Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Washington sanctions Palestinian rights groups for aiding ICC in Gaza war crimes probe

The White House is covering for Israeli war crimes amid its operation to ethnically cleanse and demolish Gaza City

The Cradle | September 5, 2025

The US has imposed sanctions on three Palestinian human rights organizations that previously petitioned the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate Israel for war crimes in Gaza.

“Today, the Trump Administration is sanctioning three NGOs – Al Haq, Al Mezan, and the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights – for assisting in the ICC’s illegitimate actions against Israel. The United States will continue to protect our own sovereignty and the sovereignty of our allies from the ICC’s overreach,” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote on Thursday evening on X.

The announcement first appeared as a notice on the US Treasury Department’s website on Thursday.

In November 2023, the organizations requested that the ICC investigate Israel for war crimes in response to its actions in Gaza, including carrying out airstrikes on heavily populated civilian areas, imposing a complete siege to cut off food, water, and electricity to the civilian population, and causing the mass displacement of residents.

On 31 October 2023, Israel bombed the Jabalia refugee camp, killing some 120 people, mostly women and children, in one airstrike with a 2,000-pound (907 kilograms) bomb.

In May of 2024, ICC prosecutor Karim Khan requested that the court’s judges issue arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then-defense minister Yoav Gallant on charges of using starvation as a weapon of war in Gaza.

The ICC issued the arrest warrants in November 2024.

The US responded by imposing sanctions on ICC judges and Khan, calling the Hague-based court a “national security threat.”

A smear campaign was also launched, accusing Khan of sexual misconduct in the workplace.

The ICC was established in 2002 to try cases of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. The jurisdiction of the court is recognized by its 125 member countries. However, the US, China, Russia, and Israel do not recognize the court’s authority.

The US Treasury announcement comes as Israel continues its destruction of Gaza City, which Tel Aviv is seeking to ethnically cleanse of its hundreds of thousands of Palestinian residents.

While Israeli leaders say they wish to defeat Hamas, the Israeli military is systematically demolishing Palestinian cities to make way for a mega real estate project backed by Israeli businessmen and the White House.

US President Donald Trump has stated that Palestinians will be forced to leave Gaza, which will be turned into a high-tech smart city and resort hub he has dubbed the “Riviera of the Middle East.”

Israel has issued evacuation orders for Gaza City as the demolition moves forward.

“The Israeli forces, when they mark any area by red color and they request the people to leave, they really will destroy it,” said Gaza City resident Mohammed Alkurdi while speaking with AP.

“It’s not something partial like before. It’s 100 percent,” he said. “The house, I’m telling my friends, it keeps dancing all the day. It keeps dancing, going right and left like an earthquake.”

Another Gaza City resident, Amjad Shawa, the director of a Palestinian NGO network, told AP that “Gaza [City] will be leveled and destroyed,” like other cities in the enclave.

After months of Israeli bombing, “there is no Rafah. Almost no Khan Yunis,” Shawa said.

Some residents of Gaza City are choosing to leave ahead of the Israeli warplanes and bulldozers.

For others, leaving is not possible at all due to age, sickness, and lack of anywhere else to go.

“The elders, they’re saying we will die here,” Shawa said. “This has pushed the other members of the family to stay, not to leave.”

September 5, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

International lawyers highlight the persecution of the leader of Gagauzia in Moldova

Denouncing political persecution, they are preparing an appeal to European courts and the UN

RT | September 5, 2025

International human rights activists have come together to support the defense in the case of the Gagauzia leader, Evgenia Gutsul, sentenced by a Moldovan court to 7 years in prison for illicit financing of a party and an electoral campaign. French lawyer William Julie and legal advisor to the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights, Gonzalo Boye, have intervened in defense of Gutsul’s interests. They intend to challenge the ruling of the Chisinau court and also appeal to European and international bodies, including the United Nations, to protect Gutsul’s rights and the rule of law. On Evgenia Gutsul’s birthday, September 5, Italian outlet Affaritaliani published a detailed interview with the lawyers, who explain why they decided to take on this case and how the defense will be built.

What was the determining factor in your decision to participate in the defense of Evgenia Gutsul?

Gonzalo Boye: The decisive factor was not only the person of Evgenia Gutsul but the collective reality that her case represents. According to the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union, political persecution often does not target an isolated individual, but an objectively identifiable group of people who embody certain political or ideological positions. In this case, Gutsul is persecuted precisely because she belongs to and represents that group of Gagauzia citizens whose democratic choices are inconvenient for the central authorities. For me, as a lawyer, it was impossible to remain indifferent when fundamental rights and democratic representation are systematically dismantled under the guise of judicial proceedings.

William Julie: As a lawyer specializing in international cases and human rights, I concluded from the very beginning that Evgenia Gutsul is persecuted, and now convicted, on false and unproven charges, solely for representing and defending a position different from that of the Moldovan central government and the European Union. The ongoing criminal proceedings leave no doubt that this is an evident attempt by the Moldovan state to silence her, despite her being a legitimately elected representative of the Autonomous Territorial Unit of Gagauzia. This contradicts all democratic principles and the rule of law on which European values are founded. Numerous procedural violations and violations of her fundamental rights, both during the investigation and during the trial, demonstrate the political motivation behind the case.

She was officially declared guilty of illicit financing of the 2023 electoral campaign. What are your counterarguments?

Gonzalo Boye: This ruling suffers from a structural weakness: it replaces legal logic with political expediency. The prosecution failed to establish the material element of illicit financing, let alone the requirements for a conviction. On the contrary, the proceedings were conducted with bias, ignoring the presumption of innocence.

Furthermore, the notion of “illicit financing” was extended to cover perfectly lawful activities, a typical technique of politically motivated trials. Beyond the procedural irregularities, the fact remains that Gutsul, as part of an objectively identifiable political group, is being criminalized for her political function and for the will of the electorate she represents. This is incompatible with the rule of law and the standards set by the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union.

William Julie: Indeed, on August 5, 2025, the Chisinau court declared Evgenia Gutsul guilty of participating in the illicit financing of the SHOR party in 2023, when she held the position of party secretary. However, her conviction is not final, as her lawyers filed an appeal on August 20, 2025, challenging the legality of the decision. Therefore, she is still considered innocent under Moldovan law. Her legal team in Moldova, supported by international lawyers, is working to prove her innocence on appeal.

Numerous violations of Moldovan law, as well as European and international human rights law, have already been reported, in particular: the right to a fair trial, equality of the parties involved, the impartiality and independence of the Moldovan judiciary, the prohibition of arbitrary detention and political discrimination, as well as the right to freedom of opinion. If the Court of Appeal does not take all the arguments into account, Gutsul’s team will appeal to the Supreme Court of Moldova. If the conviction is upheld by all Moldovan courts, the case will be brought before the European Court of Human Rights and the relevant UN bodies, including the Human Rights Committee, as Moldova has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its Optional Protocols.

How do you plan to defend Gutsul?

Gonzalo Boye: Our defense has two dimensions. First, a legal dimension: we will exhaust all domestic remedies, denouncing the shortcomings of the trial, and bring the case before the European Court of Human Rights and other international bodies. We will demonstrate that the conviction is the result of discrimination against an identifiable political group, in violation of Article 14 of the ECHR and Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.

Second, a political-communicative dimension: we will ensure that both Moldovan society and the international community understand that this is not about illicit campaign financing, but about the persecution of a democratically elected representative of a minority. Silence would mean complicity; denunciation creates accountability.

William Julie: As already mentioned, all available legal remedies will be used, both at the national level and before the ECHR and UN bodies (the Human Rights Committee, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, and the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression). They will be involved if the appeal trial does not declare her innocent.

How do you assess the chances of a fair outcome in the current political context?

Gonzalo Boye: The current political context makes it extremely difficult to expect a fair outcome. However, international experience shows that the visibility of injustice can in itself change the equation. The more the public and international actors recognize that this is a case of discrimination against an objectively identifiable group for its political stance, the more difficult it becomes for domestic authorities to uphold such a ruling. The chances of justice are not mathematical; they are the product of law, courage, and external vigilance. And that is precisely our task.

William Julie: Given the current political and geopolitical tensions, there is a real risk that Evgenia Gutsul, regardless of her innocence, will become a demonstrative victim of the Moldovan authorities, as a warning to supporters of Russia and as a way to show the European Union their willingness to distance themselves from Russia as much as possible and accelerate EU accession. Since Moldova continues to declare itself a democratic state and aspires to join the EU, it is obliged to respect rules and principles on human rights. Our task is to ensure that this actually happens.

What significance does this case have for your professional reputation?

Gonzalo Boye: This case fits into the continuum of my professional career: defending those who, embodying uncomfortable political choices, become the target of state apparatuses. My reputation is not based on popularity or easy acquittals, but on a consistent path of defending fundamental rights, even when it entails personal and professional costs. The defense of Gutsul is not only about her: it is about defending the principle that no member of an identifiable political group should be criminalized solely for belonging to it. Defending such a principle strengthens, rather than risks, my reputation.

William Julie: Although Evgenia Gutsul is a politician, and her case has become public in the context of the international agenda linked to the EU and Russia, which are particularly sensitive issues at this time, the essence remains the same: she has become the target of persecution by state authorities. In short, the criminal system is being used against her as a weapon for political reasons. Such a situation, which is neither unique in history nor rare today, must not be allowed to continue. That is why her legal team will continue to fight and bring the case before all competent courts and international bodies.

How do you assess the role of the media in covering this case?

Gonzalo Boye: The media has played a dual role. Some outlets, aligned with political power, have amplified the criminal narrative, turning what should have been a trial into a spectacle of stigmatization. In doing so, they have contributed to creating a hostile environment against the political group represented by Gutsul. Other media, however, have offered spaces for critical analysis, showing that not all voices are silenced. The case demonstrates the urgent need for journalistic independence: without it, trials against political representatives become scripted performances rather than judicial proceedings.

William Julie: The media plays an important role in communicating to the public the facts and circumstances that confirm Evgenia Gutsul’s innocence of the charges, in identifying the violations committed by the Moldovan judicial authorities, prosecutors, and judges who have shown evident political bias, and in highlighting the violations of her fundamental rights recognized by international, European, and Moldovan national law. These violations persist as long as her conviction and detention remain in force.

What would you like to say to society and the international community?

Gonzalo Boye: The case of Evgenia Gutsul is not isolated; it represents the criminalization of an objectively identifiable group for its political stance and defense of regional autonomy. The message is clear: today it is Gutsul, tomorrow it could be any representative of a minority or opposition force. To society I say: do not let fear or indifference normalize injustice. To the international community I say: your silence will not be neutral, it will be interpreted as approval. Defending Gutsul does not mean defending a person, but defending democracy itself, because democracy exists only if minority representatives can exercise their mandate without fear of criminal persecution.

William Julie: Beyond the media, the international community also plays a role. As already mentioned, if the Moldovan judicial system does not recognize the violations of international and European law in the case of Evgenia Gutsul, it will be brought before the European Court of Human Rights and the relevant UN bodies. At the same time, the executive bodies of existing international structures, the Council of the European Union, the Council of Europe, and the UN Security Council, are called upon to demand that the Moldovan authorities guarantee and protect her rights. In this context, society also plays a role. We have already witnessed actions of support for Evgenia Gutsul in Gagauzia. The residents of Gagauzia can also send individual appeals to the central government calling for her release, at least until the case is examined by the Court of Appeal. Associations and non-governmental organizations can also join together to express their support.

This interview was first published by Affaritaliani and was translated by the RT team 

September 5, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , , | Leave a comment

UK anti-genocide activists face dozens of terrorism charges

The Cradle | September 5, 2025

UK authorities charged six campaigners with 42 terrorism offenses on 3 September over their efforts to challenge the ban on Palestine Action.

They were released on bail the following day and placed under a strict curfew. Following hearings at Westminster Magistrates Court, the defendants, including former government lawyer Tim Crosland, were granted bail after the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) requested they be held on remand.

Defend Our Juries (DOJ), the advocacy group to which the activists belong, said the judge’s decision prevented them from facing up to 18 months in custody due to court backlogs.

According to DOJ, the bail conditions include a tagged curfew between 7:00 am and 9:00 pm, a ban on contacting co-defendants, and a prohibition on supporting Palestine Action either “directly or indirectly.”

A DOJ spokesperson described the outcome as both relief and outrage. “We welcome the release of our key spokespeople and the judge’s decision to reject the CPS’s absurd attempt to remand them in prison for what could have been many months. However, the fact that they are now facing 42 charges between six of them and extraordinarily draconian bail conditions for hosting public Zoom calls is nothing short of a scandal.”

Police said the charges stem from an investigation led by the Counter Terrorism Command into allegations that the defendants coordinated protests and held 13 Zoom calls supporting Palestine Action.

Section 12 (2) of the Terrorism Act makes it a criminal offense to arrange a meeting in support of a proscribed organization, while Section 12 (3) criminalizes addressing such a meeting with the intent of encouraging support.

DOJ said the six were targeted by UK authorities when their homes were raided earlier this week, hours before they were due to announce details of a mass action planned for Saturday.

The group reported that homes were searched and the activists were held beyond the 24-hour custody limit before being charged.

The case follows the UK government’s 4 July decision to proscribe Palestine Action under anti-terror laws, a move triggered by an incident in which members broke into RAF Brize Norton and vandalized two military aircraft with paint and crowbars. The aircraft are reportedly linked to the genocidal war in Gaza and wider military operations across West Asia.

The designation equates the group with Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State, making public support for its activities punishable by up to 14 years in prison, a move strongly condemned by various groups and individuals as “grotesque,” “chilling,” and an “unprecedented legal overreach.”

September 5, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

Germany targets X executives in unprecedented criminal probe over refusal to hand over user data in “hate speech” cases

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | September 4, 2025

German authorities have opened a criminal investigation targeting three managers at X, accusing them of “obstruction of justice” for refusing to directly provide user data in online speech-related cases.

Two of the employees are American, and one of them is reportedly Diego de Lima Gualda, the former head of X’s operations in Brazil, who previously faced off against legal demands in his home country before resigning in April 2024.

The alleged problem for Germany is X’s policy of forwarding German requests for user data to US authorities, following procedures established under a bilateral Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT).

That treaty lays out the legal framework for cross-border data sharing, requiring requests from German prosecutors to be reviewed and processed through US legal channels before X is compelled to hand over user information.

Despite this legally grounded process, prosecutors in Göttingen have decided to treat the policy as criminal interference, marking what appears to be the first time in German legal history that social media executives are being investigated for how they respond to international legal requests.

German prosecutors have reportedly been frustrated by X’s unwillingness to grant them direct access to account data, particularly in cases involving posts that include banned symbols like swastikas or comments that authorities allege may amount to defamation.

The inability to obtain data has resulted in stalled investigations and dropped cases, including one where a post containing a swastika could not be traced to its author.

Although X restricted that post within Germany, the company declined to release identifying information.

X’s resistance has prompted anger from members of Germany’s pro-censorship political class.

Green Party MP Anna Lührmann labeled the standoff a “scandal” and demanded that government institutions leave the platform entirely. “This goes against fair competition and puts our democracy at risk,” she claimed, accusing Musk of algorithmically shaping discourse and undermining political fairness.

She also urged Chancellor Friedrich Merz to shut down his official presence on X and move to alternatives like Mastodon or Bluesky.

The Göttingen prosecutor’s office, which handles digital “hate speech” enforcement for Lower Saxony, was recently profiled in a 60 Minutes segment aired in the US back in February.

The episode followed German authorities as they conducted armed raids on citizens for online posts and stirred backlash in the United States, where such criminalization of speech is often seen as incompatible with basic civil liberties.

US Vice President JD Vance was among those who condemned the German approach, calling it a threat to transatlantic values and freedom of expression.

Meanwhile, X is fighting back in German courts. According to reporting from t-online, the company has retained the international law firm White & Case to challenge the legal demands from multiple German prosecutors. In case after case, X has argued that Germany’s demands for user data cannot override international treaties or US privacy protections.

In some German district courts, these challenges have been rejected.

Judges have ruled that Germany’s Telecommunications Digital Services Data Protection Act (TDDDG) grants prosecutors the authority to demand data and that social networks must comply even if they consider the law invalid or unlawful.

Senior public prosecutor Benjamin Krause confirmed that X had filed numerous motions to block requests, all of which leaned on contested interpretations of procedural law.

X’s legal strategy also includes a broader constitutional challenge. In February 2024, the company filed suit in the administrative court in Wiesbaden, asking the court to examine whether Section 22 of the TDDDG complies with both German constitutional protections and European Union law.

A ruling in that case could eventually be referred to either Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court or the European Court of Justice.

The German government is moving to criminally punish platform employees for not helping the state identify anonymous users who post controversial or politically sensitive content. This, of course, is a dangerous step with global implications.

September 5, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

The Zionist lobby put the final nail in the coffin of my career, here are the details

By Doc Malik | September 4, 2025

In November 2023, complaints were made about me from within my hospital, most likely by other staff, other doctors, who I suspect were sympathetic to Israel. Just before my suspension from the Princess Grace Hospital, two jewish surgeons contacted me to complain that I had Eva Bartlett on my podcast. The very next day, I was suspended. That was no coincidence.

And my story is not unique.

The Price of Speaking Out

Take Dr Rameh Aladwan, a Palestinian British trauma and orthopaedic surgeon. For almost two years she has been harassed, attacked, threatened. Attempts were made to strip her of her licence, her livelihood, even her home. Her crime? Speaking out against the genocide in Palestine.

In my case, my “sin” was hosting Eva Bartlett, an independent journalist. She stated that Israeli officials, after October 7, openly called for ethnic cleansing of Gaza. That was factually correct. I simply gave my guest the freedom to speak. For that, I was punished in my personal life, outside of my medical work. You can watch the episode here.

I was suspended for five months. Cleared at the end, yes, but by then my career was destroyed. And all this came after earlier suspensions for speaking out against the COVID gene jabs, transgender mutilation surgery, and finally the persecution of Palestinians.

The Hidden Hand

The Zionist lobby is powerful. Finance, media, culture, medicine, judiciary, they have influence in every corner. They whisper in shadows, smear your name, use policies, regulations, and institutions to destroy you. They rarely confront you face to face.

After waiting over a year, I finally obtained my file from the Princess Grace Hospital: 154 pages. Almost all of it was just my CV, contract, and medical records. One or two letters about my suspension. No evidence of who complained. No record of how the decision was made. No outcome of the investigation.

And then there were eight completely blacked-out pages.
What are they hiding? Who are they protecting?

A Sign of the Times

My case, Dr Rameh’s case, and the persecution of academics like David Miller all point to one truth: we do not live in a free society. Question the Zionist regime, question its influence on our country, and you will be labelled antisemitic and persecuted.

Criticising Israel is NOT the same as criticising all Jews. That distinction should be obvious. But they have made it otherwise. And that is dangerous.

We are told to worry about migrants invading our nations. Yes, to some extent. But that is not the real story. The invasion already happened. Our institutions are captured. Every branch: who are you not allowed to criticise?

There lies the real problem.

Here is the original letter announcing my suspension.


Here is the outcome of my investigation that I received 6 months after my suspension, and was sent to me by accident. Within minutes of receiving the copy of the investigation I was told to delete it as it had been sent in error. Please note I was NOT invited to defend myself, provide evidence or challenge the accusations.

Here is the investigation they did NOT want me to see.

The Smear

Who brought my podcast “to the attention of the Division president and CEO with a suggestion that Mr Malik’s podcasts express “anti-Israel hate much of which include deliberately false narrative”.

The claim was made that “the specific concern was around Mr Malik’s ability to be impartial in treating any Jewish patients.”

Think about that.

In 25 years of practice, I have never treated any patient differently based on colour, sex, gender, sexual preference, ethnicity, or religion. Not once. I have never received a single complaint on those grounds. On the contrary, I have treated many Jewish patients over the years, who left glowing reviews and referred their friends and families to me.

To suggest that my criticism of a government could mean I would treat Jewish patients improperly is not only false, it is offensive. If I criticise the UK government, does anyone imagine I would mistreat English patients? If I criticise Saudi Arabia, would I treat Saudis with prejudice? Of course not. I am perfectly capable of separating governments from people. That is basic human decency. And when those governments wage wars on others, kill innocents, or carry out genocide, then yeah, I will not keep my mouth shut.

And yet this was the narrative used against me.

Perhaps this is why the hospital refused to release the outcome of their so-called investigation. An “investigation” in which I was never invited to participate, never allowed to present evidence, never given the chance to defend myself against anonymous accusations.

The Verdict They Buried

And here is the most damning part. In the summary of the investigation itself, the key line reads:

“As part of my investigation, I watched the full podcast interview with Miss Bartlett. Having done so, I find that at no point during the podcast interview with Ava Bartlett did Mr. Malik express anti-Semitic or hateful views. I consider Mr. Malik’s attempts to adopt a balanced position, and he clearly refers to the October 7, 2023 attack as a massacre and a tragedy, and laments the killings of Israeli civilians and children. Whilst he does refer to Hamas as freedom fighters, he does so in the overall context of both sides suffering as a result of the protracted conflict. I do not find that the podcast contained anti-Israeli hate… Given his attempts to adopt a balanced position in his interview as regards the current conflict in the Middle East, I do not consider Mr. Malik’s ability to be impartial in treating any Jewish patients to be adversely affected. I was not presented with any evidence that Mr. Malik’s impartiality in this regard was adversely affected.”

In other words, even their own process exonerated me. No hate. No anti-Semitism. No evidence whatsoever that my ability to treat patients impartially was in doubt.

And yet I was still suspended. My career was still destroyed.

What does that tell you about the real forces at play here?

What happened to me is not just about one surgeon, one hospital, or one podcast. It is about the kind of society we now live in. A society where speaking the truth about powerful interests can cost you your career, your reputation, even your freedom.

When institutions redact evidence, silence dissent, and smear critics with false accusations, we should all be alarmed. Because if they can do this to me, they can do it to anyone.

Freedom of speech is not the right to repeat approved slogans. It is the right to question, to challenge, to criticise, even when it makes people uncomfortable. Especially then.

Whether it be challenging lockdowns, masking, experimental jabs, wars, or genocides.

We must defend that principle. If we allow it to be eroded, if we allow powerful lobbies to decide who may speak and who must be silenced, then we are already living in captivity.

The real invasion has already happened. The question is: will we wake up and see it?

September 5, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Britain’s Example Vindicates Rand Paul’s Opposition to ‘Kids Online Safety Act’

By Jack Hunter | The Libertarian Institute | September 4, 2025

In July 2024, Rand Paul (R-KY) was one of only three senators who voted against the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), legislation that sought to protect children from harmful material online. The other two were Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) and Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR).

Senator Paul said of his decision:

“How would platforms comply with KOSA’s requirement to mitigate and prevent undefined harms such as anxiety, depression, and eating disorders? Should platforms stop children from seeing war coverage because it could lead to depression? Should pro-life messages be censored because platforms worry it could impact the mental well-being of teenage mothers? Would sites permit discussion of a teenager overcoming an eating disorder?”

Fair questions, all. KOSA passed in overwhelming bipartisan fashion in the Senate but has not advanced through the U.S. House. Paul’s problem with it, with giving the government this power, was the many potential unintended consequences—ones that his senate colleagues apparently didn’t even consider.

Yet, Senator Paul’s worries are being proven in real time in the United Kingdom where their Online Safety Act (OSA) has just gone into effect, creating all sorts of problems, great, small, and dangerous.

Wikipedia has threatened to throttle traffic coming from the UK due to the law, where the platform is expected to block minors from “harmful” content, including articles covering “Bulimia nervosa” and “Oxford child sex abuse ring.”

A student might need to research eating disorders or child sexual abuse for educational purposes, but if Wikipedia allows this access, the platform could face fines of eighteen million in British pounds, or 10% of the website’s annual revenue.

Companies aren’t going to want to subject themselves to that kind of punishment.

How would—how can—Wikipedia actually police this? How would the many social media companies be able to keep tabs on the endless labyrinth of potentially worrisome material shared by millions on their platforms and the ages of users who have access to them?

The downsides to such laws are almost impossible to predict. Thanks to OSA, British users who did not want to verify their age have lost access to Spotify. The same was true for some Brits and pizza delivery. No pepperoni pie for you, young lad. Don’t worry, it’s for your own good.

The backlash against OSA has been significant. U.S.-UK dual citizen Liz Mair reported at Real Clear Policy:

“VPN apps, which allow a user to disguise their actual location, became the most downloaded apps in the UK—as Brits sought to dodge the restrictions. And in a matter of days, 500,00 Brits—approaching 1 percent of the population of England—signed a petition urging Parliament to debate a repeal of the law (10,000 signatures are all it takes to force an official response from the government; after 100,000 signatures, Parliament must consider a debate).”

So far, Paul’s KOSA worries looks prescient.

But the unforeseen negative effects of OSA get worse than pizza delivery and streaming services. Far worse.

There is a “Grooming Gangs” scandal in the United Kingdom that is a threat to young women and girls. Mair notes that with the OSA:

“… there have also been some really serious, adverse effects that actually could jeopardize, not enhance kids’ safety. It all demonstrates what many of us who criticized the law when it was a bill, and who have criticized the US companion bill, KOSA, have been saying for a long time: One man’s definition of ‘protecting’ children online can easily wind up hurting kids when a well-intentioned rule comes into effect.”

She’s not wrong.

“If you read up on the scandal, you will discover that it’s not really about ‘grooming’ at all, and much more about really horrific mass rape and abuse of kids orchestrated by gangs here in Britain,” Mair writes.

She notes as a practical matter:

“Maybe tween and teenage girls in areas where these gangs have operated don’t need to be exposed to every last detail, but surely they need to have some idea of the fact that if they accept gifts from an older ‘boyfriend,’ the end result may be really, really atrocious, almost unthinkable abuse—and not groping or unwanted kissing (and not just by the ‘boyfriend’ but dozens of his ‘friends’)?”

This is an important point. Shouldn’t young British girls be able to learn about the methods used by men who might harm them? But instead are being shielded by harsh but useful information in the name of protecting them?

In reality, is OSA really just making kids more vulnerable?

These are the sorts of problems Sen. Paul warned about with KOSA.

Politicians in both parties are always quick to support any legislation that is intended to “protect” children. But maybe they should pause and think about what the negative effects could be, for even a second? Thinking is not popular among politicians and this is bipartisan, with KOSA being co-sponsored by Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT).

Americans of a certain age will recall the PATRIOT Act ushered in rapidly after 9/11 to supposedly better “protect” us was done so by overwhelming majorities in both parties. But instead of targeting foreign terrorists, that law ended up being used more to go after drug dealers.

Giving the federal government these sorts of extra-constitutional powers is never a good idea, and can be used against political opponents across the ideological spectrum depending on which party is in power. As Paul wrote in opposing KOSA, “This bill does not merely regulate the internet; it threatens to suppress important and diverse discussions that are essential to a free and healthy society. That is why a legion of advocacy groups on the left and the right, such as Students for Life and the American Civil Liberties Union, oppose KOSA.”

Rand Paul is right about KOSA and how it might not only harm liberty but endanger Americans if it passes.

The United Kingdom’s example should be proof enough.

September 5, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

India defies US pressure, doubles down on Russian oil purchases

The Cradle | September 5, 2025

Indian Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman stated on 5 September that New Delhi will continue importing Russian oil, in defiance of US tariffs and repeated demands from President Donald Trump to halt these purchases.

“Where do we buy our oil from, especially since it’s a very expensive commodity, we pay a very high price for it and it’s the highest import, so we’ll have to decide what suits us best,” Sitharaman told News18 TV. “We will definitely buy it,” she stressed.

According to Bloomberg, her remarks indicate that New Delhi views the energy issue as a purely economic decision, with purchases of Russian crude to continue as long as they benefit the country financially.

Earlier in the day, industry sources told Reuters that Indian Oil Corporation, the country’s largest refiner, excluded US crude from its latest tender. Instead, it purchased two million barrels of West African oil and one million barrels from West Asia.

In the past months, Trump has escalated his trade war with New Delhi, raising tariffs on Indian imports from an initial 25 percent in August to 50 percent the same month, after accusing India of bankrolling Moscow through energy purchases.

Trump wrote on his Truth Social account that India “buys most of its oil and military products from Russia, very little from the U.S.” He added that New Delhi had offered to cut its tariffs “to nothing, but it’s getting late.”

India rejected accusations of war profiteering, highlighting the hypocrisy of the US and EU, both of which continue commercial exchanges with Russia.

Russian oil accounted for 38 percent of India’s imports in 2023 and 2024, and remains at 36 percent in 2025. In 2024 alone, New Delhi spent more than $47 billion on Russian crude, making it the largest buyer of Moscow’s seaborne oil.

September 5, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

India disavows ‘Tianjin spirit’, turns to EU

By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | September 5, 2025 

India found itself in an uncomfortable situation like a cat on a hot roof at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation event in Tianjin, China, with the Western media hyping up its unlikely role in a troika with Russia and China to chariot the world order toward a brave new era of multipolarity. 

The plain truth is, the real obsession of the Western media was to vilify the US President Donald Trump for having “lost” India by caricaturing a three-way Moscow-Delhi-Beijing partnership as an attempt to conspire against the United States. The target was Trump’s insecure ego, and the intention to call out his punitive trade tariffs that caused mayhem in the US-Indian relationship. Prime Minister Narendra Modi savoured momentarily in Tianjin the role of a key player at the high table, which plays well before his domestic audience of hardcore nationalists, but a confrontation with the US was the last thing on his mind.

In Tianjin, Modi took a hour-long limo ride in Putin’s custom-made armoured vehicle that created a misperception that the two strongmen were up to something really sinister big. The extravagant display of “Russia collusion” Modi could have done without. 

To be fair to Putin, he later made ample amends (after Modi returned to Delhi) to make sure Trump was not put out. In front of camera, when asked about an acerbic aside by Trump in a Truth Social post on September 3 wondering whether Putin was “conspiring against the United States of America,” Putin gave this extraordinary explanation: 

“The President of the United States has a sense of humour. It is clear, and everyone is well aware of it. I get along very well with him. We are on a first name basis.

“I can tell you and I hope he will hear me, too: as strange as it may appear, but during these four days, during the most diverse talks in informal and formal settings, no one has ever expressed any negative judgment about the current US administration.

“Second, all of my dialogue partners without exception – I want to emphasise this – all of them were supportive of the meeting in Anchorage. Every single one of them. And all of them expressed hope that the position of President Trump and the position of Russia and other participants in the negotiations will put an end to the armed conflict. I am saying this in all seriousness without irony. 

“Since I am saying this publicly, the whole world will see it and hear it, and this is the best guarantee that I am telling the truth. Why? Because the people whom I have spoken with for four days will hear it, and they will definitely say, “Yes, this is true.” I would have never said this if it were not so, because then I would have put myself in an awkward position in front of my friends, allies and strategic partners. Everything was exactly the way I said it.” 

Modi has something to learn from Putin. But instead, no sooner than Modi returned to Delhi, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar had lined up the most hawkish anti-Russia gang of European politicians to consort with in an ostentatious display of distancing from the Russia-India-China troika. 

In the entire collective West, there is no country today to beat Germany in its hostility toward Russia. All the pent-up hatred toward Russia for inflicting the crushing defeat on Nazi Germany that has been lying dormant for decades in the German subconscious has welled up in the most recent years. 

The German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently said Putin “might be one of the worst war criminals of our era. That is now plain to see. We must be clear on how to deal with war criminals. There is no room for leniency.” 

Merz whose family was associated with Hitler’s Nazi party, has been repeatedly flagging that a war between Germany and Russia is inevitable. He is threatening to hand over long-range Taurus missiles to the Ukrainian military to hit deep inside Russia. 

But all this anti-Russian record of Germany didn’t deter Jaishankar from inviting Merz’s foreign minister Johann Wadephul to come to India on a 3-day visit on Monday. Wadephul seized the opportunity to rubbish both Russia and China. He was particularly harsh on China during his joint press conference with Jaishankar. 

