Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Hungary blasts ‘fake’ EU accusation

RT | March 23, 2026

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has denied and condemned claims that he leaked the details of EU meetings to Moscow.

The allegations were reported by the Washington Post and Politico some three weeks prior to the Hungarian parliamentary election scheduled for April 12.

On Friday, the WaPo cited security officials claiming that Szijjarto had made regular phone calls during breaks at EU meetings to provide Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov with “live reports on what had been discussed.”

On Sunday, Politico echoed the allegations, citing unnamed diplomats and officials who said Brussels had begun limiting the flow of confidential material to Hungary, forcing leaders to meet in smaller groups amid concerns that Budapest might leak sensitive information to the Kremlin.

“Instead of spreading lies and fake news, come to Budapest to support the opposition! Last time it worked… for us,” Szijjarto said Sunday in a post on X, responding to a comment by Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who argued that the new allegations “shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone.”

The Hungarian foreign minister earlier stated that Tusk was “the star speaker at the opposition rally” four years ago, stressing that back then Prime Minister Viktor Orban and his Fidesz party had won the election by 20%.

Szijjarto also criticized his Polish counterpart, Radoslaw Sikorski, over a similar remark, accusing Warsaw of “spreading lies to support the [opposition] Tisza Party and install a pro-war puppet government in Hungary.”

Orban has been at odds with Brussels over his criticism of open-border migration and what he calls a “suicidal” plan to admit Ukraine to the bloc.

Hungary’s prime minister and Vladimir Zelensky are involved in a standoff over the Ukrainian leader’s claim that he is unable to send Russian oil to Hungary. In return, Orban has refused to green light a €90 billion debt facility Brussels wants for Ukraine.

March 23, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception | , | Comments Off on Hungary blasts ‘fake’ EU accusation

SAFE Debt Trap: Poland’s €43.7 Billion Bet on Unipolar Illusion

By Adrian Korczyński – New Eastern Outlook – March 23, 2026

For Poland—already one of NATO’s most heavily militarized economies—SAFE is therefore not merely a financial instrument but a strategic decision about how deeply the country wishes to anchor itself within the EU’s emerging defense architecture, and at what price.

Introduction: A “Turning Point” Built on Debt

In early 2026, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk described Poland’s €43.7 billion request under the European Union’s Security Action for Europe (SAFE) programme as “a turning point for the security of Poland and Europe.” The statement was vintage Tusk—confident, sweeping, and designed for a headline. Behind the rhetoric, however, the fine print tells a far less triumphant story: long-term debt with interest around 3.17%, repayment schedules stretching toward the 2070s, and procurement rules that effectively redirect part of borrowed funds into specific defense supply chains—including those involving Ukrainian producers.

SAFE, officially presented as a major European defense investment programme, allows the European Commission to raise up to €150 billion on financial markets and lend the funds to member states for military spending. The loans come with relatively favorable terms: maturities of up to 45 years and a ten-year grace period before repayment of principal begins. On paper, the arrangement appears manageable. In practice, it represents a profound long-term commitment. Today’s political leaders can borrow vast sums for weapons systems, drones, and fortifications, while the financial burden will be carried by taxpayers decades into the future.

For Poland—already one of NATO’s most heavily militarized economies—SAFE is therefore not merely a financial instrument but a strategic decision about how deeply the country wishes to anchor itself within the EU’s emerging defense architecture, and at what price.

SAFE: The EU’s New Security Architecture

The SAFE programme was introduced by Brussels in late 2025 as part of a broader effort to strengthen Europe’s defense industrial base in the aftermath of the war in Ukraine. The mechanism is relatively straightforward. The European Commission raises funds on capital markets and redistributes them to participating states as long-term loans earmarked strictly for defense spending. Eligible projects include weapons procurement, ammunition production, and industrial modernization within the defense sector.

Yet SAFE also contains structural conditions that significantly shape how the money can be spent. One of the most consequential provisions is the so-called 65 percent rule: at least 65 percent of components used in projects financed under SAFE must originate from the European Union, the European Economic Area, or Ukraine. In practice, this requirement reinforces specific supply chains and pushes European defense industries toward deeper integration with Ukrainian production networks.

European Commission documents openly describe this as a strategic goal. SAFE, according to the Commission, will help “deepen Ukraine’s integration into the European security ecosystem” and allow member states to purchase defense products from Ukrainian manufacturers within joint procurement frameworks. This reflects the broader process of integrating Ukraine’s wartime defense industry into Europe’s defense economy since 2022.

