Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

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

Iraq, Pakistan ink Hormuz safe passage deals with Iran: Report

The Cradle | May 13, 2026

Iraq and Pakistan have reached separate arrangements with Iran to move crude oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) through the Strait of Hormuz under Tehran’s new system for controlled passage through the strategic waterway, Reuters reported on 12 May.

The deals come as the US-Israeli war on Iran has sharply reduced energy exports from the Gulf, a region that normally supplies 20 percent of the world’s crude oil and LNG.

Claudio Steuer of the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies told Reuters that “Iran has shifted from blocking Hormuz to controlling access to it … Hormuz is no longer a neutral transit route, it is a controlled corridor.”

Under this new framework, Iraq secured safe passage for two very large crude carriers, each carrying about 2 million barrels of crude, through the strait on Sunday.

An Iraqi oil ministry official said Baghdad is now seeking Iranian approval for additional shipments, as oil revenue makes up 95 percent of the Iraqi budget.

“Iraq is a close ally of Iran, and any deterioration in Iraq’s economy would also damage Iran’s economic interests in the country,” the official said.

In a separate arrangement, two tankers carrying Qatari LNG are heading to Pakistan after Islamabad reached an agreement with Tehran, according to two industry sources cited by Reuters.

The sources said neither Iraq nor Pakistan made direct payments to Iran or the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) for the transits.

Industry sources said Tehran is formalizing control over the strait by asking Baghdad to submit documents for each tanker, including destination, shipping details, ownership, and cargo specifications.

A Pakistani source told Reuters that the process has not been smooth, saying, “The IRGC sometimes changes the goalposts, so it is hard to keep things on track, but we are working through it.”

Amid the chokehold of the US–Iran double blockade, maritime activity through the vital Strait of Hormuz has withered to a mere five percent of its normal capacity, staggering global economies and energy markets.

The blockade has pushed Pakistan to open six overland routes for Iran-bound cargo, giving Tehran an alternative land corridor as the US blockade disrupts maritime trade through the Gulf.

A military correspondent for The Cradle reported that Pakistan issued the “Transit of Goods through Territory of Pakistan Order 2026” on 25 April, designating Karachi Port, Port Qasim, and Gwadar Deep-Sea Port to receive cargo bound for Iran and Central Asia through the Taftan border crossing.

The move could help clear around 3,000 Iranian containers stranded in Karachi after restrictions on ships traveling to and from Iran left food and consumer goods stuck at Pakistani ports.

Former Pakistani information minister Mushahid Hussain Syed said the new corridor gained importance after “the US Navy’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz since 13 April,” but stressed that Islamabad sees the arrangement as a commercial decision rather than a direct escalation with Washington.

“The unfair blockade has left thousands of Iranian containers stuck at Karachi ports, which has made it harder for people in Iran to get consumer goods,” Syed told The Cradle.

May 13, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , | Comments Off on Iraq, Pakistan ink Hormuz safe passage deals with Iran: Report

‘Utterly baseless’: Iran rejects Kuwait’s claim of hostile plot on its island

Press TV – May 13, 2026

Iran’s Foreign Ministry has dismissed as “utterly baseless and rejected” accusations by Kuwait that the Islamic Republic had been planning hostile acts against its neighbor.

In a statement on Wednesday, the ministry strongly condemned the “improper action” of the Kuwaiti government in “politically and propagandistically exploiting” the case of four Iranian personnel who had been on a routine naval patrol mission and entered Kuwaiti territorial waters due to a navigational system malfunction.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran, while reiterating its principled policy of respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries in the region, including Kuwait, declares that it expects the Kuwaiti authorities, while avoiding hasty statements and baseless allegations, to pursue the existing issues through official channels,” it said.

The ministry also stressed the need for Iran’s embassy in Kuwait to be granted “the fastest possible access” to the detained Iranian nationals in accordance with international legal norms, and called for their immediate release.

Kuwait’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced on Tuesday that it had summoned the Iranian ambassador and delivered a note of protest to him.

It claimed that this action was taken following “the infiltration of a group of Iranian armed forces into Bubiyan and their clash with Kuwaiti forces.”

In a statement released on Wednesday, Kuwait’s Ministry of Interior also alleged a group linked to what it called the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) had attempted to enter Bubiyan Island.

May 13, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Comments Off on ‘Utterly baseless’: Iran rejects Kuwait’s claim of hostile plot on its island

Gates-Funded ‘Big Catch-Up’ Delivers 100 Million Vaccine Doses — Including High-Risk DTP Vaccine Not Used in U.S.

By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | April 27, 2026

More than 18 million children in 36 countries across Africa and Asia were vaccinated as part of “The Big Catch-Up,” a global initiative launched in April 2023 and concluded last month.

The campaign delivered 100 million vaccine doses, and included these vaccines, according to a fact sheet: Pentavalent (DTP-Hep-Hib), measles or measles-rubella, IPV, bOPV, rotavirus, PCV, MenA, and yellow fever.

The campaign included “targeted follow up to ensure that children recieved [sic] not only a first dose, but ideally all doses needed in a series.”

The fact sheet did not specify how many vaccines could be administered during a single visit, or if the campaign included any monitoring of the children for side effects or injuries.

Of the 18.3 million children vaccinated, 12.3 million “zero-dose children” had not previously received any vaccines, and 15 million had not received a measles vaccine, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).

The initiative focused on children ages 1-5 who had missed routine vaccinations.

The WHO, UNICEF and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance — backed by the Gates Foundation — launched the initiative “to address vaccination declines driven largely by the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Final figures are still being tallied, but the organizations said they were “on track” to exceed their goal of vaccinating 21 million children. They released their numbers on April 24 to kick off World Immunization Week.

Kennedy clashes with Sen. Shaheen over Gavi funding

During a U.S. Senate hearing last week, U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. clashed with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) over Kennedy’s 2025 decision to block U.S. funding for Gavi.

In a June 2025 prerecorded video for Gavi officials, Kennedy said that the U.S. funding would be withheld until Gavi “re-earned the public trust,” citing concerns over vaccine safety.

“In its zeal to promote universal vaccination, it has neglected the key issue of vaccine safety,” Kennedy said. “When the science was inconvenient, Gavi ignored the science.”

The U.S. gave $300 million to Gavi in 2024, and the Biden administration, also in 2024, had pledged over $1.5 billion to the organization over five years — funding that Kennedy has since withheld.

Shaheen praised Gavi for vaccinating 1.2 billion children during its existence and for being the “world’s leading purchaser of U.S. produced vaccines.”

Shaheen said Gavi representatives warned her that “if this funding is not released, millions of children will die.” She asked Kennedy to commit to working with her and Gavi representatives to restore the funds.

Kennedy said concerns about Gavi’s use of funds must first be addressed. Gavi funnels money to the WHO, “which we got out of because it was doing such a miserable job,” he said.

DTP vaccine injury lawsuits led to legal immunity for vaccine makers

Kennedy also told Shaheen that Gavi is distributing a vaccine with known serious side effects to millions of children when a safer alternative exists.

“Their biggest vaccine is now a DTP vaccine … an old version that was discontinued in this country because it was causing brain injury,” he said. “We discontinued it. Europe discontinued it. They’re still giving it to 161 million African and Asian children a year.”

Kennedy said he asked Gavi why they didn’t use the safer version instead — the DTaP vaccine. “They said they didn’t want to do that.”

DTP vaccines distributed in Africa typically contain the “whole-cell” pertussis vaccine to protect against whooping cough. These vaccines contain an inactivated version of the entire B. pertussis organism, most containing aluminum salts as an adjuvant and thimerosal as a preservative.

In the U.S. and other high-income countries, the whole-cell vaccine was replaced with the acellular DTP vaccine in the 1990s because the vaccine was linked to both minor and serious side effects.

The controversy surrounding whole-cell DTP vaccines drives major U.S. vaccine legislation.

In the late 1970s and 1980s, serious and widespread concern grew about the safety of the DTP shot, after many children experienced seizures, serious brain injury or death following DTP vaccination.

Between 1980 and 1986, lawsuits seeking more than $3 billion in damages were filed against vaccine manufacturers, most for the DTP vaccines made by Wyeth (now Pfizer).

After the lawsuits revealed that Wyeth knew of the risks, juries began authorizing large payouts to families of children injured by the vaccine. As the lawsuits threatened to bankrupt the vaccine insurance industry, manufacturers began to exit the industry.

Congress responded by passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, which established the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program — a no-fault system intended to give the pharmaceutical industry broad protection from liability while compensating children injured by compulsory vaccines.

In 1991, the Institute of Medicine concluded that evidence showed a causal relation between the DTP shot and acute encephalopathy, although scientists said there was not enough evidence to say that it causes long-term neurological damage.

DTP cheaper, possibly more effective — but linked to more serious injuries

In 1991, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration licensed the diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccine — which caused fewer side effects than its predecessor vaccine.

In 1997, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended the DTaP vaccine over the whole-cell DTP vaccine for infants, replacing the older formulation entirely in the U.S.

At the time, the committee cited research suggesting that the whole-cell DTP vaccine was documented to commonly cause erythema, swelling and pain at the injection site, fever and other mild systemic events, as well as serious adverse events — including convulsions and hypotonic hyporesponsive episodes. The serious events occurred in 1 in 1,750 doses administered.

Acellular vaccines are not as effective against whooping cough, reportedly because immunity wanes more quickly and because the pathogen has adapted to the vaccines. They are also more expensive to produce.

Some experts argue that despite higher rates of adverse events, their higher efficacy rates make the whole-cell DTP shots better candidates for mass vaccination campaigns like “The Big Catch-Up.”

“Weighing the risk-benefit of different types of vaccines is often tricky,” said Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., senior research scientist at Children’s Health Defense. “It involves the prevalence of the disease and access to medical care should the vaccine fail to protect, or adverse events manifest.”

Jablonowski said cost is also usually a factor, “as the least hazardous often cost the most. It is a sad state when the more vulnerable take on the greater hazard for diseases that are preventable or treatable by other means.”

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

May 4, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Comments Off on Gates-Funded ‘Big Catch-Up’ Delivers 100 Million Vaccine Doses — Including High-Risk DTP Vaccine Not Used in U.S.

Here’s why Iran is sovereign and Germany is not

By Tarik Cyril Amar | RT | May 1, 2026

Sovereignty, as defined in international law, is both crucial and complex. In the real shark-pool world of geopolitics, it is not hard to spot: if you have the ability to rule at home and resist attack from outside (any outside), then you are sovereign. Otherwise not. No exceptions.

That’s why Iran has sovereignty, but Germany does not. Iran has withstood two months of a devious and brutal war of aggression waged by the US and Israel, which in turn is “merely” the culmination of decades of assaults levied via economic warfare, assassination campaigns, and subversion.

However, Iran has not only successfully foiled the current Israeli-American blitzkrieg-and-regime-change scenario, but also put the attackers on the backfoot. Tehran’s achievement is already historic. It has changed and will change the course of history.

Germany, by contrast, cannot even defend its own vital infrastructure, as the Nord Stream sabotage and its aftermath have demonstrated. What is even worse, its governments have had no will to do so. On the contrary, they have been rewarding the Ukrainian attackers with untold billions to feed Kiev’s ultra-corruption. Their backers – certainly including the US and Poland, and most likely Great Britain, too – need not worry about any trouble from Berlin either.

Case closed: Iran is sovereign, Germany is not. If you are German and find this uncomfortable, complain to Berlin.

Against this backdrop, it is oddly fitting that it is Iran which is now exerting a powerful influence on German politics despite not having any deliberate designs to do so, whereas German calls on Tehran (or, for that matter, Moscow or Beijing) to do this and leave that – as articulated by Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul with an almost comical lack of self-awareness – come across as embarrassing: sad spectacles of an impotence that doesn’t even know itself.

Iran, on the other hand, has now had a palpable impact on what unfortunately remains Germany’s single most important foreign-policy relationship. Indeed, as the current, post-1990 “unification” (really, expansion, and that’s still a polite term) Germany is really the old Cold War West Germany writ large (and going to seeds, too), the relationship with the US is more than just important. Historically, it was literally foundational.

And here we are: It is due to Iran’s resistance that this relationship has entered a deep crisis. Of course, other factors have played (or should have played) a role as well: for instance, Washington’s ferocious, bipartisan economic warfare against its old key client (polite term) in Europe, including at least complicity in destroying vital energy infrastructure and supply options (Biden, Democrats) via massive incentives for German industry to relocate to the US (Biden, Democrats) to devastation by tariffs (Trump, Republicans).

But it is over Iran that things have now come to a head: German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has openly criticized Washington’s conduct of the war, and US President Donald Trump has launched one of his social media rampages, going after Merz and Germany with, as Secretary of War (Crimes) Pete Hegseth would put it, “no quarter” given.

Trump has even threatened, in effect, to withdraw the almost 40,000 US troops from Germany. It would be stupid and self-damaging for the US to do so, but then, this is the Trump administration. Full disclosure: As a German, I hope they go ahead.

Trump has also told Merz off for wanting Iran to have a nuclear weapon (false on two counts: Iran isn’t building one, and Merz is a compliant client leader who would never dare dissent from the US and Israel) and for being bad at running Germany, which must rankle, because most Germans agree. Merz has just earned himself the worst poll ratings of any German chancellor ever.

He has made things even worse – yes, Merz can do that – by releasing an exceedingly masochistically timed interview to complain that, in essence, no one likes him. True, but saying so has only triggered a national tsunami of mockery: now he is not only vastly unpopular but derided as a wimp, who loves to dish out harsh admonishments and mean austerity but can’t take the response.

A short video clip deep-faking Merz performing a satire of MC Hammer’s classic “You can’t touch this” by singing “No one likes me” is going viral. At a town hall-style meeting, the chancellor was openly laughed at. Major mainstream media are beginning to talk about a crisis deep enough to end the current government and, even worse for Merz, about rebellious murmurs inside his own CDU party.

All of this because Merz was making remarks about the Iran War. But make no mistake: Friedrich Merz, still infamous for applauding Israeli “dirty work” (“Drecksarbeit”) in Iran last summer, has not discovered a conscience. Listen attentively to his recent statements, made before a group of high school kids, and you realize, the chancellor’s real beef with America is that Washington hasn’t done its current “dirty work” quickly and, above all, successfully. No one loves a loser, not even, it turns out, Friedrich Merz, whose prior obsequiousness toward Trump had raised eyebrows even in Germany.

Yet whatever Merz’s sordid motives, take a step back and look at this picture from the point of view of history-in-the-making: Here is the German chancellor, who claims to be ready to make his country lead Europe (yes, not a great idea, but let that pass for now), whose government is presiding over the greatest German debt-and-armament splurge since World War Two (and that against a background of profound economic crisis), and he is stumbling over Iran. So much for the rise of multipolarity and the decline of Europe.

Not because that was Tehran’s aim. As a matter of fact, the Iranian leadership probably has very little time to think about Berlin – except noting for the future that, in practical terms, it is serving as a loyal accomplice in the American-Israeli war of aggression. No, the reason Iran now impacts and shakes the American-German relationship is that Tehran has been defeating the US, and so the client state Germany is registering the public “humiliation” of America (Merz’s term) by showing immediate signs of faltering compliance.

Who in this picture is reshaping things? And who is being shaped? Here’s another way to define sovereignty. And Germany still loses.

Tarik Cyril Amar is a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory.

May 1, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | Comments Off on Here’s why Iran is sovereign and Germany is not

NATO’s Baltic Operation Aims to Curb Russian Cargo Traffic

teleSUR | April 20, 2026

On Monday, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko denounced that the true objective of NATO’s “Baltic Sentry” operation is to establish control over key transport routes and restrict cargo shipments in Russia’s interests.

In an interview with RIA Novosti, Grushko said that NATO’s heightened activities in the Baltic Sea pose serious threats to international shipping and economic activity.

“At present, a NATO naval group consisting of the 1st Standing Maritime Group and the 1st Standing Mine Countermeasures Group of warships is operating in this water,” Grushko said.

“In January 2025, the alliance launched Operation Baltic Sentinel, the true objective of which is to establish control over international shipping routes and restrict cargo shipments in Russia’s interests,” he added.

In this context, NATO is making decisions to deploy additional military infrastructure and forces on the Swedish island of Gotland. In recent years, NATO has increased its activities near Russia’s western borders. Moscow has repeatedly expressed concerns over the buildup of NATO forces.

Regarding this topic, the Fakti outlet recalled that, in a speech in March on France’s nuclear deterrence policy, President Emmanuel Macron said “his country must strengthen its nuclear doctrine in the face of new threats. In response, he ordered an increase in the number of nuclear weapons possessed by Paris.”

“Denmark has already concluded a strategic nuclear deterrence agreement with France, which is designed to complement NATO’s deterrence mechanisms. Poland is also in talks with France about joining this initiative,” it added.

April 20, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | | Comments Off on NATO’s Baltic Operation Aims to Curb Russian Cargo Traffic

‘Israel’ attacks civilians to hide its embarrassing military failures & out of pure sadism

By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | April 12, 2026

Proving itself incapable of winning on any front, despite such vast power imbalances, the Zionist regime has developed various collective punishment doctrines over the years. This time, after getting battered by Iranian missiles and failing to achieve any strategic goal, it takes out its frustration on Lebanon and Gaza.

When the US-Israeli alliance launched its war of aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran on February 28, the Zionist regime’s Premier Benjamin Netanyahu openly gloated about getting what he had wanted for over 40 years. However, the moment he had been pushing for decades to reach failed to render the results the Israeli leader had hoped for.

US President Donald Trump, having initially agreed to Iran’s 10-point plan, before later backtracking, decided to announce a two-week cessation of hostilities with Iran. Within hours, having freed up its Air Force that had been bogged down in Iran attack operations, the Israelis were already targeting civilians across Lebanon, including bombing an ambulance in Tyre, south Lebanon.

Hours after that came the horrifying Beirut massacre, during which the Israelis carried out over 100 airstrikes in 10 minutes, demolishing dozens of civilian buildings without any notice. The result was the mass slaughter of more than 300 people, with an additional 1,200 left injured across the country in less than a day.

This was evidently no accident; the Israeli leadership had been claiming throughout the 15-month Lebanon ceasefire – which they violated over 15,400 times according to UNIFIL – that Hezbollah had been defeated, that it posed no threat to the northern settlements and would easily be dealt with. In early March, the Israeli victory narrative collapsed completely.

There is a reason why 77% of Israelis polled, according to Hebrew media outlet Maariv, say they want a continuation of the war against Lebanon. That reason is that they understand well that Hezbollah is still a massive threat to them, and the occupation army they support has failed at deterring the Lebanese Party.

Over two years of genocide in the Gaza Strip, Hamas is still there, and none of the dozen Palestinian Resistance groups have been defeated, despite them taking blows. In Lebanon, the Zionist regime killed most of Hezbollah’s senior leadership, yet failed to deal any decisive blow to the organization. The largest blow that was dealt to Hezbollah was the way the 2024 assault on Lebanon reshaped the Lebanese government.

In Iran, twice, the Israeli-US alliance has assassinated a large number of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s leadership figures, but has failed to deliver any defeat to it. All of the statistics about the percentages of missiles and launchers that the Israelis claim to have destroyed are simply plucked out of thin air.

While the leadership in Tel Aviv may allege that they have come out of every confrontation with some kind of total victory, they also admit that the “war is not over”. This is an admission of failure, because if each war were a victory for them, they wouldn’t require another. The only thing that saves them each time is that they are granted ceasefires, which the Zionists use as a period in which they create new plots to attack once again. If the wars were all-out and total, they would eventually be drained and forced to submit.

So, as each lull in the fighting occurs – what some call “ceasefires” – the Israelis end the round with more treachery. This time around, as soon as the US announced that a two-week temporary ceasefire had been reached, Tel Aviv used the opportunity to concentrate its entire air force on striking civilian targets as a calibrated tactic.

The Gaza genocide was not done simply out of a desire to shed blood as a revenge blow, although this clearly played into it; the genocide was a message to the Palestinian people and the rest of the region. It was a desperate attempt to salvage the so-called “deterrence capacity” image that the Zionist regime had spent so long building up.

The Israelis did not want to directly go after the Palestinian resistance in Gaza because they knew that it would be costly, so they hid in their tanks and armored vehicles, entering areas with the intent of flattening infrastructure and knocking out major hospitals as the end goal of each operation.

In Lebanon, their tactics are very similar, but are complicated by the fact that Hezbollah is a far stronger military force to deal with. We immediately saw that Tel Aviv displaced a million Lebanese, bombed all the bridges allowing for civilian passage to the south of Lebanon, and then flattened entire towns and neighborhoods.

The mass slaughter of civilians in Beirut was also part of that strategy. The civilian populations of Gaza and Lebanon become a punching bag, with the end goal being the demoralization of the people, attempting to turn them against the resistance groups they overwhelmingly support.

April 12, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , | Comments Off on ‘Israel’ attacks civilians to hide its embarrassing military failures & out of pure sadism

EU state issues ultimatum to Zelensky over Russian oil supplies

RT | February 21, 2025

Slovakia will cut its emergency electricity supplies to Ukraine unless Kiev resumes deliveries of Russian oil by Monday, Prime Minister Robert Fico has warned.

The standoff centers on the Soviet-era Druzhba pipeline, the main artery carrying Russian crude to Hungary and Slovakia. When supplies stopped in late January, Ukraine blamed a Russian airstrike. Moscow, however, insisted that Kiev was using energy to blackmail the two EU countries, which have been critical of the bloc’s support for Ukraine. Both Slovakia and Hungary echoed Moscow’s stance.

Writing on Saturday on X, Fico issued a direct ultimatum to Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky while hinting at Kiev’s ingratitude over past humanitarian assistance and readiness to host around 180,000 Ukrainian refugees.

Zelensky, he said, “refuses to understand our peace-oriented approach and, because we do not support the war, he is behaving maliciously toward Slovakia.”

Fico recalled that Ukraine had already halted Russian gas supplies to Slovakia, a move he said costs the country €500 million ($589 million) per year. “Slovakia cannot accept Slovak-Ukrainian relations as a one-way ticket benefiting only Ukraine,” he said.

The Slovak leader also stressed that Ukraine is highly dependent on outside energy supplies as its own power grid is reeling under Russian strikes, which Moscow says come in retaliation for Kiev’s “terrorist attacks” deep into the country.

”In January 2026 alone, these emergency supplies, needed to stabilize the Ukrainian energy grid, were required twice as much as during the entire year of 2025,” he said, adding that Zelensky’s “unacceptable behavior” once again proved that Slovakia had been right to opt out of the €90 billion EU loan to Kiev.

This comes as Hungary has also warned Kiev that it is “considering the option of stopping power and gas shipments towards Ukraine” over the Druzhba pipeline stand-off.

February 21, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Comments Off on EU state issues ultimatum to Zelensky over Russian oil supplies

Tensions between Hungary and Ukraine could lead to a new regional conflict

By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | February 12, 2026

Tensions between Hungary and Ukraine have reached a new level of severity, dangerously approaching the possibility of open confrontation. What was once limited to diplomatic disagreements and rhetorical disputes now takes on broader strategic dimensions, with potential for regional destabilization. The recent statement by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, labeling Ukraine as an “enemy,” should not be seen as mere rhetoric but as an indication of a structural rupture in bilateral relations — and possibly a prelude to more serious developments.

The immediate trigger of the crisis lies in Kiev’s insistence, with support from sectors in Brussels, that Budapest end its energy cooperation with Russia. For Hungary, a country highly dependent on external energy supplies, agreements with Moscow are not an ideological choice but a strategic necessity. Any attempt to interfere in this area is perceived by the Hungarian government as a direct violation of its sovereignty and national security.

However, the energy issue is only the surface of a deeper problem. For years, Budapest has denounced discriminatory Ukrainian policies against the Hungarian minority in the Transcarpathian region. Occurrences of forced recruitment, linguistic pressure, and cultural marginalization have fueled growing resentment within Hungary. All of this has contributed to the intensification of bilateral tensions.

It is precisely at this point that the risk of armed conflict begins to gain relevance. Although a direct war between two European countries seems unlikely in the short term, history shows that conflicts often emerge from poorly managed crises involving ethnic minorities and border disputes. Hungary, a member of NATO and the European Union, could not act militarily without triggering serious continental repercussions. Nevertheless, even a mere hardening of its posture — such as reinforcing military presence at the border, conducting strategic exercises, or creating mechanisms to protect the Hungarian diaspora — would already significantly raise regional tensions.

For the Kiev regime, which faces a prolonged conflict with Russia, opening an additional front with a NATO neighbor would be strategically disastrous. However, the logic of total war and permanent mobilization tends to reduce the margin for political concessions. If the Ukrainian government interprets Hungarian criticism as internal sabotage of its war effort, it may respond with even harsher measures — deepening the cycle of hostility.

The European Union thus faces a delicate dilemma. If it chooses to pressure Budapest to align unconditionally with the pro-Ukraine agenda, it risks deepening internal divisions and fueling sovereigntist movements within the bloc. On the other hand, if it recognizes the legitimacy of Hungary’s concerns, it may be accused of weakening political support for Kiev. In either case, European cohesion suffers.

The potential developments go beyond the immediate military dimension. A diplomatic escalation will result in Hungary more and more systematically vetoing European initiatives favorable to Ukraine, blocking financial packages, and paralyzing strategic decisions at the EU level. In a more extreme scenario, internal sanctions against Budapest or even mechanisms to suspend rights within the EU could arise — measures that would further aggravate the political environment.

On the military front, even if direct confrontation remains unlikely, border incidents, refugee crises, or disputes involving consular protection of dual citizens cannot be ruled out. In prolonged conflict contexts, small incidents can quickly escalate out of control.

The central fact is that formal rhetoric of enmity changes the nature of bilateral relations. When one state frames another as a direct threat, institutions begin preparing for scenarios of containment and potential confrontation. Europe, already marked by a large-scale conflict in the East, may be approaching a new focal point of instability.

Hungary has every right to use all necessary means to protect itself from Ukrainian provocations — including military means if diplomatic efforts fail. The only remaining question is whether, in such a scenario, NATO and the EU would side with one of their member states or continue to ignore Ukrainian crimes, as they have done in the current conflict with Russia.

February 12, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | Leave a comment

Japan to Sign Up For NATO’s Ukraine Arms Pipeline

Sputnik – February 10, 2026

Japan has allegedly pledged significant financial support for Ukraine, and committed to providing specialized equipment, with reports indicating long-term assistance.

Doubling down on its US-pushed militarization drive, Japan is moving closer to NATO by signing on to the alliance’s Security Assistance and Training for Ukraine (NSATU) program, which facilitates the flow of military equipment to Ukraine, according to NHK.

Sources cited by the outlet claim Japan will soon officially announce its participation in the initiative, announced during the NATO Summit in July 2024 and headquartered in Wiesbaden, Germany.

The equipment that Japan is expected to procure for Ukraine reportedly includes body armor, vehicles, and, potentially, radar systems.

The NSATU mechanism coordinates the donation of military equipment from Allied and partner nations to Ukraine’s armed forces, aligning their capabilities with NATO standards.

Russia has repeatedly argued that Western weapons shipments to Ukraine undermine any prospects for a negotiated settlement and amount to NATO’s direct involvement in the conflict. Russia has also warned that convoys delivering arms to Ukraine would be treated as legitimate military targets.

February 10, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

Muammar Gaddafi’s son assassinated in Libya amid reports of French ‘meddling’ in Africa

The Cradle | February 6, 2026

Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the prominent son of former Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi, was assassinated by unknown gunmen in Libya on 3 February.

Gaddafi was killed in his home in the town of Zintan, 136km southwest of the Libyan capital, Tripoli.

Gaddafi’s political team released a statement saying that “four masked men” stormed his house and killed him in a “cowardly and treacherous assassination.”

The statement said that he tried to fight off the attackers, who shut off the security cameras at the house “in a desperate attempt to conceal traces of their heinous crimes.”

Gaddafi served as his father’s close advisor from 2000 until 2011, when Muammar Gaddafi was killed by NATO-backed militants with links to Al-Qaeda.

As part of the so-called Arab Spring in early 2011, British and Qatari intelligence organized an army led by members of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) to topple the Libyan state.

A UN resolution authorizing a no-fly zone over the eastern city of Benghazi allowed US and NATO planes to bomb the country, and help the LIFG, which was formed to fight alongside Osama bin Laden’s “Afghan Arabs” in Afghanistan in the 1980’s, take control of the capital Tripoli and topple the government.

Muammar Gaddafi was murdered by the NATO-backed militants after fleeing his hometown, Sirte, in a military convoy following a battle there in October 2011.

Sirte later fell under the control of Libya’s branch of ISIS, serving as its most significant base outside of West Asia, while the country descended into civil war and chaos.

Saif al-Islam Gaddafi was captured and imprisoned in Zintan in 2011 after attempting to flee the North African country following his father’s killing.

He was released in 2017 as part of a general pardon and had lived in Zintan since.

Saif al-Islam’s assassination comes as France has reportedly been preparing “neo-colonial coups d’etat” in Africa and seeking opportunities for “political revenge” on the continent, according to the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service’s (SVR) press bureau.

French influence in African countries it had formerly colonized is waning, as African nations refused “to serve as puppets of the financial and political oligarchy of French globalists,” the press bureau stated.

“Whether inspired by the American operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro or imagining himself as the arbiter of the fate of African peoples, Macron has authorized his special services to launch a plan to eliminate ‘undesirable leaders’ in Africa,” the SVR press bureau claimed.

The SVR added that France was involved in the attempted coup against military leader and President Ibrahim Traore in Burkina Faso last month.

“Our intelligence services intercepted this operation in the final hours. They had planned to assassinate the head of state and then strike other key institutions, including civilian personalities,” said Burkina Faso security minister Mahamadou Sana.

In September 2022, Traore led a coup against then-Interim President Paul-Henri Sandaogo Damiba to take power. His government quickly distanced itself from France while helping to found the Alliance of Sahel States, comprising Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger.

The SVR said France was also seeking to destabilize the governments of Mali, the Central African Republic, and Madagascar.

February 6, 2026 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries