the myriad ways Brianne fought and continues to fight for truth and justice for the Covid-vaccine injured, who have been completely abandoned and often maligned by society.