Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Michael von der Schulenburg: Europe’s Self-Defeating Iran War Policy

Glenn Diesen | March 12, 2026

Michael von der Schulenburg is a German member of the EU Parliament who was previously a UN diplomat for 34 years in positions that included Assistant Secretary General of the UN Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs. Schulenburg also lived and worked for 9 years in Iran for the UN, and explains why this war is yet another disaster for Europe.

Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:

Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen:

March 12, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite, Video | , , , , , | Comments Off on Michael von der Schulenburg: Europe’s Self-Defeating Iran War Policy

Sorry, The New Republic, Climate Change Isn’t Causing Somali Migration. Blame Civil Strife and Poverty.

By Linnea Lueken | Climate Realism | March 10, 2026

The New Republic (TNR) posted an article titled “Somali Immigrants Fled Climate Change. Now They’re Facing ICE,” claiming that Somali migrants in the United States have been driven out of their country by climate-change caused drought. This is false, or at least incomplete. Drought is a natural part of the region, even multi-year drought, and the present one is no different than the region has experienced with some regularity historically. It is civil strife and government corruption, resulting in continued poverty, that is leading Somalis to flee their homeland. With present governing institutions and security, they have been unable to improve water handling practices. Climate change has nothing to do with Somali emigration elsewhere in the region or to the United States, as even those interviewed for the article acknowledge.

TNR undermines its titular claim that unprecedented man-made climate change has forced Somalians to migrate by admitting that Somalian culture has “deep-rooted traditions of movement and migration.” TNR goes on to say that “Somalis have been caught in civil war and unrest for decades, and many have migrated to Kenya, Ethiopia, Europe, and the United States.”

Somehow not noticing the actual central point of that statement, that Somalians often move and that political strife has kept them destabilized, TNR says that climate change plays a “pervasive role” in the migration.

TNR claims that a multi-year drought “made a hundred times more likely due to warming caused by fossil fuel emissions—is affecting Somali people’s decisions to either relocate internally or migrate across international borders.”

Incredibly, later in the article, TNR refutes its own suggestion that this drought is worse, and pushing unprecedented migration, by explaining that this is how farmers have long dealt with drought in Somalia:

Traditionally, Somali pastoralists had resilient ways to deal with changes in rainfall and drought patterns, where families migrated and moved on a regular basis, even crossing borders in the process. But the nature of climatic changes—and conflict—overwhelmed their traditional capacities, leading to more rural-urban migration within the country and in East Africa.

That’s right, severe drought is something Somalians have dealt with for ages, long enough to have known traditions regarding adaptation to the dry periods.

There is no evidence that this drought is worse than those that drove historic migration.

The cited claim that recent drought in Somalia was made “a hundred times more likely” by climate change is not based on sound science. It comes from an attribution study from World Weather Attribution that specifically seeks to tie various weather conditions to human-caused climate change, they do not come to any other conclusions. Climate Realism has gone into the specifics of how unscientific World Weather Attribution studies are here, here, and here.

The TNR piece says that “[f]rom 2020 to 2023, the East Africa region had five failed rainy seasons, an unprecedented drought and climatic episode not seen in 40 years, which led to 70 percent crop loss, three million livestock deaths, and the displacement of about 2.9 million people in Somalia, according to some estimates.”

Admitting that a weather event also happened 40 years ago should tell a writer that their argument about something being “unprecedented” – meaning, without precedent, or never happened before—is faulty.

In fact, studies and data show a long history of swings between severe drought and monsoon floods in the region, and they show that nothing about modern drought is unprecedented. Paleo studies, including one published in Science, show that “intervals of severe drought lasting for periods ranging from decades to centuries are characteristic of the monsoon and are linked to natural variations in Atlantic temperatures.”

Climate Realism has covered this very claim before: In Anthony Watts’ “No, CBS News, Drought in Somalia is Not Being Driven by Climate Change,” he compared natural weather-driving patterns like the Atlantic Meridional Oscillation (AMO) and recent drought in Somalia and found repeated patterns of drought that were similarly severe.

Somalia is part of the Sahel region, and Watts shared this graphic of the region’s rainfall index since 1900, which shows that the rainfall in the Sahel varies widely over time:

Figure 1: More than a century of rainfall data in the Sahel show an unusually wet period from 1950 until 1970 (positive index values), followed by extremely dry years from 1970 to 1991. (negative index values). From 1990 until present rainfall returned to levels slightly below the 1898–1993 average, but year-to-year variability was high. Source: Benedikt Seidl – based on JISAO data

Additionally, comparing crop production data between Somalia and neighboring countries like Ethiopia and Kenya reveals that even when drought impacts East Africa, Somalia is uniquely incapable of maintaining agricultural production. During the same period in which Ethiopia and Kenya saw increasing production in vital cereal crops, UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) data show Somalia declining. (See figure below)

Is climate change not hitting Kenya and Ethiopia? What is the difference?

While Somalia has a long history of severe, recurring droughts, the worst drought in the past 50 years was the “Long-tailed Drought” from 1973 to 1975. That drought, and a subsequent similarly deadly drought in the early 1980s, occurred when the Earth was in a cooling spell and atmospheric carbon dioxide was much lower than today.

Somalia’s civil war and resulting destruction and corruption is the prime force behind Somalia’s emigration. Ironically, one of the interviewees in the TNR piece says as much:

Drought does not necessarily lead to famine and does not always lead to migration,” said Abdi Samatar, a Somali scholar and geographer at the University of Minnesota […] Somalis were unable to “put Humpty Dumpty back together in their country,” and in the absence of government support, “people have to do what they can for themselves,” Samatar added.

We at Climate Realism could not have said it better ourselves, though we have explained as much in past articles where mainstream outlets tried to link climate change and Somalia’s migration issue.

The New Republic’s effort to tie Somalians fleeing their country for the United States to climate change was a flawed, agenda-driven effort from the start. Even when those interviewed by TNR link the mass exodus of residents from Somali to other factors, TNR persists in pushing the narrative that climate change is playing a “pervasive role.”

It is true that Somalia is suffering through a severe, life threatening drought. It is also true that such droughts are not unprecedented but have been common throughout the region’s history. The nation’s unstable government and the ongoing, long-standing, civil war bear far more of the blame than climate change, especially since there is little or no evidence that Somalia’s climate has changed much over the past century.

The current drought is hitting Somalia’s populace worse than those of nearby countries in the region because of the political instability there. The New Republic was told this by the experts they interviewed but chose to ignore it to advance a climate scare story. Evidently, it’s too much to hope for honest journalism at The New Republic.

Linnea Lueken is a Research Fellow with the Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy.

March 12, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Comments Off on Sorry, The New Republic, Climate Change Isn’t Causing Somali Migration. Blame Civil Strife and Poverty.

Expert Guts Claims That HPV Vaccine Reduces Cancer Risk

By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | March 3, 2026

Public health policy should rest on solid, transparent evidence — not slogans, not marketing and not selective readings of scientific reviews, biochemist Lucija Tomljenović, Ph.D., said recently.

In a wide-ranging interview on the “Slobodni Podcast,” Tomljenović challenged the evidence base for HPV vaccination programs.

She told host Andrija Klarić that safety and efficacy claims are unsubstantiated, and the benefits of the vaccine do not outweigh the risks.

The widely circulated claim that the HPV vaccine dramatically reduces cervical cancer risk — by as much as 80% if administered before age 16 — collapses under closer examination.

Tomljenović has published more than a dozen papers on the HPV vaccine. She was also an expert witness in litigation against Merck, maker of the Gardasil HPV vaccine. In that role, she presented a systematic critique of the claims that the HPV vaccine prevents cancer.

She also delivered an overview of the science on the adverse events associated with the shot, and she presented evidence that Merck manipulated regulators and legislators to grow the market for its vaccine.

Claims that HPV vaccine reduces cancer risk based on flawed Cochrane reviews

Tomljenović explained for “Slobodni” listeners why the 2025 Cochrane reviews on HPV vaccines — widely cited by health authorities and the media to support the claim that the vaccine reduces cervical cancer incidence by up to 80% — are flawed.

She said the reviews’ own data undermine their conclusions.

The Cochrane Library is often regarded as the gold standard of systematic reviews, she said. Mainstream health institutions often base recommendations on findings from Cochrane.

However, systematic reviews are only as reliable as the studies they include, she said.

According to Tomljenović’s analysis of the 300-plus-page review, the majority of epidemiological studies cited to show the vaccine’s effects — including its ability to stop invasive cervical cancer — had serious or critical risk of bias, according to the ratings of Cochrane’s own reviewers.

A systematic review is a “study of studies,” a high-level research method that reviews, synthesizes and critically appraises the available body of evidence for a given disease or health topic in a standardized and systematic way.

Risk-of-bias assessments in those reviews evaluate whether methodological flaws — in design, analysis or reporting — are likely to invalidate results. A “serious” or “critical” rating signals substantial flaws that make conclusions highly questionable.

Yet despite this, Tomljenović said the Cochrane review concluded there was “moderate certainty evidence” that HPV vaccines reduce cervical cancer incidence.

She said that when the studies included in a systematic review are predominantly rated as low quality by the reviewers themselves, it is not justified to conclude the studies provide “moderate certainty evidence” for any outcome.

“Garbage in equals garbage out,” she said.

“If the majority of your studies are of such poor quality — by your own assessment — you cannot claim moderate certainty evidence,” she says. “That is just misinformation.”

Cervical cancer rates were in decline before HPV vaccine introduced

If HPV vaccination dramatically reduces cervical cancer, it follows that there would be a clear population-level decline of the disease following widespread vaccination.

Tomljenović presented national cervical cancer statistics from the U.K., Australia, and the U.S. showing that cervical cancer rates had been declining — and in some age groups were already near zero — before HPV vaccines were introduced into immunization schedules.

“The rate of cervical cancers in the U.K. have been rapidly declining and they have reached their lowest point long before HPV vaccines were introduced,” she said.

In Australia, despite very high vaccination rates, she said there has been no corresponding dramatic improvement when it comes to cancer rates.

She shared those statistics in her presentation slides. “You want me to believe something,” she says. “Show me the data.”

Clinical trials didn’t test for cancer prevention

Health officials and vaccine makers claim the HPV vaccine prevents cancer. However, neither the clinical trials nor the studies included in the Cochrane reviews actually studied whether the vaccines prevented cancer.

Randomized controlled trials for HPV vaccines did not use invasive cervical cancer as an endpoint. Instead, they measured reductions in precancerous lesions such as cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) as a surrogate marker for cancer.

However, CIN2 lesions often resolve without becoming cancerous.

Even if one assumed that CIN2 was a valid surrogate, Gardasil 9 demonstrated roughly 60% efficacy against CIN2 or worse over 3.5 years in those trials, Tomljenović said.

This can’t logically translate into claims of 90% lifetime cervical cancer prevention — especially when cervical cancer develops over decades and trials followed participants for only about three years.

“High efficacy against lower-grade precancerous lesions does not necessarily translate to high vaccine efficacy against … cervical cancer,” she said.

Tomljenović said her conclusion is shared by several independent research groups, including a group of German physicians and a group led by Dr. Peter Gøtzsche, writing in peer-reviewed literature.

HPV vaccines associated with many serious side effects

Tomljenović said that many known adverse events associated with the HPV vaccines are not disclosed in official vaccine product information.

Those side effects, which are documented in case reports and adverse event reporting systems, include cardiac arrhythmias, neurological conditions such as acute hemorrhagic encephalomyelitis, autonomic nervous system disorders, chronic fatigue syndrome, premature ovarian failure, and permanent disability.

Other studies have identified similar adverse events.

The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has also recognized serious adverse events. For example, a judge awarded compensation to the family of Christina Tarsell, a young woman who died following Gardasil vaccination.

Tomljenović said serious and life-threatening injuries may be rare, but people should be properly informed about the risks.

Financial interests, not science, driving vaccine policy

Tomljenović said she does not dismiss research purely based on funding sources. However, when methodological weaknesses align with extensive pharmaceutical lobbying and financial relationships, legitimate concerns arise that financial interests rather than evidence-based science are driving vaccine policy.

A 2012 article in the American Journal of Public Health documented Merck’s role in drafting and promoting legislation that mandated the HPV vaccine for school attendance in the U.S.

The researchers found that Merck served as “an information resource, lobbying legislators, drafting legislation, mobilizing female legislators and physician organizations, conducting consumer marketing campaigns, and filling gaps in access to the vaccine.”

She also said there is a “revolving door” between Merck and regulatory agencies. Dr. Julie Gerberding, former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, became president of Merck’s vaccine division when she left the agency.

During her tenure at Merck, she accumulated over $100 million in personal wealth.

Tomljenović also invoked the Vioxx scandal — another Merck product later withdrawn from the market after killing tens or hundreds of thousands of people — as a cautionary tale about regulatory failures.

Researchers have suggested that Merck pushed Gardasil to compensate for its financial losses from Vioxx.

Pap screenings are the best way to prevent cervical cancer

Tomljenović concluded that regular Pap screenings remain a proven, risk-free alternative to HPV vaccination for cervical cancer prevention.

She said that “exposing healthy children to long-term, unpredictable and incompletely understood vaccine risks for no proven substantial benefits … is utterly unscientific, unreasonable, immoral and plain reckless.”

Pap screenings, she argues, carry no risk of autoimmune complications or neurological injury and have already driven substantial declines in mortality.

Watch the [English language] interview here:

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

March 12, 2026 Posted by | Corruption, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Comments Off on Expert Guts Claims That HPV Vaccine Reduces Cancer Risk

No evidence Russia sabotaged Baltic cables – Finnish intel

RT | March 12, 2026

Russia was not behind a series of ruptures in underwater cables in the Baltic Sea, Finland’s spy chief has admitted, adding that the assessment is “very broadly” shared within the European intelligence community.

Seabed infrastructure in the waterway has been repeatedly damaged in a series of incidents over the past two years. Several merchant vessels have been found dragging their anchors across the seabed, damaging power and communication cables in the process.

While some NATO and EU officials have accused Russia of sabotage and “hybrid warfare,” no evidence to back up the allegations has ever emerged. Moscow has repeatedly dismissed such claims as “absurd” and baseless.

Speaking to the outlet Suomen Kuvalehti in an interview published on Wednesday, Juha Martelius, the head of the Finnish Security and Intelligence Service (Supo), admitted that no proof of Moscow’s involvement had been found.

“Our understanding has been that there has been no deliberate Russian state activity in the background. It is a very broadly shared view in the other European intelligence community,” he said. The undersea infrastructure has been repeatedly damaged in accidents since as early as the 2000s, yet such occurrences previously did not receive extensive media coverage, he added.

Russia’s own underwater infrastructure was damaged in some of the incidents, Martelius pointed out. Moscow actually seeks to ensure that its own maritime traffic flows through the Baltic Sea undisturbed rather than to cause disruptions in the area, he argued.

“There are many factors here that support the fact that there is no motive in Russia,” he added.

Still, Martelius pointed the finger at the so-called “shadow fleet” allegedly operated by Russia to circumvent Western-imposed sanctions. Such vessels are often poorly maintained, and their crews are under-trained, the spy chief asserted, which has resulted in repeated instances of anchor-dragging causing damage to undersea cables.

Moscow has maintained that the notion of the fleet’s very existence is unfounded, and the term itself is a propaganda trope used to describe vessels that transport cargo outside the coverage of London-based insurance brokers.

March 12, 2026 Posted by | Russophobia | , | Comments Off on No evidence Russia sabotaged Baltic cables – Finnish intel

The Strategic Folly of a (Serious) US Ground Invasion of Iran

It simply can’t be done

Ashes of Pompeii | March 12, 2026

Tucker Carlson recently spoke of a potential false flag operation designed to manufacture consent for a US ground invasion of Iran. Tucker is no longer an “insider” in Washington but he still likely has his sources. Therefore this talk deserves serious examination, not because an invasion is feasible, but because the gap between political rhetoric and military reality has never been wider. Twelve days into the current conflict, with US bases being degraded under sustained attack and Iranian missile barrages continuing unabated, the notion of a ground invasion collapses under the weight of logistical, technological, and geographical constraints that no amount of political will can overcome.

The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered the calculus of conventional warfare, demonstrating that drones have radically changed the battlefield. Mechanized armor columns, the backbone of American land warfare doctrine since World War II, have proven devastatingly vulnerable to cheap, ubiquitous unmanned systems. What took billions in sophisticated weaponry to accomplish in previous eras can now be achieved with commercially available drones costing mere thousands of dollars. The US military is only now scrambling to adapt to this reality, while Iran are already drone masters, having made drone warfare one of the foundations of its defensive doctrine. Iranian forces have not merely acquired drones; they have built an entire asymmetric warfare architecture designed to exploit the vulnerabilities of conventional mechanized forces. And make no mistake, the Chinese would be thrilled to supply Iran with all the drones and components necessary.

This technological shift is particularly catastrophic for invasion planners when combined with Iranian geography. Unlike Iraq’s vast desert expanses, Iran is characterized by narrow mountain passes, constricted valleys, and limited corridors of approach through the Zagros and Alborz ranges. These geographic chokepoints are perfect killing zones for drone swarms and precision missile strikes. Any US mechanized column attempting to advance would be funneled through predictable routes, stripped of air support by Iranian air defenses, and systematically destroyed by loitering munitions and anti-tank drones. The Ukraine war has shown that even forces with extensive drone warfare experience suffer devastating losses in such conditions; the United States, still adapting its doctrine and procurement, would face an even steeper learning curve under combat conditions.

The logistical foundation required for invasion simply does not exist. Operation Desert Storm required six months of uncontested buildup in 1991. Today, US forward bases across the region are under active bombardment, with mounting casualties and degraded operational capacity. The notion that America could amass the hundreds of thousands of troops, thousands of armored vehicles, and millions of tons of supplies needed for an Iranian invasion while its regional infrastructure is being systematically struck is fantasy. Compounding this is the seriously degraded state of US strategic sealift capacity, which has suffered decades of underinvestment. The ships needed to transport heavy armor and sustainment cargo simply do not exist in sufficient numbers, and those that do are vulnerable to Iranian anti-ship missiles in the confined waters of the Persian Gulf.

Air power cannot compensate for these limitations. The current aerial campaign, despite causing significant destruction, has not broken Iranian morale or degraded its capacity to launch heavy ballistic missile retaliations. If anything, the surprise attack has unified the Iranian population behind the regime, demonstrating the counterproductive nature of aerial coercion against a nationalist population with deep historical memories of foreign intervention. Meanwhile, Israel is absorbing punishing strikes, undermining narratives of effortless dominance. Nor is air transport any sort of logistical substitute for sealift for an operation of this nature. The quantities required are far, far beyond what the USAF can sustain.

And this is to say nothing of manpower restraints. About 700,000 US troops particpated in Desert Storm. Presumably an even larger invasion force would be required for Iran, given its size, geography and demographics. Does anyone in their right mind imagine anywhere up to a million US soldiers being available for this sort of endevour?

This does not mean the conflict will not escalate. The danger Tucker Carlson identified, a false flag or manufactured incident, remains real precisely because it could justify limited actions short of invasion. What is most likely is some form of limited incursion: a raid on a coastal facility, a seizure of an island in the Gulf, or a special forces operation designed to create the appearance of decisive action. Such an operation would allow President Trump to project strength domestically, to pound his chest before an American audience hungry for demonstrations of power. It would generate headlines and temporary political capital.

But such theatrical gestures would not alter the strategic equation. They would not degrade Iran’s missile capacity, break its will to resist, or secure US interests in the region. They would likely provoke further retaliation, deepen Iranian resolve, and expose the limits of American power rather than its strength. A limited incursion is not an invasion; it is a political performance that leaves the fundamental constraints of geography, technology, and logistics untouched.

The hard reality is that a US ground invasion of Iran is not merely inadvisable, it is militarily impossible under current conditions. The logistics are impossible, drones have changed warfare where Iran has adapted and America has not, and geography ensures that any mechanized advance would be suicidal. Trump and Hegseth can plot all the invasions they want, but even the current obsequious Pentagon, would push back very hard against the suicidal folly of a ground invasion.

The conflict will continue, but its resolution will not come through fantasies of conquest that belong to a bygone era of total American hegemony.

March 12, 2026 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism, Militarism | , , | Comments Off on The Strategic Folly of a (Serious) US Ground Invasion of Iran

US-Israeli war of aggression on Iran meant to reshape region: Omani FM

Press TV – March 12, 2026

Oman’s Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi says that the United States and Israel launched an all-out coordinated aggression against Iran to block the Palestinian statehood and reshape the West Asia region.

Albusaidi said on Thursday that the “real objective of the war” is to “weaken Iran, reshape the region, and push the normalization agenda,” including efforts “to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state.”

The top Omani diplomat warned that the ongoing US and Israeli attacks on Iran are part of a “dangerous chain of violations.”

The war on Iran has undermined the legal framework that has provided regional stability for decades, he added.

Albusaidi also pointed out that Iran is not the only target of the ongoing aggression.

“There is a broader plan targeting the region, and Iran is not the only target. Many regional actors are aware of this, but they are betting that aligning with the United States may push it to revise its decisions and policies,” he said.

In recent months, the Tel Aviv regime has displayed its ill intention by releasing maps which show several areas of Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Iraq as part of “Greater Israel,” a vicious Zionist project, widely supported by the administration of US President Donald Trump.

The Israeli regime’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu and members of his extremist cabinet have already announced a plan to annex the occupied West Bank in order to steal more Palestinian land and block the possibility of a Palestinian statehood.

Albusaidi also warned the war could drive higher oil prices and major supply chain disruptions globally.

The US-Israeli aggression has already driven the oil and gas prices much higher and caused food inflation.

Oman is seeking to stop the war and return to diplomacy, he stressed.

Albusaidi said the war may end soon, but called for reconsidering Persian Gulf security strategies and preparing for worst-case scenarios.

The US and Israel attacked Iran on February 28 in an unprovoked act of aggression, targeting sites across Iran, including schools, hospitals, and sports halls.

Iran responded by launching missiles and drones at targets inside Israel as well as at American bases across the region.

Senior Iranian officials have asserted that any deliberate assault by the United States and Israeli regime on Iran’s civilian and cultural heritage sites constitutes a “flagrant breach of international humanitarian law and an undisputed war crime.”

Elsewhere in his remarks on Thursday, the Omani foreign minister said Oman will not join Trump’s so-called “Board of Peace” and will not normalize relations with Israel.

The remarks come as Trump keeps pushing more Arab states of the Persian Gulf region to join the Abraham Accords and normalize their ties with Israel despite the regime’s brutal more than to-year long Israeli assault against Palestinians in Gaza.

March 12, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Comments Off on US-Israeli war of aggression on Iran meant to reshape region: Omani FM

Iran Does Not Consider Israel Party to Talks to Need Mediators With It – Ambassador

Sputnik – 12.03.2026

Iran does not need mediators with Israel because it does not consider it a party to negotiations, Iranian Ambassador to Moscow Kazem Jalali told Sputnik in an interview.

“Iran does not officially recognize the Zionist regime as a party with which to negotiate. To date, there have been no cases of mediation or similar measures. In the recent series of events, Iran has responded on the battlefield and is not seeking mediation or any similar steps,” Jalali said when asked whether Iran attempted to establish contact with Israeli authorities through Russia.

He also recalled that Israel had told the Russian leadership that it had no intention of attacking Iran, but Tehran, he said, knew that such assurances were untrue.

On February 28, the United States and Israel launched strikes on targets in Iran, including in Tehran, causing damage and civilian casualties. Iran responded by striking Israeli territory and US military facilities in the Middle East.

The US and Israel initially claimed their “preemptive” attack was necessary to counter the perceived threat coming from Iran’s nuclear program, but they soon made it clear that they want to see a change of power in Iran.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed on the first day of the military operation. The Islamic Republic declared 40 days of mourning.

Russian President Vladimir Putin described Khamenei’s assassination as a cynical violation of international law. The Russian Foreign Ministry condemned the US-Israeli operation and called for an immediate deescalation and an end to hostilities.

March 12, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on Iran Does Not Consider Israel Party to Talks to Need Mediators With It – Ambassador

Macron’s aircraft carrier and warplanes to the Persian Gulf is a dangerous vanity project

By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 12, 2026

Like a knight in shining armour, French President Emmanuel Macron is vowing to defend Europe’s interests as the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran escalates.

Macron is not defending Europe or French honor. His theatrical swashbuckling is going to get more people killed and very possibly make the economic impact on Europe even more disastrous.

On a visit to Cyprus this week, Macron declared that a strike on Cyprus was a strike on Europe. He was referring to drone attacks on a British air base on the Mediterranean island last week that were blamed on Iran. It’s not clear who fired the drones at a time when false-flag operations are suspected in Turkey and Azerbaijan, carried out by Israeli forces seeking to embroil the region.

The French president was also filmed inspecting troops on board the Charles de Gaulle, France’s sole aircraft carrier, which he said is being sent along with 12 other warships to the Strait of Hormuz. The aircraft carrier was abruptly redirected from NATO exercises in the Atlantic to the Mediterranean.

The Strait of Hormuz has been closed to oil tankers since the U.S. and Israel launched their aggression on Iran two weeks ago. Europe is particularly vulnerable to oil price shocks and diminishing supply since the EU cut itself off from Russian energy markets over the proxy war in Ukraine.

In addition to the French armada being dispatched to the Persian Gulf, Macron has also ordered Rafale fighter jets to “defend the skies” over the United Arab Emirates, where the French have a base.

However, Macron’s latest show of bravado has telltale question marks. He emphasized that the French naval mission and its air assets were “purely defensive.” This indicates a lack of resolve, and that Paris is worried about the political backlash among French voters if it is seen to be wading into a reckless war started by the unhinged Americans and Israelis.

Also, Macron will be concerned that Iran views any involvement by European states as a party to the aggression and will likewise be targeted. That’s why Macron was trying to make out that French warships would be only “escorting tankers” to ensure passage through the Strait of Hormuz. The subtext to Iran is, please don’t hit us.

But Iran has categorically stated that as long as the U.S. and Israel’s aggression continues, then not one drop of oil will pass out of the Persian Gulf. If French warships try to enter the Gulf even as escort vessels, they will be seen as trying to break Iran’s tactical blockade. That will make them legitimate targets for Iran.

Macron qualified his armada plan as happening when the conflict subsides. That hardly sounds like a forthright act of bravery, more like hedging your bets.

What the French leader is doing is engaging in a vanity contest. Notably, the British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, has been ridiculed by Donald Trump as “not being Winston Churchill” over his dithering to send military support. The British press has noted that Macron was trolling British weakness and “rubbing our noses in it”. The visit to Cyprus – which still has colonial links with London – was aimed at showing up the British as ineffective, unlike the chivalrous French coming to the rescue.

Macron is also attempting to sideline Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who was in the White House last week, sucking up to Trump by avowing Berlin’s support against Iran. There has been a long-running ill feeling in Paris that Germany is becoming too big for its boots militarily. Macron is endeavoring to don the mantle of European leadership by declaring the defense of interests in the Persian Gulf.

The blunt truth is that Europe and France in particular are a non-entity. The EU is a mess because it has been a pathetic vassal to the United States, cutting itself off from Russian energy and damaging its economies. Now that oil is being cut off from the Persian Gulf and oil prices are heading above $100 per barrel, the Europeans are hit with a double whammy – all because of their subservience to Washington.

Macron’s strutting around the Charles de Gaulle to the strains of the Marseillaise is just theatrics to contrive looking as if he is doing something.

Another vanity factor is the major loss of the French warplane deal with Colombia last week.

For years, the French have been bidding for the sale of their Rafale fighter jets to the South American country. At the last minute, Colombia canceled the purchase and opted instead for Swedish Gripen jets. The loss is huge, amounting to €3 billion for French revenue and thousands of manufacturing jobs. But even more than that, the knock-on effect is a serious setback to French ambitions to crack the strategic Latin American market.

As soon as the news of the Colombia setback was announced, Macron took to nationwide television with his plans to send the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier and its squadron of Rafale jets.

This is Macron compensating for being jilted by Colombia and the potential damage to France’s military reputation and future sales of its Rafale. He is using the Persian Gulf as an advertising platform for the French military.

The mobilizing of French sea and air assets is less about “defending” Europe and more about boosting national ego and Macron’s self-image as a reincarnation of Napoleon or De Gaulle.

Macron’s folly could see him getting France and Europe dragged into a disastrous war instigated by Trump and the genocidal Israeli regime.

Iran has warned that France or any other European involvement in the war will not be viewed as neutral. France, Britain, and Germany have fanned this war by their duplicity and pandering to the United States and Israel. Macron’s vanity is an added dangerous factor for escalating the conflict and the catastrophic impact on the global economy.

If Macron and the Europeans had any moral fibre, they should be condemning the U.S. and Israeli aggression against Iran, not exploiting it for self-aggrandizement.

March 12, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Macron’s aircraft carrier and warplanes to the Persian Gulf is a dangerous vanity project