Poland’s €43.7 Billion Bet

Among all EU member states, Poland has emerged as the most ambitious participant in SAFE. Warsaw submitted a request worth approximately €43.7 billion, by far the largest share of the programme’s €150 billion envelope. If fully implemented, the funds would finance dozens of projects, including air-defense systems, artillery production, drones, and modernization of military infrastructure. The first tranche—roughly €6.5 billion, representing about 15 percent of the total—could arrive as early as spring 2026 once all domestic legal procedures are completed.

Prime Minister Tusk has framed the programme primarily as a financial opportunity. According to the government, SAFE offers “long-term capital without pressure on the budget today,” with borrowing costs significantly below commercial rates. Yet even under favorable terms, the sheer scale of the loan carries long-term consequences. Over several decades, total repayments could exceed €60 billion, effectively committing future governments to financial obligations extending well into the second half of the century. The issue is therefore less about immediate affordability than about the cumulative strategic and fiscal trajectory that such borrowing sets in motion.

The Fiscal Context: Poland’s Expanding Military Burden

Poland has already undertaken one of the most rapid military expansions in modern Europe. By 2026, defense spending is projected to reach approximately 4.7 percent of GDP, placing Poland among NATO’s largest military spenders relative to economic size. Major procurement contracts have been signed with the United States and South Korea, including tanks, fighter aircraft, missile systems, and advanced artillery.

At the same time, Poland has been one of Ukraine’s most significant supporters since the beginning of the war in 2022. When military aid, refugee support, and financial assistance are combined, the cumulative cost is estimated at roughly 4.9 percent of Poland’s GDP over several years. Taken together, these commitments mean that nearly one tenth of national economic output has been linked—directly or indirectly—to defense and war-related expenditures.

Against this backdrop, the addition of another €43.7 billion in long-term borrowing inevitably raises questions about fiscal priorities and sustainability. Unlike Hungary, which maintains diplomatic channels open with all parties while negotiating exemptions from EU financial guarantees, Warsaw’s rigid moralism increasingly translates into a balance sheet item: billions in interest payments for weapons that may become obsolete before the loans mature. The demographic pressures, rising housing costs, and uncertain European economic outlook only deepen the gamble.

Ukraine’s Industrial Link: Strategic Integration and Structural Risks

One of the most controversial elements of the SAFE framework is its implicit integration of Ukrainian defense industries into European procurement chains. Because the programme allows member states to purchase equipment produced in Ukraine as part of joint projects, some portion of the funds borrowed by EU governments may ultimately flow to Ukrainian manufacturers. In strategic terms, Brussels presents this as a logical extension of Europe’s security policy: strengthening Ukraine while simultaneously expanding Europe’s industrial base.

However, the policy also intersects with a persistent and widely documented problem—systemic corruption within Ukraine’s wartime economy. A notable example emerged in November 2025, when Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) uncovered a major bribery scheme within the state-owned nuclear company Energoatom. Investigators alleged that contractors were forced to pay kickbacks of 10 to 15 percent in order to secure contracts, with total illicit gains estimated at around $100 million. Although the scandal did not directly involve the SAFE programme, it reinforced concerns among European observers about the governance environment surrounding large public contracts in wartime Ukraine.

For countries borrowing tens of billions under SAFE, this raises an unavoidable question: can European auditors trace billions in loans through a wartime economy where, as recent NABU cases show, contract values can include a 15 percent “risk premium” for local intermediaries?

The Domestic Political Clash: Tusk vs. Nawrocki

Poland’s participation in SAFE has also triggered a significant domestic political dispute. Although parliament has approved legislation necessary to implement the programme, the final step requires the signature of President Karol Nawrocki. Without it, Warsaw cannot fully activate the financial mechanism needed to access the loans.

Nawrocki has expressed skepticism about the programme, arguing that the structure of SAFE risks limiting Poland’s economic sovereignty and binding national defense policy too tightly to decisions taken in Brussels. In response, he has proposed an alternative financing mechanism known informally as “SAFE 0%.” The proposal, developed with the National Bank of Poland, would mobilize roughly 185 billion zloty (about €43 billion) from the country’s foreign currency reserves and gold holdings. As Nawrocki explained: “We have a concrete, Polish, safe and sovereign alternative that will not involve any financial interest costs—this is SAFE 0%.”

