Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Trump invites Putin to a roller coaster ride

By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | March 13, 2025 

The political optics of the joint statement issued after the US-Ukrainian talks at Jeddah on March 11 lasting nine hours is hard to tell since President Donald Trump prides himself on his ability to strike deals. Prima facie, the optics are that Ukraine caved in and accepted a Trump administration proposal for a 30-day cease-fire with Russia and on its part, the latter agreed to immediately lift a pause on intelligence sharing with Kyiv and resume military assistance. 

The White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt during a Fox News TV broadcast said that Trump “put Zelensky in his place and told him that the Americans are serious about a long-term peace deal…And we are very, very pleased with the way that the Ukrainians and this deal today turned out.” 

However, there are fine prints in a joint statement, which add the caveat that “Ukraine expressed readiness to accept the U.S. proposal to enact an immediate, interim 30-day cease-fire” if Russia did the same. The statement qualifies that “The United States will communicate to Russia that Russian reciprocity is the key to achieving peace.”

The US Secretary of State Marco Rubio interpreted that the agreement now puts the pressure on Russia to end the war. He said, “We’ll take this offer now to the Russians, and we hope that they’ll say yes, that they’ll say yes to peace. The ball is now in their court.” 

Rubio signalled that if Moscow doesn’t sign up to the ceasefire, “then we’ll unfortunately know what the impediment is to peace here.” For sure, coercive diplomacy has crept in. 

Curiously, even before talks began in Jeddah, Rubio had told reporters, “It should be clear to everyone that the United States has tools available to also impose costs on the Russian side of this equation, but we hope it doesn’t come to that. What we’re hoping is that both sides realise that this is not a conflict that can end by military means; it can only end by diplomatic means. And the President’s goal is to bring them both to the table to get this resolved. But it’s a reminder that we understand that the United States has tools at its disposal if in fact this falls apart, and — but we’re hoping it doesn’t. We really do. We hope it doesn’t reach that point.”

There has been no public indication so far that Russia would accept an unconditional, month-long ceasefire that compromises the core objectives of the special military operations. Indeed, that’s what the Russian people will expect from President Vladimir Putin.

Of course, Putin himself had indicated in January, “The goal should not be a short truce, not some kind of respite for regrouping forces and rearmament with the aim of subsequently continuing the conflict, but a long-term peace based on respect for the legitimate interests of all people, all nations living in this region.” 

It will be politically damaging for Moscow to retract from the terms spelt out by Putin last June in his address to the foreign ministry in Moscow as conditions for Russia agreeing to peace talks. Again, the generals’ opinion has to be taken into account. The Russian forces have managed slow but consistent advances in the east in the Donetsk region and are preparing for breaking through into the neighbouring region of Dnipropetrovsk. Only last weekend, after heavy fighting, they managed a significant breakthrough in the Kursk region, coming close to encircling around 10,000 elite Ukrainian troops. 

Clearly, it is not going to be easy for Putin to order the generals that it’s time for a ceasefire that may look like a strategic defeat as the Russian forces are still failing in their core strategic goals. Konstantin Kosachev, chairman of the international affairs committee of the upper house of Russia’s parliament, probably reflected the mainstream elite opinion in a post on Telegram that: “Russia is advancing. Real agreements are still being written there, at the front. Which they should understand in Washington, too.”

On the other hand, there is no question that Putin’s preference will be to avoid unpleasantness with Trump, leave alone a collision course. Putin has to tread with care, as Trump will not like anyone stopping him from getting his deal.   

On Monday, in a subtle suggestion that Putin and Trump are sailing in the same boat, Tass carried two reports (here and here) warning that British activities in Odessa directly threaten Russian interests and, furthermore, that “According to the information received by the SVR (Russian Foreign Intelligence Service), the British leadership sees a threat to its interests in the promotion of dialogue between the US and Russia to resolve the Ukrainian conflict… London is extremely irritated by the fact that Donald Trump ‘dialogues with Russia as a superpower and shows disregard to close allies.’”

The SVR statement added, “The British authorities consider it an ‘urgent priority’ to undermine ‘peacekeeping’ efforts of the new US administration on the Ukrainian track. The media and specialised NGOs are tasked with demonising Trump, portraying him as ‘a man with a poor peacekeeping record and susceptible to Kremlin manipulation.’”

Interestingly, Tass also reported on a telephone conversation between Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service Director Sergey Naryshkin and Chief of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) John Ratcliffe. The readout said, “the parties discussed the issues of interaction of both intelligence agencies in areas of common interest and the settlement of crisis situations” and reached an agreement “on maintaining regular contact between the SVR and CIA directors with the aim of facilitating international stability and security and reducing confrontation in relationships between Moscow and Washington.”

Evidently, Zelensky, tutored by his American friends and European advisers, has decided on a play-along strategy to avoid antagonising Trump counting, arguably, that he should leave it to Putin to cross and disappoint Trump. Put differently, in an iterative process, Ukraine needs to project itself as the constructive party.

That said, in the final analysis, the dynamics are such that personal diplomacy rather than ideological commitments or even military achievements may come to prevail. The outcome will depend on the personal agreements — or the lack thereof — between Putin and Trump.  

Trump himself told reporters that he thought he would speak with Putin this week and that he hoped a lasting cease-fire would be negotiated in the coming days. Meanwhile, Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff is reportedly planning to travel to Moscow to meet Putin. He had a meeting with Putin lasting several hours last month. 

The bottom line is that one way or another, Moscow will have to decide quickly how to play Trump. To my mind, in this bouquet of thorny roses out of Jeddah, the likelihood is that Putin may opt to string discussions out by offering a succession of counter proposals.  

March 12, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | 1 Comment

Mennonite Community in Texas Is ‘Frustrated’ by Media Coverage of Measles Outbreak

By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | March 4, 2025

Many Mennonite community members in West Texas feel “frustrated” and “targeted” by mainstream media coverage of the current measles outbreak in Gaines County, Texas, Tina Siemens, a Mennonite business owner and award-winning author told The Defender in an exclusive interview today.

“The media spins it as there’s a large panic in our community. I have not seen that — and I get out and about in my community,” said Siemens, an immigrant who has lived in the Seminole, Texas, area since 1977. Seminole is the county seat for Gaines County.

“There’s some frustration, especially that it is so much targeted just to the Mennonites.”

The measles outbreak in West Texas — particularly in Gaines County — garnered mainstream media attention after the Texas Department of State Health Services (Texas DSHS) last week reported what it called “the first death from measles in the ongoing outbreak in the South Plains and Panhandle regions.”

Texas DSHS spokesperson Lara Anton on Feb. 26 told The Associated Press the outbreak’s main concentration of cases has been a “close-knit, under-vaccinated” Mennonite community.

But Siemens said that’s not a fair characterization. “It’s not just Mennonites that have the measles. There are other groups that have measles, but the Mennonites are an easy target.”

The Mennonites in West Texas mostly live on farms where they grow crops, including peanuts and cotton.

Siemens speaks out publicly because she feels called to be a “bridge builder” between immigrants and non-immigrants, she said. She wants the societal contributions of immigrant groups like the Mennonites to be appreciated — and for immigrants not to be targets of blame or poor treatment.

She detailed an instance of a Mennonite mother receiving “unfair” treatment. “I had a very dear lady message me last night,” Siemens said.

The woman was a Mennonite mother who had recently gone to her doctor’s office for a regular checkup.

The mother told Siemens the office staff demanded that she put on a mask right away because they could tell from her dress and accent that she was a Mennonite from Seminole, where the measles outbreak was strongest.

Meanwhile, other people who came into the office who did not look or sound like Mennonites were not instructed to wear a mask.

Siemens said the mother was then verbally “battered” by medical staff who told her, “You need to vaccinate. You need to vaccinate. You’re not a good mom if you’re not vaccinating.”

That kind of treatment is disrespectful and unfair, Siemens said.

Siemens said it’s not just the unvaccinated that are getting measles in West Texas. On Feb. 21, the Seminole Sentinel ran an article under the headline, “Measles Outbreak Now Includes Vaccinated Population.”

Parents who choose not to vaccinate kids aren’t uneducated

According to Siemens, “The media is portraying the unvaccinated as uneducated” and reporting that because they decline the vaccine, “they are the ones that are carrying all of the measles outbreak.”

“That is just not the truth,” she said.

The parents she knows who chose not to have their children receive the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine studied the vaccine’s risks, Siemens said. “They did more reading than those who say, ‘My doctor says [to get the shot], and I’m going to listen to my doctor.’”

There is evidence of serious health risks linked to the MMR vaccine. For instance, researchers in 2004 found that boys vaccinated with their first MMR vaccine on time were 67% more likely to get diagnosed with autism compared to boys who got their first vaccine after their 3rd birthday.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that children receive their first dose of the MMR vaccine between 12 and 15 months old.

Research also shows that the MMR vaccine causes febrile seizures, anaphylaxis, meningitis, encephalitis, thrombocytopenia, arthralgia and vasculitis.

Over the past 10 years, there have been 41 deaths following MMR or MMRV vaccination reported in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

Reports in VAERS are not necessarily verified and vary in completeness. However, underreporting is a known and serious disadvantage of the VAERS system. Researchers previously determined that the number of injuries reported to VAERS is less than 1%.

Additionally, the MMR vaccine contains virus levels significantly higher than those originally safety tested in the version of the vaccine approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) — and the current vaccine has never been tested for safety, according to the legal testimony of Dr. David Kessler, former head of the FDA.

Siemens said she was vaccinated when she entered the U.S. in 1977 as an immigrant. “Did my parents study what was in the vaccines? No, they didn’t. But in 1977 versus 2025, that spectrum has changed a lot.”

Vaccines today are not what they were in 1977, she said. “And thanks to COVID, the trust has just diminished to almost non-existence.”

What’s most important is people’s right to choose

Siemens has worked with “those who choose to vaccinate and those who choose not to vaccinate … They have equal rights in our country.”

What’s most important is that we respect people’s right to choose for themselves and their children. “The freedom of choice is powerful,” she said.

Siemens has assisted the local health department by looking over their translations of community announcements informing people of measles testing sites and the availability of vaccines.

“The Mennonites in Seminole, Texas, all speak German,” she said. “There’s two dialects: a high German, which is the written language, and the low German, which is more the spoken language.”

The CDC today announced on X that it is now on the ground in Texas, too.

The CDC is partnering with the Texas DSHS to respond to the state’s measles outbreak.

Siemens said she has been in touch with the parents of the child who died after testing positive for measles. She confirmed that the child who died was a 6-year-old girl and that the family is part of the “broader community” of Gaines County.

Siemens also said that details surrounding the child’s death have been shared with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and will later be made public.

“This story is going to be told in much more detail when the time is right.” For now, she said, “Just know that this family is being loved on by our community.”

Related articles in The Defender

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.

March 5, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

Russia’s Resurgence and the Evolving US-Russia Relations

By Abbas Hashemite – New Eastern Outlook – March 4, 2025

Since World War II, Russia and the US have been fierce rivals, but with Donald Trump’s re-election and Russia’s rise as a superpower, the US is now shifting toward fostering cordial ties.

Russia’s Resurgence and the Evolving US-Russia Relations

The Cold War resulted in the collapse of the Soviet Union, creating a unipolar world order led by the United States. Since the culmination of the Cold War, the US has been following a more hardline foreign policy towards its rivals and allies, tarnishing its soft image around the globe. However, its economic and military supremacy helped it to sustain its position as the sole superpower of the world for almost 3 decades. The United States has been alluring third-world countries through economic aid to achieve its geopolitical interests in different regions. It also coerced weak countries militarily to support its foreign policy interests.

Nonetheless, the rapid rise of Russia and China has provided third-world countries with new military and economic giants, transforming the global geopolitical landscape. Russia’s influence is rapidly rising among the Muslim and African countries. It is also known as the leading country of the BRICS organization. Moscow is also leading the de-dollarization movement under the banner of the BRICS. Global oil trade in non-US dollar currencies has already reached 20 percent in 2020-23 from a mere 2 percent in 2000-2010. More than 40 countries are demonstrating their interest in the BRICS membership, signaling the decline of the US-led unipolar world order. The rise of BRICS has significantly enhanced Russia’s diplomatic influence. Most third-world countries seek to establish cordial relations with Moscow due to its policy of noninterference and its inclusive foreign policy.

The Strain in US-Israel Relations and Russia’s Global Stature

On the other hand, the US support to Israel in its war crimes in Gaza and its veto of the UN ceasefire resolutions have ruptured its international image. Israel has been the largest recipient of US aid since its creation. Despite all international condemnations and appeals, the Biden administration provided billions of dollars of US aid, both military and financial, to Israel. It also provided diplomatic support to Israel, further deepening the international resentment against the United States. Meanwhile, the Putin administration proved to be a staunch supporter of human rights and justice by speaking for the rights of Palestinian citizens. In the past few years, President Putin has become one of the strongest voices against Islamophobia.

Due to his vision, Russia has regained its position as the superpower of the world. Russia’s soft image has risen to an unprecedented level under his presidency. Moreover, the failure of the US sanctions to bankrupt Russia is often attributed to his leadership skills. It is also due to his leadership that the United States has been unable to isolate Moscow diplomatically. The Biden administration’s policy of weakening Russia by ensnaring it in an invincible conflict with Ukraine also seems to be collapsing due to the victories of the Russian forces.

US and Russia’s Changing Relations

The incumbent US President Donald Trump has always admired the leadership skills and personality of President Putin. He has consistently criticized Ukraine’s unwarranted provocation of Russia. President Trump is aware that the U.S. is not in a position to defeat or compete with Russia’s rise. The recent summit between Sergei Lavrov, the Secretary of State of Russia, and his American counterpart, to lay a foundation for the meeting of the leaders of the two countries and Trump’s aggressive rhetoric towards Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is a big diplomatic win for Moscow. President Trump has also praised President Putin for his seriousness to end the Russia-Ukraine conflict. All these developments have further elevated the diplomatic stature of Russia internationally.

In a surprising move, the United States voted against a Ukrainian resolution, blaming Moscow for its invasion, in the United Nations, marking a significant shift in the US policy under President Trump. Instead, the U.S. introduced a new resolution, titled The Path to Peace, which featured neutral language and called for a lasting peace. This sent a chill down the spines of the European leaders, as they knew that Ukraine could not win against Russia without the US support. This development holds immense significance and can be seen as a diplomatic win for Russia and Washington’s acceptance of defeat as a global hegemon. It is this sense of defeat that encourages the US to foster ties with Moscow.

Although President Trump has repeatedly threatened the BRICS nations about the de-dollarization campaign, the growing interest of the middle powers in the BRICS membership and their tilt towards Russia indicates that the US needs to establish cordial ties with Moscow to avoid isolation in the new multipolar world order. Washington stood victorious in the first Cold War, but the current developments demonstrate that it has already lost the Cold War 2.0. Russia, as always, seems to be open to diplomatic negotiations with the United States and is also ready for a peaceful solution to its conflict with Ukraine, but it will never compromise on its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

March 4, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , | Leave a comment

Kremlin says rapid US foreign policy shift largely aligns with its vision

Al-Manar | March 2, 2025

The Kremlin said that the United States’ dramatic shift in foreign policy largely aligns with its own vision.

“The new administration is rapidly changing all foreign policy configurations. This largely coincides with our vision,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told a reporter from state television.

“There is a long way to go, because there is huge damage to the whole complex of bilateral relations. But if the political will of the two leaders, President Putin and President Trump, is maintained, this path can be quite quick and successful,” Peskov added.

Peskov made the comments on Wednesday, but the remarks were only made public today, AFP news agency reported.

US President Donald Trump has sought to build ties with Moscow since taking office in January, reaching out to President Vladimir Putin and siding with Russia at the United Nations.

Trump has since even further aligned himself with Moscow, rebuking Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in a stunning televised confrontation at the White House on Friday.

Moscow, which launched a full-scale military offensive against its neighbor in February 2022, had railed against former US president Joe Biden’s unconditional support for Ukraine.

March 3, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

Three years on… Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine is vindicated

Strategic Culture Foundation | February 28, 2025

This week marks the third anniversary of Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine, launched on February 24, 2022.

Moscow has consistently explained the conflict in Ukraine to be a manifestation of a bigger geopolitical confrontation brought about by U.S. and NATO aggression using Ukraine as a proxy. That aggression was latent for decades going back to the end of the Second World War.

Russia’s emerging military victory against a NeoNazi regime armed to the teeth by an array of Western enemies has not just defeated a nefarious proxy war. It is demolishing the charade of supposed Western moral authority. This is an epoch-making watershed. It is significant that this event comes at a time when U.S. and Western global power is failing and flailing, and a new multipolar order is evolving, one where Russia’s international esteem and influence are increasing.

The United States, its European allies and the Western corporate-controlled news media have tried to depict Ukraine as an innocent victim of “unprovoked Russian aggression”.

Three years on, the Western narrative has collapsed in a pile of propaganda lies. The United States, under the new administration of President Donald Trump, has abandoned the erstwhile claims made against Russia. This week, the United States tabled a resolution at the United Nations Security Council which calls for peace in Ukraine and refrained from accusing Russia of aggression.

As many as one million Ukrainian soldiers have been killed over the past three years on the battlefield. Russia has not disclosed how many of its troops have died. Some estimates put the death toll at around 100,000.

The conflict in Ukraine is the biggest on the European continent since the end of World War II. It is a tragedy of epic proportion, especially given that the conflict could have been avoided by diplomacy.

The Trump administration is now pushing for peace negotiations with Russia. The American president has also acknowledged some of the “root causes” of the conflict, namely the provocative and unacceptable idea of Ukraine joining the NATO alliance advocated by his predecessor, and the longer-term threat posed by NATO’s expansion toward Russia’s borders since the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s.

In other words, the U.S. administration has now moved to a point for diplomacy that the previous Biden White House rejected.

It is important to recall that in the weeks before hostilities erupted at the end of February 2022, Moscow had presented a detailed and comprehensive proposal for a mutual security treaty between Russia and the U.S.-led NATO military alliance. That diplomatic initiative was dismissed by Washington and its European allies. The rejection of negotiations made the conflict and the ensuing death and destruction inevitable. That is a diabolical shame on the heads of the Western powers.

In our weekly editorial on February 25, 2022, it was stated: “Moscow had warned that if its reasonable security proposals were not reciprocated, then there would be ‘military-technical measures’. Having exhausted the initiative for dialogue and mutual respect, the next phase is the use of more ‘physical language’ to convey meaning to people who seem unresponsive to normal dialogue. It is the Western powers and their arrogant presumption of superiority that are responsible for the impasse and now the repercussions.”

Russia was fully justified in taking military action against NATO’s relentless threats. The conflict was never about merely Ukraine, it was about facing down the entire U.S.-led Western bloc and its incorrigible aggression towards Russia.

Again, in our editorial from three years ago we stated: “Russia has for years warned that U.S. and NATO aggression was posing a critical danger to international security and had to stop. The revoking of arms control treaties by the U.S. (the ABM, INF, Open Skies Treaty) and the expansion of missile threats near Russia’s borders were no longer tolerable. Ukraine is really just one element of the bigger picture. But this week, Russia has moved finally to stop the aggression. It is a historic watershed.”

This week, Russian President Vladimir Putin expressed hope that sanity and diplomacy may prevail under the Trump administration to negotiate a peace settlement in Ukraine. Putin also warned of the danger that diplomacy could be sabotaged by Western powers who would rather that their proxy war against Russia continues – no matter how many deaths it inflicts nor the risks of all-out nuclear war.

It is not clear if the Trump administration can be a reliable party. Trump this week extended economic sanctions on Russia for another year – which is not a good sign. Yes, he has expressed recognition of Russia’s deep concerns but this American president is fickle and mercurial. He seems prone to flip-flopping on his positions. Last week, he called Ukraine’s expired president, Vladimir Zelensky, a “dictator” (which is arguably correct). But this week, Trump denied the disparagement while inking a major mining deal with Zelensky in Washington.

Let’s not forget, too, that Trump during his first administration was complicit in instigating war when in 2019 he approved Javelin missiles to the Ukrainian regime – the first time the taboo of supplying lethal weapons was broken. Trump also ripped up the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty and the Open Skies Treaty, gravely provoking tensions with Russia.

Fair enough, this time around, Trump has, in a good way, upended relations with European allies by snubbing their involvement in peace talks with Russia. The rupture in the transatlantic alliance has cast a huge shadow of doubt that the NATO bloc can hold together after 76 years of existence.

At the very least, Trump has created a space for dialogue and potential peace. However, it remains to be seen if his administration delivers on resolving the systematic causes of conflict.

It could turn out that Washington is merely moving to save face for the United States from an embarrassing defeat in Ukraine, aiming to dump the costs on its European lackeys, rather than forging a genuine security treaty as demanded by Moscow.

Washington’s belated dropping of the narrative about “Russian aggression” proves that the narrative was baseless. The Western-backed war in Ukraine with hundreds of billions of dollars and euros has been fueled on lies and deception. That is monstrously criminal.

Russia launched its special military operation to protect the ethnic Russian population that had come under relentless, murderous attacks by the NATO-backed Kiev regime that the CIA had installed in the 2014 coup.

Russia has regained historic territories through referenda in Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions. Other historic territories are also up for reclaiming, including Kharkiv and Odessa, the port city founded by Russian empress Catherine the Great in the 18th century.

Russia will continue its military campaign to eradicate the Neo-Nazi regime in Kiev.

And Russia will ensure that the NATO bloc (if it continues to exist, which is doubtful at this time) never acquires a foothold in the rump Ukrainian territory. That includes rejecting any spurious notion by Britain and France of deploying “peacekeeping troops”.

The debacle among the U.S. and its European allies is proof of Russia’s vindication and why it was wholly justified in taking military action against NATO in Ukraine.

The enemies of Russia are in no position to trade. They have nothing to trade.

Russia’s vindication means there can be no shoddy deal – or compromises as Trump fancifully reckons. Russia is right to insist on all its demands for security and respect.

February 28, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | Leave a comment

‘Inhumane, Reckless’: Critics Weigh in on Europe’s Approval of Self-amplifying COVID mRNA Vaccines

By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender |February 24, 2025

Europe has approved a self-amplifying mRNA COVID-19 vaccine for ages 18 and up. The move drew criticism from scientists, who cited several concerns, including high rates of serious side effects among clinical trial participants and no long-term safety data.

The European Commission, the European Union’s primary executive body, on Feb. 14, granted marketing authorization for ARCT-154 — marketed as KOSTAIVE — a vaccine manufactured by CSL and Arcturus Therapeutics.

Japanese regulators were the first to approve the ARCT-154 shot, which the country made available for the 2024-25 season to people 65 and over, and 60- to 64-year-olds with severe underlying conditions.

Self-amplifying mRNA vaccines are similar to synthetic mRNA vaccines in that they both contain foreign mRNA that the body’s cells translate into a protein. However, unlike synthetic mRNA vaccines, self-amplifying vaccines also contain an enzyme that instructs the body on how to make more mRNA.

“What makes self-amplifying mRNA technology so worrisome, is that the mRNA will perpetuate indefinitely,” said Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., senior research scientist at Children’s Health Defense (CHD).

Jablonowski explained that with the traditional COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, “at least there is some solace in knowing the original mRNA will break down and stop production of the spike proteins.”

Nicolas Hulscher, an epidemiologist with the McCullough Foundation who writes on Substack, called Europe’s approval of ARCT-154 a “grave mistake.”

“These products behave like a synthetic virus,” Hulscher said. “The replicon mRNA is designed to encode not only the target antigen but also viral replicase, enabling the mRNA to replicate itself within the target cells. This replication machinery allows for an unknown period of toxic antigen production.”

The antigen is the “active ingredient in all vaccines … that causes the immune system to begin producing antibodies,” according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Jablonowski said that being chronically exposed to an antigen — “especially one as toxic as the COVID-19 spike protein” is “like being vaccinated every day for the rest of your life.”

Plus, the product may not effectively target emerging COVID-19 variants, Jablonowski said:

“When a new variant emerges, as coronaviruses change constantly, would the strategy be another self-amplifying mRNA vaccine? Another factory that may never turn off? And so on? There will be a breaking point.

“The tragic short-sightedness of this strategy is that eventually the vaccinated will be creating spike protein to assault their own body to teach their immune system how to combat a virus that doesn’t exist anymore.”

Hulscher said long-term safety data on ARCT-154 is “non-existent.” He also reported that 90% of clinical trial participants experienced adverse events after the first dose, with 74.5% reporting systemic reactions and 15.2% requiring medical attention.

Arcturus Therapeutics is one of at least nine vaccine developers working on self-amplifying mRNA products, according to a November 2024 analysis by Hulscher.

So far, none of the clinical trials for the product have “addressed the major concern of product shedding,” Hulscher said.

Jablonowski also pointed out that the mRNA lipid nanoparticle technology has been shown to cross the placental barrier, making it “unconscionable that the European Commission would allow these products anywhere near a person who may become pregnant.”

FDA approved clinical trial for self-amplifying bird flu vaccine

Although the U.S. has yet to approve a self-amplifying mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration last November gave the green light for Arcturus Therapeutics to launch clinical trials for a self-amplifying mRNA vaccine targeting the H5N1 virus, commonly known as bird flu.

The trials are funded by the U.S. government and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. “The United States must REJECT this dangerous technology,” Hulscher said.

Cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough agreed.

“Vaccinologists have made a critical error in the design of genetic vaccines,” McCullough said. “Injection of the genetic code for any foreign protein including parts of viruses causes the body to respond with an immune attack against its own cells.”

“This leads to intense vaccine injury syndromes all through the human body,” he said.

McCullough added, “Giving the vaccines their own ‘life’ with the ability to reproduce themselves is inhumane, reckless, and from the outset, should be flagged as dangerous and potentially lethal to the recipient.”

Related articles in The Defender

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.

February 26, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | 1 Comment

COVID Vaccines Linked to 113% Higher Risk of Underactive Thyroid

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | February 19, 2025

People who received COVID-19 mRNA vaccines had a 113% higher risk of hypothyroidism and a 16% greater risk of hyperthyroidism, according to a study published in The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism.

The six co-authors of the study — four from institutions in Taiwan, one from China and one from the U.S. — performed a retrospective cohort study to compare the risk of thyroid dysfunction among a “large cohort” of people who received COVID-19 shots and among the unvaccinated.

According to the study, reports on long-term thyroid dysfunction following COVID-19 vaccination were limited. “Understanding the risk of subacute thyroiditis, hyperthyroidism, and hypothyroidism in vaccinated individuals is crucial for post-vaccination monitoring,” the study noted.

The study used two equal-sized samples of 1,166,748 people each. The people in one sample received COVID-19 vaccines, while those in the other sample did not. Subacute thyroiditis, hyperthyroidism and hypothyroidism were the primary outcomes the study examined.

Patient data were derived from a database managed by TriNetX, a provider of “real-world data for the life sciences and healthcare.”

According to the results, the vaccinated had a 30% higher risk of being diagnosed with hypothyroidism 12 months following their vaccination. Those who received COVID-19 mRNA vaccines had a 113% higher risk of hypothyroidism 12 months after getting the vaccine.

There was no significant difference in hyperthyroidism among the vaccinated and unvaccinated samples after 12 months. However, people who received an mRNA COVID-19 versus another type of COVID-19 vaccine had a 16% higher risk of hyperthyroidism 12 months after their vaccination.

Hypothyroidism, or underactive thyroid, is a condition that occurs when the thyroid gland does not produce enough thyroid hormone. It can lead to symptoms including a slowed heart rate, muscle weakness, weight gain, depression and memory problems.

Hyperthyroidism refers to an overactive thyroid, which can lead to overproduction of the thyroid hormone. Symptoms include a fast or irregular heartbeat, heart palpitations, tremors, fatigue, swelling, unintentional weight loss and changes in menstrual cycles.

The risk of subacute thyroiditis — an immune reaction of the thyroid gland often accompanied by an upper respiratory infection — remained unchanged in both groups after 12 months.

Results contradict findings of prior studies with shorter monitoring periods

The study’s results highlight “the need for ongoing thyroid function monitoring,” the authors said.

Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., senior research scientist at Children’s Health Defense (CHD), called the study’s results “earth-rattling.” Jablonowski said they contradict the findings of two previous studies, which found no link between COVID-19 vaccines and thyroid disease.

According to Jablonowski, those two studies also used large samples but employed much shorter monitoring periods — less than two months — compared to the new study’s 12-month monitoring period.

Jablonowski said:

“This paper stands as a warning to endocrinologists ‘highlighting the need for ongoing thyroid function monitoring’ for the vaccinated. For the greater scientific and medical communities the authors demonstrate that two months of observation … is insufficient for vaccine safety evaluation.”

A meta-analysis published in May 2024 identified a link between COVID-19 vaccines and thyroid-related autoimmune diseases.

Epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher said the results of the new study raise “serious concerns” about the safety of mRNA shots and confirm the growing number of studies linking the products to serious adverse events and death.

“Recently, a study found that COVID-19 vaccination doubles the risk of post-COVID death in the long-term,” Hulscher said.

Hulscher suggested that the new leadership of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) “should initiate more large-scale studies comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated populations to identify other serious long-term health risks.”

Last week, the U.S. Senate confirmed Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as HHS secretary. During his confirmation hearings, Kennedy pledged that HHS would emphasize “good science” and “gold standard” scientific research.

Following his confirmation, Kennedy told Fox News he would seek to implement a better vaccine injury surveillance system. On Tuesday, during his first address to HHS staff, Kennedy pledged to subject potential causes of chronic disease — including vaccines — to “unbiased scientific investigation.”

Some U.S. states and at least one country — Slovakia — are considering proposed legislation or policy recommendations to ban mRNA shots, on the basis of their health risks.

A growing number of medical organizations and scientists have publicly supported a ban or moratorium on mRNA products.

Related articles in The Defender

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.

February 22, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

Moscow confirms long-range strikes against Ukrainian energy complex

RT | February 20, 2025

Russian forces conducted long-range strikes targeting Ukraine’s military-linked gas infrastructure overnight, the Defense Ministry in Moscow confirmed on Thursday. Earlier, Kiev claimed the targets were civilian.

The ministry stated that the operation involved missiles launched from air, naval, and ground platforms, along with drones. The strikes targeted “elements of gas and energy infrastructure crucial for the Ukrainian military industrial complex,” all of which were successfully hit, according to the official statement.

Ukrainian Energy Minister German Galushchenko confirmed the damage to the facilities, alleging that the Russian objective was to “halt the extraction of gas essential for civilian use.” The Russian military maintains that it does not target civilian facilities.

The Ukrainian military reported that Russia launched at least 14 cruise and ballistic missiles, alongside over 160 drones. The statement refrained from detailing how many missiles were intercepted, a departure from Kiev’s typical communications strategy. Previously, the Ukrainian air defense force showcased claimed interceptions through graphics depicting Russian weapons; however, Thursday’s report focused solely on drones, stating that 80 were neutralized.

Earlier this week, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky expressed concern over dwindling supplies of interceptor missiles for US-provided MIM-104 Patriot systems. He had previously lauded them as superior to other air defense technologies supplied by Western arms donors.

Ukraine has reportedly received six full batteries, including three from the US and three from Germany, as well as individual launchers from the Netherlands. During a press conference on Wednesday, Zelensky requested 20 more Patriot systems to bolster his country’s defenses.

February 20, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

US Conditionally Approves Avian Flu Vaccine for Poultry

Vaccine cartel is closer to realizing its dream of vaccinating 308 million egg laying hens in the US, but leaky vaccines are likely to result in new pathogens.

By John Leake | Focal Points | February 15, 2025

Science magazine just reported U.S. conditionally approves vaccine to protect poultry from avian flu. As the article states:

With egg prices in the United States soaring because of the spread of H5N1 influenza virus among poultry, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) yesterday conditionally approved a vaccine to protect the birds. President Donald Trump’s administration may therefore soon face a fraught decision on whether to join the ranks of other nations—including China, France, Egypt, and Mexico—that vaccinate poultry against H5N1.

Although many influenza researchers contend that vaccination can help control spread of the deadly virus, the U.S. government has long resisted allowing its use because of politics and trade concerns that many contend are unscientific. The USDA approval may signal a shift in policy linked to the Trump administration’s worries about egg prices. Even with the conditional approval, USDA must still approve its use before farmers can start to administer the vaccine because special regulations apply to H5N1 and other so-called highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) viruses.

The vaccine, made by Zoetis, contains a killed version of an H5N2 variant that the company has designed to work against circulating variants of the H5N1 virus that have decimated poultry flocks and have even jumped to cows and some humans.

The article is an expression of how Science has been corrupted by the Vaccine Cartel. In fact, there are substantial reasons for resisting the mass vaccination of poultry. The main one is that poultry vaccines are “leaky”—that is, they do NOT prevent infection and transmission. Their purported benefit lies in the claim that they generate sufficient immunity to prevent the birds from becoming seriously ill.

The trouble with leaky vaccines is that they may promote the emergence of a more virulent strain of H5NI.

As we noted in our paper, Proximal Origin of Epidemic Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5N1 Clade 2.3.4.4b and Spread by Migratory Waterfowl:

According to a 2021 paper titled ‘H5Nx Viruses Emerged during the Suppression of H5N1 Virus Populations in Poultry’ by a research team of the University of Georgia:

“We show that H5Nx viruses emerged during the successful suppression of H5N1 virus populations in poultry [in China], providing an opportunity for antigenically distinct H5Nx viruses to propagate. Avian influenza vaccination programs would benefit from universal vaccines targeting a wider diversity of influenza viruses to prevent the emergence of novel subtypes.”

The findings of these researchers present an illustrative case of Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche’s thesis that mass vaccination with non-sterilizing vaccines can result in the emergence of a new, more virulent viral strain. As the University of Georgia team note, “In particular, we show that the widespread use of H5N1 vaccines likely conferred a fitness advantage to H5Nx viruses due to the antigenic mismatch of the neuraminidase genes.”

The emergence of H5NX from leaky vaccines was consistent with a landmark 2015 paper titled Imperfect Vaccination Can Enhance the Transmission of Highly Virulent Pathogens. This academic paper was so remarkable that its findings were also reported in National Geographic report titled Leaky Vaccines Enhance Spread of Deadlier Chicken Viruses.

Rather than authorizing leaky vaccines for U.S. poultry, the USDA should consider allowing the latest clade of H5N1 to run its course so that the birds can acquire natural immunity to it. The practice of mass culling has been a total failure and the new poultry vaccine is equally unlikely to end to the problem, though there is a good chance it will contribute to the emergence of an even more dangerous variant of H5N1.

February 16, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | Leave a comment

End of war in Ukraine near as Poland and Europe fear explosion of Ukrainian crime activity

By Uriel Araujo | February 13, 2025

Even a peace deal will not put an end to problems in the region or tensions in Europe. US-funded Ukrainian radical nationalism will not just go away overnight. Likewise, there is no easy way out of Ukraine’s structural problems with endemic corruption and criminality. When it comes to the Ukrainian crisis, unfortunately, the end is not the end.

The Polish, and the rest of Europe for that matter, are bracing themselves for an explosion of cross-border organized crime activity with the end of the conflict in Ukraine (which now seems closer than ever). Poland’s President Andrzej Duda is warning about such an “explosion” of crime within Ukraine with the end of the war, and is calling on Kyiv’s allies to provide it with “massive support”. Moreover, Duda is worried, as he said in an interview to the Financial Times, that this could spill across the border into his own country, and also affect the rest of Europe and even the United States, with migration waves and transnational mob activity.

The situation reminds the Polish leader of Russia in the early nineties, after Soviet collapse, when organized crime gangs of the so-called “Vor” subculture were able to recruit veterans of the Soviet campaign in Afghanistan. The Ukrainian soldiers, in the present situation, would go back home to find a ruined economy. “Just recall the times when the Soviet Union collapsed and how much the organised crime rate went up in western Europe, but also in the US”, said Duda.

Duda should be taken seriously: The Ukrainian mafia gangs are major players in international crime including the dope trade, prostitution and weapons trafficking. In addition to that, Transparency International ranked Ukraine at 104 out of 180 countries in its 2023 corruption index. Ukraine’s level of corruption is similar to what one may find in Uganda, for instance.

There is another reason why Duda’s warning makes sense: it implies that the end of the conflict could be near enough so that Poland (and Europe) should start taking measures to prepare for such a scenario. There are of course two main ways the war can come to an end: via a Ukrainian victory or via a Russian one. The former is tremendously unlikely as of now unless something extraordinarý were to happen. The latter is obviously what Duda must have in mind.

Poland, despite occasional tensions, has been a steady ally of Kyiv, but even the Polish authorities in Warsaw are saying that they have no intention of deploying their troops in the neighboring country (to help it against Russia). Other European leaders feel similarly about this – with his proposals about deploying troops in Ukraine, France’s President Emmanuel Macron is to become a lone voice.

The situation has obviously changed, largely due to Trump’s election. Even if Ukraine were to somehow obtain victory now through military or diplomatic means, the heavily armed and radicalized nationalists in the country (who can be found in the military and a number of militias) would not simply disappear and would in fact feel empowered in such an unlikely scenario, thus planting the seed for further conflicts with Russia in the future and with other neighbors, including Poland. Again this does not even seem like a possibility at all right now.

A third scenario would be some kind of negotiated peace with Russia still being most plausible. This in fact is thus just a variation of the Russian victory scenario. Here is why such victory today (more than ever) is the most likely scenario to take place pretty soon:

1. The first reason has to do with the Trump factor. The US President, in a clear departure from the previous administration’s foreign policy, has just announced that Washington-Moscow talks on ending the war are to begin “immediately.” It actually makes sense for the US to take the initiative because the whole matter has to a large degree been an American proxy attrition war against Russia.

US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has already made Washington’s new stance clear during a meeting at the NATO headquarters in Brussels: he said it would not be realistic for Ukraine to expect to reclaim its pre-2014 borders and there is no point in seeking such an “illusionary goal” and thereby “prolonging” the war. Hegseth also ruled out the possibility of Ukraine becoming a NATO member.

Partly “withdrawing” from Europe (albeit still eyeing Greenland) is in any case in line with Trump’s neo-Monroeism. While focusing on the border and on Panama and other issues, Trump also has to face pressing issues with regard to the crisis in Palestine and Israeli demands. Ukraine is just not his priority, it seems.

2. One can argue that Trump’s call for peace in Ukraine could be only for show and would actually be a way of shifting the Ukrainian “burden” onto Europe. The problem is that it remains unclear whether Europe right now would be capable or willing to play this role. As Zelensky himself told European leaders last month, Europe simply cannot protect Ukraine without American help. The European members of NATO in fact face one concrete threat of aggression against a European ally today, and that comes from Washington itself, which is quite an ironic development. The US President, amazingly enough, has refused to rule out military action to conquer Greenland, which is part of the Kingdom of Denmark.

In other words, a Russian victory, perhaps by a negotiated peace, cannot be taken for granted (nothing can) but is increasingly likely. It would in any case put an end to an unfortunate conflict which has been tremendously costly in a number of ways, including in terms of the humanitarian crisis.

The last two years of the conflict should be always seen as part of the longer one-decade crisis which started in 2014. One may be critical of Vladimir Putin’s decision to launch a military campaign in 2022. The fact remains that the current crisis has been largely driven by American interference, by pushing NATO expansion and supporting the coup d’etat which overthrew President Viktor Yanukovych, as well as backing the subsequent ultra-nationalist Maidan revolution. Washington funded and armed the Ukrainian far-right militias as well which have been integrated into the country’s military and security forces as the case of the infamous Azov regiment.

Ukrainian chauvinism (US funded or not) has in turn fueled tensions – and not only with Russia but also with other neighbors, as I wrote before. The Ukrainian far-right would be empowered even by a Russian victory, because it could promote a revengeful narrative or denounce Zelensky’s “betrayal”.

The ultra-nationalists are not the only ones who can cause problems in the aftermath of today’s crisis – mobsters are another force in itself, as mentioned. With regards to Duda’s concern about a boom in mafia activity, the truth is that Polish-Ukrainian first steps taken towards a confederacy risk blowing back and fueling anti-Ukrainian feelings in Poland, as Poland has issues with its own strand of radical nationalism. Polish ultra-nationalists in fact could also claim parts of neighboring Ukraine with the end of the war, as I’ve written.

It is said one cannot uncook an egg. Be as it may, even if Ukraine and Russia reach a peace deal, this will not put an end to problems in the region or even to tensions in Europe, more broadly. US-funded Ukrainian radical nationalism (which has roots in the new independent state of Ukraine and its attempt at nation-building since the nineties) will not just go away overnight. Likewise, there is no easy way out of Ukraine’s structural problems with endemic corruption and criminality. When it comes to the Ukrainian crisis, unfortunately, the end is not the end.

Uriel Araujo, PhD, is an anthropology researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts.

February 13, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

Trump sanctions ICC

RT | February 6, 2025

US President Donald Trump has signed an executive order imposing sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC) for investigating the US and its allies. Last November the Hague-based court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defense minister, Yoav Gallant, in a move that angered US officials.

Trump’s executive order will enforce financial and visa-related sanctions on individuals and families who support ICC investigations into US citizens or allied nations.

The ICC has been preparing for a “swift assault” from the new US administration, the Guardian reported last month, citing sources within the organization. The measures could affect the ICC’s access to banking and payment systems, IT infrastructure, and insurance providers, the publication said. It could also “paralyze” the court’s work and pose “an existential threat” to its functioning.

Earlier this month, the US House of Representatives voted to impose sanctions that would cancel US visas and place financial restrictions on any ICC officials prosecuting US “allies.”

The US adopted the American Service-Members’ Protection Act in 2002 – nicknamed “The Hague Invasion Act.” The legislation was designed to protect American military personnel, as well as elected and appointed officials, from prosecution by international legal bodies which Washington has not recognized.

The act authorizes the US president to use “all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any US or allied personnel” detained or imprisoned on behalf of the ICC, since the US is not a party to the Rome Statute regulating its activities. The authorization implies potential military action, leading to the act’s informal name.

The ICC’s attempt to investigate alleged American war crimes in Afghanistan in 2020 resulted in the US placing sanctions on then prosecutor Fatou Bensouda.

The court has accused Netanyahu and Gallant of using starvation as a method of warfare in Gaza, as well as deliberately depriving the enclave’s civilian population of essential supplies such as food, water, and medicine without any “obvious military necessity.” Washington says the ICC lacks jurisdiction over Israel, since it is also not a signatory to the Rome Statute.

Last year, however, the US praised Karim Khan, the same ICC prosecutor who requested arrest warrants against Israeli leaders, when he brought charges against Russian President Vladimir Putin. Moscow is not a party to the agreement establishing the court.

February 6, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , | 1 Comment

Did Trump’s Ukraine Peace Plan Just Leak?

By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | February 4, 2025

A leaked document has given us a first glimpse at President Donald Trump’s peace plan for Ukraine. According to the Ukrainian online newspaper Strana, U.S. officials handed the plan to European diplomats who then passed it on to Ukraine.

The existence of the plan has not been verified, and Andriy Yermak, head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, has said “no ‘100-day peace plan’ as reported by the media exists in reality.”

If the plan is real, and if it is being put on the table by the Trump administration as a finished product that, if rejected, will lead to more sanctions on Russia and more weapons for Ukraine (as Trump has threatened), then the war will go on, and Trump’s promise to quickly end the war will vanish in a puff of delusion. But if the plan is real, and if it is put on the table as a starting point for negotiations, then there is hope. And there is suggestion that it is a starting point.

Here is an item by item analysis of what each side may consider acceptable in the supposed plan and what each side may insist on negotiating further.

The process begins with an immediate phone call between Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin followed by discussions between Washington and Kiev. That the plan may be intended as a starting point for negotiations is suggested by the fork in the schedule that negotiations will continue if common ground is found or pause if it is not. Further negotiations would lead to an Easter truce along the front line, an end of April peace conference, and a May 9 declaration of an agreement.

Russia has said that the Istanbul agreement could still be “the basis for starting negotiations.” In June 2024, Vladimir Putin set out a peace proposal based on the Istanbul agreement, but adjusted for current territorial realities. Putin’s proposal had four points: Ukraine must abandon plans to join NATO, they must withdraw from the four annexed territories, they must agree to limits on the size of their armed forces, and they must ensure the rights of ethnic Russians in Ukraine.

The alleged Trump plan can be evaluated by comparison to Putin’s proposal and to recent statements made by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

  1. Ukrainian troops must withdraw from Kursk at the time of the April Truce. This would be acceptable to Russia, who would insist on Ukrainian troops leaving its territory. But for Ukraine, this would be a difficult concession; not because of the withdrawal but because of the timing. Aside from the strategically catastrophic hope that the Kursk invasion would divert Russian troops away from the Donbas, the point of taking Russian territory was to use it to barter for the return of Ukrainian territory. Giving up the bargaining chip before the negotiations begin would nullify Ukraine’s hope of using it to force the return of more of its land.
  2. Ukraine must end martial law and hold presidential elections by the end of August and parliamentary elections by the end of October. This could be a bitter pill for Zelensky. Recent polling has shown that he could well lose that election. Elections would be welcomed by Russia, who see Zelensky’s government as intransigently hostile and anti-Russia. This would legally transfer hope for regime change to Ukrainians.
  3. Ukraine must declare neutrality and promise not to join NATO; NATO must promise not to expand into Ukraine. Ukraine was willing to abandon its NATO hopes in Istanbul. Though accepted by Kiev as inevitable, it would now be a painful concession. In the absence of NATO membership. It would be a hard sell to Ukrainians that the war after the Istanbul talks was worth the devastation. For Russia, this point is key, and there can be no negotiations without it. It would be the key accomplishment to get the two-sided promise that Ukraine will not ask for membership and NATO will not offer it.
  4. Ukraine will become a member of the European Union by 2030. This item is acceptable to both. EU membership will be necessary for Zelensky to present to Ukrainians as something that was worth fighting for. Ukraine is now free to pursue its ambitions to turn west and join Europe. Though Russia had concerns in 2014 with the EU’s Association Agreement with Ukraine because of its implied integration of Ukraine into the European security and military architecture, Putin has long left EU membership on the table for a postwar Ukraine, and that was specifically agreed to in the Istanbul agreement.
  5. Ukraine will not reduce the size of its armed forces and the United States will continue modernizing the Ukrainian military. While Ukraine will welcome this, it may not be enough. Russia will have a hard time with this one. This is like “the Israeli model” that then-Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett says Putin and Zelensky were both open to in the early days of the war. But, in the absence of NATO, Zelensky has been adamant about American supported security guarantees. And, already by Istanbul, Russia was demanding limits on Ukraine’s armed forces. At the very least, modernized Ukrainian weaponry would have to be defensive and with a cap on firing into Russian territory.
  6. Ukraine refuses military and diplomatic attempts to return the occupied territories, but does not officially recognize Russian sovereignty. This item does not go far enough for Russia and too far for Ukraine. Zelensky has accepted that “De facto, these territories are now controlled by the Russians. We don’t have the strength to bring them back.” So, he will accept not attempting to return the occupied territories militarily. He has also insisted that Ukraine would never officially recognize Russian sovereignty over those lands. But the added clause, that he will not attempt to return them diplomatically, may be going further than Zelensky has been willing to go. In the case of Crimea, he has reserved the right to try to bring territory back diplomatically. For Russia, the de facto recognition of the territory it occupies will likely be enough. In his proposal, Putin insisted on the complete withdrawal from the territories while saying nothing about Ukraine officially recognizing Russian sovereignty over them. However, though Russia may be willing to negotiate over Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, they are less likely to accept only the lands east of the current front without it including all of the Donbas.
  7. Some sanctions on Russia will be lifted, including European Union bans on Russian oil. This item will likely be acceptable to Ukraine, especially since temporary duty on sales of oil will be used to restore Ukraine. It will likely be acceptable, at least as a starting point, for Russia.
  8. Parties that support Russian language and peaceful relations with Russia can participate in Ukraine’s elections. State actions against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and Russian language must cease. Though difficult for Zelensky and some forces in Ukraine to accept, protection of language, religious and cultural rights is the second key Russian demand along with NATO.
  9. The idea of a European peacekeeping force is to be discussed separately. The recognition that security guarantees are both key and difficult for both parties is realistic. Neither side will agree to a European security force: Russia because it goes too far, Ukraine because it goes not far enough.

If this possible plan is a final draft whose rejection means negotiations end, then the war will not end. But if Donald Trump’s plan is intended as a starting point to negotiations—the most difficult of which may be the security guarantees — then there is hope.

February 5, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »