America’s ‘Democratic’ Allies Are Becoming More Authoritarian
By Ted Galen Carpenter | The Libertarian Institute | February 17, 2025
U.S. officials have a long history of portraying Washington’s allies and clients as democratic, even when their behavior is blatantly authoritarian. Such cynical hypocrisy was at its zenith during the Cold War, but it is surging again.
A similar trend is evident with respect to U.S. interference in the internal political affairs of other countries through such mechanisms as the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Such agencies fund regimes and political movements that are deemed obedient to Washington’s wishes and supportive of American foreign policy objectives. Conversely, U.S. administrations actively undermine governments or movements that they consider hostile or even just insufficiently cooperative. The actual nature of U.S. clients often is a far cry from the carefully crafted democratic image of them that Washington circulates.
A recent example of American meddling in the internal affairs of another democratic country appears to have taken place in the Republic of Georgia. According to Parliament Speaker Shalva Papuashvili, USAID spent $41.7 million to support its preferred candidates in the country’s recent parliamentary elections. Adjusted for the size of Georgia’s population, such an expenditure in the United States would amount to $3.78 billion,
The U.S. track record in Georgia since the dissolution of the Soviet Union lends credibility to the speaker’s accusation that Washington is meddling in his country’s internal political affairs. President George W. Bush fawned with praise for Mikheil Saakashvili, the leader of Georgia’s “rose revolution” in 2003. Under Saakashvili, Georgia had become a “beacon of liberty,” Bush crowed. Generous flows of aid from Washington ensued. However, massive corruption soon characterized Saakashvili’s rule, as did his growing repression of political opponents. Ultimately, Saakashvili’s adversaries ousted Washington’s beloved “democratic” client from power.
The contrast between the laudatory American portrayal of Saakashvili as a paragon of democratic reform and the reality of his conduct was stark. However, Washington’s role in Ukraine over the years has been even more pervasive and dishonest. Although Ukraine’s president, Victor Yanukovych, came to office in a 2010 election that even a team of European Union (EU) observers conceded was reasonably free and fair, officials in Barack Obama’s administration, especially Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, worked to undermine his presidency. Yanukovych’s preference for closer economic ties with Russia instead of the EU and the United States apparently was intolerable to Western policymakers.
In 2014, the United States and key NATO partners helped Ukrainian demonstrators (primarily in Kiev’s Maidan Square) force Yanukovych to flee. An intercepted telephone call between Nuland and the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine confirmed the massive extent of Washington’s interference in Ukraine’s affairs. Nuland herself later admitted that the United States had poured more than $5 billion to Ukrainian groups in the years before the Maidan uprising. Supposedly, the purpose was to “promote democracy,” but as usual, the funds went almost entirely to groups Washington considered supportive of U.S. policies. It would be hard to identify a more flagrant case of outside interference in the affairs of another country.
Even if U.S. leaders sincerely intended their largesse to bring a stronger, healthier democracy to Ukraine—which is extremely doubtful—Washington did not achieve that goal. Corruption and blatant repression have become increasingly bad under the post-Maidan governments. Even though U.S. leaders invariably portray Ukraine’s current president, Volodymyr Zelensky, as a democratic champion, his record proves the opposite. Under his rule, Ukraine has outlawed opposition parties, muzzled the press, harassed uncooperative churches, and amassed a record of arbitrary imprisonment and torture. Much of that abuse was evident before the outbreak of war between Ukraine and Russia. Confirming that any attempt to portray Zelensky’s rule as democratic is a hypocritical farce, Ukraine has now postponed elections indefinitely.
The rot of hypocrisy and covert authoritarianism has infected even governments in NATO and the European Union. A grotesque example occurred earlier this month in Romania when an election commission dominated by the two governing parties, the Social Democratic Party (PSD and the National Liberal Party (PNL), annulled the first round of the presidential election held on November 24. Instead of the candidates of those two parties advancing to the second round runoff as expected, neither one did so. Instead, Caliin Georgescu, the candidate of a right-wing populist party led the field. Elena Lasconi, a reformer representing another “minor” party took the other runoff spot.
That outcome apparently was intolerable to Romania’s political establishment or its supporters in the EU and the United States. They viewed Georgescu as especially unacceptable, since he openly criticized NATO and opposed continuing to aid Ukraine. The country’s election commission nullified the voting results and rescheduled the first round balloting for May 4, 2025. Commissioners charged that, wait for it… Russia had illegally tampered with the election! Moscow’s horrid offense was its alleged support of a Tik Tok campaign that seemed to benefit Georgescu. Tangible evidence regarding Russian involvement was noticeably absent. Despite the lack of evidence, U.S. and EU officials denounced Russia and praised the Romanian government for trashing the election.
Eugene Doyle, a reporter for New Zealand’s Solidarity.com, noted the menacing significance of this episode. “To save democracy, the US and the European elites appear to have found it necessary to destroy democracy. For the first time ever an election was overturned in an EU/NATO country. Ever,” he wrote. Doyle also cites evidence that Russia was not even the likely culprit. The Tik Tok effort apparently originated with a botched PNL scheme to siphon off votes to Georgescu from other mainstream competitors.
Moreover, as Doyle points out, “Even if the Russians did it, in what crazy world would you wipe an election for a Tik Tok campaign, particularly one that was at best a few hundred thousands of dollars’ worth of advertising/messaging/ chatting—in contrast to the millions of dollars the U.S. State Department and various branches of the U.S. government spent on the same campaign?”
The answer is that it would happen in a world where political elites in the United States and its principal allies have never really been committed to democracy. Not as a domestic governing principle and definitely not as a foreign policy objective. Instead, the alleged commitment is a propaganda tool that is discarded whenever it becomes inconvenient. We live in such a world, and have done so for many years.
Zelensky’s key rival names Ukrainian election date
RT | February 16, 2025
Ukraine will hold elections in late October 2025, former President Pyotr Poroshenko has claimed. The politician cited a number of sources linked to government, and said that the relevant agencies have already started preparing.
“Write it down: [it will be on] October 26 of this year,” said the former president, who currently leads the European Solidarity party, which holds 27 seats in Ukraine’s 450-seat parliament. He was answering a question about the potential election date by the Censor.net media outlet.
When further pressed about the sources of his information, Poroshenko said he had contacts in the presidential administration, as well as within law enforcement agencies. He went on to claim that a Ukrainian printing house had already started producing the ballots. The nation’s Central Election Committee has also started its own preparations, he said.
The Ukrainian Interior Ministry is supposedly in the process of opening its first office in Berlin, the former president claimed, adding that it was being done “solely for the elections.” Germany hosts the biggest number of Ukrainian refugees, amounting to over 1.24 million people, according to online data aggregator Statista. Russia follows close behind, with 1.22 million Ukrainians having taken refuge there since the start of the conflict.
According to Poroshenko, the authorities intend to use the election to retain power. “They are preparing everything in such a way [that would] leave them without opponents,” the former president claimed, adding that the current government seeks to “crawl back into power, destroying democracy, freedom, and transparency of elections.”
Poroshenko led the country from 2014 to 2019, following the overthrow of President Viktor Yanukovich in a Western-backed coup. He was succeeded by Vladimir Zelensky. Poroshenko then emerged as a fierce critic of his successor. In 2023, he condemned what he described as Kiev’s “authoritarianism.”
In December 2021, Poroshenko was charged with treason over alleged coal deals in Donbass during his presidency. His assets were frozen in January 2022, but he vowed in court not to flee the country. Earlier this week, Zelensky imposed a set of new sanctions against him linked to the treason charges. The move was condemned by Poroshenko as “absolutely illegal” and led to a protest by his party in the Ukrainian parliament.
Ukraine was expected to hold a parliamentary election in 2023 and a presidential poll in 2024. Both were suspended indefinitely by Zelensky, due to martial law. The Ukrainian leader has since repeatedly insisted the nation cannot hold elections amid the ongoing conflict with Russia.
US President Donald Trump’s special envoy for the Ukraine conflict, Keith Kellogg, has said Washington would like to see Kiev hold both votes before the end of the year.
Kiev regime attacks Chernobyl to sabotage peace talks
By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | February 17, 2025
In recent days, an incident involving a drone attack on the Chernobyl nuclear plant has generated controversy and debate. According to Ukrainian authorities, a Russian drone allegedly struck the facility, damaging the structure around the reactor. Ukraine’s illegitimate president, Vladimir Zelensky, was quick to blame Russia, stating that the situation reflected a Russian assault on Ukraine’s nuclear infrastructure. However, Russian authorities, including Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, denied these claims, labeling them as yet another provocation by Kiev. More than that, even some Ukrainians question the regime’s official narrative.
Peskov categorically rejected the idea that Russia had attacked any nuclear facility, especially Chernobyl, stating that such claims were unfounded. He argued that any accusation of Russia attacking nuclear power plants was fabricated, asserting that Russia would never target such sensitive locations due to the risks involved. He suggested that the attack was, in fact, an attempt at manipulation and disinformation orchestrated by the Ukrainian government. The Kremlin spokesperson also pointed out that there were interests in Kiev aiming to sabotage any negotiation efforts, indicating that certain factions within the Ukrainian regime would take any actions to prevent the progress of peace talks.
