Lebanese army may partially ‘freeze cooperation’ with US-led ceasefire committee
The Cradle | June 6, 2025
The Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) released a statement on 6 June warning it could potentially “freeze cooperation” with the US-led ceasefire monitoring committee regarding site inspections, due to constant Israeli violations.
The statement came the morning after Israel carried out a large-scale attack on Beirut’s southern suburb.
In the statement, the LAF condemned Israel’s “daily aggression” against Lebanon and its continued occupation of Lebanese territory. “Immediately after the Israeli enemy announced its threats, it began coordinating with the Cessation of Hostilities Monitoring Committee to prevent an attack. Patrols also headed to a number of sites to inspect them, despite the enemy’s rejection of the proposal,” the statement added.
“The Israeli enemy’s persistent violation of the Agreement and its refusal to cooperate with the Cessation of Hostilities Monitoring Mechanism only weakens the role of the Committee and the Army, and could lead the military establishment to freeze cooperation with the Cessation of Hostilities Monitoring Mechanism regarding site inspections,” the LAF went on to say.
Following the attacks on Thursday evening, Lebanon’s President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam released statements condemning the Israeli airstrikes.
The president said the attack was a “blatant violation of an international agreement” and served as “conclusive evidence” of Israel’s rejection of regional peace.
Salam also condemned the “systematic and deliberate assault on Lebanon’s security, stability, and economy” and called on the international community to “shoulder its responsibility to deter Israel and ensure its full withdrawal from Lebanese territories.”
The Israeli airstrikes on Beirut took place on the eve of the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha.
Thousands of civilians were displaced from their homes after Israel issued evacuation orders for eight residential buildings in the southern suburb on Thursday night.
Israeli drones carried out over a dozen “warning strikes” before warplanes struck and destroyed the targeted buildings, marking the largest attack on Lebanon’s capital since the ceasefire was reached last year.
Tel Aviv claimed the buildings were located above underground drone production facilities belonging to the Lebanese resistance movement, Hezbollah.
“After Hezbollah extensively used drones as a key component of its attacks on Israel, the terrorist organization is expanding its drone production industry in preparation for the next war with Israel,” an Israeli army spokesman said.
Lebanese security sources who spoke with several local media outlets said the Lebanese army requested via the US-led ceasefire committee that it enter the buildings and inspect them to refute Israel’s claims.
The sources said the army entered one of the buildings and found no evidence of any weapon facilities. However, Israel rejected the request and began carrying out drone strikes, forcing the army to withdraw.
“In the (ceasefire) agreement, there is a mechanism for inspections if there is a complaint. Israel in general, and Netanyahu in particular, wants to continue the war in the region,” a Hezbollah official told Lebanese media, denying the presence of any drone facilities at the locations targeted by Israel.
As the final round of airstrikes took place, Israeli warplanes also bombed the village of Ain Qana in southern Lebanon, citing the presence of Hezbollah facilities.
Hundreds of people have been killed since the ceasefire agreement, which Israel has so far violated over 3,000 times, was reached in November last year. Israeli forces also maintain an occupation of five locations inside Lebanon, which they established themselves in after the ceasefire, in violation of the deal.
Lebanese diplomatic efforts have so far failed to make progress in forcing Israel to stop its attacks and withdraw its forces from the five points in southern Lebanon, which are separate from the other areas in the south that the Israeli army has been illegally occupying for years.
Lebanon’s continued coordination with the US-led monitoring committee has yielded no results.
Israel’s Channel 14 said on Thursday evening that the latest Israeli strikes on Beirut were carried out in full coordination with Washington.
Tucker Carlson warns: ‘Iran is not alone; attacking it risks world war, US defeat’
Press TV – June 5, 2025
Iran, backed by its allies, is not alone, an ex-Fox News host says, warning that any attack by the United States against the Islamic Republic risks a world war that would lead to the US defeat.
American political commentator and presenter Tucker Carlson sounded the alarm on Thursday, as Iran has stressed the inseparable nature of uranium enrichment activities to the nation’s nuclear program, dismissing calls by US President Donald Trump and other US officials for “zero-level” enrichment.
The provocative demand by the US administration has already sent shockwaves through the ongoing Oman-mediated negotiations between Tehran and Washington over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program, leaving the future of the talks in limbo and raising the risk of military confrontation between the two.
In a post on his X account, Carlson argued that figures like Mark Levin are pushing for war with Iran under the pretense of stopping nuclear proliferation, stressing that there is no credible evidence that Iran is close to developing a nuclear bomb, and the ongoing fear-mongering is a recycled narrative from decades past.
“It’s a lie. In fact, there is zero credible intelligence that suggests Iran is anywhere near building a bomb, or has plans to. None. Anyone who claims otherwise is ignorant or dishonest. If the US government knew Iran was weeks from possessing a nuclear weapon, we’d be at war already. Iran knows this, which is why they aren’t building one. Iran also knows it’s unwise to give up its weapons program entirely,” the ex-Fox News host said.
“So why is Mark Levin once again hyperventilating about weapons of mass destruction? To distract you from the real goal, which is regime change — young Americans heading back to the Middle East to topple yet another government. Virtually no one will say this out loud. America’s record of overthrowing foreign leaders is so embarrassingly counterproductive that regime change has become a synonym for disaster. Officially, no one supports it. So instead of telling the truth about their motives, they manufacture hysteria: ‘A country like Iran can never have the bomb! They’ll nuke Los Angeles! We have to act now!” added the conservative political commentator.
Carlson described Levin and like-minded ideologues in Washington as dishonest ideologues exploiting fear to trigger another disastrous conflict, warning that a war with the Islamic Republic would be catastrophic, far more dangerous than previous US interventions.
“And then there’s the question of the war itself. Iran may not have nukes, but it has a fearsome arsenal of ballistic missiles, many of which are aimed at US military installations in the [Persian] Gulf, as well as at our allies and at critical energy infrastructure. The first week of a war with Iran could easily kill thousands of Americans. It could also collapse our economy, as surging oil prices trigger unmanageable inflation. Consider the effects of $30 gasoline,” he warned.
An ardent advocate of Trump, Carlson emphasized that Iran has significant missile capabilities, strong allies like Russia and China through BRICS, and a vital role in global oil markets.
“But the second week of the war could be even worse. Iran isn’t Iraq or Libya, or even North Korea. While it’s often described as a rogue state, Iran has powerful allies. It’s now part of a global bloc called BRICS, which represents the majority of the world’s landmass, population, economy and military power. Iran has extensive military ties with Russia. It sells the overwhelming majority of its oil exports to China. Iran isn’t alone. An attack on Iran could very easily become a world war. We’d lose,” he stressed.
Carlson also slammed war advocates for intentionally pushing Iran toward conflict by making demands they know Tehran will reject, all to corner Trump into betraying his anti-war promises.
Iran and the US have so far held five rounds of indirect talks on a replacement for the 2015 nuclear deal. However, the talks have faced an obstacle over the US demand for Iran to stop enriching uranium under any new deal.
Ukraine’s most reckless attack: Was NATO behind it?
RT | June 6, 2025
While Western headlines celebrated Operation Spider’s Web as a daring feat of Ukrainian ingenuity, a closer look reveals something far more calculated – and far less Ukrainian. This wasn’t just a strike on Russian airfields. It was a test – one that blended high-tech sabotage, covert infiltration, and satellite-guided timing with the kind of precision that only the world’s most advanced intelligence networks can deliver. And it begs the question: who was really pulling the strings?
Let’s be honest. Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence didn’t act alone. It couldn’t have.
Even if no Western agency was directly involved in the operation itself, the broader picture is clear: Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence, its military, and even its top political leadership rely heavily on Western intelligence feeds. Ukraine is deeply embedded within NATO’s intelligence-sharing architecture. The idea of a self-contained Ukrainian intel ecosystem is largely a thing of the past. These days, Kiev draws primarily on NATO-provided data, supplementing it with its own domestic sources where it can.
That’s the backdrop – a hybrid model that’s become standard over the past two years. Now, let’s look more closely at Operation Spider’s Web itself. We know the planning took roughly 18 months and involved moving drones covertly into Russian territory, hiding them, and then orchestrating coordinated attacks on key airfields. So how likely is it that Western intelligence agencies had a hand in such a complex operation?
Start with logistics. It’s been reported that 117 drones were prepped for launch inside Russia. Given that numerous private companies in Russia currently manufacture drones for the war effort, it wouldn’t have been difficult to assemble the necessary devices under that cover. That’s almost certainly what happened. Components were likely purchased domestically under the guise of supplying the “Special Military Operation.” Still, it’s hard to believe Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence could have pulled off this mass procurement and assembly alone. It’s highly likely Western intelligence agencies played a quiet but crucial role – especially in securing specialized components.
Then there’s the explosives. If the operation’s command center was located in the Ural region, as some suggest, it’s plausible that explosives or components were smuggled in via neighboring CIS countries. That kind of border-hopping precision doesn’t happen without outside help. In fact, it mirrors tactics long perfected by intelligence services in both the US and Western Europe.
Because make no mistake: this wasn’t just the CIA’s playground. European services – particularly those in the UK, France, and Germany – possess the same capabilities to execute and conceal such an operation. The NATO intelligence community may have different national flags, but it speaks with one voice in the field.
The real giveaway, however, lies in the timing of the strikes. These weren’t blind attacks on static targets. Russia’s strategic bombers frequently rotate bases. Commercial satellite imagery – updated every few days at best – simply can’t track aircraft on the move. And yet these drones struck with exquisite timing. That points to a steady flow of real-time surveillance, likely derived from signals intelligence, radar tracking, and live satellite feeds – all tools in the Western intelligence toolbox.
Could Ukraine, on its own, have mustered that kind of persistent, multidomain awareness? Not a chance. That level of situational intelligence is the domain of NATO’s most capable agencies – particularly those tasked with monitoring Russian military infrastructure as part of their day job.
For years now, Ukraine has been described in Western media as a plucky underdog using low-cost tactics to take on a larger foe. But beneath the David vs. Goliath narrative lies a more uncomfortable truth: Ukraine’s intelligence ecosystem is now deeply embedded within NATO’s operational architecture. Real-time feeds from US and European satellites, intercepts from British SIGINT stations, operational planning consultations with Western handlers – this is the new normal.
Ukraine still has its own sources, but it’s no longer running a self-contained intelligence operation. That era ended with the first HIMARS launch.
Western officials, of course, deny direct involvement. But Russian investigators are already analyzing mobile traffic around the impact sites. If it turns out that these drones weren’t connected to commercial mobile networks – if, instead, they were guided through encrypted, military-grade links – it will be damning. Not only would that confirm foreign operational input, it would expose the full extent of how Western assets operated inside Russia without detection.
At that point, no amount of plausible deniability will cover the truth. The question will no longer be whether NATO participated – but how deep that participation ran.
Lindsey Graham and Other US Congressmen Purportedly Used Ukraine as Personal Cash Cow
Sputnik – 06.06.2025
A group of US lawmakers has been using Ukraine to enrich themselves, retired CIA intelligence officer and State Department official Larry Johnson tells Sputnik, citing whistleblowers.
About 23 members of the US Congress, including Senator Lindsey Graham, helped themselves to the money coming from Ukraine, the whistleblowers claim.
“We’re not talking a few thousand dollars. We’re talking much more than that,” Johnson remarks.
He does point out, however, that these are just allegations at the moment, and that it is up for US authorities to properly investigate these claims.
“It’s not going to take six months to do this investigation, it can be done in a much shorter time frame. So we’ll see what comes of it,” Johnson predicts.
He also argues that it will be easier to make the results of this investigation public “once this whole debacle that is the war in Ukraine, comes to fruition, as the total defeat of NATO becomes apparent.”
British Council Exposed: Soft Power and Spying Tool Disguised as Cultural Outreach
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 05.06.2025
The FSB has urged Russia’s foreign partners to investigate the subversive activities of the British Council in their countries. This is why.
Education and Culture Front Organization
Created in 1934 by the British government, the British Council’s public facing image is about the promotion of English language learning, recruitment for UK universities, educational support for teachers abroad, cultural and academic partnerships and exchanges.
In reality, as Russia’s FSB has revealed, Council activities include:
- targeting youth leaders and elites to try and sway them to support Western and British interests
- spying, from informal monitoring of the socio-economic situation inside Russia to military intel gathering in the conflict zone in Ukraine
NED’s Granddaddy
While Soros, USAID the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and other US soft power alphabet agencies were only able to set up shop in Eastern Europe in the 1980s or after 1991, the British Council had been active in the region since WWII. Expelled from the USSR in 1946, it returned in 1959 (restricted to Moscow).
After the USSR’s demise in 1991, the Council set up offices in as many as 15 Russian cities, and scores more in Ukraine, the Baltics, the Caucasus and Central Asia.
The Council terminated its activities in Russia in 2018, and was officially ruled an undesirable organization by the Russian Prosecutor’s Office on Thursday, but the FSB says it continued Russia operations long after its supposed exit, engaging in:
- recruiting staff at top Russian universities in at least four regions to spread propaganda to young people
- targeting Russians living abroad in influence ops, in the hopes that they will return home and influence policy once the Ukraine conflict ends
- collecting socio-economic and military intelligence on Kherson region using UK-based refugees
Global Spider’s Web
With a $1.7B budget and offices in over 100 countries, the Council is active:
- in Britain’s former colonial empire (especially India)
- in the EU as a British soft power tool post-Brexit
- among BRICS bloc nations
- Belarus kicked them out in 2000. Iran did so in 2009
“We would like to address partners from countries friendly to Russia: by flirting with the British and creating favorable conditions for organizations like the British Council, allowing it to work with youth, future leaders and politicians, such countries risk losing control over very important socio-political processes. Therefore, we recommend that you carefully look into the work of the British Council in your countries and, notwithstanding pressures from London, mitigate the negative consequences of its work at an early stage,” the FSB said in Thursday’s statement.
British Council’s Cousin: An Oligarch’s Private Soft Power Tool
Along with the British Council, the FSB also reviewed the subversive work of Oxford Russia Fund, a charity group which entered Russia in 2006, ostensibly funding “humanitarian programs” in education, and scholarships to Russian students studying in the UK.
In reality, it was a front for former Russian oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s push to create a new generation of pro-West “young leaders” in Russia. Khodorkovsky, notably, has long dreamed of a color revolution in Russia.
The Oxford Russia Fund was ruled undesirable in 2021.
Russian Foreign Intel Service Vet Blows the Lid Off Britain’s Secret Soft Power Recruitment Strategy
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 05.06.2025
Britain is a master in the use of public and non-profit organizations for intelligence, deploying them “for centuries,” and Russia a top target, SVR Lt. Gen. (ret.) Leonid Reshetnikov told Sputnik, commenting on the FSB’s warning to Russia’s foreign partners on Thursday about the British Council’s subversive activities.
“Russia has been the main focus of this work since the time of Ivan Grozny. I say this in all seriousness,” Reshetnikov said, adding that the British have had “many years, many centuries of experience” in indirect forms of intelligence collection.
How Are Agents Recruited? A Primer
“They actively use the scientific and teaching fields. When our educators go to the UK or other countries where the British are active, they should always keep in mind that they will be studied, that informal, friendly and trusting relationships will be formed with them,” the veteran ex-secret agent explained.
The task is “studying the mood in scientific, student and teaching circles, selecting people, not necessarily recruiting (i.e. you are an agent, we pay you and you act), but making offers, for example, to give lectures, publish a brochure or a book, visit London, give lectures there, etc.”
Actually recruiting agents is the most blunt approach, and often not necessary to extract the information, facts, assessments or intentions the British intel services are looking for.
“It’s enough to have a circle of agents of influence, a circle of people who are intellectually, ideologically, culturally attached to London, to the English way of life. It’s very easy to use them in a straightforward manner. That’s the job,” Reshetnikov said.
In this area, the veteran former spy emphasized that the British are even more capable than their transatlantic cousins in the CIA.
“It’s best to keep fewer British NGOs in your country. The fewer the better, especially British ones. This is one of the most challenging intelligence services in the world to face,” Reshetnikov emphasized.
US on track for biggest nuclear arms spending hike since Cold War – disarmament activists
RT | June 5, 2025
The White House has proposed a spending increase on nuclear bomb development unseen since the Cold War, the Los Alamos Study Group has claimed.
The nuclear disarmament activist group based its conclusions on a technical supplement to the budget for the next fiscal year, as well as congressional testimonies by several senior officials released late last month.
In a press release on Wednesday, the group estimated that President Donald Trump’s administration is seeking $4.782 billion for the ‘Weapons Activities’ portion of the National Nuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA’s) budget. The latter is the primary source of funds for the development, construction, and modernization of US nuclear warheads and bombs.
According to the activists, an additional $1.884 billion was allocated to the NNSA in the fiscal year 2025 to cover the damages caused to its installations by two hurricanes. However, this sum, which apparently has yet to be expended, was not tallied in the budget details under consideration.
The Los Alamos Study Group claimed that if this emergency funding is left out, the warhead budget proposed by the White House for 2026 would represent a 25% year-on-year increase – the largest hike since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.
If the $1.884 billion in question is included, the year-on-year increase would stand at 17% – a level unseen since 1982.
The proposed spending hike is expected to be put to a vote in Congress later this year.
In mid-May, US Secretary of Energy Chris Wright announced that NNSA had completed the manufacture of the first B61-13 gravity bomb, roughly a year ahead of schedule. It is the latest modification to the B61 family of nuclear bombs, which is the longest-serving among the key elements of the US nuclear triad’s air component. It has been in production since 1968.
The warhead is fitted with newer electronics and control features such as a tail kit, which effectively turns it into a guided munition. Its maximum yield is said to be approximately 360 kilotons – 24 times that of the bomb dropped by the US on Hiroshima.
If and when commissioned, the B61-13 will emerge as among the most powerful nuclear gravity bomb in the US arsenal. Several media outlets, citing unnamed officials, previously reported that its destructive force would make it the weapon of choice for targeting underground command and control facilities.
Meanwhile, six more new modifications of the B61 bomb family are currently being developed.
EU financing ‘extremism’ – Georgia
RT | June 6, 2025
Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze has accused the EU of inciting and financing extremism in his country. The claim comes amid a deepening rift between Tbilisi and Brussels over alleged “democratic backsliding.”
Kobakhidze insisted on Thursday that his government has “indisputable” evidence that Western actors are backing anti-government protests in the country.
”We prove this with facts, videos, and [EU] financing practices. We have direct facts about how these people are financing extremism in our country. We talk to them with facts, but they respond with general phrases, and more often lies. This is sad,” Kobakhidze said, as cited by Rustavi 2.
Parliament Speaker Shalva Papuashvili echoed the charge, stating that “extremism in Georgia is supported and financed from the budgets of the EU.” He added that he had written to EU Ambassador Pawel Herczynski detailing the accusations but had yet to receive a reply.
The ruling Georgian Dream party, which secured a decisive parliamentary majority in October 2024, has accused Western powers of interfering in the country’s domestic politics under the guise of “democracy promotion.” Officials in Tbilisi have drawn parallels to the 2014 Maidan uprising in Ukraine and say similar tactics are now being used to destabilize Georgia for refusing to adopt a confrontational stance against Russia in the Ukraine conflict.
Following Georgian Dream’s victory, a coalition of pro-Western parties alleged fraud and launched protests to force the government’s resignation. EU and US officials voiced support for the opposition, which Georgian leaders denounced as foreign meddling.
Brussels has also led a coordinated campaign against Georgia’s foreign influence transparency law, legislation that requires political organizations to disclose substantial foreign funding. Although similar laws exist across the West, the European External Action Service claimed the legislation in Georgia was “a serious setback for democracy” and warned it could “threaten the country’s EU path.”
Tensions spiked last month when French President Emmanuel Macron, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz issued a joint statement on Georgia’s Independence Day, accusing the government of “democratic backsliding.” Papuashvili dismissed the statement as “shameful,” saying it disrespected both the state and its people.
Georgia was granted EU candidate status in December 2023 but has since suspended accession talks, citing Brussels’ increasingly coercive tone. The government, however, insists that it remains committed to eventual EU membership.
How the US deep state feeds the Ukraine war
By John Laughland | RT | June 5, 2025
The picture of Lindsey Graham, US Senator for South Carolina, and Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, grinning into a camera in Brussels on June 2, is worth a thousand words.
Graham is one of the most extreme hardcore warmongers in Washington DC, and the competition is pretty stiff. Ever since he first became a member of the US Congress over 30 years ago – once in, American politicians are rarely voted out – he has devoted his career to arguing vehemently for war.
His remarks are often not just belligerent but also sadistic, such as when he recently posted that he hoped ‘Greta could swim’, meaning that he hoped her Gaza aid ship would be torpedoed. Joking about an attack on a civilian aid ship carrying a young female civilian activist is sick – and typical of Graham.
Like his old friend, the late Senator John McCain, Lindsey Graham is obsessed with the idea of war with Russia. He has been pushing for this since at least 2014. In 2016 he told Ukrainian soldiers, “Your fight is our fight.”
Graham’s presence in Brussels is therefore significant. Ever since von der Leyen’s appointment in 2019, she has pushed herself forward as the principal public face of the Brussels institutions. Six years ago, she said she wanted to make the European Commission into a ‘geopolitical’ body – even though it has no role in foreign or military policy.
Since then, she has done little else than parade on the international stage. She is among the most hawkish and anti-Russian European figures, absurdly claiming, like French Foreign Minister Bruno Lemaire, that EU sanctions have brought the Russian economy to its knees.
The Graham-von der Leyen alliance is therefore a natural one – against Donald Trump. European politicians are often quite explicit in their view that Trump is now the enemy.
The same goes for Lindsey Graham. In Kiev last week, Graham explicitly challenged Trump’s authority to decide US foreign policy. He lambasted the very notion of negotiations with Russia – just as Zelensky did to Vance in the Oval office in February – and said that the president of the US is not the boss. “In America, you have more than one person at the card table. We have three branches of government,” – meaning that the Senate would soon impose its own sanctions on Russia, whatever the executive does. Graham’s budget bill from February is intended to spend even more money on the US military – as if that were possible – which means that he is marshalling the US deep state to fight back after initially reeling from the re-election of Trump.
Meanwhile, the Europeans’ determination to continue the war is existential. Their Russophobia, which goes back at least to the 2012 Russian presidential election, when Putin came back into the Kremlin, is extreme because their “Europe” is defined by its hostility to Russia. Russia is “the other Europe” which the EU does not want to be and which it defines itself against.
Von der Leyen and others want to use the war against Russia to federalise Europe and create a single state. Meanwhile, Trump’s Russia policy is based on sidelining Europe. When he first announced talks with the Russians, EU leaders demanded a seat at the table. They failed. US-Russia talks took place outside Europe – in Riyadh – while the Russia-Ukraine talks the EU vehemently opposed are taking place without the EU, in Istanbul.
Let us not forget how furiously EU leaders opposed talking to Russia. When Viktor Orban travelled to Kiev and Moscow last July, Ursula von der Leyen denounced Orban’s “appeasement”. The EU’s then chief diplomat said in an official statement that the EU “excludes official contacts between the EU and President Putin.”
The French foreign minister said in February that if Sergey Lavrov telephoned him he would not answer the call. Now these very same people claim they want to “force” the Russians to come and talk!
EU policy on Russia is now in ruins. That is why, like Graham, they are determined to stop Trump. Their attempts have been ever more desperate and ridiculous. On May 12, Kaja Kallas and other EU leaders said Russia “must agree” to a ceasefire before any talks. Three days later, those talks started anyway. Britain also tried to scupper them by saying it was “unacceptable” for Russia to demand recognition of the “annexed” regions, which is odd considering Britain is not a participant.
European credibility is therefore at zero. In March, the British prime minister had said that the plans to send British and French troops to Ukraine had entered “the operational phase.” They were ready, he claimed, to protect Ukraine’s security by directly entering the war zone. By April, these plans had been dropped.
On May 10, European leaders threatened Russia with “massive sanctions” if it did not agree to a ceasefire immediately. Russia did not agree to a ceasefire and yet there have been no more “massive sanctions.” A 17th package of sanctions was indeed announced on May 14, but it was so weak that Hungary and Slovakia, who oppose the EU’s overall policy, let it pass. In any case, the 17th package clearly had nothing to do with the ultimatum because such sanctions take a long time to prepare. Instead, that is what Lindsey Graham was in Brussels to discuss.
The EU and the UK have thus sidelined themselves with their meaningless braggadocio. They cannot operate without the Americans. But which Americans? The claim that the White House did not know about the recent Ukrainian drone attack on Russian airfields might well be true: the US deep state, embodied by people like Graham, is clearly trying to undermine the executive. Both Lindsey Graham and former CIA director Mike Pompeo were in Ukraine just days before the attack.
The political goal of the drone attack was obviously to scupper the talks scheduled for the following day in Istanbul, or to provoke Russia into a massive response and drag the US into the war. Even if the attack does not succeed in these goals, it clearly sets the tone for the future Ukrainian insurgency which, American and European officials hope, will turn that country into an ‘Afghanistan’ for Russia. The US deep state is in for the long game.
So are the Europeans. On May 9, ‘Europe Day’, European leaders confirmed their intention to set up a Special Tribunal for the crime of aggression, to prosecute Russia for invading in February 2022.
Western European states are already the primary financers of the International Criminal Court, whose prosecutor is British. The ICC indicted Russian leaders, including Putin, in 2023 and 2024, on various very surprising charges. (Ursula von der Leyen continued to lie about “20,000 abducted children,” the day after the Ukrainians gave the Russians a list of 339 missing children.) Now the Europeans intend to open a new front in their ‘lawfare’ against Russia.
Such a Special Tribunal, if it comes into existence, will tear the heart out of any peace agreement – just as Ukraine’s acceptance of the jurisdiction of the ICC in 2014 and 2015 rendered the Minsk agreement of February 2015 null and void. With one side of its mouth, Ukraine asked the ICC to prosecute Russian officials and Donbass “terrorists”; with the other side, it agreed at Minsk that the Donbass insurgency was an internal Ukrainian problem and ruled out any prosecution or punishment (Article 5 of the February 2015 Minsk agreement).
It is not possible to agree a peace agreement with a country and at the same time to set up a Special Tribunal whose sole purpose is to criminalize it. So the creation of this Tribunal, which will presumably remain in existence for over a decade like the ad hoc tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda, is nothing but a Euro-American institutional time bomb designed to blow up in the future any agreement which the two sides might reach in the short term. The future of “Europe” depends on that.
John Laughland, who has a doctorate in philosophy from the University of Oxford and who has taught at universities in Paris and Rome, is a historian and specialist in international affairs.
Ukraine could soon launch an attack on Hungary, some NATO countries may even support it: Hungarian security expert
Remix News | June 5, 2025
Hungary is now the target of covert actions from Ukraine, and with a national election approaching within a year, Ukraine is increasingly portraying its neighbor as an enemy, warns Hungarian security expert József Horváth. However, beyond covert operations, Ukraine may even begin to launch sabotage attacks or other direct actions against Hungary, a threat that has risen since Ukraine’s successful attack on Russia’s strategic bomber fleet.
In recent weeks, Hungary and Ukraine have claimed to have uncovered spies and arrested them on their respective territories. Horváth, who is the head of the Sovereignty Protection Research Institute in Hungary, told Hungarian news outlet Mandiner that Hungary is essentially being treated as an “enemy” not just by Kyiv but also by other Western intelligence services.
“The news in Hungary in recent days and weeks confirms that the activities of the Ukrainian intelligence services must be taken very seriously. The disinformation and destabilization efforts they have seen in Hungary so far, and the recent action carried out in Russia, indicate that the threat has increased,” said Horváth.
The security expert even warned of a potentially major action from Ukrainian forces against Hungary.
“Hungary has been drawn as a kind of enemy on the country’s western horizon. In light of this, we cannot rule out the possibility that they could carry out an action like the one that was successfully carried out against Russian strategic bombers after a year and a half of preparation. Given this long and professional preparation, we must also be very alert in the coming months,” he said.
Such an attack against Hungary, which is a member of NATO, may produce little more than a shrug from many of Hungary’s NATO allies, many of which see Hungary as an enemy as well. Although Horváth does not mention what such an attack could look like, it could include actions against Hungary’s power grid, oil refineries and other critical infrastructure, as well as even targeting military infrastructure. Other false flag actions could occur as well.
When asked whether it could really be possible that Ukraine could attack Hungary, Horváth responded that it is not only realistic, but could even be supported by NATO members.
“To paraphrase Lord Palmerston’s famous quote, ‘Ukraine has no friends, Ukraine has interests,” he responded. “Yes, I think they would dare to do so, and I can even imagine that several NATO member states would look on with gloating.”
Ukrainian services are well-versed in sabotage operations on foreign soil and many on the left-liberal establishment would not blink an eye if Ukraine carried out attacks against Hungary, especially if Ukraine could obscure where these attacks are coming from. While Ukraine may not end up attacking Hungary, Kyiv will almost certainly run covert and influence operations against Hungary, all with the goal of ousting Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán from power.
“The simple answer is that they want to punish Hungary, and the more detailed one is that they would like to have a government in power that would oppose the current pro-peace, sovereignist policy and create a federal system that would stretch the nation-state framework of the union, because they would see this as an opportunity to break the resistance against them,” he said.
The Ukrainian population is also being primed for an attack, with Horváth saying that Ukraine is also increasingly viewing Hungary as a direct enemy amongst the Ukrainian populace.
“Ukrainian communication in the past year has been, with a slight exaggeration, nothing more than that Hungary is not supplying them with weapons, and therefore Ukraine cannot win. Both the soldiers and the civilians living in the hinterland have formed the image in their minds that we are preventing the Ukrainian victory,” said Horváth. “It doesn’t matter that we are providing humanitarian aid, supporting them with fuel, food, medicine, and electricity. This doesn’t add up in their minds. However, they have no chance of regaining the territories occupied by the Russians by force or in any other way, so their anger may turn towards us.”
The rhetoric coming from Ukraine at the moment is especially relevant given that the EU is pushing to make Ukraine an EU member state. Horváth notes that this push is coming despite an ongoing war.
“Unfortunately, I have to say that the Germans, the French, the British and to some extent the Poles are also determined on this issue. A ‘coalition of the determined’ has been created, and these countries agree not only on the need to support Ukraine ‘to the last Ukrainian’ in the war against the Russians, but also on the need to admit them to the union. From this perspective, the political elite in Brussels and the self-determining Western states seem to want to force Ukraine to become a member of the European Union, even against the common sense of two plus two, and thus pay for the fact that they will ‘defend Europe’ against a virtual Russian threat,” he said.
The EU is not only bending or breaking all the rules to fast-track Ukrainian membership, but they also want to admit another problematic country, Moldova.
“There is no such thing as speeding up the process of EU accession, and it has always been the case. However, the EU leadership is trying to create a precedent regardless of the rules. So far, they have intervened in the lives of nation-states in quite a few areas that they had no right to, but they have started to create those unique closures through which they later pretend that the given step was completely natural. There is one more thing that is not being talked about in Brussels: This is a package, and this package includes not only Ukraine, but also Moldova. By including Moldova, the EU would import another – albeit currently dormant – conflict, since part of the country, Transnistria, is controlled by Russian separatists,” he stated.
If Ukraine does join, it will present major problems for all of Europe.
“What will 800,000 severely traumatized, armed Ukrainian soldiers do, whose salaries are not paid overnight? What if only one 100,000 of them head west?” he asked.
As for peace, Horváth sees little chance now, especially after Ukraine’s massive drone strike against Russia’s bomber fleet.
“I think the time has passed (for peace) because the Ukrainian secret service has just recently caused a very painful loss by blowing up Russian strategic bombers, so I see no chance of a ceasefire at the moment. Not least because it seems that the current Ukrainian leadership is not interested in concluding a ceasefire, since then elections would have to be held, in which Zelensky would have no chance. Ergo, they jumped on the Brussels train because they know that they are in power as long as the EU gives them money, and until then they want to continue this war,” Horváth said.
Profiles in courage: Trump & Eisenhower
By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | June 6, 2025
President Donald Trump had a difficult week. No, this isn’t about Elon Musk or Harvard University. On Wednesday, his call to Russian President Vladimir Putin didn’t go well. It turned into a ‘conversation’, as Trump wrote on Truth Social, lasting only an hour and 15 minutes, which means, setting aside the time for interpretation, it left no room for substantive discussions.
The call took place against the backdrop of the attack on Russia’s nuclear force on June 1. Trump acknowledged in his Truth Social post later that Putin spoke “strongly” about Russia’s response to come. The post was notable for its subdued tone.
We wouldn’t know whether Putin brought up Western involvement. The Kremlin merely noted that “Donald Trump reiterated that the Americans had not been informed about this [attack] in advance.”
Zelensky’s version is that the attack was in the pipeline for the past 18-month period. Yet, we are to believe, neither the CIA nor MI6 whose operatives run the show in Kiev got an inkling of it. Trump’s Truth Social post simply omitted this crucial part of the conversation with Putin, which is highly significant — and consequential.
Especially, as Kremlin-funded RT had already carried one report citing the assessment of an ex-French intelligence officer that the Ukrainian targeting couldn’t have been possible without US satellite inputs.
Earlier, Tass also had carried a similar report citing a former US naval officer who estimated that the 18 month-period was when the Biden administration was virtually on auto-pilot (due to the president’s dementia). An interesting thought in itself?
Tass quoted the American source who actually said on a War Room podcast: “So, who was it on the American side that either gave the greenlight to this or provided the initial intelligence targeting? Hey, where is William Burns and Jack Sullivan, the neocon whizkids in Biden’s team?
Again, on the same day as Trump spoke to Putin, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov warned at a news conference in Moscow, “The fact that certain circles in the United States have been and are still hatching plans to move towards eradicating Russia as a state is also undeniable… We should not underestimate the consequences of such a mindset… Russian society should remain in a state of high readiness for any intrigues.”
Interestingly, Ryabkov called on Washington and London specifically to speak up on the attack on Russian airfields. As he put it, “We demand that both London and Washington respond in a manner that stops this recent round of escalation of tensions.”
When asked about the Ukrainian attack on Wednesday in Brussels, NATO secretary-general Mark Rutte came up with an ingenious argument: “Let’s not forget that the capabilities they hit were the capabilities the Russians were using to attack innocent people going about their daily lives in Ukrainian cities and communities. So I think we should take note of that.” Clearly, the poor chap was in the loop! Rutte refused to speak further.
Equally, the social media is awash with the assessments by some prominent American experts, especially ex-CIA analysts, pointing a finger directly at the agency’s involvement. Of course, Russia has the experience and technical expertise to dig deep.
There are comparable situations. What comes to mind is the famous U-2 spy plane incident on May 1, 1961. Perhaps, Trump is finding himself in the same embarrassing situation as President Dwight Eisenhower.
Do we give the benefit of the doubt to Trump that he too was unaware of the strike on Russia’s nuclear force on June 1? To my mind, the analogy of the U-2 incident holds good — a rare cold-war era confrontation over the US’ blatant violation of Russian sovereignty and territory at a critical juncture just when the White House was navigting an improvement of relations with Russia.
Eisenhower was kept in the dark about the full details of the U-2 although countdown had begun for his planned summit meeting with Nikita Khrushchev, the Soviet leader, in Paris to discuss a Soviet-American detente (just what Trump is attempting with Putin.) The following excerpts from the archives of the Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial, Eisenhower National Historic Site are most insightful:
“[U-2 spy plane pilot Gary] Powers did have a contingency in the form of a concealed needle with the poison Saxitoxin. If injected, this would have killed him and prevented his capture. Powers did not utilize this and was surrounded by Soviet citizens very soon after he touched down. Soviet citizens soon found his United States issued firearm, and other items bearing the flag of the U.S., turning him over to Soviet officials. Powers, and what was left of his spy plane, were shipped to Moscow be researched and documented. In a matter of hours, Khrushchev was informed of the captured pilot and the wrecked U-2.
“When Powers was overdue to land at Norway [U-2 had taken off from its base in Peshawar], the CIA started to consider what might have happened. As a result, their contingency plan went into action. To prevent the public and the Soviets from learning the true nature of the U-2 aircraft, a misinformation campaign began. A NASA press release stated one of their high-altitude weather research U-2 aircraft had gone missing over Turkey, and that it may have drifted into Soviet airspace because of an unconscious pilot. A U-2 was shown off in NASA colors as well to help sell the story. Khruschev learned of this story from the Americans and decided to lay a trap for the United States and for Eisenhower.
“The Soviets released information that a spy plane was shot down but did not include any other information on the status of the aircraft or Powers. The U.S. believed it could shape the narrative further and kept releasing “reports” of oxygen difficulties in the aircraft and that the auto pilot may have sent the plane into Soviet territory. Once the deception from the United States grew large enough, on May 7th, Khruschev sprung his trap by stating the pilot was alive, and that the Soviets had captured the remains of the aircraft, which contained a camera and film of Soviet Military Installations. This destroyed the cover story and was a public embarrassment for the United States and for President Eisenhower. The President learned of this at the office of his Gettysburg residence, where he got a phone call informing him the Soviets had captured Powers. This shattered the peace and tranquility of his stay in Gettysburg, and he knew that he would be held responsible in the eyes of the Soviet Union. In a remark to an aide, Eisenhower reportedly said, “I would like to resign.”
While Eisenhower did not resign, the U-2 incident and the acute embarrassment so close to the end of his second term defined his Cold War legacy. Khrushchev cancelled the Paris summit and Soviet-American detente had to wait until Henry Kissinger consolidated his grip over US foreign policy strategies. Nonetheless, the Deep State, which loathed detente, booby-trapped Richard Nixon’s presidency!
Eisenhower’s sense of betrayal is reflected in his farewell address when he bitterly called out the Deep State and prophesied that it will someday wreck America’s democracy.
History is repeating. Look at the cascading turbulence already around Trump presidency. Eighty two out of 100 members of the Senate are co-sponsoring a bill by Senator Lindsey Graham (whose affiliation to the Deep State is legion), forcing Trump’s hands to impose “bone-breaking” sanctions against Russia, whose sole objective is to stall any improvement of US-Russia relations. Meanwhile, a call for impeachment of Trump is already in the air.
Featured Video
No Threat Can Force Iran’s Surrender /Trita Parsi & Lt Cl Daniel Davis
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
An Expert Military Analysis of War with China
Actually, None is Necessary
By Fred Reed • Unz Review • December 13, 2020
The Correlation of Armed Forces: U.S. goods and services trade with China totaled an estimated $634.8 billion in 2019. Exports were $163.0 billion; imports were $471.8 billion. The U.S. goods and services trade deficit with China was $308.8 billion in 2019. Trade in services with China (exports and imports) totaled an estimated $76.7 billion in 2019. Services exports were $56.5 billion; services imports were $20.1 billion. The U.S. services trade surplus with China was $36.4 billion in 2019.
There is talk within the Washingtoniat of a possible war with China. Steve Bannon, who apparently was dropped on his head as a child, actually favors such a war. We hear the usual shoo-the-boobs alarm about how the Chinese are doing something terrible and we must gird our loins and American values and show them what for, bow wow, woof. The danger is that the current game of who-blinks-first in Asian waters might actually provoke a shooting war. You know the kind of thing: One warship refuses to get out of the way of another, a collision ensues, some retard lieutenant who signed up on waivers opens fire, and we’re off and running. It is not a good idea to let children play with matches.
The said war is discussed either in emotional terms by idiots or in purely naval terms by those familiar with such things, so we hear of the First Island Chain and the Second Island Chain and whose missiles against the other’s missiles and so on. This would be appropriate if we were fighting World War Two again. Which we aren’t. Let’s take a quick-and-dirty look at how such a war might go.
To begin the war, America would overestimate itself and underestimate China. This is doctrine in the Pentagon. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Iran To Target Military Industrial-Tech Complex That Facilitated Gaza Genocide
- Collapsing Empire: The Resistance Disarms ‘Israel’
- Suicide Should Not Be a Government Service
- Rethinking America’s greatest threat: Iran vs. Israel-Firsters
- Iran accuses adversaries of false flags to strain Turkey ties
- Poland rules out sending Patriot missiles to US/Israel amid war on Iran
- Tehran approves new Hormuz plan with major restrictions
- No Threat Can Force Iran’s Surrender /Trita Parsi & Lt Cl Daniel Davis
- UK’s New Pandemic Plan Would Turn Big Tech Into a Mass Location Tracking Network
- Growing insecurity, soaring prices fuel protests in north as regime bans evacuation: Sources
- If Americans Knew
- Ann Coulter Rips Into Fox News for Iran War Coverage, Compares to False Rigged 2020 Election Reporting
- Joe Kent Urges Americans To Call White House and Congress To Object To Sending Troops Into Iran
- DNC Resolution to Reject AIPAC Funding Puts Democratic Leaders in the Hot Seat
- Swedish foundation to build 400 schools as over 650,000 Gaza children remain without education for 2 years
- Israeli army admits photshopping image of slain Lebanese journalist
- This is how Israel is systematically killing health workers under the cover of war in Lebanon
- Carrying life under fire: Israeli invasion of Lebanon leaves pregnant women facing deadly risks
- Champagne all around for the new death penalty (for Palestinians) law – Not a ceasefire Day 172
- Why are Palestinian books struggling to be seen on Amazon?
- The Line Between Affinity and Conspiracy
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study Finds Warming Saves Lives…Cold Temperatures 12 Times More Deadly Than Excess Heat
- German Science Blog Accuses PIK Climate Institute Of Hallucinating Climate Tipping Points
- Devastating Assessment Of Comirnaty Vaccine By Former Senior Pfizer Europe Toxicologist
- New Study: CO2 Is ‘Effectively Negligible’ As An Explanatory Climate Change Factor Since 2000
- Former Pfizer Toxicologist Dr. Helmut Sterz Tells Bundestag Hearing Pfizer Vaccine Should Have Never Been Approved
- Energy Expert: Germany’s Nuclear Phaseout Was A “500 Billion Euro Mistake”
- New Research: South Australia’s Mid-Holocene Sea Surface Temperatures Were 4°C Warmer Than Today
- Storing Green Energy To Last Germany 10 Days Would Require A 60-Million Tonne Battery
- New Studies: UK Sea Levels Were 4 Meters Higher Than Today During The Mid-Holocene
- Destructive Green New Deal: German Energy And Metal Group Warns Of Drastic Crisis
Aletho News 