NATO needs Romania to launch WWIII – Georgescu
RT | April 11, 2025
Calin Georgescu, a former Romanian presidential candidate whose bid was controversially invalidated earlier this year, has claimed that NATO wants to “launch World War III from Romania.” In an interview with US journalist Tucker Carlson, he said his staunch pro-peace stance was among the main reasons why he was barred from running for president.
The right-wing politician, known as an outspoken critic of NATO, the EU, and Western support for Ukraine, scored a surprise win in the first round of November’s presidential election, receiving 23% of the vote. However, the country’s Constitutional Court swiftly moved in to annul the result over alleged “irregularities” in his campaign. Later, Georgescu was stripped of his right to run for office.
Appearing on Carlson’s podcast on Thursday, the former Romanian presidential candidate alleged that NATO wants to “launch… World War III from Romania.” The politician cited the fact that the “largest military base of NATO is in Romania,” coupled with the 380-mile (612 km) long border that his country shares with Ukraine.
“In this situation of course Romania is the asset for [the] European Union, for [French President Emmanuel] Macron in order to launch the war,” Georgescu insisted.
“They want to turn NATO [into] an offensive force” and are “pushing for war,” he alleged, adding that “my position was exactly against them.”
According to Georgescu, “all my campaign was just concentrate[d] on peace[.] When I said… the word ‘peace’, they immediately alerted… because they need war.”
The right-wing politician went on to say that the “majority of Romanian people… have this position against any intervention and any participation [in] war.”
“I was denied [the right to run for president] by the globalist mafia,” the former candidate alleged, further claiming that the people behind the invalidation of his candidacy were the same people who attempted to derail Donald Trump’s presidential campaign in the US, using similar smear tactics.
Appearing on ‘The Shawn Ryan Show’ in January, Georgescu similarly suggested that NATO military infrastructure in Romania could be used to launch a major offensive against Russia.
Bucharest, a NATO member since 2004, has been expanding the MK Air Base to make it the largest NATO installation in Europe.
Moscow has described the base as “anti-Russian” and warned that it would be among the first targets for retaliatory strikes in a military conflict.
Israeli Airstrikes Across Gaza Kill, Injure Dozens
IMEMC | April 11, 2025
On Thursday, Israeli forces intensified bombing and shelling across the destroyed, besieged, and starved Gaza Strip, causing dozens of casualties, including women and children.
In Gaza City, a building in the city center was targeted, killing at least five Palestinians and injuring many others. Six more Palestinians lost their lives, and several were wounded when the army struck the Abu Al-Awn family’s home in the Shuja’iyya neighborhood.
Among the injured was a Palestinian infant whose arm had to be amputated following the attack.
In Deir Al-Balah, central Gaza, the army launched missiles at the Abu Al-Ajeen area, killing two Palestinians and wounding several others. Homes in Qizan Najjar, south of Khan Younis, were also shelled by Israeli forces.
Further south, in Khan Younis, a missile targeted the Abu Doqqa family’s home in the Shahayda area, north of Abasan town, killing two Palestinians, including a child.
In another incident, a displaced family sheltering near Nasser Hospital was struck by a missile fired from an Israeli helicopter, killing one Palestinian and injuring others.
Additional strikes in Khan Younis led to the death of a woman and injuries to several residents at the Al-Farra family’s home in the Sheikh Nasser area.
In Mawasi Rafah, the southernmost part of Gaza, a Palestinian was killed when soldiers fired live rounds at displaced residents in the Shakoush area.
On the political front, Israeli Channel 13 reported ongoing indirect discussions regarding a prisoner exchange deal, which include proposals for the release of more than five Israeli captives. Kan News stated that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu conducted a situation assessment with military officials and negotiation teams about the Egyptian-mediated proposal.
According to reports, the Egyptian plan includes releasing eight captives alive, implementing a 50-day ceasefire, allowing humanitarian aid to enter Gaza, and commencing negotiations for a second phase aimed at ending the war and facilitating an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza.
Sources reveal that the proposal, considered “serious” by Arab media, includes the release of eight or nine Israeli captives, among them an American-Israeli soldier named Aidan Alexander, along with eight bodies. In return, Israel would release 300 Palestinian detainees, including 150 serving life sentences, and 2,200 detainees from Gaza.
The plan also outlines a 70-day extension of the ceasefire in Gaza, during which the second phase of negotiations would proceed. This phase includes facilitating the delivery of fuel and humanitarian aid to Gaza, reopening border crossings, and providing Hamas with detailed information about the status of remaining hostages.
Medical sources cited by Al Jazeera reported that Israeli attacks since dawn on Thursday have claimed the lives of at least 29 Palestinians, with additional casualties being reported amid ongoing strikes. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO), expressed alarm over the escalating humanitarian crisis. He warned of worsening health conditions and rising fatalities resulting from Israel’s blockade on aid shipments, emphasizing the urgent need for medical evacuations for over 10,000 individuals in Gaza.
To date, Israeli bombardments have claimed the lives of at least 50,886 Palestinians, including 12,365 women and 17,954 children. Approximately 11,000 individuals remain missing, largely believed to be under the rubble of bombed homes and buildings. The total number of wounded has now surpassed 115,875, primarily affecting children, women, and the elderly.
Steve Witkoff’s Iran mission holds seamless possibilities
By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | April 11, 2025
The rubric of the US-Iranian talks slated for Saturday in Muscat turned into a vanity fair of sorts — whether the talks should be called ‘indirect’ or ‘direct’. The US President Donald Trump sought direct talks and claimed that Iranians conveyed through back channel that they had no objection to it. Furthermore, Trump disclosed that indirect talks already started. While maintaining publicly that the talks will be ‘indirect’, Iranians didn’t call out Trump.
Accordingly, Trump nominated his trusted aide and longstanding friend Steve Witkoff to represent him at the talks. Tehran reciprocated with Abbas Araqchi, a veteran nuclear negotiator and brilliant diplomat, and currently the foreign minister.
Trump noted with satisfaction that Tehran has fielded a negotiator at the highest possible level. Interestingly, Trump made the announcement on the talks from the Oval Office in the presence of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Such hyper activism on the optics may create a surreal impression. After all, there is also a military build-up going on in the US base in Diego Garcia, including B-52 heavy bombers with a range of 10000 kms. But the Russian assessment is that the US’ mobilisation of military assets falls way short of the level of force strength required to start a war with Iran.
The presence of Araqchi and Witkoff at the talks in Muscat underscores that both sides are approaching the talks in all seriousness conscious of the real risk of a dangerous escalation of the present precarious situation around the Iran nuclear issue if concrete progress is not achieved in the negotiations by mid-2025.
The clock starts ticking for the E3 (France, Germany, and Britain) to move to restore the UN Security Council sanctions on Iran by invoking the JCPOA’s veto-proof ‘snapback’ mechanism for which the cutoff date is the month of October. Snapback also restores Security Council ban on uranium enrichment, further reactor development, and ballistic missile activities.
Tehran has warned that if the UN sanctions are restored, it may withdraw from the NPT in response and if that happens, it is no longer obligated to retain IAEA safeguards. But there is a gestation period of 3 months before Iran’s exit from NPT gets formalised.
Enter Russia. According to the 1992 nuclear cooperation agreement between Moscow and Tehran, “nuclear material, equipment, special non-nuclear-material, and related technology” as well as nuclear materials produced by the result of transferred technology “shall be under the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards” during their “entire period” of stay in Iran.
The agreement further stipulates that these materials “shall be used only for declared purposes that are not connected with activities of manufacturing nuclear explosive devices” and “shall not be used to carry out activities in the field of nuclear fuel cycle” that are not under IAEA safeguards.
Suffice to say, at the very least, Iran’s nuclear cooperation agreement with Russia may obligate Tehran to retain some IAEA presence. Russia’s economic interests in nuclear cooperation with Iran will also play a part. Besides, the recent Russian-Iranian treaty on strategic cooperation explicitly affirms Tehran’s commitment to nuclear non-proliferation. Russia also tends to prioritise a constructive engagement of the US in its foreign policies and its moderating influence on Iran lest it goes the North Korean way will be a significant factor in the US-Iranian negotiations. The situation around Iran has already figured more than once in the recent US-Russia exchanges since February including at the highest level between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin.
During this week, against the backdrop of the talks in Muscat, President Masoud Pezeshkian made certain significant remarks. It is entirely conceivable that he was speaking for Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
First, Pezeshkian said Khamenei is “not opposed to US entities investing capital” in the Iranian economy. Succinctly put, this is a radical departure from Iran’s traditional stance.
Second, Pezeshkian said, “We are open to dialogue, but with dignity and pride, we will not compromise on our achievements and we will not make deals (on them).” In effect, Pezeshkian has notified that any suggestions that the only acceptable deal with Iran must include complete dismantlement of the country’s nuclear program will be a non-starter.
Third, Pezeshkian not only reiterated Iran’s rejection of nuclear weapons but stated its willingness to be subject to robust safeguards. As he put it, “We are not looking for an atomic bomb. Who is setting policy above the Leader of the Islamic Revolution who has officially announced that we are not looking for a nuclear bomb? Check it a thousand times. You can verify a thousand times that we don’t have atomic bombs, but we need nuclear science and nuclear energy.”
Fourth, Pezeshkian also had a message of sorts for Israel. He said, “We are not looking for war, but we will stand strong against any aggression with the knowledge and power that our scientists have created. The more they harm us, the more powerful we will become, and the stronger we will stand against any threat they pose to us.”
Taken together, these remarks by Pezeshkian would give a fair idea of what the contours of a possible settlement of the nuclear issue could be as the talks proceed.
Most importantly, Iran seeks an economic partnership with the US and implicit in it is the unspoken readiness for political and diplomatic ties. Iran’s approach bears an uncanny resemblance to what Russia has adopted in its nascent dialogue with the Trump administration. Trump’s choice of Witkoff as the negotiator for Iran can be seen as a signal that the US is open to explore opportunities of economic cooperation with Iran as an underpinning to the normalisation process. (By the way, the Washington Post has reported that Witkoff is willing to travel to Tehran, if invited.) Certainly, Tehran pins hopes on Witkoff bringing new thinking into the paradigm. Do not be surprised if he travels to Tehran in the near future.
That said, the Trump administration must appreciate that Iran lives in a tough security environment and is attempting to use its nuclear threshold status as a deterrent. Therefore, what is possible is a combination of limits and monitoring that can adequately reduce proliferation risks.
The onus is on Witkoff to articulate behind closed doors realistic US objectives for a nuclear deal, bearing in mind that politics is the art of the possible. This involves refraining from calls for the complete dismantlement of the Iranian nuclear program, and, equally, the projection of ideas as to how Tehran will benefit from an agreement with the United States.
When I visited Tehran last June to observe the presidential election, a topic that came up in almost all conversations and TV interviews was: What to expect from a Trump administration? What I could sense was that contrary to what Israeli media management strives to project to muddy waters, Tehran has no revenge mentality and instead senses that Trump’s priorities in a second term are not about projection of power but the regeneration of America. As a civilisational state that was never colonised through millennia, Iranian culture is highly pragmatic but it will never surrender its legitimate interests or compromise under pressure. In this respect, it is a unique country in the region. (See an outstanding policy brief by Washington-based Arms Control Association titled The Art of a New Iranian Nuclear Deal in 2025.)
Iran’s relevance to the regeneration of the American economy (MAGA) is self-evident. Apart from vast mineral resources, Iran’s human resources can give a solid underpinning to economic and technological partnership with American business and industry. An enduring nuclear deal with Iran is best achieved through an overarching relationship to reengage with Iran as a partner after over four decades.
The end of La Grande illusion democratique
By Stephen Karganovic | Strategic Culture Foundation | April 11, 2025
Only the incurably naïve were shocked by the brazen and deliberate rigging of the French Presidential elections. Granted, the outrageous infringement of collective West’s verbally proclaimed democratic electoral canons in Romania, which took place shortly before, could have been taken by alert observers as a reliable signal of what might imminently occur in other precincts of the “European garden.” Blinded by cultural racism however some of them might have mistaken electoral rigging in Romania, a recently acquired patch of that garden, as a sui generis case, entirely attributable to Balkan primitivism. But they would have overlooked conveniently the now well established fact that instructions to corrupt Romanian bureaucrats to eliminate inconvenient candidate Georgescu did not emanate from Bucharest alone. We now know that they were issued imperatively from the idyllic Garden’s ideological centre, which is in Brussels.
Without diminishing, in the electoral disqualification and penal punishment of Marine Le Pen, the influence of the local French branch of the globalist cabal (it would be unpardonably incorrect to call that scum “elite”) there also the nefarious role of the nerve centre in Brussels must be stressed.
The arbitrary mechanism which allows the cabal to target virtually anybody it perceives as unsuitable or as a threat was laid bare by Croatian European Parliament deputy Mislav Kolakušić. The core charge pressed against Le Pen, let us recall, was of a basely pecuniary nature, namely that as an EU deputy she partially used her office employees in Strassbourg to do political work on behalf of her French political party, the Front National, improperly remunerating them with European Union funds. The outspoken EU parliamentarian Kolakušić knows of what he speaks because he was himself charged with this ghastly infraction, an accusation from which he managed to successfully defend himself only thanks to having kept meticulous records. It appears that acting with Gallic abandon Marine Le Pen or her office manager were not nearly as fastidious record keepers and they are now paying the political and penal price for the oversight.
What Kolakušić reveals about the inner workings of the system, based on his own experience and observation, is most unsettling and strongly suggests a deliberately built-in trap ready to be sprung on anyone who gets out of line. His remarks are in Croatian, but their gist is as follows. The way the European Parliament interprets its own rules, its officials are authorised to determine as they deem fit whether parliamentary deputies or their staff on any given day had worked a full eight hours as required on tasks exlusively related to matters pertaining to European Parliament affairs, or not. If not, there are unpleasant consequences that can be made to follow. That portion of salaries alleged to have been paid out from European funds for performing tasks deemed unrelated to European Parliament work is refundable on demand, as subjectively assessed by investigators who are empowered to act with arbitrary discretion. But that is the least of it. More ominously, the arbitrariness extends to the determination of how the matter shall be treated. It could be considered a harmless lapse curable with a reprimand and a refund. But if the powers that be take a particularly dim view of the alleged malefactor, it could also be treated as an act of moral turpitude, having been committed with the element of mens rea, which creates grounds for the imputation of criminal liability. It is by opting for the latter interpretation, of course, that with the helpful assistance of the French judiciary (that some naive folks had thought to be so incorruptible) that they got Marine Le Pen.
“Such a procedure,“ Kolakušić explains further, “is unprecedented anywhere else in the world or in any other parliament, but it is a perfect weapon for settling accounts with dissidents, be they of the so-called extreme right or extreme left, or independent parliamentarians, which is to say the only members of the European Parliament who think using their own brains and who formulate their own original positions on major issues.“
Before over-sentimentalising the plight of Madame Le Pen and showering her with excessive sympathy, some of which she undoubtedly deserves but not uncritically and always in prudent measure, her own responsibility for the situation she faces should be honestly confronted. At some point she made a conscious decision to play ball with the cabal that is now persecuting her. In order to try to accomodate them she went as far as reneging on her filial duties and renouncing her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, the founder of the political party she now heads, which she virtuously relabelled from Front National to Rassemblement national in an attempt to make it more palatable and sound less “extremist“ to her enemies. She then went on to ease her father’s associates out of the picture and replace them with a more “modern“ and “progressive“ crew, with the same goal in mind of ingratiating and reinventing herself as a “mainstream“ political actor (or actress, if you wish). Needless to say, she presided also over an ideological shift in her party’s political orientation which, whilst remaining verbally committed to sovereignism and the promotion of French national interests, conspicuously lost the sharp edge that previously had made it distinctive in the French political landscape.
And now, with the Presidency of France within her grasp, the French people having become utterly disgusted with the alien cabal that is running their country into the ground and ready to vote for her, what has Marine Le Pen got to show for her accomodations? She can boast a multimillion euro fine, a four year prison sentence, half of it suspended but the other half very much in effect, and a five-year ban on political activity, crashing her dream of becoming President of France for a long time, and more likely forever.
Madame Le Pen has now learned the hard way a painful lesson that Russians also have had to grasp gradually and at considerable cost to themselves. It is that the cabal are недоговороспособныe, or in plain English “not agreement capable.” All attempts to curry favour with them are futile. They have their trusted agents, “Mr. and Mr. Macron” being prime examples, whom they cultivate to do their bidding. No substitutes are solicited or accepted from the ranks of the profane, no matter how hard and long the newcomers have laboured to ingratiate themselves.
The massive outpouring of anger by the disenfranchised French people, who are rightfully furious at being deprived of the opportunity to vote for the candidate of their choice, may be of some consolation to Marine Le Pen, just as similar expressions of popular anger that have been going on in Romania for weeks may assuage the wounded feelings of Calin Georgescu, but will otherwise have no palpable effect.
Madame Le Pen may waste her time appealing the French court’s scandalous decision if she so wishes. She may publicly fume and denounce her persecutors to her heart’s content. (Humiliatingly, the video recording of one of her scathing denunciations, where she delusionally likens her electoral disqualification to a “nuclear bomb,” was removed from YouTube shortly after being posted, as can be verified by clicking on the hyperlink above.) But it is unlikely that any sort of commotion in the streets will produce significant changes in the dispensation that has from on high been decreed, either in France or in Romania.
Instead of wasting her time in the courts, which are as rigged as the electoral system, Marine Le Pen could perhaps have some fun and play a little game with her tormentors. Our advice to her is to pull a Perón stunt and delegate her super smart and photogenic niece Marion Maréchal Le Pen, an EU Parliament deputy and political figure in her own right, to take up the Le Pen mantle and with the blessing of aunt Marine run for President of France in 2027. It may be recalled that in the 1970s Juan Perón was in exile and similarly disqualified in Argentina to run for political office. He outwitted his opponents by designating Hector Cámpora to run on the Peronist party ticket in his stead. Cámpora won, annulled the impediments blocking Perón’s return to power and resigned in Perón’s favour. Surely Marion could do the same for aunt Marine.
Will Marine Le Pen have the creativity to step out of the box and twist the lion’s tail just a bit? We will soon find out.
France & Britain Prepare Foreign Intervention Into Ukraine – Russian Foreign Ministry
Sputnik – 11.04.2025
MOSCOW – London and Paris’s discussions on sending deterrent forces to Ukraine are preparations for foreign intervention, Alexey Polishchuk, Director of the Second CIS Department at the Russian Foreign Ministry, told Sputnik.
“The issue of peacekeeping is not on the agenda now. According to world practice, the main condition for deploying peacekeepers is achieving a peaceful settlement or a sustainable ceasefire,” he said.
Polishchuk emphasized that Kiev is sabotaging peace efforts, particularly the moratorium on strikes against energy facilities.
“The negotiations on the formation of the so-called deterrent forces, which are currently being conducted by the “coalition of the willing” led by France and Britain, are in fact a preparation for foreign intervention,” he said.
French President Emmanuel Macron said after hosting the summit of the “coalition of the willing” in Paris on March 27 that a number of countries wanted to send troops to Ukraine as “deterrent forces.” He said that the UK-French initiative would be neither a replacement for Ukrainian troops nor a peacekeeping force. The goal would be to deter Russia by stationing troops in the strategic locations.
Russian spokesperson Maria Zakharova warned that any foreign military presence would be seen as a threat to Russia, risking direct military conflict.
Zelensky mustn’t govern Russians he despises – Lavrov
RT | April 11, 2025
Vladimir Zelensky’s openly declared hatred for Russians means he must not and will not govern people living in former parts of Ukraine that Kiev seeks to retake, Moscow’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has stated.
In a late March interview with the French daily Le Figaro, Zelensky expressed his disdain for “Russians who killed so many Ukrainian citizens,” asserting that this “hatred” fuels his leadership.
Lavrov referenced the comments during a press conference at the Foreign Ministry on Friday, underscoring why Moscow has deemed Kiev’s territorial claims unacceptable.
“Who would even hypothetically consider handing over those people to such an individual? Nobody. No way,” he emphasized.
Since the Western-backed coup in Kiev in 2014, five Ukrainian regions plus the city of Sevastopol have voted to break away and join Russia. The Ukrainian government has dismissed these referendums as a “sham.”
Lavrov also reminded journalists of Zelensky’s previous derogatory remarks, including statements made prior to the conflict’s escalation in 2022. In 2021, Zelensky urged Donbass residents who identified as Russian to relocate to Russia. That same year, he referred to politicians targeted by his government with personal sanctions as another “species.”
The minister accused the Ukrainian government of “legislatively eradicating everything related to Russia and the Russian world: the Russian language, Russian-speaking media, the Orthodox Christianity represented by the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church, and much more.”
Such discriminatory policies, he argued, justify labeling the Zelensky administration “neo-Nazi” and contribute to ongoing hostilities. Lavrov asserted that US President Donald Trump recognizes Russia’s red lines and considers “the return to the 1991 borders, as Zelensky keeps demanding” impossible.
The Trump administration seeks to mediate a peace deal between Moscow and Kiev, while the UK and France are leading discussions on a proposed “reassurance force” to be deployed in Ukraine if a truce is achieved. Moscow has firmly rejected the idea of NATO troops being stationed in Ukraine.