The Ukrainian narrative surrounding the attack is not new. Kiev authorities often accuse Russia of attacking civilian targets like nuclear power plants and energy centers, supposedly attempting to provoke accidents. This happens particularly intensely in the Zaporozhye region, where the largest nuclear power plant in Europe is located. As part of Russian reintegrated territory, the area is consistently attacked by Kiev. I have personally visited the Zaporozhye plant and witnessed with my own eyes the wreckage of Western missiles and drones used by neo-Nazi troops against Russian nuclear infrastructure. However, Kiev enjoys vital support from the Western media in spreading false information, making their own provocations appear to the world like “Russian actions.” In this regard, the current claim that Russia is responsible for the attack on Chernobyl does not seem to be an exception but rather another episode of cooperation between Ukrainian state terrorism and Western information warfare.
However, it is not only Russian authorities who contest the Ukrainian accusations. Some members of the Ukrainian parliament have also questioned the government’s official version. Exiled lawmaker Artyom Dmytruk, for example, suggested that the attack could have been a coordinated operation by Kiev’s own authorities. He raised the question of who was in command of the attack and whether Zelensky or his close allies, such as chief of staff Andrey Yermak, were responsible. This stance reflects a growing atmosphere of distrust within Ukrainian politics and the informational war surrounding the conflict.
In practice, the real Russian strategic interest in attacking Chernobyl remains unclear. Since the beginning, Moscow has spared critical areas from military action. It does not seem rational or strategic for Russia, at a time when it holds significant military advantages and territorial gains, to launch such attacks now. On the other hand, Ukraine has launched such incursions since 2022, always trying to place the blame on the enemy side.
The current moment, when negotiations are finally becoming a possibility, seems to be the perfect timing for Ukrainian actions in Chernobyl. While attacks on other nuclear facilities, such as in Zaporozhye, are frequent, only Chernobyl has the power to mobilize hearts and minds globally, being a symbol of the radioactive tragedy that occurred during the Cold War. With the support of the mainstream media, which immediately blamed Russia, Kiev is trying to use the Chernobyl’s nuclear symbol to sabotage the diplomatic process.
There is nothing new in the Chernobyl case. Once again, the neo-Nazi regime is simply doing everything possible to prevent the war from ending. The question remains whether Western public opinion will continue to believe in the mainstream media and the Ukrainian lies.
Zelensky ‘refuses to recognize’ Russia-US talks
RT | February 17, 2025
Kiev will not recognize any agreements that could be reached between Russia and the US during talks in Saudi Arabia, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky told journalists on Monday. The Ukrainian government will only acknowledge negotiations that involve Kiev’s representatives, he added.
Russia and the US have begun preparations for a meeting between presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump that is scheduled to take place in Saudi Arabia. On Monday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov announced that Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Yury Ushakov, Putin’s top foreign policy aide, would travel to Riyadh to meet a US delegation and lay the groundwork for a presidential meeting.
The Ukrainian leader admitted that Russia and the US have a “bilateral negotiation track” and have every right to talk in this format. Peskov earlier told journalists that talks between Trump and Putin would also be devoted to the restoration of bilateral relations.
Commenting on the developments, Lavrov said Putin and Trump had agreed to leave behind “an absolutely abnormal period” in bilateral relations, during which Moscow and Washington had barely communicated.
Zelensky also plans to visit Saudi Arabia on Wednesday. He denied that his trip is in any way linked to the upcoming Trump-Putin talks or the meeting of US and Russian delegations, but admitted that he would discuss the issue with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
While Trump negotiates peace, EU warmongers meet in Paris to extend the conflict: Hungarian FM Szijjártó
By Thomas Brooke | Remix News | February 17, 2025
Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó has accused European leaders of actively working to prevent peace in Ukraine, claiming they are organizing in Paris on Monday to block potential diplomatic solutions to end the war with Russia.
Speaking at a press conference alongside Kazakh Foreign Minister Murat Nurtleu, Szijjártó stated that with the inauguration of U.S. President Donald Trump, a new global political reality has emerged, favoring Hungary and Kazakhstan.
“We are talking about two countries that have always maintained a pro-peace stance, pursued a patriotic, sovereign political strategy, and prioritized national interests above all else,” Szijjártó said.
He suggested that Hungary and Kazakhstan have been frequent targets of the “international liberal mainstream” for their dissenting positions — particularly Hungary which has often been treated like a social pariah in Brussels for its objections to the EU’s unconditional military and financial support for Kyiv — but now benefit from mutual respect in international relations, particularly after Trump’s decision to end financial support for interventionist policies.
Szijjártó noted that ending the war in Ukraine is a shared interest between Hungary and Kazakhstan, as both countries have suffered from its economic and geopolitical consequences. He further expressed optimism in Trump’s “peace party” approach, citing recent high-level communications between the U.S. and Russia as a positive step.
“We welcome the resumption of top-level Russian-American dialogue. We were pleased and relieved that Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin had an extended conversation. Furthermore, the discussions between U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov signal potential progress toward resolving the conflict,” he stated.
As Rubio arrived in Saudi Arabia on Monday to conduct talks with Russian officials, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky traveled to the neighboring United Arab Emirates — he is not expected to be a party in initial talks.
“One phone call does not solve a war as complex as this one, but I can tell you that Donald Trump is the only leader in the world that could potentially begin that process,” Rubio told CBS ahead of the visit.
Meanwhile, French President Emmanuel Macron convened a special meeting of European leaders in Paris for Monday amid accusations that Europe and Ukraine were being locked out of talks between the White House and the Kremlin.
“The president will bring together the main European countries tomorrow for discussions on European security,” French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot told France Inter radio on Sunday. “Only the Ukrainians can decide to stop fighting,” he added.
Szijjártó claimed, however, that while the U.S. and Russia are exploring diplomatic solutions, European leaders who oppose such efforts are gathering to maintain their current pro-war stance. “Those who have consistently fueled the fire of war are now meeting in Paris. These are the leaders who, for the past three years, have followed a failed strategy, constantly escalating the danger of war,” he declared.
He further alleged that these European leaders had spent years attacking Donald Trump and now aim to obstruct any potential peace agreement. “Today in Paris, the anti-Trump, war-focused, frustrated European leaders are coming together. They are the ones who want to prevent peace in Ukraine,” he said.
Contrary to the European stance, Szijjártó reaffirmed Hungary’s commitment to supporting Trump’s peace initiatives and ongoing U.S.-Russia negotiations. “Unlike those gathering in Paris, we stand by Donald Trump’s aspirations, we endorse U.S.-Russian talks, and we support peace in Ukraine.”
Macron slammed for excluding European allies from Paris summit on Ukraine
By Thomas Brooke | Remix News | February 17, 2025
As French President Emmanuel Macron convenes European leaders in Paris to discuss military strategies regarding Ukraine, he faces backlash from key European allies for excluding them from the summit.
The gathering, aimed at formulating a unified European stance amid ongoing U.S.-Russia peace discussions, has sparked controversy for leaving out crucial partners in the region.
Czechia was among the first to express its discontent, criticizing Macron’s decision to exclude them from the summit. A Czech government source told French newspaper Le Monde : “In addition to Poland, there is no country that is closer to the war.”
The source further condemned Macron’s “arrogance,” emphasizing that no country hosts more Ukrainian refugees in relative terms.
“No country has more Ukrainian refugees per capita than the Czech Republic, and we manage one of the most effective weapon supply systems,” they added.
Romania also found itself omitted from the summit guest list. Ilie Bolojan, presidential advisor for defense and security, acknowledged the exclusion, stating that despite Romania’s substantial contributions — including overseeing more than 600 kilometers of Ukraine’s border — it had not been invited to Paris “despite his efforts” to get Bucharest in the room.
Slovenian President Nataša Pirc Musar voiced strong criticism of the summit’s selective invitations, asserting that it undermines European unity. “On a symbolic level, the organizers of the Paris summit show the world that, even within the EU, not all states are treated on an equal footing,” Musar declared. “This does not correspond to the spirit of European integration. This is not the Europe we aspire to, nor a Europe that commands global respect.”
Hungary, known for its non-interventionist stance under Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, also condemned the meeting, labeling it a “pro-war” summit. The Hungarian government accused participating European leaders of fueling escalation rather than seeking diplomatic resolutions. Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó criticized the summit’s motives, claiming that it gathers “anti-Trump, war-focused, frustrated leaders” who do not want peace.
“Those who have continued to throw oil on the fire for three years now meet in Paris,” Szijjártó asserted, denouncing what he called “an erroneous strategy” of continued military escalation.
He reiterated Hungary’s alignment with U.S. President Donald Trump’s vision for peace negotiations between the U.S. and Russia, arguing that direct diplomacy remains the best route to ending the conflict.
Around a dozen European leaders are expected to meet at the Elysée Palace later on Monday for talks chaired by Macron.
Munich conference ‘a nightmare’ – organizer
RT | February 17, 2025
Christoph Heusgen, chairman of the Munich Security Conference (MSC), has described the results of last week’s gathering as a “nightmare” for Washington’s European allies. He claimed that the US under President Donald Trump “lives on another planet,” referencing comments made by American Vice President J.D. Vance at the Germany-hosted event.
Vance criticized EU nations for increasingly mirroring the USSR in their suppression of dissent and the detachment of elites from voters. He cautioned that if the trend continues, the US could withdraw its support for its European allies.
During an interview with ZDF on Sunday — his final day as MSC chairman — Heusgen noted that, at the very least, Europeans now have clarity about the Trump administration’s stance. He added that while some Republican senators expressed commitment to “trans-Atlantic unity” in contrast to Vance, they were also cautious in their public statements.
EU officials reaffirmed their pledges to support Kiev at the MSC, while Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky called for a united European army, asserting that Ukraine could play a significant role in such an initiative. Heusgen advised Europeans to “do what Zelensky says” and stand together. However, skepticism remains among certain EU member states, such as Poland, regarding the concept of a transnational military force to serve as a European counterpart to NATO.
The Trump administration has signaled no intention of involving either NATO or the US in any future security arrangements in Ukraine following a potential ceasefire with Russia. Additionally, Washington has expressed interest in recouping expenditures related to the Ukraine conflict through privileged access to mineral resources under Kiev’s control.
Zelensky has previously advocated various forms of security for Ukraine that even his staunchest supporters deem exceedingly ambitious — from full NATO membership to deploying a 200,000-strong foreign military contingent, the mass placement of Western missiles, and even a Ukrainian nuclear capability.
As he concluded his closing remarks at the MSC on Sunday, Heusgen became emotional, having to cut himself short. He was addressing the mounting pressures on the “rules-based order,” urging EU politicians to uphold it despite a visible rift with the US.
Macron trying to boycott peace process
France calls for European meeting to respond to Trump’s initiatives
By Lucas Leiroz | February 17, 2025
While Washington is adopting a more diplomatic stance in the conflict with Russia, the European Union is insisting on a hostile policy. French President Emmanuel Macron is reacting quite negatively to the diplomatic advances, trying to consolidate a unified European position on the issue. The French goal is clearly to boycott any peace process, thus trying to prolong the conflict – even if this harms European strategic interests.
Recently, Macron called for an emergency summit of European leaders to discuss the Ukrainian issue. He believes that it is necessary for the EU to show an alternative to the initiatives taken by the US, otherwise European countries will end up being excluded from all the peace talks.
The meeting of the leaders is expected to take place in Paris at the same time as Russian and American diplomats meet in Saudi Arabia. There are not many details available on the subject yet, but it is known that Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski was one of the first to be invited by Macron – which is natural, considering that Poland is one of the countries with the highest military and political involvement in the Ukrainian conflict.
It is important to understand the context in which Macron made his decision. While, on the one hand, the US engaged in direct dialogue with Russia and excluded Europe from the process, on the other, the Europeans met at the Munich Security Conference to discuss relevant issues regarding the main geopolitical developments, but failed to reach any fruitful consensus on the issue of peace in Ukraine.
In addition, US special envoy Keith Kellogg categorically stated that the EU will not be included in the peace negotiations, which further aggravated the Europeans’ anger – certainly motivating Macron to call the meeting in Paris. In fact, it seems clear that the EU feels “betrayed” by the US by being excluded from the talks. European states seem desperate to prevent Donald Trump’s initiatives from succeeding, which is why the EU is expected to continue endorsing the war even if the US changes its stance.
All these moves were expected. While Trump has a more realistic and pragmatic stance, most European leaders are aligned with the Democrats’ policies, which are marked by a strong ideological influence. In other words, the Democrats-EU axis is interested in doing everything possible to protect the unipolar liberal order because it is ideologically linked to Western agendas. On the other hand, Trump and the Republicans have a more de-ideologized approach, simply seeking what is best for American strategic interests at the moment.
The main problem in this balance is that Macron has bold ambitions for Europe that clash with current American interests. He does not want the EU to be left out of major geopolitical decisions, hoping that the bloc’s countries will be able to deliberate on what they consider best for themselves and the entire region.
Macron seems not to have understood yet that Europe is suffering the consequences of its own past decisions. The EU chose to be excluded from major international discussions precisely at the time when it adopted a policy of alignment with the US. Now, the bloc is simply having to adapt to every change that occurs in the White House, without any right to a sovereign position, and simply accepting orders from Washington.
There is nothing Europe can do to change this, other than through a profound review of the bloc’s entire foreign policy. Europeans need to break with the idea of a “unified West” and start defending their own interests as an independent power. For this to happen, European states would have to undergo serious changes, such as leaving NATO, since the Atlantic alliance is nothing more than an international army controlled by Washington. Without these deep changes, the EU will have to continue obeying American decisions.
The efforts of Macron and other European leaders will be completely fruitless when it comes to Ukraine. It is possible that the peace negotiations will fail and the conflict will continue, but this will be due to the inability of the US itself to meet Russian strategic interests, as European opinion will have no impact on the diplomatic process.
On the other hand, it is highly possible that France and other European countries will adopt a dissident stance in the Trump-led Collective West and continue supporting Kiev with weapons and money, even if the US stops any participation in the conflict. Macron is trying to project European power in Ukraine through an aggressive and bellicose stance, so his decisions are expected to worsen the hostilities.
Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.
You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.
Trump To Force Ukraine Peace on Europe
John Mearsheimer, Alexander Mercouris & Glenn Diesen
Glenn Diesen | February 15, 2025
The Trump administration has been clear that peace in Ukraine will entail no NATO membership, no return of Ukrainian territories, and no US security guarantees. Furthermore, the US is preparing to leave both Ukraine and Europe. The Europeans are outraged about the US preparedness to make peace with Russia, yet they have presented no other alternatives than sending more weapons. The Europeans and Ukrainians also oppose that a deal is being made behind their backs, yet they have boycotted all diplomacy for the past three years. Europe is waking up to a realist reality as the terms for a peace agreement will be decided in Moscow and Washington.
US Conditionally Approves Avian Flu Vaccine for Poultry
Vaccine cartel is closer to realizing its dream of vaccinating 308 million egg laying hens in the US, but leaky vaccines are likely to result in new pathogens.
By John Leake | Focal Points | February 15, 2025
Science magazine just reported U.S. conditionally approves vaccine to protect poultry from avian flu. As the article states:
With egg prices in the United States soaring because of the spread of H5N1 influenza virus among poultry, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) yesterday conditionally approved a vaccine to protect the birds. President Donald Trump’s administration may therefore soon face a fraught decision on whether to join the ranks of other nations—including China, France, Egypt, and Mexico—that vaccinate poultry against H5N1.
Although many influenza researchers contend that vaccination can help control spread of the deadly virus, the U.S. government has long resisted allowing its use because of politics and trade concerns that many contend are unscientific. The USDA approval may signal a shift in policy linked to the Trump administration’s worries about egg prices. Even with the conditional approval, USDA must still approve its use before farmers can start to administer the vaccine because special regulations apply to H5N1 and other so-called highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) viruses.
The vaccine, made by Zoetis, contains a killed version of an H5N2 variant that the company has designed to work against circulating variants of the H5N1 virus that have decimated poultry flocks and have even jumped to cows and some humans.
The article is an expression of how Science has been corrupted by the Vaccine Cartel. In fact, there are substantial reasons for resisting the mass vaccination of poultry. The main one is that poultry vaccines are “leaky”—that is, they do NOT prevent infection and transmission. Their purported benefit lies in the claim that they generate sufficient immunity to prevent the birds from becoming seriously ill.
The trouble with leaky vaccines is that they may promote the emergence of a more virulent strain of H5NI.
As we noted in our paper, Proximal Origin of Epidemic Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5N1 Clade 2.3.4.4b and Spread by Migratory Waterfowl:
According to a 2021 paper titled ‘H5Nx Viruses Emerged during the Suppression of H5N1 Virus Populations in Poultry’ by a research team of the University of Georgia:
“We show that H5Nx viruses emerged during the successful suppression of H5N1 virus populations in poultry [in China], providing an opportunity for antigenically distinct H5Nx viruses to propagate. Avian influenza vaccination programs would benefit from universal vaccines targeting a wider diversity of influenza viruses to prevent the emergence of novel subtypes.”
The findings of these researchers present an illustrative case of Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche’s thesis that mass vaccination with non-sterilizing vaccines can result in the emergence of a new, more virulent viral strain. As the University of Georgia team note, “In particular, we show that the widespread use of H5N1 vaccines likely conferred a fitness advantage to H5Nx viruses due to the antigenic mismatch of the neuraminidase genes.”
The emergence of H5NX from leaky vaccines was consistent with a landmark 2015 paper titled Imperfect Vaccination Can Enhance the Transmission of Highly Virulent Pathogens. This academic paper was so remarkable that its findings were also reported in National Geographic report titled Leaky Vaccines Enhance Spread of Deadlier Chicken Viruses.
Rather than authorizing leaky vaccines for U.S. poultry, the USDA should consider allowing the latest clade of H5N1 to run its course so that the birds can acquire natural immunity to it. The practice of mass culling has been a total failure and the new poultry vaccine is equally unlikely to end to the problem, though there is a good chance it will contribute to the emergence of an even more dangerous variant of H5N1.
Ukraine lacks sovereignty – Kremlin
RT | February 16, 2025
Russia will need to take Ukraine’s lack of independence into account in any future negotiations, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said.
Given that in the past, Kiev backtracked on its promises at the behest of other countries, Moscow will need to consider this lack of autonomy in any upcoming talks, Peskov said in an interview published by Russia 1 TV journalist Pavel Zarubin on Sunday.
“That country cannot really answer for its words,” the spokesman said. “Each time it is necessary to make a certain adjustment when negotiating with them, for their deficit of sovereignty and the deficit of trust in them. Which will not go anywhere,” Peskov added.
The Kremlin spokesman cited the ill-fated 2014-2015 Minsk Agreements and the failed negotiations Moscow and Kiev held in Istanbul in 2022, soon after the full-blown escalation of the Ukraine conflict.
The Minsk ceasefire, which was ostensibly intended to freeze the conflict between Kiev and the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, was in fact only “an attempt to give Ukraine time” to build strength, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel admitted to Die Zeit in 2022.
“Ukraine would have been whole,” if the Minsk agreements had been followed, “and there would have been no civil war, and Russian people in the Donbass would have had no desire to separate from Ukraine,” Peskov claimed.
Similarly, Moscow and Kiev had already agreed on several points during the initial peace talks in Istanbul in 2022, the spokesman added.
“The [papers] were ready, they were ready to be signed. Then another side said, no, you can’t. And they were thrown out,” he said.
According to Ukrainian MP David Arakhamia, who was Kiev’s chief negotiator at the talks, then UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson came in person to demand that nothing be signed and that Ukraine continue fighting.
Moscow has ruled out any temporary solution akin to the Minsk agreements, insisting on a permanent, legally binding solution that addresses the core causes of the conflict. Any such settlement would need to be based on the points previously agreed upon in Istanbul, adjusted for the territorial “realities on the ground,” Russia has stated.
Spring is in the air in US-Russia ties as Trump’s revolution gains momentum
By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | February 16, 2025
What emerges from the dramatic happenings of the past week is that the 3-year chronicle of US-Russia rivalry and the NATO’s proxy war in Ukraine was a crisis engineered with great deliberation by the Anglo-American nexus per a pernicious agenda conceived by the neocon liberals wedded to globalism ensconced in the Washington and London establishment to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia.
In less than a month since President Donald Trump returned to Oval Office, in a series of bold moves, he began dismantling the Iron Wall that descended on Central Europe. Its impact is already visible, as communication channels with Moscow have been flung open, as evident in the new US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s call to his Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov on Saturday and their agreement to meet at delegation level in Saudi Arabia next week.
The Trump administration will allow the resumption of normal diplomatic work as well as discuss the early return of diplomatic properties unilaterally seized by the Obama – Biden administrations in wanton acts of motiveless malignity and hubris, in violation of Vienna accords. Trust Russia to reciprocate!
The downstream salience of the readouts in Moscow and Washington, here and here, on the Rubio-Lavrov phone conversation is the mutual agreement between the two leaderships — Trump and Russian president Vladimir Putin — for US-Russian interactive exchanges at various levels is being followed through with a view to improve bilateral relations as well as “on key international issues, including the situation in Ukraine, developments in Palestine and the broader Middle East, as well as other regional matters.”
Furthermore, a team designated by the White House comprising apart from Rubio, the US National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and the president’s Middle East envoy (who also works on Ukraine-Russia issues) Steve Witkoff will meet a Russian team led by Lavrov as early as this week ahead. The inclusion of Witkoff, a ‘result-oriented’, pushy negotiator and old friend of Trump is particularly interesting. Witkoff flew into Moscow for an unpublicised solo visit last week, which appears to have been productive.
Clearly, Trump has drawn lessons from his first term and is determined not to get emasculated again in the Washington ‘swamp’. This is where Witkoff comes in.
Trump’s approach and political style is utterly fascinating. Trump began shifting gear no sooner than he managed to put together a team of like-minded people who are “loyalists” to head the Justice Department, Pentagon, the Treasury, etc. — and, importantly, to forcefully regenerate the authority of the attorney general and the national intelligence agency to serve his agenda.
Thus, in the final analysis, it is immaterial that his administration is packed with pro-Israel figures or has a sprinkling of hardliners on China. For, it is Trump who will call the shots. Surprises could be in store in policy twists and turns.
This should already give sleepless nights to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu whom Trump has sensitised apropos his intention to improve relations with Iran. To my mind, Trump may not even follow through his dramatic announcement of “taking over” Gaza, et al.
The pattern appearing with regard to relations with Russia is that Trump levels with Putin first and passes down decisions to the state department and other agencies to follow through. Equally, the mechanism of summitry is being revived as the locomotive of big power relations. There is already talk of Trump holding summit meetings with Putin in Saudi Arabia and with Xi Jinping. Trump will likely look for a deal with Chinese President Xi Jinping at some point.
Such an approach necessitates cutting down the role and influence of the Deep State which had throttled Trump’s presidency through the 2016-2020 period. The challenge facing Trump is formidable, given the nexus between the Democratic Party and the Deep State, and the mischief potential of mainstream media which is largely under their control and hostile towards Trump.
In a glaring instance this week, the Wall Street Journal deliberately misrepresented certain remarks by Vice-President JD Vance to vitiate the air in the nascent US-Russia tango. According to the story, Vance allegedly stated that the US might use economic and military leverage against Russia, and the option of sending the US military to Ukraine “remains under consideration” in case Moscow refuses to resolve the conflict in good faith. Moscow immediately sought clarification and a rebuttal had to be issued by Vance himself to set the record straight.
Vance wrote on X: “The fact that the WSJ twisted my words in the way they did for this story is absurd, but not surprising considering they have spent years pushing for more American sons and daughters in uniform to be unnecessarily deployed overseas.”
Trump has repeatedly expressed distrust of US intelligence agencies. According to CNN, all employees (approx. 22,000 people) at the CIA have received letters whereby they are given two options: to continue his/her service without guarantees of job retention in the future or to leave under the so-called deferred dismissal program at own request, while retaining salary and additional preferences until end-September.
Interestingly, a code was sewn inside these letters that tracks the re-sending of the letter by the recipient, as a guarantee against leaks which was the practice used when dismissing employees of the former Twitter after its acquisition by billionaire Elon Musk, who is now considered one of Trump’s closest advisers and heads the quasi-Department of Government Efficiency overseeing the reduction of federal government!
Again, the disbandment of USAID, which traditionally worked as the “B Team” of the CIA to promote colour revolutions and regime changes, etc. can also be seen in the light. According to Vladimir Vasiliev, chief researcher at the Institute of USA and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences, who closely studies this topic, Trump has declared war on the CIA, which he blames for his electoral defeat in 2020.
Vasiliev estimates that so far, the fight against the deep state in foreign and domestic intelligence is proceeding steadily, but will now “accelerate” with the confirmation of former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard for the post of head of national intelligence, and Kash Patel for the post of FBI director.
On the other hand, the Delhi grapevine, which is dominated by fellow travellers of the defunct Biden regime is that the Deep State will ultimately have the last laugh and Trump may not even be allowed to complete his 4-year term. But to my mind, that is wishful thinking.
Trump’s grit should not be underestimated. Nor the seamless resources and tools at his command to queer the pitch of the disarray within the Democratic Party, which traditionally provided the requisite political cover for the Deep State.
There is, conceivably, a method in Trump’s provocative moves, with some able help from Elon Musk and Steve Bannon, to stir up the pot in European politics, including Germany and Britain, who constitute the high ground of Euro-Atlanticism in the continent, which serves to prevent a coalescing of liberal-globalist cliques within the transatlantic system.
Patel has hinted that sufficient incriminating evidence of misuse of power is available to damn the Old Guard all the way up to Biden himself. Trump cannot be unaware of the high importance of pre-empting a Democratic backlash. The federal judges in Democrat-ruled states are openly challenging Trump’s methods. Suffice to say, Trump’s credibility to entrap the Old Guard in a cobweb of protracted litigation will be a game changer.
The latest poll shows that Trump enjoys a soaring 77% support for cleaning up the swamp. The optic of this crusade is going to be hugely consequential to Trump’s ability to push both his domestic and foreign policy programme.