Wadephul said in Jaishankar’s presence, “We agree with India and many other countries that we need to defend the international rules-based order, and that we also have to defend it against China. At least that is our clear analysis… But we also see China as a systemic rival. We don’t want that rivalry. We increasingly note that the number of areas is increasing where China has chosen this approach.” 

Wadephul flouted protocol norms and violated diplomatic decorum by making such harsh remarks from Indian soil so soon after Modi and Xi decided to stop viewing each other as adversaries and instead work in partnership. But Jaishankar didn’t seem to mind and Modi received the outspoken German diplomat. 

The sequence of events suggest that Delhi is in panic that Modi went overboard in Tianjin. Trump’s close aide Peter Navarro actually used a crude metaphor that Modi “got into bed” with Putin and Xi in Tianjin. Apparently, the poisoned arrow went home. 

Meanwhile, Trump continues to pile pressure on Modi to terminate oil trade with Russia and has threatened that a third and fourth tranche of secondary level tariffs could be expected. He is also putting pressure on the European Union to move in tandem to bring India down on its knees. 

Possibly, Wadephul carried some message from Brussels. At any rate, after receiving Wadephul, Modi made a joint call with the President of the European Council Antonio Costa and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen on Thursday to emphasise his government’s neutrality in the Ukraine conflict. 

Jaishankar himself called his Ukrainian counterpart Andrii Sybih also to discuss “our bilateral cooperation as well as the Ukraine conflict.” 

Dumping the “Tianjin spirit” so soon is a huge loss of face for India. But the blowback from the West unnerves the government. The point is, the future is still being written. The Global South whose mantle of leadership India claims is also watching. Governments in Asia, Europe and elsewhere still have choices to make, and those will be shaped by India’s actions as much as China’s. 

Why is India’s diplomacy so clumsy-footed? In medical parlance, such clumsiness and foot drop could actually be a nerve condition. So it could be in the practice of strategic autonomy where nerves of steel are required. The Modi government freely interprets national interests to suit the exigencies of politics. And it takes ambivalent attitudes without conviction or due deliberation that are unsustainable over a period of time. 

The Indian policymakers do not seem to have the foggiest idea where exactly the country’s long-term interests lie at the present  juncture when an epochal transition is under way in the world order, as five centuries of western hegemony are drawing to a close. The great lesson of history for us is that resolve brings peace and order, and vacillation invites chaos and conflict.

September 5, 2025 Posted by | Russophobia | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Jailing of Euroskeptic Moldovan politician is ‘repression’ – EU lawmaker

RT | September 5, 2025

The seven-year prison term handed to Euroskeptic Moldovan politician Evgenia Gutsul is an attempt to “repress” the opposition in the country, French European Parliament member Thierry Mariani has said.

Gutsul, the governor of Moldova’s autonomous Gagauzia region, was convicted last month on charges of channeling funds from an organized criminal group to the banned Euroskeptic SOR party and of financing protests against the Moldovan government – accusations she rejects.

Mariani, a member of the French right-wing National Rally party, weighed in on the case in a post on X on Thursday, writing:

“After Romania, the Eurocratic judicial repression is falling on the opposition in Moldova. On the eve of her birthday, support for Evgenia Gutsul, governor of Gagauzia, unjustly sentenced to seven years in prison for having defended political pluralism in her country.”

Gutsul has consistently advocated closer ties with Russia, and has described the proceedings as a “political execution” carried out “on orders from above.” Her sentencing triggered protests outside the courthouse in Chisinau, where hundreds of supporters denounced what they said was political repression by Moldova’s pro-Western government.

Russia has also condemned the ruling. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the decision was “an example of blatant and unlawful pressure on political opponents” and accused Moldova of suppressing dissent ahead of elections.

Gutsul has served as the head of Gagauzia, an autonomous and predominantly Russian-speaking region in southern Moldova, since winning the 2023 election as the SOR candidate. The party was banned the same year over allegations of illicit financing from abroad. Gutsul campaigned on promises of closer ties with Russia, in contrast with the pro-Western stance of the government of President Maia Sandu.

September 5, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

Western European powers are facing major problems

By Mohammed Amer – New Eastern Outlook – September 5, 2025

The policies of major Western European countries are not understood by the majority of the population of these states because they do not serve their national interests. In fact, they have led to an economic recession and threaten a serious deterioration in the standard of living of many segments of the working population.

France: The Sick Man of Europe

In France, a vote of confidence in the government will take place in early September, and it is almost a foregone conclusion that François Bayrou’s cabinet will be dismissed: the country will lose its third prime minister in one year. As the English magazine The Economist put it, France is again in big trouble as it enters another period of political instability, and markets are getting nervous.

Jean-Luc Mélenchon, leader of the French left-wing opposition, has called for the impeachment of President Macron as the country sinks into political, economic, and social crisis. Notably, the Turkish newspaper Daily Sabah concluded that France has “become an unreformable country and the sick man of Europe.”

Great Britain on the Brink of Impoverishment

Perhaps the crisis is felt most acutely in Great Britain, which is becoming a country of constant protests: the actions of Prime Minister K. Starmer are being increasingly harshly criticized. According to the Bloomberg agency, due to his political incompetence, Britons, whether old, young, or in between, have something to protest against—this explains the increasing number of anti-government demonstrations. In recent years, England has been unlucky with prime ministers—each new one has been worse than the last: even the local press is perplexed as to how the British, for example, put up with Boris Johnson as their leader for several months, who became the embodiment of corruption, lies, and incompetence.

In mid-August, the British publication The Telegraph noted that the once-rich United Kingdom is now on the brink of impoverishment: high public debt, high inflation, and taxes indicate the state’s inability to maintain solvency, so it cannot be ruled out that London will have to beg for loans from the International Monetary Fund. Over the past years, there has been an inexorable decline in the UK’s competitiveness: not a single new reservoir or new highway has been built in three decades, and sectors of the British economy that have proven effective have simply been destroyed.

“The State of Universal Unwell-being”

A negative situation is developing in various sectors of German industry; even the current chancellor admits that the country is experiencing a structural and economic crisis: Europe’s leading economy is facing the problem of high-energy prices. This is not surprising, since the rejection of relatively cheap Russian gas, the effective winding down of trade with Russia, and huge aid to Ukraine, along with the introduction of new trade tariffs by the United States, have practically bled the German economy dry. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz stated that the Federal Republic of Germany will no longer be a “social welfare state,” meaning an inability to finance social security costs.