Yet while the proposal removes interest payments, it does not eliminate the underlying scale of the commitment. Drawing heavily on central-bank reserves could weaken Poland’s financial buffers and limit future monetary flexibility. The dispute therefore reflects not a disagreement over the scale of defense spending, but over the method—whether the burden should take the form of long-term EU loans or internal financial restructuring, and whether either path truly accounts for the opportunity cost of locking Poland into a single geopolitical silo.

A Regional Contrast: The Visegrád Divide

Poland’s expansive participation in SAFE contrasts sharply with the more cautious stance adopted by several of its Central European neighbors. Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic have either minimized their involvement in the programme or avoided it entirely. At a European summit in late 2025, these countries also negotiated exemptions from certain financial guarantees tied to EU support packages for Ukraine.

Their governments argue that national budgets must retain greater flexibility and that European security policy should not become overly dependent on large-scale borrowing mechanisms. Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó summarized this skepticism in early 2026, remarking that the European Union appeared “not prepared for peace.” Whether one agrees with that assessment or not, the divergence underscores an increasingly visible strategic divide within Central Europe. While Warsaw doubles down on loyalty to Brussels and Washington, its neighbors quietly preserve room to maneuver.

Multipolar Reality and Strategic Alignment

The debate surrounding SAFE unfolds at a moment of profound shifts in the global balance of power. Emerging economies grouped within BRICS+ now account for a rapidly expanding share of global economic output in purchasing power parity terms. Trade corridors across Eurasia continue to expand, while new financial mechanisms challenge the dominance of traditional Western institutions.

In response, many mid-sized states increasingly pursue strategies of strategic hedging—maintaining economic and diplomatic relations across multiple geopolitical blocs rather than aligning exclusively with any single center of power. Poland has chosen a different path: a deep and explicit anchoring within the Euro-Atlantic security framework. For Warsaw, geography and historical experience remain powerful arguments for such alignment. Yet the financial scale of initiatives like SAFE inevitably raises questions about how much strategic flexibility the country is willing to sacrifice in exchange for security guarantees, and whether future generations will thank today’s leaders for betting so heavily on a single vision of the world.

The Generational Question

Beyond geopolitics and fiscal policy lies a more fundamental issue: time. SAFE loans can extend for up to forty-five years, meaning that the financial consequences of today’s decisions may last until the 2070s. The immediate beneficiaries of the programme will be defense industries and military planners in the 2020s and 2030s. The final repayments, however, may fall on taxpayers decades later—many of whom were not yet born when the decisions were made.

For this reason, some economists increasingly frame the programme as an intergenerational transfer, in which present security priorities are financed by future public budgets. Whether that trade-off ultimately proves justified will depend less on today’s political narratives than on whether Europe’s security environment in the 2070s will remember, or care about, the promises made in 2026. For Poland, the gamble is not merely financial. It is a test of whether strategic rigidity can ever truly pay off in a world that increasingly rewards those who adapt, hedge, and keep their options open.

March 23, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , | Comments Off on SAFE Debt Trap: Poland’s €43.7 Billion Bet on Unipolar Illusion

War on Iran threatens global Gulf capital flows: FT analysis

Al Mayadeen | March 23, 2026

The war on Iran could disrupt the flow of Gulf capital across global markets, raising concerns about broader financial stability, according to economist Mohamed El-Erian, writing to the Financial Times.

While much attention has focused on energy markets and the resumption of oil production and shipments, El-Erian argued that an equally important issue is how the war may affect the Gulf’s relationship with international capital markets in the short term.

The six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, have become major global financial players over decades, investing heavily across international markets.

El-Erian noted that there is a risk of a temporary shift in capital flows as Gulf countries face increased domestic financial demands amid the war, even if their long-term investment role remains intact. Such a shift could impact global interest rates and the distribution of funding, given the world’s growing reliance on GCC capital.

Before the US-Israel war on Iran, GCC countries had already established themselves as influential forces in global finance, not only as energy suppliers but also as major hubs for transport, tourism, and liquidity.

The region generated a current account surplus exceeding $800 billion over the past four years and has deployed its financial resources across global markets, including public and private investments.

GCC’s growing role in global finance

El-Erian highlighted the growing presence of global financial institutions in the Gulf, where sovereign wealth funds, offices, pension funds, and banks actively manage and allocate capital internationally.

Over time, GCC countries have expanded their investment strategies, now playing a leading role in sectors such as artificial intelligence, life sciences, and robotics.

However, the war on Iran has caused a near “sudden stop” in the energy sector, creating short-term revenue pressures. Governments are expected to increase spending to shield populations from the impact of the war, even as some expenditures decline.

El-Erian emphasized that GCC countries are not uniform, noting that outcomes will depend on financial reserves, revenue recovery speed, and the balance between domestic spending and international investments.

He also warned that any disruption in global capital flows comes at a difficult time, with advanced economies facing large deficits and rising debt issuance, alongside major financing needs driven by technological shifts such as artificial intelligence.

The result is sustained high borrowing costs, which could affect countries, companies, and households, while amplifying financial risks and exposing new vulnerabilities.

Despite the challenges, El-Erian said the GCC will recover its energy exports and maintain its role as a global financial and logistical hub, but stressed that temporary shifts in capital flows must be considered in assessing the broader economic impact of the Iran war.

March 23, 2026 Posted by | Economics | , , , , , | Comments Off on War on Iran threatens global Gulf capital flows: FT analysis

Mossad De Facto Admits To Inciting Riots In Iran

The Dissident | March 22, 2026

A New York Times article has reported that the Israeli/American failing regime change plot in Iran was contingent on a plan from the Israeli Mossad to incite riot in the country to effect regime change.

The article wrote, “Within days of the war’s beginning, said David Barnea, the Mossad chief, his service would likely be able to galvanize the Iranian opposition — igniting riots and other acts of rebellion that could even lead to the collapse of Iran’s government. Mr. Barnea also presented the proposal to senior Trump administration officials during a visit to Washington in mid-January.”

The article added:

Mr. Netanyahu adopted the plan. Despite doubts about its viability among senior American officials and some officials in other Israeli intelligence agencies, both he and President Trump seemed to embrace an optimistic outlook. Killing Iran’s leaders at the outset of the conflict, followed by a series of intelligence operations intended to encourage regime change, they thought, could lead to a mass uprising that might bring about a swift end to the war.

“Take over your government: It will be yours to take,” Mr. Trump told Iranians in his initial address at the war’s start, after saying they should first seek shelter from the bombing.

In the run-up to the war, current and former American and Israeli officials said, Mr. Netanyahu invoked Mossad’s optimism about a possibility of an Iranian uprising to help convince Mr. Trump that bringing about the collapse of the Iranian government was a realistic goal.

This is a de facto admission that Mossad was behind the violent riots that took place in Iran in January of this year, and used those riots to convict Trump that regime change in Iran was viable.

When the protests began in late December of last year, a Mossad connected account wrote in Persian , “Let us come out to the streets together. The time has come.
We are with you. Not just from afar and in words. We are with you in the field as well.”

Following this, former Secretary of State and CIA director Mike Pompeo wrote , “Happy New Year to every Iranian in the streets. Also, to every Mossad agent walking beside them.”

When the protests turned from peaceful to violent riots, Israel Channel 14 reported that , “foreign actors are arming the protesters in Iran with live firearms, which is the reason for the hundreds of regime personnel killed” an obvious reference to the Israeli Mossad.

The admission from the Israeli Mossad that their push for regime change in Iran was based on the idea that the Mossad could ignite, “riots and other acts of rebellion that could even lead to the collapse of Iran’s government” is further evidence that Israeli Mossad infiltration caused the Iranian riots in January, which Israel then used to sell a regime change war in Iran to the Trump administration.

But the plan backfired once the Israeli/American war on Iran began.

Since its inception, the war was clearly an attempt to turn Iran into a failed state and not just remove the current government.

As Vali R. Nasr, professor of international affairs and Middle East studies at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies put it, “under constant bombardment Iranians are growing increasingly worried about the devastation of their country. They worry that U.S. and Israeli support for Kurdish and maybe even Azeri and Baloch separatists will break up the nation. These concerns are constantly circulating in public forums and are seen nightly in the form of antiwar demonstrations across the country and are morphing into an emerging sense of national resistance” adding, “If Iranians come to see this war as waged against Iran — and not just the Islamic republic — then Iranian nationalism may be mobilized in the service of resistance. America and Israel’s strategy of regime change by bombing military and government industries and infrastructure in Iranian cities, towns and neighborhoods and threatening Iran’s territorial integrity by arming Kurdish militias will not drive a wedge between the population and the regime and produce a popular revolution.”

In reality, the U.S./Israeli attempts to destroy Iran have only caused many Iranians to rally around the flag.

Nonetheless, this critical admission shows that the Israeli Mossad helped incite the riots in January and hoped it could be used to enforce regime change once the American/Israeli bombing began.

March 23, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Mossad De Facto Admits To Inciting Riots In Iran

Tehran: World grown thoroughly exhausted with US-Israeli ‘false flag storylines’

Press TV – March 23, 2026

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman says the world has grown thoroughly exhausted with the US-Israeli “false flag storylines.”

In a post on his X account on Monday, Esmaeil Baghaei reacted to the NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte’s stance, which rejected the recent claims by Israeli regime officials regarding Iran’s missile program posing a threat to Europe.

“That even the NATO Secretary General (who is infamously pressing Alliance members to appease the US and support their illegal war on Iran) declines to endorse Israel’s most recent disinformation, speaks volumes: the world has grown thoroughly exhausted with these tired and discredited “false flag” storylines,” he noted.

Israeli officials, over the past two days, claimed the interception of an Iranian missile targeting a British military base in Diego Garcia.

They presented Iran’s missile program as a threat to continental Europe.

The event reportedly happened between Thursday night and Friday morning, according to US media.

The Wall Street Journal and CNN reported that one of the missiles failed mid-flight while the other was hit by a US interceptor fired from a warship.

This comes amid heightened US and Israeli aggression against Iran, where the United States and the Israeli regime launched an unprovoked war of aggression on Iran on February 28, assassinating the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, as well as several top military commanders.

Iran immediately began to retaliate against the aggression by launching barrages of missiles and drone attacks on the Israeli-occupied territories as well as on US bases in regional countries.

Iran has repeatedly warned against US-Israeli “false flag” operations.

March 23, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , , , | Comments Off on Tehran: World grown thoroughly exhausted with US-Israeli ‘false flag storylines’

Trump ‘stuck between a rock and a hard place’, lacks Iran war strategy: Ex-CIA chief

Press TV – March 23, 2026

A withering critique from longtime Washington insider and former top spy Leon Panetta has intensified scrutiny of US President Donald Trump’s handling of the war against Iran.

In an interview with the Guardian newspaper on Sunday, Panetta, who previously also served as the US defense secretary (now war secretary), warned that the United States finds itself ensnared in a rapidly deteriorating crisis with few viable paths forward.

He portrayed an administration led by Trump that has slipped into a precarious position after weeks of unprovoked and unjustified aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran, which began with the assassination of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, on February 28.

He said Trump is “stuck between a rock and a hard place” and warned that his administration’s approach projects an image of weakness on the international stage.

Panetta, a veteran of Democratic administrations spanning decades, did not hold back in his critique of the incumbent US president’s decision-making style.

He said Trump has displayed a tendency toward naivety regarding the unpredictable nature of wars, saying the president appears to operate under the belief that simply repeating assertions might make them come true.

Such conduct, Panetta noted, was more “befitting of children than of presidents.”

His remarks came as the Iranian retaliatory operations continue to inflict heavy blows on the US military infrastructure in the region, decimating radars, drones and fighter jets.

The strategic waterway of the Strait of Hormuz also remains closed to US vessels, which has led to a dramatic rise in energy prices across the world.

Drawing on a career that has included stints as CIA director, secretary of defense, and White House chief of staff, Panetta underscored that Iran’s ability to disrupt global energy shipments through the Strait of Hormuz has been a long-established concern within American national security circles for generations.

That long-feared contingency, he warned, is now unfolding in real time.

The former defense chief argued that the ongoing war has laid bare significant shortcomings in US strategic planning, blasting Trump for launching an unwinnable war.

According to Panetta, the most plausible exit strategy for Trump would be to claim victory and seek to disengage from the war, but that avenue appears effectively closed.

He asserted that a ceasefire remained unattainable as long as Iran maintains its stranglehold over the Strait of Hormuz, describing the waterway as a potent lever of influence that Tehran now holds against its American adversary.

Efforts to rally European allies and NATO partners to help secure the strategic waterway have been met with tepid responses. Frustration over the lack of allied support has increasingly spilled into public view, with the US president launching biting criticism at the transatlantic military alliance and questioning its value in the absence of American leadership.

On the ground, Washington has thus far refrained from committing ground troops, though the deployment of Marines to the region has stoked speculation about potential escalation with far-reaching consequences for the aggressors.

March 23, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Trump ‘stuck between a rock and a hard place’, lacks Iran war strategy: Ex-CIA chief

Trump’s bombardment of fake news so far is working quite well. But where is it heading?

By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 23, 2026

Trump’s latest move in Iran, to consider mobilizing a second larger tranche of troops, might be the act of a lunatic who genuinely believes there can be a positive outcome for America and Israel in the Iran War. What we may be witnessing is a new, more desperate, extreme strategy after he has come to terms that virtually all of the first strategy has ended in disastrous consequences. Certainly we can assess that he is considering such a move.

Yet despite all the hype from U.S. media, it is important to stress that Trump has not yet acted. He is looking at the possibility of a deployment of 8,000 troops with the view of taking Kharg Island in combination with an 800-mile stretch of the Iranian coastline, heavily fortified with troops and missiles aimed at both the choke point of the Straits of Hormuz and also beyond it.

Any military strategist will surmise that this idea is even more whacky than the initial plan, which, it has transpired, was carried out with no planning or assessment whatsoever.

The assumptions are simply preposterous. To take Kharg Island, it would mean that any amphibious landing would have to come from a U.S. battleship which would pass through the Straits of Hormuz. And secondly, the island itself is heavily fortified as you would expect it to be, given that it produces [transfers] most of Iran’s oil. Even if a ship could by some act of a miracle reach it, the resistance by the Iranians who would be ready and waiting would be intense and might well result in all of the U.S. marines sent there being wiped out. The present 2,200 marines who are on their way to the region from Asia are not airborne, which means they can only land by boat. This idea is madness on a level that we have never seen before, with some military experts comparing it to Gallipoli in 1915, where British, French, Russian and Australian navies lost 250,000 men as they failed over almost a year to take the peninsula — resulting in the rise to prominence of the Turkish commander at the time, Mustafa Atatürk, who finally became president of the new republic of Turkey later in 1923.

What is more likely is that Trump is panicking and constantly creating media fodder for journalists to report on, while he buys time to work out how to get out of the hellhole that he has created for himself. Practically begging allies via social media or press conferences to help gives a clue to the level of desperation. But Trump’s ability to create fake news to distract U.S. media away from the reality is impressive.

When U.S. bombers left UK bases and dropped their load over a few days on the island, this threw the spotlight on the island and created a new subject to focus on. But what U.S. journalists did not look too closely at was the impact of the bombing. All the bombers did was to put a crater exactly halfway up the runway of the main airstrip, depriving planes from landing or taking off. It was hardly a great military victory. In fact, it actually deprives the Americans themselves of landing huge air transport military aircraft there, suggesting that they have no real intention of ever taking the island.

The truth is that the snake island is just media chaff which has been thrown up in the air to cause a distraction. If we examine a number of stories in the press in recent days, in fact, there have been a number of such stories to distract journalists away from asking tougher questions to Trump.

Fake story number two: allies “supporting” Trump. Barely 48 hours after France, UK, Germany and others all sent a very quick “no” back to Trump after he asked them for help in securing the straits, it would seem they all did a U-turn. A statement which the UK government issued seemed to say that they were all ready to help Trump, which shocked many. So why wasn’t this story put on the front pages of all major UK and U.S. newspapers as an extraordinary event in itself, as a drastic change to the crisis? Because journalists were sceptical and read the small print. They also read Reuters’ sceptical interpretation of it and noticed that those world leaders didn’t take to social media and announce the new initiative to “support” Trump. This word “support” was buried in the text, but the interpretation was only in the sense that these countries — including Japan — were sympathetic to Trump, similarly to your neighbour coming to the wake of one of your loved ones, eating your sandwiches and taking your drink, but then leaving while muttering condolences — without making any contribution to the funeral expenses.

But there’s more fake news.

Fake news #3 was the Japan stunt. Almost immediately we saw the arrival of the Japanese Premier at the White House who, when getting out of her car, embraced Trump for the whole world to see. What a spectacle! But what was this hug all about? Yes, of course the Japanese needed to quickly sign an energy deal to stabilize their own economy, but the compliments that the Japanese PM paid on Trump during the press conference would have some believe that Trump’s own people wrote the script. Praising Trump as a world leader on a level that none other can match left the buffoon in the White House stumbling on his own words, with him finally blabbing out a poor taste joke about Pearl Harbour. What was behind this banal performance? Was it real?

Of course it was not. EU leaders, probably led by Sir Keir Starmer’s media experts, had no doubt staged the whole thing and prepared her speech and her behaviour, as they too are panicking, knowing only too well that Trump isolated could possibly drag America into a Vietnam-type war which could go on for years. Their reckoning was: ’We can’t support him, but let’s at least issue a statement and get the Japanese PM to give him a hug.’ All Trump needs is a hug and a few absurd compliments which would leave most Americans pushing fingers down their own throats.

But of course such vomit-inducing sycophancy can’t keep relations warm for very long.

With both American aircraft carriers far from the Straits of Hormuz now (one damaged by an Iranian missile) and no real options for Trump to turn to, to settle world oil prices and come down hard on the Iranians, he’s looking like the greatest loser America has ever had as a president. It is not inconceivable that he will send ground forces to the region if the situation gets worse. This decision is more or less taken for him as his own rationale must constantly come up with media fodder which keeps him in the news as the main story. Sending troops to the region though is not the same as sending them in, although the bombing which is now going on along Iran’s coastline would suggest that he believes U.S. marines could control and contain those Iranian military installations, which is worrying as a second colossal failure of joined-up thinking seems to be heading our way.

But what is even more worrying is the extent of how much Trump lies both to journalists in press conferences and to the American people about his victory in Iran. In a country which sometimes feels like an irony-free zone, you would think he would be more ridiculed for this, but this is not the case. The real worry here is how naïve and frankly stupid Americans are, as one option that Trump has, other than using nuclear weapons in Iran, is creating a false flag attack on U.S. home soil. Not only would that allow him to announce a ’state of war’ which would justify cancelling the midterms, but it would also force EU countries and Japan to ramp up their ’free hugs’ policy to a whole new level. Free hugs are not free, by the way.

March 23, 2026 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Trump’s bombardment of fake news so far is working quite well. But where is it heading?

Iran to Mine Sea Lanes in Persian Gulf in Case of Attack – Defense Council

Sputnik – 23.03.2026

TEHRAN – Tehran will mine all sea lanes in the Persian Gulf in the event of an attack on the coast of the country or islands, the Iranian Defense Council said on Monday.

“We remind you that in the event of any attempt by the enemy to attack the coast or islands of Iran, all sea lanes in the Persian Gulf, as well as the coast, will be mined,” the council said in a statement, as quoted by the Fars news agency.

The passage through the Strait of Hormuz is possible only for countries that are not hostile to Iran, if this issue is coordinated with Tehran, the statement added.

The United States sees no alternative to conducting a ground military operation to capture Iran’s Kharg Island and is accelerating troop deployments to the region, Israeli newspaper The Jerusalem Post reported earlier, citing sources familiar with the matter.

On March 20, Axios reported that US President Donald Trump is prepared to seize Kharg Island to pressure Tehran into opening shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.

A US official told the newspaper that “the US military has accelerated the deployment of thousands of Marines and Navy personnel to the Middle East.”

On March 22, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated that all options remained on the table and did not rule out the possibility of sending US troops to the Iranian island.

March 23, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on Iran to Mine Sea Lanes in Persian Gulf in Case of Attack – Defense Council

Barak blasts Netanyahu: ‘Stop lying – you can’t destroy Iran’s nuclear, missile capabilities’

Press TV – March 23, 2026

Former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak on Monday launched a blistering attack at the regime’s incumbent political and military leadership, slamming them for peddling “blatant” lies over the war against Iran and noting that the regime has no strategy to end the war.

In an interview with Channel 13, Barak, who also previously acted as the regime’s military chief and military affairs minister, delivered a stark assessment of the Israeli wars on Gaza, Lebanon and the Islamic Republic of Iran.

“We cannot open the Strait of Hormuz, nor destroy Iran’s nuclear and missile capabilities, so don’t lie to us too much,” Barak said, directly challenging the regime’s claims regarding its capacity to confront the Islamic Republic.

His remarks came as the Israeli-American war against Iran entered its 24th day with no end in sight. The war, which started with the assassination of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, and some top-ranking officials and military commanders, has failed to achieve the “regime change” agenda or to decapitate the Iranian government.

On the contrary, as experts acknowledge, Iranian armed forces have decimated Israeli military and intelligence infrastructure across the occupied territories as well as US military bases in some Persian Gulf countries as part of Operation True Promise 4.

So far, 74 waves of missile and drone operations have been successfully carried out against enemy targets, which have effectively destroyed the air defense systems.

Barak, who acted as the regime’s premier from 1999 to 2001, launched a stinging attack at the regime’s war cabinet, stressing that the political echelon lacks both the knowledge and the will to end the fighting that has failed to achieve any objectives.

“Israel at the political level doesn’t know – doesn’t know or doesn’t want – to bring the war to an end,” he said. “They don’t know how to end wars.”

He also pointed to unfulfilled promises made repeatedly by the Benjamin Netanyahu regime vis-à-vis the genocidal wars against Gaza and Lebanon.

“We are two and a half years in; Hamas is still there after they promised us six times that we were a step away from ‘total victory.’ Hezbollah is still there after they told us we threw them back decades,” he stated.

Barak also took aim at Netanyahu’s long-standing emphasis on the so-called “Iranian threat,” noting that the regime’s claims of neutralizing the danger do not align with reality.

“Iranian nuclear program and missiles are still there after they clarified to us that he [Netanyahu] removed the existential threat,” he said, shaken by the direct Iranian missile impacts across the occupied territories in the ongoing war.

The former prime minister described a systemic breakdown in trust between the regime and settlers, exacerbated by what he called deliberate withholding of information.

“Now, what is the problem? When there is no truth and no trust. We also don’t know all the details, including those of us who were deep inside these matters,” Barak said. “We don’t know what the truth is. But they shouldn’t tell us ‘the truth’ – they just shouldn’t lie to our faces in such a blatant way so that we can participate in the discussion more seriously.”

March 23, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism | , , , , , | Comments Off on Barak blasts Netanyahu: ‘Stop lying – you can’t destroy Iran’s nuclear, missile capabilities’

Trump backs down on Iran strikes; Tehran denies any talks

Al Mayadeen | March 23, 2026

US President Donald Trump announced Monday that he has postponed military strikes on Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure for five days, claiming that Washington and Tehran have held “very good and productive conversations” over the past two days toward resolving the war.

The announcement came hours before a deadline Trump had issued on Saturday, in which he threatened that Iranian power plants would be destroyed if Tehran failed to “fully open” the Strait of Hormuz to all shipping within 48 hours, prompting a swift and decisive warning by Tehran that power infrastructure feeding US bases and “Israel” in the region would be targeted.

Iran denies direct talks

After Trump’s statements, Iranian officials swiftly rejected claims of direct negotiations between Tehran and Washington.

Iran State TV, citing the Foreign Ministry, reported: “There are no talks between Tehran and Washington.”

The Foreign Ministry further characterized Trump’s remarks as an attempt to manipulate global energy markets and buy time for his military plans.

“Yes, there are initiatives from some countries in the region to de-escalate tensions, and our response to all of them is clear: we are not the party that started this war, and all such requests should be directed to Washington.”

Context: IRGC warned Trump of consequences

The Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) issued a statement earlier today rejecting accusations by US President Donald Trump that Iran intends to target desalination facilities across the region, warning instead of reciprocal measures if Iranian infrastructure is struck.

The IRGC accused Washington of initiating the war, stating that “the aggressive American army… began the war by killing children,” saying that 180 children were killed in attacks on primary schools and that five water facilities, including a desalination plant on Qeshm Island, had already been targeted.

The statement firmly denied targeting civilian water infrastructure, asserting that “the IRGC has not carried out such actions.”

Addressing recent threats against Iranian energy infrastructure, the IRGC warned that any strike on power facilities would trigger direct retaliation.

“What we have done is declare our position: if power plants are targeted, Iran will respond by targeting the power infrastructure of the occupying entity, as well as power plants in regional states that supply electricity to US bases, in addition to economic and industrial infrastructure and energy sectors in which Americans hold shares. Without doubt, we will do so.”

The statement further added that economic and energy infrastructure linked to US interests would also be considered targets.

Emphasizing its prior restraint, the IRGC noted, “You targeted our hospitals – we did not respond in kind. You targeted relief centers – we did not respond. You targeted our schools – we did not respond. But if you target electricity, we will target electricity.”

The statement concluded with a warning that Iran would respond to any escalation “at a level that ensures deterrence,” adding that “the United States does not know our capabilities, it will see them on the battlefield.”

March 23, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on Trump backs down on Iran strikes; Tehran denies any talks