Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Kuwait Ratifies Landmark Defense Agreement with Pakistan

Sputnik – 27.07.2026

Kuwait has officially ratified a broad defense cooperation pact with Pakistan that was signed in June 2023. The ratification follows high-level military contacts between the two countries.

“This agreement reintroduces Pakistan as a direct security stakeholder in the Gulf, beyond its traditional role of providing manpower and training,” said Sultan M. Hali, writer and retired Group Captain of the Pakistan Air Force.

Key points from his commentary:

1️. New role. Pakistan ceases to be merely a supplier of troops. The pact positions Islamabad as a direct security stakeholder in the Gulf.

2️. Hedging strategy. Kuwait is reducing excessive dependence on the US and NATO by relying on a nuclear-armed Muslim-majority ally.

3️. Multipolarity. Arab monarchies are turning to China, Turkiye, and South Asia in response to a fragmented world order.

4️. Basing. Permanent bases are unlikely, but joint exercises, rotational deployments, and maritime patrols are realistic scenarios.

5️. Defense industry. Kuwait may consider the Pakistani-Chinese JF-17 Thunder — cheaper than Western analogs and less vulnerable to embargoes.

6️. Forward presence. Expands Pakistan’s capability to monitor Gulf maritime traffic, including energy chokepoints.

7️. Defense diplomacy. Strengthens Pakistan’s leverage in Gulf councils and its position vis-à-vis India.

8️. Economic dividends. Military cooperation often accompanies labor, trade, and energy agreements, boosting Pakistan’s regional integration.

“Kuwait’s move signals recognition that multipolarity in defining relations is now essential for resilience in an increasingly fragmented regional order,” Hali said.

July 27, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Comments Off on Kuwait Ratifies Landmark Defense Agreement with Pakistan

Preparing for Regional Escalation: Iran Appears to Be Pre-Empting the US’ Attack Strategy

By Robert Inlakesh | Palestine Chronicle | July 15, 2026

The US Trump administration sought to weaponize diplomacy once again against the Islamic Republic of Iran and implement a surprise attack strategy – this time, Tehran appears to have preempted the American-Israeli plot.

The Iran-US Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) officially died this week, but in reality it was terminated on June 26 with the Lebanon-Israel deal that Washington brokered. The reason why was simple: the United States decided to print on paper a new deal that violated the former by granting Israel de facto permission to maintain a belligerent occupation of southern Lebanese lands.

Throughout the month that the MoU technically held, the US committed various violations of a number of clauses of the agreement, including by direct threats from Donald Trump himself to assassinate the entire Iranian negotiating team. But the Lebanon issue was far more indicative of where things were heading than the limited skirmishes in the Persian Gulf and threats to commit war crimes.

Clause 1 of the MoU concerned the ensuring of the war’s termination on all fronts, with Lebanon being explicitly mentioned. Tehran made it clear that this meant a full withdrawal of Israeli occupation forces from southern Lebanon and the protection of Lebanese sovereignty.

Instead of implementing the clause, Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu coordinated a careful approach to the Lebanon war, one that would not result in a withdrawal or end to the war, while simultaneously being careful not to provoke any Iranian retaliatory strikes. Therefore, the US worked with Israel to develop a new conspiracy. This involved the use of the US-proxy regime in Beirut to stir division within Lebanon, an attempt to force the Lebanese army to clash with Hezbollah, combined with an initiative to pressure neighboring Syria to invade the Bekaa Valley region in order to take on Hezbollah.

Meanwhile, as this plot was developing, the Israelis returned to the pre-March 2 status quo more or less in Lebanon – Hezbollah froze its retaliatory operations, while Israel continued to blow up civilian homes, bomb on a lower scale, while maintaining its presence inside south Lebanon.

A US military advisory force is being deployed to Beirut in order to guide the Lebanese army on its newly agreed-upon mission to clash with Hezbollah, the stated goal of which is to disarm the movement. Speculation also has it that the US may even be considering deploying thousands of combat troops into Lebanon in order to help prop up the regime in Beirut if the situation goes sideways, although this assertion is yet to be fully substantiated.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) has been documenting the ongoing mobilization and military buildup along the Lebanese-Syria border, as Trump himself has repeatedly stated in public that he seeks to use Syria’s forces to invade Lebanon.

Hezbollah’s sudden silence and lack of operations indicate that it has been taking these threats very seriously. Fighting Israel alone has been a battle that it has proven capable of managing, but preparations to fight US-proxies inside Lebanon, the possible collapse of the Lebanese Army into warring factions, and combating a Syrian invasion all demand new defensive and even perhaps offensive preparations.

Iran, for its part, was clearly also coordinated more heavily with Yemen’s Ansarallah leadership. The Yemen front never fully opened during the war earlier this year. Tehran openly challenged Saudi Arabia’s blockade on Yemen, while Ansarallah was mobilizing its forces and declared that it would fight to break the blockade. When Riyadh took the decision to strike Sana’a International Airport, this reopened the Yemen-Saudi War for the first time since early 2022, collapsing the UN-brokered ceasefire.

Yemen’s role in the renewal of the regional war will add major pressure, especially as it holds the card to shut down the Bab Al-Mandab Strait, imposing a blockade in the Red Sea that will choke the global economy further than it has been under the pressure of the Strait of Hormuz blockade. Ansarallah’s capabilities have also significantly developed since 2022, meaning that they will be able to aid Iran in their war efforts against targets in the Arabian Peninsula.

If the US succeeds in pressuring Damascus to launch an assault on Lebanon, then Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) have already threatened to enter the fight on the ground. The PMU would likely seek to seize areas in eastern Syria, like Deir Ezzor, which would open up new supply lines inside Syrian territory and put enormous pressure on its forces.

A US-Israeli plot to collapse the Lebanese State in order to weaken Hezbollah is a major gamble to say the least, one which will inevitably lead to a rise in regional sectarianism. It is also very likely that Arab Gulf media will also act to portray the conflict as a new Sunni-Shia war, as they begin to take more active roles in support of the US-Israeli war effort.

Ultimately, it appears as if the Iranians are not taking any chances and are being proactive, which has been reflected in the scale of their strikes on US assets in the region, including a surprise attack that took out US ATACMS missiles in Kuwait earlier this week.

A return to full-scale war this time around could trigger a series of conflicts that will spiral out of control and thus make any easy off-ramp impossible. The Global economic repercussions will be horrendous, as the only end to the war is total victory or total defeat. The US will be put in a position where it will be forced to withdraw from the region, while Israel is betting on the idea of Iran being significantly weakened as a result of the conflict’s continuation.

No side appears to be backing down, so unless the US suddenly decides to perform a 180-degree pivot in its approach, West Asia is about to erupt into total chaos.

– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine. He contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.

July 16, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Preparing for Regional Escalation: Iran Appears to Be Pre-Empting the US’ Attack Strategy

US/Israeli equipment failing against new hypersonic tactic

Sputnik – 10.07.2026

The Russian military’s strategy of combined aerial attacks, involving waves of strike drones followed up by ballistic, cruise or hypersonic missiles, has proven highly effective not only in the Ukrainian theater, but Iran’s defense against US and Israeli aggression, says Russian defense analyst Alexander Stepanov.

The tactic, almost impossible to defend against, involves:

  • drones (slow-flying Geran-2s, faster Geran-4s or rocket-powered Geran-5s – which fly at speeds up to 800 km/h) which by themselves are “extremely difficult” to down using small arms and air defense means available to mobile fire teams
  • “multiple wave” tactics designed to overwhelm and expend expensive and limited Patriot missile stocks and overload enemy air defenses, forcing Ukraine to disperse its Patriot launchers
  • follow-up precision ballistic and quasi-ballistic missile attacks

Patriots, the last line of defense in Kiev’s arsenal, have four missiles per launcher in their PAC-2 variant, and up to 16 in PAC-3. Typically, two missiles are assigned to a single target.

Playing the Numbers Game

When Russia launches hundreds of projectiles across multiple waves, defense essentially becomes impossible, and involves expending interceptors which cost tens if not hundreds of times more than the strike systems they’re targeting ($4.2-5.3M per Patriot interceptor, compared to tens of thousands of dollars in the case of Geran drones).

“All these points create extreme vulnerabilities for SAM operators forced to respond quickly to serious threats, including in the context of massive combined attacks,” Stepanov says.

“Even if they manage to repel the first wave of attack drones, [the next waves include] ballistic weapons, high-precision missiles that can fly along a quasi-ballistic trajectory, including Iskanders, and hypersonic ones, like Zircons and the air-launched Kinzhals.”

“There is a clear understanding that the equipment being shipped, primarily through NATO countries and the United States, are incapable of countering these speeds. We saw this as well in the Iranian campaign, when expensive systems, including THAAD over-the-horizon interceptors, failed to cope with attacks and were destroyed, along with expensive radars and the regional component of the US’s global early warning system,” Stepanov summed up.

July 10, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , | Comments Off on US/Israeli equipment failing against new hypersonic tactic

Leaked Israeli report shows Iran strikes’ true cost

Mehr News | July 1, 2026

Leaked official Israeli documents reveal that Iranian missile attacks on the Bazan refinery in Haifa destroyed critical infrastructure, including a storage tank.

Quds News Network reported on Tuesday that an official draft document published by the Israeli regime’s Interior Ministry reveals significantly broader damage than previously disclosed following the Iranian missile strikes.

The document, which was published as part of procedures to approve reconstruction work at the Bazan refinery complex in Haifa Bay, reportedly details damage to gas turbines, steam boilers, electrical rooms and other auxiliary systems that had not previously been publicly reported.

It also states that an oil derivatives storage tank struck during the March attack is beyond repair and must be replaced with a new tank with a capacity of up to 12,700 cubic meters.

The June strike on the complex severely damaged its power plant, disrupted refinery operations and killed three workers. At the time, Bazan estimated the losses at $150-200 million, while Israeli officials maintained that fuel supplies would not be affected.

According to the Interior Ministry document cited by QNN, the damage extends beyond physical infrastructure and has affected the refinery’s operational capacity.

The document states that the destruction of the storage tank has “directly affected the ability to produce gasoline that meets the specifications required by the market and to supply it to consumers.”

This contradicts previous statements by then-Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen, who said the strikes had not damaged production facilities and would not affect fuel supplies.

The document further reveals that the area approved for reconstruction is almost double that authorized after the June attack, indicating that the scale of the destruction was considerably greater than previously acknowledged.

According to the Interior Ministry document cited by QNN, the complete restoration of the Bazan complex is not expected before 2028, only about three years before the Israeli cabinet’s planned evacuation of the Haifa Bay petrochemical industries in 2031.

The document concludes that the damage affects “essential operational and storage components” within one of the Israeli regime’s most important energy facilities, requiring years of reconstruction while maintaining production and fuel supplies.

July 1, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Comments Off on Leaked Israeli report shows Iran strikes’ true cost

Ukrainian spies likely behind Monaco bomb attack on oligarch – media

RT | June 30, 2026

Investigators believe that the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) likely carried out the bombing attack on Ukrainian-born businessman Vadim Ermolaev in Monaco, Le Figaro has reported. The attack seriously injured Ermolaev and two members of his family.

An explosive device packed with shrapnel detonated at the entrance to a residential building on Rue Reverend Pere Louis Frolla, near the principality’s French border, on Monday evening. Ermolaev, his wife, and his 13-year-old child were all seriously wounded, with both parents in critical condition and the boy burned but in stable condition, according to Le Figaro.

According to Le Figaro’s sources, “investigators are focusing on the possibility that the attack was orchestrated by the SBU, the Ukrainian intelligence service.” Detectives reportedly believe that the bomb was not meant to kill Ermolaev, but to deliver “a warning” to the 58-year-old businessman.

Ermolaev ran a web of legitimate businesses, but was allegedly involved in the operation of hundreds of scam call centers based in his native Dnepropetrovsk. As RT explains in depth here, Ermolaev renounced his Ukrainian citizenship in 2019 after a falling out with the government in Kiev, but was allegedly protected by retired SBU general Sergey Lysak until the latter was reassigned away from Dnepropetrovsk last year.

Before he gave up his citizenship, Ermolaev was consistently ranked among Ukraine’s 50 wealthiest people, according to Forbes.

Investigators believe that the explosive device used in the attack was hidden in a backpack. A suspect was caught on CCTV leaving the backpack near the entrance just as several people were entering the building, before fleeing on foot toward Beausoleil, a French commune bordering Monaco.

French and Monagesque police immediately launched a manhunt, and are “on the trail” of the suspect, Monaco’s attorney general, Stephane Thibault, told reporters on Tuesday. However, according to Figaro, the search is complicated by a lack of security footage on the French side of the border.

“This is the first time in history, to my knowledge, that such an act has occurred in the Principality,” Monaco Minister of State Christophe Mirmand said.

On the French right, anger toward Kiev is growing. “Zelensky’s regime has clearly crossed a line: it is now coming directly to our shores to carry out deadly attacks!,” ‘The Patriots’ leader Florian Philippot wrote on X. “How [can we] welcome Ukrainian troops on the Champs-Elysees on July 14?”

“Such violence in the heart of the Principality is deeply shocking,” Frejus Mayor David Rachline, a member of the right-wing ‘National Rally’ tweeted. “Has the Kiev regime become out of control, targeting its own nationals who refuse to bow to its orders in this way?”

June 30, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Comments Off on Ukrainian spies likely behind Monaco bomb attack on oligarch – media

Iraq sets Sept. 30 deadline for resistance groups to hand over arms amid US pressure

Press TV – June 29, 2026

Iraq has set a late-September deadline for resistance groups to hand over their weapons to the state, as Washington pressures Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi to expedite the disarmament of anti-American factions.

“The end of next September will be the ultimate date for the surrender of weapons,” stated government spokesperson Haider al-Aboudi during a press conference on Monday.

He added, “Simultaneously, the [US-led] international coalition will withdraw.”

Under Zaidi’s leadership, the Iraqi government has initiated a renewed effort to disarm armed groups and limit weapon possession to state control. The initiative receives substantial support from Washington, which has long advocated for the disarmament of such groups, many of which are part of the anti-American Resistance in Iraq coalition.

Zaidi, who has received robust backing from the US since assuming office in May, is scheduled to visit Washington in mid-July.

Earlier in June, he met with US envoy to Iraq Tom Barrack, where both emphasized the necessity of ensuring “the complete disarmament and disbandment” of non-state armed groups.

The disarmament process is also expected to coincides with the withdrawal of the US-led coalition purportedly formed to fight against the Daesh Takfiri terrorist group from Iraq, as per an agreement between Washington and Baghdad.

Since the establishment of Iraq’s new cabinet, several resistance factions have expressed their willingness to surrender their weapons and integrate into the state security apparatus.

The Iraqi government’s deadline comes at the same time as a significant anti-corruption purge initiated by Zaidi, resulting in the arrest of at least 67 high-ranking officials and lawmakers. Among those arrested was Muthanna al-Samarrai, a prominent Sunni politician and leader of the Azm Alliance.

“This anti-corruption narrative is distinct from its predecessors, and safeguarding public funds is a duty that remains unaffected by individuals or circumstances,” Aboudi emphasized, asserting that the anti-corruption campaign “will not cease.”

June 29, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Comments Off on Iraq sets Sept. 30 deadline for resistance groups to hand over arms amid US pressure

Abelardo De la Espriella’s Victory Renews Pressure on Venezuela

José Niño Unfiltered | June 26, 2026

Colombia elected Abelardo de la Espriella as its next president on June 21, 2026, delivering the country’s leadership to a man who spent nearly a decade publicly calling for the violent overthrow of Venezuela’s socialist government. His victory over leftist Senator Iván Cepeda by fewer than 250,000 votes marks a dramatic rightward shift for a nation that shares a porous 1,400-mile border with Venezuela and hosts millions of Venezuelan refugees.

De la Espriella takes office on August 7, 2026. If Brazil’s November presidential election delivers Flávio Bolsonaro to the Planalto Palace, the two largest nations bordering Venezuela will be governed by leaders who have explicitly endorsed forceful regime change in Caracas. Combined with the apparent willingness of acting Venezuelan President Delcy Rodríguez to cooperate with Washington, the conditions may finally exist for completing what the Trump administration attempted and failed to accomplish in 2019.

De la Espriella’s hostility toward Caracas is neither recent nor cautious. He first articulated his position on Venezuela during a 2018 appearance on Peruvian TV personality Jaime Bayly’s Miami television program. According to to his own subsequent writings, he urged Venezuelans to commit tyrannicide against Nicolás Maduro. Days later he published a column titled “Death to the Tyrant” in Barranquilla’s El Heraldo, writing that “the death of Nicolás Maduro becomes necessary to guarantee the survival of the Republic.”

When U.S. forces captured Maduro in January 2026, de la Espriella publicly celebrated, claiming he had predicted it years earlier. He sold the American operation not as an “invasion” but as “the arrest of an international criminal and head of the Cartel de los Soles,” arguing that Washington acted according to the law due to Venezuela’s alleged lack of institutional legitimacy.

His campaign platform explicitly called for a renewed military alliance with Washington. In February, De la Espriella announced that he would immediately begin “bombing the camps of the narco-terrorists and spraying drug crops,” adding that “this cannot be done without a strategic alliance with the United States and the State of Israel.” He marketed this as a 90-day security plan modeled on Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele’s approach, promising to retake national territory through joint task forces, aerial bombardment of criminal camps, fumigation of 330,000 hectares of coca, and the construction of 10 mega-prisons in remote jungle locations. He has also promised to establish American military bases on Colombian territory as part of a comprehensive security restructuring.

Colombia may soon find a partner in this posture across its longest border. Five months after de la Espriella’s inauguration, Brazilians will decide their own presidential election. Flávio Bolsonaro, son of former President Jair Bolsonaro, has made Venezuela the centerpiece of his campaign against incumbent Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

When Maduro was kidnapped in January, Flávio immediately seized on the moment. He posted that “Venezuela has become one of the most extreme examples of how an authoritarian regime can destroy a nation,” calling Maduro a “narcoterrorist.” At the time, his brother Eduardo texted him saying “you are elected president, because we know that a lot of things will come out of Maduro,” predicting that Maduro’s capture would expose Lula’s ties to the Venezuelan regime.

At CPAC in March 2026, Flávio displayed a photograph of Lula embracing Maduro to a crowd that booed loudly. He accused Lula of maintaining ties with leftist dictatorships through the São Paulo Forum, which he described as a network linking Lula, Cuban communism, and drug cartels. Brazil’s Supreme Court opened an investigation into Flávio for defamation, which he denounced as political censorship.

Flávio took Lula to task for “publicly criticizing President Trump’s actions on Venezuela, Iran, Cuba, and the fight against drug trafficking.” He pledged that under his presidency, Brazil would serve as a reliable U.S. partner rather than an opponent on these issues. Reuters polling in late October shows Flávio and Lula locked in a statistical tie heading into the October first round.

What these leaders propose is not new. Washington reached for it in 2019. The Trump administration’s first attempt to topple Maduro collapsed in spectacular fashion. National Security Adviser John Bolton appeared at a January 28, 2019 press conference at the White House with a notepad reading “5,000 troops to Colombia,” held visibly in front of cameras while announcing new oil sanctions against Venezuela’s state company PDVSA—signaling Washington’s interest in using Colombian territory as a staging ground for military pressure on Caracas. Colombia’s Foreign Minister Carlos Holmes Trujillo Garcia said his government had no knowledge of what the note meant.

On February 23, 2019, a U.S.-backed humanitarian aid plot from Cúcuta ended in violence when Venezuelan security forces blocked the convoy with tear gas and rubber bullets. According to a USAID Office of Inspector General report, only 8 of 368 metric tons of aid actually reached Venezuela—the rest was distributed inside Colombia or shipped to Somalia.

The failure at Cúcuta had a quieter companion in Brazil. The Brazilian military establishment proved decisive in blocking regional intervention. Vice President Hamilton Mourão, a retired general, stated flatly that “under no circumstances” would Brazil allow the U.S. to use its territory for military action against Venezuela. He emphasized that “nobody is betting on a military solution.”

Brazil’s Vice President Hamilton Mourão stated firmly that the United States could not use Brazilian territory to invade Venezuela. Senior Brazilian military figures similarly warned against being drawn into a conflict that could make their forces a buffer between American and Venezuelan troops. The military’s resistance held even as President Jair Bolsonaro gave ambiguous public signals, while gesturing toward all options, he acknowledged that the possibility of intervention was “near-zero.”

That said, what failed in 2019 may succeed in 2027 because Venezuela’s current leadership appears willing to cooperate with Washington in ways Maduro never would. A CIA authored classified assessment, reported by the Wall Street Journal, identified Delcy Rodríguez as the best suited candidate to lead a transitional government. Days after Maduro’s capture, Rodríguez was sworn in as acting president on January 5, 2026. On January 15, CIA Director John Ratcliffe traveled to Caracas for a two-hour meeting with Rodríguez—the highest-ranking Trump administration official to visit Venezuela since Maduro’s removal—to deliver the message that “the United States looks forward to an improved working relationship.” The meeting came at the personal urging of President Donald Trump, who had spoken with Rodríguez by phone the previous day and called her “a terrific person,” writing on Truth Social that “we are making tremendous progress, as we help Venezuela stabilize and recover.”

The optics devastated hardline Chavistas. Mario Silva, host of the flagship pro-government propaganda program La Hojilla on state television VTV, accused Rodríguez of treason. In a May 2026 broadcast, he accused her inner circle of negotiating Venezuela’s future with Washington “behind the movement’s back.” He reportedly went further in a YouTube video, suggesting that Rodríguez was the only figure in the Venezuela government in touch with the CIA prior to January 3.

If such allegations prove to be true, smart money suggests Rodríguez would fold under sustained pressure from a multinational coalition. Trump has already removed her from DEA and OFAC sanctions lists despite the DEA having classified her as a “priority target” for drug trafficking as recently as 2022. She oversaw the deportation of diplomat Alex Saab directly to the United States after the Maduro government had fought for years to free him.

The Latin American Right has been ascendant for half a decade. Javier Milei in Argentina. Daniel Noboa in Ecuardo. José Antonio Kast in Chile. Now Abelardo de la Espriella in Colombia. If Flávio Bolsonaro wins Brazil’s November election, the two largest economies bordering Venezuela will both be governed by leaders who have explicitly endorsed American pressure campaigns against Caracas.

De la Espriella’s campaign pledged to restore the cooperative relationship with Washington that existed before Gustavo Petro. Flávio Bolsonaro has promised to align Brazil with U.S. pressure campaigns. With Rodríguez already meeting CIA directors in Caracas and following Washington’s orders on matters like Saab’s deportation, the path toward a final resolution of Venezuela’s political crisis may be shorter than anyone anticipated.

What Brazil’s generals blocked in 2019 may prove irrelevant in 2027 if Flávio Bolsonaro controls the presidency and appoints loyalists to military commands. What Colombia’s Ivan Duque hesitated to support may become explicit policy under de la Espriella. And what Maduro would never accept, Rodríguez appears willing to negotiate.

The question is no longer whether a multinational coalition will pressure Venezuela toward elections. The question is whether Rodríguez will call those elections voluntarily or wait until Colombian and Brazilian forces mass on her borders with American backing.

One thing is clear: the political crisis in Venezuela is far from over.

June 27, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , , | Comments Off on Abelardo De la Espriella’s Victory Renews Pressure on Venezuela

Iran to continue IAEA cooperation under existing framework, SNSC decision: Baghaei

Press TV – June 22, 2026

The spokesperson for Iran’s Foreign Ministry says Tehran will continue its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) under existing procedures and in accordance with parliamentary legislation and decisions by the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC).

Esmaeil Baghaei, who serves as spokesperson for the Iranian negotiating team, said on Monday that “Iran’s engagement with the Agency, in fulfillment of its obligations under safeguard agreements, will continue within the existing framework and in line with the resolutions of the Majlis (parliament) and the decisions of the Supreme National Security Council.”

The remarks came after US Vice President JD Vance said during a press conference at the Bürgenstock hotel that Iran had agreed to invite IAEA inspectors back into the country.

Sources familiar with Saturday’s talks in Switzerland said Tehran did not negotiate over its nuclear program during the 18-hour discussions and did not agree to any new commitments, IRNA reported.

Meanwhile, Fars News Agency quoted an informed source as saying that Vance’s claim was “false”.

Under the “Law Requiring the Government to Suspend Cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency,” enacted on June 25, 2025, Tehran has invited IAEA inspectors to visit its active nuclear facilities on a case-by-case basis, subject to approval by the SNSC.

Since the law took effect, IAEA inspectors, with the council’s approval, have conducted multiple inspections at the Bushehr nuclear power plant, including overseeing the loading of reactor fuel supplied by Russia.

As a result, inspections of operational Iranian nuclear facilities are not new, and Tehran has continued to cooperate with the UN nuclear watchdog regarding access to such sites.

However, inspections of damaged nuclear facilities and arrangements concerning Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile remain contingent on the establishment of a specific mechanism in a final agreement expected to be negotiated during the anticipated 60-day talks.

June 22, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Comments Off on Iran to continue IAEA cooperation under existing framework, SNSC decision: Baghaei

Zelensky threatens to attack Belarus

RT | June 19, 2026

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has issued an ultimatum to Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, threatening him with military action if Minsk fails to meet Kiev’s demand, just days after a deadly drone strike on a bus carrying a children’s soccer team from Belarus.

Earlier this week, Lukashenko said that those seeking to drag his nation into the conflict “will have to pay dearly for that,” demanding answers from Kiev over the strike on the bus and other “provocations.” The attack in Russia’s Bryansk Region injured six minors and killed the wife of a Belarusian school soccer team coach who was accompanying the young athletes to a Russian seaside resort.

Kiev denied responsibility, while Zelensky claimed that it was Lukashenko who must “be honest” and prove Minsk’s peaceful intentions by removing air defenses and relay transmitters along the border with Ukraine.

“I think one week would be enough for him to accomplish this,” the Ukrainian leader stated at a press conference in Kiev on Friday. “If he does not do it, we will.”

Lukashenko has repeatedly said that Belarus has no intention of engaging in a war against any nation and “is not threatening anyone.” Zelensky, however, stated that there was “no need for unnecessary words,” and issued another veiled threat against the Belarusian oil refining industry.

“Just like his, for example, oil refining industry,” Zelensky said, claiming that Minsk is one of Russia’s “main” suppliers of petroleum products. “Can this be stopped? I am sure that it is within his power.”

A close Russian ally, Belarus has largely stayed out of the conflict since 2022, while calling on Moscow and Kiev to engage in dialogue and expressing its readiness to contribute to a diplomatic resolution. In September 2025, Lukashenko stated that he was ready to meet Zelensky personally to discuss possible compromises, but the Ukrainian leader rejected the offer. In November, Minsk released 31 Ukrainian citizens from detention in a “goodwill gesture” at the request of Kiev and US President Donald Trump, who was also seeking to mediate the conflict.

Over the past few weeks, Zelensky has been ramping up his rhetoric about an allegedly growing threat posed by Belarus. He accused Minsk of preparing to enter the Ukraine conflict on Russia’s side – and threatened it with a preemptive strike.

June 19, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Comments Off on Zelensky threatens to attack Belarus

Russian frigate fires warning shots in English Channel

RT | June 16, 2026

A Russian vessel fired warning shots near a British yacht sailing on a dangerous trajectory in the English Channel, the Russian Defense Ministry has said, adding that the shots were fired when all other options had been exhausted.

The Admiral Grigorovich was sailing in international waters between the Isle of Wight and Normandy shortly before midday on Tuesday when its crew spotted the civilian yacht, the ‘Bright Future’ sailing “on a dangerous course that would bring it into close proximity with the warship,” the ministry said.

The Russian crew tried and failed to reach the yacht by radio, before firing signal flares and sounding a siren, neither of which succeeded in changing its course. When the yacht came within 150 meters, the commander of the Admiral Grigorovich decided to fire warning shots across its bow with small arms.

“Following this, the British-flagged yacht immediately altered course and moved away from the Russian warship,” the ministry said, adding that the Russian crew “acted in strict compliance with international navigation rules and took all necessary measures to prevent an incident.”

The incident was first reported by the British press, which made no mention of the yacht sailing toward the warship. The British Defense Ministry did not comment on the encounter, except to tell the BBC that it was “investigating reports of an incident in the Channel.”

The Admiral Grigorovich – a 3,600-ton warship equipped to carry Kalibr cruise missiles – was being followed by a Royal Navy patrol ship – the HMS Mersey – at the time of the incident, the BBC reported. It is unclear how close the HMS Mersey was to the Admiral Grigorovich at the time.

The incident took place two days after British commandos boarded and seized a Cameroon-flagged tanker supposedly carrying sanctioned Russian oil. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer described the tanker as belonging to Russia’s “shadow fleet,” a euphemism for tankers that carry Russian oil without coverage from Western insurers. The vessel, the ‘Smyrtos’, was boarded in the English Channel.

June 16, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Comments Off on Russian frigate fires warning shots in English Channel

Will Trump Break JFK’s Agreement on Cuba?

By Jacob G. Hornberger – Future of Freedom Foundation – June 8, 2026

In October 1962, the United States and the Soviet Union (i.e., Russia) came within an inch of all-out nuclear war with each other. To resolve the crisis, President John F. Kennedy and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev entered into an agreement in which the United States agreed not to invade Cuba in return for Russia’s decision to withdraw nuclear missiles it had installed in Cuba.

For more than 50 years, both Russia and the United States have complied with that agreement. Russia has never re-installed nuclear missiles into Cuba. In turn, the United States has never re-invaded Cuba.

Given President Trump’s recent acts of aggression against Cuba, the question naturally arises: Will Trump and the US national-security establishment break the commitment that President Kennedy made by initiating another military invasion of Cuba?

Soon after Kennedy was inaugurated in 1961, the US national-security branch of the federal government, which, by this time, had become the most powerful branch, employed deception, subterfuge, lies, and manipulation to induce the new president into authorizing a US invasion of Cuba. The plan called for using a contingent of CIA-trained Cuban exiles to invade the island, with the aim of ousting the communist regime that had come into power with the Cuban revolution in 1959.

The CIA told Kennedy that no US air support would be needed. They also told him that the Cuban people hated Cuban leader Fidel Castro and would rise to the assistance of the US invaders.

Both were lies, and the CIA knew it was lying to Kennedy. The CIA figured that once its invasion got underway and was going to go down to defeat at the hands of the communists, JFK would have no other effective choice but to authorize the air support — as a way to “save face.”

But JFK stood his ground, and the US invasion of Cuba went down to defeat. This was, of course, the beginning of the vicious and ruthless war between JFK and the US national-security establishment that would end in JKF’s defeat on November 22, 1963. See FFF’s book JFK’s War with the National-Security Establishment: Why Kennedy Was Assassinated by Douglas P. Horne, who served on the staff of the Assassination Records Review Board in the 1990s.

After the disaster of the Bay of Pigs invasion, the Pentagon continued to pressure Kennedy into ordering an invasion of Cuba. As part of this pressure, the Joint Chiefs of Staff presented JFK with one of the most shameful and immoral plans in US history — Operation Northwoods. It called for terrorist attacks on American soil in which innocent Americans would be intentionally sacrificed at the hands of US agents who would be falsely portraying themselves as Cuban communists. The terrorist attacks would then be used as a justification for invading Cuba and violently achieving regime change.

To Kennedy’s everlasting credit, he rejected Operation Northwoods, much to the deep anger and rage of the national-security branch against which he was at war.

Why was the national-security branch so obsessed with invading Cuba? Their mindset was part of their old Cold War racket, which came into existence after World War II to justify the conversion of the federal government from a limited-government republic to a national-security state, which is a totalitarian-like governmental structure with omnipotent powers, including the power of assassination.

The Cold War racket involved inculcating the American people with a deep fear that the Reds were coming to get them. Central to this racket was the notion that the Reds in Cuba were only 90 miles away from American shores and, therefore, needed to be taken out before they invaded Miami, fought their way up the Eastern seaboard, and captured Washington, D.C. Never mind that Cuba was an impoverished Third World Country that lacked the remotest capability of even crossing that little stretch of water and successfully conquering the well-armed citizens of Miami. Never mind also that Cuba has never initiated any act of aggression against the United States and that it simply has always wanted to be left alone by the US national-security branch, which has always steadfastly and obsessively refused to leave Cuba alone.

Castro knew that the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA were pressuring Kennedy into ordering another invasion of Cuba. That’s when the Russians came to his assistance. They installed nuclear missiles in Cuba to hopefully deter the US from invading again. Alternatively, the missiles were to serve as a means of self-defense if the US were to initiate another war of aggression against Cuba.

It’s important to recognize something important here: The Cubans had every right in the world to have those nuclear missiles installed in Cuba. After all, Cuba is a sovereign and independent country. It is also worth noting that Cuba, like every other nation, has the right to defend itself from invasions and wars of aggression, including those initiated by the United States.

But no one (including Russia), likes to have nuclear missiles pointed at it from just a short distance away. The US certainly didn’t like it (just as Russia wouldn’t like it if US or NATO nuclear missiles were installed in Ukraine). And so, JFK demanded that the Russians withdraw their missiles from Cuba. If Russia had refused to do so, it is a virtual certainty that JFK would have ordered an attack on the missiles and an invasion of Cuba, both of which the Pentagon and the CIA were demanding. The result would have been World War III.

To resolve the crisis, Russia agreed to withdraw its missiles, and the US committed to not invade Cuba again. It’s an agreement that has been honored for more than 60 years.

Of course, Trump, the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA can argue that the agreement, which they considered was a betrayal of America and a grave threat to US “national security” was not a treaty. That’s true. It was simply an oral agreement — a handshake, if you will. Nonetheless, an agreement is an agreement. There was no time limit on the agreement, which meant that it would exist into perpetuity. The Russians would not reinstall their nuclear missiles and the United States would not invade Cuba again.

If Trump and US national-security establishment decide to break JFK’s agreement, undoubtedly the Russians will not retaliate. But it will be another reason why people around the world understand that the United States can never be trusted to keep its word.

June 11, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | Comments Off on Will Trump Break JFK’s Agreement on Cuba?

How Western Intelligence Agencies Built the Global Jihadist Network

By José Niño | The Libertarian Institute | May 26, 2026

Americans have been fed a comforting fairy tale about Islamic terrorism. Radical jihadists attack the West simply because they despise freedom, democracy, and the American way of life. This narrative flatters domestic audiences while conveniently obscuring a far more troubling reality. For decades, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Israel have armed, financed, tolerated, and tapped into Sunni Islamist extremists as geopolitical tools to destabilize rivals. The evidence spans multiple theaters and rests on declassified documents, congressional investigations, and credible investigative journalism.

The most thoroughly documented case is Operation Cyclone, the CIA program to arm and finance the Afghan mujahideen from 1979 to 1992. In a 1998 interview with Le Nouvel Observateur, former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski confirmed that the CIA began aiding mujahideen opponents of the pro-Soviet Kabul government six months before the Soviet invasion—a calculated provocation intended to draw Moscow into an unwinnable war. When asked if he regretted supporting Islamic fundamentalism that gave “arms and advice to future terrorists,” Brzezinski replied:

“What is more important in world history? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some agitated Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?”

Multiple intelligence agencies participated in this operation. MI6 ran covert operations supporting hardline commanders. Pakistan’s ISI served as the critical financial and logistical conduit—operating under the direction of Pakistani President Zia ul-Haq, who controlled ISI policy throughout the war. Saudi Arabia agreed to match CIA contributions dollar for dollar, a commitment secured when Brzezinski visited Riyadh in February 1980 and one that CIA officer Gust Avrakotos and congressman Charlie Wilson (D-TX) would fly to Riyadh to enforce whenever Saudi payments fell behind. Historian Steve Coll documented in Ghost Wars that Osama bin Laden informally cooperated with ISI-run guerrilla training camps on behalf of newly arrived Arab jihadists, with intimate connections to CIA-backed commander Jalaluddin Haqqani. The global jihadist network that became al-Qaeda grew directly from this infrastructure.

The Afghan theater was not an isolated experiment but the opening chapter of a longer story. The same networks it created spread rapidly to the next front. The Chechen insurgency of the 1990s was joined by Arab and Central Asian jihadists who had cut their teeth in Afghanistan. The most prominent was Ibn Khattab, a Saudi-born mujahideen veteran born in 1969 inʿAr’ar, Saudi Arabia, who left for the Afghan jihad at age 18 before entering Chechnya in 1995. Saudi-backed organizations funneled funds, and Gulf state charities developed during the Afghan jihad maintained, in some cases wittingly and in others not, support for al-Qaeda-affiliated groups throughout the decade. Several of the future 9/11 conspirators—including Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, Ziad Jarrah, and Ramzi bin al-Shibh—originally sought to travel to Chechnya in 1999 before being redirected to al-Qaeda’s Afghan camps, per the 9/11 Commission.

While the Chechen theater illustrated how Western-cultivated networks could spiral beyond control, Washington was already running new variations of the same playbook elsewhere. Veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh’s 2007 New Yorker article “The Redirection” documented that the W. Bush administration, in cooperation with Saudi Arabia, launched covert operations to weaken Hezbollah and Iran by bolstering Sunni factions. According to Hersh’s intelligence sources, “a by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.”

Israel was running its own parallel operations against Iran during the same period. Foreign Policy magazine published a 2012 report by journalist Mark Perry drawn from CIA memoranda, describing how Israeli Mossad officers posed as CIA agents to recruit members of Jundallah, a Pakistan-based Sunni Salafi organization responsible for numerous bombings inside Iran. As one intelligence official told Perry:

“It’s amazing what the Israelis thought they could get away with. Their recruitment activities were nearly in the open.”

The same structural logic that shaped Afghanistan, Chechnya, and the Middle East has also played out in Central Asia. The Chinese government has accused the United States of using Uyghur Islamist networks to destabilize Xinjiang, with Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian repeatedly alleging American support for Uyghur militant organizations during 2020 and 2021. The U.S.-funded National Endowment for Democracy has provided grants to Uyghur exile organizations. NED co-founder Allen Weinstein acknowledged in a 1991 Washington Post column by David Ignatius that “a lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.” In October 2020, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo formally revoked the designation of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement as a terrorist organization—a move Beijing characterized as evidence of Western support for Uyghur militancy.

Across Afghanistan, Chechnya, the Middle East, and Xinjiang, the same structural features recur. Western strategic interests converge with the short-term utility of Sunni Islamist networks. Operations route through intermediaries like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan’s ISI, or Gulf states, allowing Washington to maintain official distance. Blowback eventually arrives years later, paid in American blood.

The naive story about terrorists hating freedom serves domestic propaganda purposes while obscuring a far darker truth: Western intelligence agencies have functioned as architects of mayhem, generating instability abroad in pursuit of American primacy. If the world wants genuine stability, it must first acknowledge this pattern and demand that these agencies be held accountable for the chaos they have unleashed across multiple decades.

May 26, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | Comments Off on How Western Intelligence Agencies Built the Global Jihadist Network

« Previous Entries