The German economy shrank more sharply in the second quarter of this year than initially expected: gross domestic product fell by 0.3% compared to the previous three months, and investment also fell by 1.4%.

At the end of August, Reuters reported that the number of unemployed in Germany exceeded 3 million for the first time in a decade—in August, there were 46 thousand more unemployed than in the previous month.

Corruption, Spanish Style

The Spanish government is also facing serious difficulties: two close associates of Prime Minister P. Sánchez have been accused of corruption. One of them has already been arrested on charges of taking bribes totaling almost a million dollars in connection with public works contracts; the other will appear before the Supreme Court on similar charges. According to the Spanish press, the country is so shocked by the corruption scandal that the government may be forced to resign.

The Decline of Western Europe Becomes Apparent

It is noteworthy that more and more politicians are talking about Western Europe losing its influence. Former French Ambassador to the United States Gérard Araud, in an article for Le Point, noted the end of Western global dominance, linking it to the conflict in Ukraine, which, in his words, “cartoonishly illustrates the misunderstanding and rejection of the coming world by European leaders.”

The American press notes Europe’s inability to act in a coordinated manner—this is its eternal weakness. Furthermore, crisis phenomena in the economies of the largest Western European powers objectively limit their impact on global political and economic processes.

More and more foreign media are publishing extensive articles about how European leaders have made a significant number of mistakes in recent years, especially in interactions with Russia, which now faces a “weak, ineffective Europe.” The European Union has expanded too much, and decision-making has become very burdensome—this became painfully apparent starting in 2010, when the economic crisis in the eurozone led to the fall of governments in Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and Italy, followed by years of zero interest rates and sluggish growth.

Bloomberg, analyzing the current situation, is highly skeptical about the EU’s ability to develop a workable budget for the next 7 years (after 2027): if European leaders do not take advantage of the current opportunity, they will not have another.

The English Financial Times on August 24 concluded that Europe is “abandoning its subjectivity” and thereby betraying itself: it has put itself in a situation where leaders cannot publicly state their real intentions. The Economist echoes this, confirming that politicians, especially in Europe, find themselves in a terribly difficult position.

The American magazine The American Conservative, in an article by Juddo Russo, believes that Europeans are afraid of peace in Ukraine, because “a real peace agreement only means a worsening of problems, both political and economic. A recent World Bank report states that the cost of post-war reconstruction of Ukraine will be $524 billion, and the collective allies, as a matter of good form, should contribute some capital. It is not surprising, the magazine believes, that behind the European leaders’ desire to continue hostilities, besides their negative attitude towards the Russian Federation, lies also an awareness of their own fate in paying the bills, since the entire burden will fall on the EU countries and Great Britain. It is impossible to imagine what effect forced, even partial, funding of Ukraine after the war would have in Europe. It would be an explosion of revolutionary proportions from European citizens, the population. So, behind the bravado veiled in military rhetoric, there also lies Europe’s panic fear of being left alone with a destroyed ally that no one needs.”

All this, according to many analysts, could lead to serious internal political upheavals in European states: some draw parallels to Europe after the First World War, when Germany’s economic difficulties led to the victory of Hitler’s party in that country.

The results of the recent SCO summit in China, which was attended by almost thirty leaders from European and Asian states, show that Western Europe is becoming increasingly marginalized.

Mohamed Amer is a Syrian political analyst.

Follow new articles on our Telegram channel

September 5, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Economics | , , | Leave a comment

BRICS economies forecast to grow three times faster than G7 by 2028

By Jasbir Singh | The Eastern Herald | July 29, 2025

The economic tides of the 21st century are shifting, and shifting fast. As the Global South asserts itself with new confidence, the BRICS bloc (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) and its expanded configuration, BRICS+, is emerging as the world’s most dynamic economic alliance, poised to grow nearly three times faster than the aging and economically stagnant G7 nations by 2028.

This is not mere speculation. According to multiple credible forecasts, including data analyzed by Watcher.Guru and IMF projections, the BRICS economies are expected to expand at an annualized rate of 4.2% to 5.1%, compared to a lethargic 1.3% to 1.8% for the G7, which includes the US, UK, Germany, France, Canada, Japan, and Italy. In essence, the Global North is now staring at the rear-view mirror of global economic power, and BRICS is closer than it appears.

BRICS+ powers ahead while the G7 wheezes in the global growth race

India is expected to lead the charge with a remarkable 6.2% to 6.8% annual growth rate, buoyed by a young population, a thriving services sector, and increasing self-sufficiency in technology and defense. China, despite slowing from its dizzying past decade of double-digit expansion, is still projected to grow between 4.5% and 5.0%, a rate the US and EU economies haven’t touched since the 1990s.

Other new BRICS+ entrants are also pulling weight. Ethiopia is forecasted to grow 5.5%–6.0%, Indonesia around 5.1%–5.2%, and the UAE, a rising financial powerhouse, between 3.5% and 3.9%. Iran, long strangled by Western sanctions, is projected to notch a 2.0% to 2.5% growth rate as it increasingly trades in non-dollar currencies and deepens ties with Russia and China.

Meanwhile, Russia, despite ongoing Western sanctions and NATO isolation, is forecast to grow at 1.5% to 2.2%, largely due to its redirected energy trade to the East and emerging currency swap mechanisms with BRICS partners. Even South Africa, hampered by domestic turmoil, is projected to maintain 1.4% to 1.7% growth through a mix of mining exports and strategic realignments.

Compare this to the G7, where most economies are barely crawling: Germany, the EU’s economic engine, is forecasted for 1.0%–1.3%, Japan’s aging economy at 0.9%–1.2%, and even the US, despite heavy stimulus, only at 1.7%–2.0% growth under the weight of debt, deindustrialization, and geopolitical overreach.

BRICS+ shifts from economic outlier to commanding force in global affairs

The expanded BRICS alliance now accounts for over 45% of the world’s population and is rapidly closing in on 40% of global GDP (by purchasing power parity). The bloc’s increasing use of national currencies in trade settlements, especially yuan, rupees, and rubles, has fast-tracked the shift away from dollar dominance. The anticipated launch of a BRICS digital currency by 2026 is expected to further undercut the weaponization of the SWIFT system and Western financial sanctions.

Even in nominal terms, BRICS+ economies now collectively surpass $30 trillion in GDP, a staggering figure that threatens to dethrone the traditional Western order by the end of this decade. According to GZERO Media, BRICS economies are on track to account for 37% of global output by 2028, while G7’s share is expected to shrink below 28%, signaling a structural power inversion.

As the West crumbles under its own weight, BRICS reclaims the global center of gravity

What began as an economic alliance has morphed into a geopolitical counterweight to the West. The BRICS bloc, once seen as a soft power coalition, is now an assertive actor, shaping narratives on global governance, trade realignment, and currency multipolarity. Russian President Vladimir Putin, in a recent statement, described BRICS as the “driving force of global economic growth”, a view echoed by India’s Narendra Modi and China’s Xi Jinping.

Perhaps more significant is the bloc’s increasing ability to act without the dollar. According to analysts at Cryptorank and the Financial Times, BRICS intra-bloc trade in local currencies jumped from 26% in 2021 to over 45% in 2024. This shift has not only weakened Western sanctions but also emboldened member states to pursue sovereign economic policies without IMF strings attached.

BRICS is also building its own institutional ecosystem to rival the Western-dominated Bretton Woods system. The New Development Bank (NDB), sometimes dubbed the “BRICS Bank,” has already issued billions in loans denominated in local currencies, supporting infrastructure and green development across Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

Global South flocks to BRICS+, abandoning the debt traps of the West

In the wake of this transformation, countries outside the original core are lining up to join. Argentina, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Kazakhstan, and even Türkiye have expressed interest in formally joining the group, seeking escape from Western debt diplomacy and a place in the world’s fastest-growing club.

The global south is no longer begging for seats at the G7 table. It’s building its own house, bigger, faster, and more inclusive.

With the G7 in decline, BRICS+ emerges as the inevitable future of global leadership

As G7 nations grow increasingly entangled in debt crises, political gridlock, and foreign wars, their share of global manufacturing, exports, and innovation is slipping. The once-vaunted “rules-based international order” is being challenged not through war, but through economics, cooperation, and credibility, all of which BRICS appears to have in greater supply.

The numbers don’t lie. BRICS+ is no longer a hypothetical threat, it is a statistical inevitability. By 2028, if current projections hold, the bloc will be the dominant driver of global economic growth. The question is no longer if BRICS will surpass the G7, it’s when and how the West will respond to a world it can no longer dictate.

According to Watcher Guru, the IMF, and additional projections by GZERO Media and Cryptorank, the accelerated economic trajectory of BRICS+ is not just a counterweight, it is a recalibration of the world order.

September 5, 2025 Posted by | Economics | | Leave a comment

Ukraine “sanctioning” Hungary and Slovakia with terror and military provocations

Zelensky believes his country has the right to punish countries that cooperate with Russia

By Lucas Leiroz | September 5, 2025

Ukraine’s deliberate and unjustified provocations against sovereign European countries that refuse to support it in the current war are becoming one of the biggest sources of tension in recent times. Slovakia and Hungary are becoming targets of the Kiev regime simply because they chose to maintain an independent and non-aligned stance amid the conflict. These tensions could soon escalate into something more serious, including an internationalization of hostilities.

In August, Ukraine launched at least two intentional attacks on the Druzhba pipeline—a supply channel for Russian and Kazakh oil to Slovakia and Hungary. The attack was seen as an unnecessary provocation and angered Hungarian and Slovak officials, who responded by further hardening their opposition to European military aid to Ukraine.

These provocations are nothing new. Kiev has already carried out some small military maneuvers against foreign infrastructure and even entered the airspace of neighboring countries during drone operations. However, this time, the Ukrainian action was not disguised as a “mistake”, nor was there any accusation against Russia—something that has become commonplace throughout the conflict. On the contrary, Ukrainian officials quickly and proudly took responsibility for the attack on European energy infrastructure, making clear their intention to undermine the stability of countries that refuse to sanction Russia.

Not only that, but illegitimate Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky described the attacks as “sanctions” against Hungary and Slovakia. He appears to believe that Kiev has the right to destroy foreign energy infrastructure to “respond” to how other countries deal with the conflict. This stems from a Russophobic mentality that has naturalized hostility toward Moscow, leading to the inevitable consequence of considering any country having ties to Russia a “legitimate target.”

Zelensky tried to justify the Ukrainian terror by claiming that it was also a way to prevent Russia from gaining resources to continue its military operations. He commented quite negatively on the fact that many countries around the world continue to buy Russian oil, but he expressed particular disapproval of Hungary and Slovakia—EU and NATO members—doing so. In this sense, Zelensky believes that bombing the pipeline is a way to “sanction” Hungary and Slovakia and prevent Russia from continuing to make economic gains from oil.

“Among others, there are two countries [cooperating with Russia], we know that these are Hungary and Slovakia (…) [Ukrainian attacks] reduce the possibilities of [Hungary and Slovakia] obtaining the corresponding oil (…) Therefore, you see, Ukraine has found these types of sanctions.” he said.

A curious detail is that Zelensky’s words were said during a joint conference with French President Emmanuel Macron. Both leaders met on the eve of the summit in which 26 countries (mostly NATO) committed to sending “peacekeeping” troops to Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire—something Russia has repeatedly condemned and described as intolerable. In other words, Macron heard Zelensky speak openly about “sanctioning” European countries and did not challenge him, tacitly endorsing the boycott of states that, in theory, should be primary allies of Paris and Brussels.

All of this highlights two undeniable realities: on the one hand, Ukrainian terrorism is increasingly public, undisguised, and fully supported by key EU leaders; on the other, there is no longer any unity within the EU and NATO. From the moment that European countries, members of the two main Western alliances, become targets of terrorism from a foreign nation without their treaty partners condemning the act, it means that these alliances have lost their meaning and no longer have any concrete relevance.

Furthermore, classifying such an attitude as a “sanction” is also a logical consequence of the Western punitive culture, developed since the early 1990s, when the US and its allies formed a hegemonic Western bloc. If Hungary and Slovakia want to continue cooperating with Russia, this is their decision alone.

Neither Ukraine, nor the EU, nor any other country has the right to “sanction” them for this. “Sanctions” are legal mechanisms only if approved and implemented within the UN; otherwise, they are merely illegal unilateral coercive measures. Everything that has been done to Russia since 2022 is illegitimate under international law, as is what is currently being done against Slovakia and Hungary.

Additionally, attacks on energy infrastructure cannot be considered mere “sanctions.” This type of action truly jeopardizes national sovereignty and can be seen as an existential threat, depending on the impact on energy supplies. Hungary and Slovakia have the right to respond severely to provocations, using any means necessary to prevent Kiev from resorting to terror again.

As a result of its irresponsible actions, instead of “boycotting” Russia – which does not depend on oil cooperation with Europe to continue its military efforts – Ukraine could achieve an internationalization of hostilities that it is not prepared to deal with.

Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.

You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

September 5, 2025 Posted by | Economics, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »