Iran’s Foreign Ministry has declared that the Islamic Republic’s defensive strikes against military targets in the northern occupied territories were carried out within the framework of inherent self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter, following repeated ceasefire violations by the Zionist regime.
In a statement released on Monday, the ministry said the strikes came in response to Israel’s persistent breaches of the April 8 ceasefire, including its collaboration with the US military in attacks on Iranian ships and targets in southern Iran over the past two weeks, as well as US‑backed maritime piracy against the Iranian nation.
Iran emphasized that the ceasefire in Lebanon is an inseparable part of the April 8 truce agreement, and that the United States bears direct responsibility for Israeli violations and any resulting escalation in the region.
The ministry warned that any malicious adventure by the Zionist regime against Lebanon or Iran will be met with a crushing and comprehensive response from Iran’s brave armed forces.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran reiterates its nation’s serious determination to decisively defend its security and national interests wherever it deems necessary,” the statement read.
The April 8 ceasefire was brokered by Pakistan after 40 days of intense US‑Israeli war on Iran.
Despite the truce, Israel has continued its aggression against Lebanon and Gaza, while the US has maintained a naval blockade of Iranian ports.
Iran has consistently insisted that any final agreement must include a comprehensive halt to hostilities on all fronts, including Lebanon.
The latest Iranian strikes came after the Israeli regime committed a gross violation of the ceasefire by launching deadly attacks on the southern suburbs of Beirut on Sunday.
Iran had warned last week that it will target the occupied territories in case of an attack on Beirut and its sorroundings.
America’s position on the Ukraine conflict has become almost indistinguishable from that of the EU, making US President Donald Trump’s stated ambition to mediate an end to the fighting hollow, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has told RT.
Trump repeatedly blamed the conflict between Russia and Ukraine on his predecessor, Joe Biden, and claimed that he could bring it to a swift conclusion while campaigning in 2024.
However, recent statements by members of his administration suggest a different course, Lavrov said on Thursday in an interview on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum.
“Biden’s war has become Trump’s war,” the Russian foreign minister said.
Speaking to Congress this week, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said efforts to facilitate Russia-Ukraine talks were complicated “because, frankly, we’re not an impartial mediator.” He cited the continuation of the sanctions on Russia and sales of US weapons to Ukraine.
“After we agreed to the United States proposal in Anchorage [in August 2025], Washington began to shift its position. Instead of advancing those same proposals in its dealings with Ukrainians, it is now pretending that the parties should sort things out themselves. This is not a very consistent position,” Lavrov said.
“It is the West that cannot be trusted to keep its agreements. Its approach is: ‘I’ll promise something now, then stall for time.’ If the US had truly advanced its own initiative, I think… the fighting would already have stopped.”
According to Lavrov, the only major difference between Trump’s policy and that of Biden and the EU is that his administration resumed direct talks with Russia. Dialogue is important, he said, but it must be matched by action on commitments already made. … Full video interview
A suspected Ukrainian maritime drone exploded in the Romanian port of Constanta on Friday morning, prompting a major emergency response and the evacuation of the area, local media and officials said.
The unmanned boat was discovered in the port several hundred meters from the oil terminal, local media said. It was reportedly carrying explosives and became stuck in an anti-pollution barrier before detonating. The location is also close to the headquarters of the Romanian Agency for Saving Human Life at Sea.
Romania’s Defense Ministry said the object self-detonated at around 10:30 AM without causing casualties. The area had already been secured and isolated by the Romanian authorities while the drone was being assessed.
The ministry has also stated that the drone did not belong to the Romanian military and had not been involved in recent exercises in the Black Sea, describing it as being “of the type used in the war in Ukraine.”
Local media later reported that three more drones had exploded. Another one near the Port of Constanta, and two more in Ukrainian waters. Constanta County Prefect Adrian Picoiu told the News.ro outlet that the drones were of Ukrainian origin.
Commander Sandu Mateiu also told local news outlet Digi24 that the vessel resembled a Ukrainian MAGURA V5 maritime drone used by Kiev’s military intelligence, which can carry hundreds of kilograms of explosives, travel long distances, and often operate in swarms.
The authorities in Constanta have issued a Code Red warning due to the danger of further explosions along the coast, ordering people to keep at least 1 km away from the shoreline until the threat is eliminated.
The Russian Embassy in Romania responded to the incident by stressing that the drones in question are “Ukrainian unmanned maritime vehicles, used by the Kiev regime to commit terrorist acts against civilian ships and to create threats to the safety of navigation in the Black Sea.”
The diplomatic mission emphasized that “any attempts to directly or indirectly associate these drones with Russia and to attribute responsibility for the incident are without any basis.”
In recent months, Ukrainian drones have repeatedly veered into the airspace of nearby countries, including the Baltic states and Finland, triggering warnings and airport shutdowns, crashing into buildings, and damaging infrastructure.
Moscow has accused Western states of consistently ignoring or downplaying the incidents, particularly after it is confirmed that a Ukrainian aircraft was responsible, or trying to pin the blame on Russia.
Russian officials have also repeatedly raised concerns that Kiev could intentionally be staging drone provocations outside its borders in an effort to trigger a direct confrontation between NATO and Moscow.
A House committee summarily struck down an amendment to strip a measure from the massive annual defense policy bill that would provideIsrael “a higher level of military-industrial integration” with the U.S. than Washington has “with any other country in the world.”
Pro-Israel voices on the House Armed Services Committee argued that reports about Section 224 — that Congress was trying to integrate U.S. and Israeli military systems as a way to entrench aid without proper oversight — were disingenuous and wrong.
In fact, members claimed that these were “existing initiatives” and that Section 224 “actually improves oversight and accountability of these programs by designating a single official responsible for them,” according to Chairman Mike Rogers, (R-Ala.)
Not quite true, said the Quincy Institute’s Ben Freeman, who broke the initial story of Section 224 for RS last week. “Members of Congress supporting the proposal laid out caricatures of critiques against Section 224. And when they did actually talk about the provision itself they spread half-truths and outright inaccuracies about how far this provision will go to integrate the U.S. and Israeli defense sectors.”
According to Freeman, as reported in these pages, Section 224 would lay the groundwork for:
… bilateral research and development, co-production of weapons, joint ventures, licensing agreements, and seemingly every manner of U.S.-Israeli military-industrial complex cooperation. The U.S. and Israel already work together heavily on missile defense, but this provision would greatly expand coordination to seemingly every area of defense tech, including AI, quantum, autonomous systems, directed energy, cyber, biotech, and many more. It also proposes “network integration” and “data fusion.” In other words, the U.S. military’s data could soon be the Israeli military’s data.
Critically, it would shift the annual $3.8 billion the U.S. now gives Israel (a 10-year memorandum of understanding soon up for renewal) to these programs and partnerships, i.e. “co-production” and other “fusion” deep inside Pentagon procurement and acquisitions process, where sunlight is rare and often fleeting. A perfect solution — which is, by the way, endorsed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — to the dwindling American support for Israel’s wars and U.S. military assistance for them.
In his remarks on Section 224, Khanna spoke vociferously against what he saw as a blank check at a time when a majority of Americans say they do not want to send more military aid to Israel.
“The American people are tired of the arrogance and insolence of Prime Minister Netanyahu telling America what we should do. The entire country of Israel has a GDP that is less than a single town in my district, yet somehow Netanyahu thinks he could tell the American people what we should do,” he charged.
“I am for Team America. I am for the interests of this country, and I believe that’s what Donald Trump ran on. That includes American interests against any foreign country,” Khanna said. “We should have American sovereignty and make it clear that we strike 224. If we want to give aid to Israel, if we want to sell them weapons, that should be a vote for the entire Congress.”
Unfortunately for Khanna, the majority on the committee did not agree. According to several members, not only is Israel the only friend we have in the region, it helped us create new technologies and capabilities, and we would only benefit from a deeper relationship.
“This is a win-win relationship. We have Silicon Valley, Israel has Tel Aviv, and it’s like Silicon Valley number two. We have gained so much technology advantages from our partnership with Israel, and vice versa,” declared Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb). “They gain as well, and this is what we’re trying to do, is create that synergy. They support our foreign policy, they’ve been the most supportive of us in the U.N. They’re the only democracy in Middle East, and so I’ll oppose the amendment.”
Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas) warned that American national security would be at risk if such synergy didn’t occur. After “the bad actors” of the world go after Israel they will then “exercise their free will against us,” he charged.
Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) took the line that the reports about Section 224 were overblown. “It’s not a new framework at all. We have three existing programs right now where we do military cooperation with Israel to develop technologies. Those programs already exist,” he said.
“This amendment … suggests some other areas where maybe we should look at opportunities, and as the chairman noted, we had somebody now appointed to coordinate those programs.”
He said he, too, was “frustrated with Netanyahu’s leadership” and Israel’s support for a “war with Iran that has strengthened Iran and weakened our position,” but he disagrees that Section 224 “is Congress just bowing to what Netanyahu wants — this is to our benefit.” In fact, such sharing should occur with Ukraine, too, he added.
Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) was the only other member who spoke out in favor of Khanna’s amendment, pointing out that current laws prohibit transfers of weapons to countries committing war crimes and violating international law, but Section 224 makes no such provisions, and takes oversight away, despite what some of her colleagues were arguing on Thursday.
She raised the issue of Israeli-owned Pegasus spyware, which was blacklisted for its use against Americans. “Two administrations from both parties left it on that list, and that same company is right now trying to buy its way into the American market, fusing our defense and technology sectors together permanently,” she said.
A proposal “with no conditions in the exact area where we have already been burned (Section 224) is reckless on its own terms, and it would do it through a must-pass bill with almost no oversight and with none of the human rights conditions that govern the rest of security assistance.”
Next steps: Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) says he will work with Khanna to strip the language from the final House NDAA. If the parade of voices that insist Israel must have this relationship with the U.S. military is any indication, it will be a hard road ahead.
Kelley Beaucar Vlahos is the Editor-in-Chief of Responsible Statecraft.
On May 25, I wrote about how the Republican leadership of the United States House of Representatives had put off until the House would return from recess in June a vote on ending the Iran War. It had appeared that the war termination resolution would win a majority vote on the House floor
Here is an update. On Wednesday, with the House having come back into session this first week of June, the vote on the Iran War resolution took place. The resolution passed by a vote of 215 to 208. Breaking down the vote in a Reuters article, Patricia Zengerle wrote:
The four House Republicans who voted for the war powers resolution were Representatives Tom Barrett of Michigan, Warren Davidson of Ohio, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania and Thomas Massie of Kentucky.
No Democrats voted against it. Seven House members did not vote.
House members were able to use the War Powers Resolution to force consideration of the Iran War termination resolution contrary to the wishes of House leadership.
But, before supporters of a noninterventionist US foreign policy celebrate too much, they should read on in Zengerle’s article to where she reports that also on Wednesday House members moved toward escalating US involvement in the Ukraine War, using another procedural mechanism to bypass leadership. She wrote:
Separately on Wednesday, the House approved a procedural motion that clears the way for a vote on the Ukraine Support Act, which would provide security aid to Ukraine as it fights a Russian invasion. The act reached the floor only after a petition reached a 218-signature threshold last month to move ahead.
Six Republicans and one independent who normally votes with Republicans voted in favor of the Ukraine measure.
With House Democrats appearing uniformly against one war and for another, it is hard not to see their views on the respective wars as political — vote against the Iran War because it is “President Trump’s war” and for the Ukraine War because it is “President Biden’s war.” (In truth, well over a year into Trump’s presidency, the Ukraine War that he had promised to end quickly has become clearly Trump’s war as well.) The same reasoning would seem to apply in reverse to the Republican leadership’s efforts to prevent votes on both matters. The “People’s House” is a disgrace.
Over the past eight or so days, the US has targeted Iranian vessels as well as targets on the Iranian mainland. This included non-Iranian oil vessels. In essence, this was the US seeking to escalate the blockade of the blockade.
At first, Iran’s response was proportional. The US could tolerate that response.
In fact, it was beneficial to the US to continue the exchange of blows but keep them relatively limited, as it would slowly but surely erode Iran’s deterrence without imposing intolerable costs on the US.
But yesterday, Iran moved to change that equation.
After the US struck a Botswana-flagged tanker as part of Trump’s blockade, the Iranians counter-escalated disproportionally.
Tehran struck Kuwait International Airport as well as a US base in Kuwait, Ali Al-Salem.
It struck the 5th Fleet facilities in Bahrain. (Full extent of damage unknown.)
It struck Jordan. (Full extent of damage unknown.)
It struck northern Iraq. (Full extent of damage unknown.)
It struck the UAE. (Full extent of damage unknown.)
It struck the Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar. (Full extent of damage unknown.)
It was a demonstration – and reminder – that Tehran retains escalation dominance.
Whereas the US is comfortable with either a possible deal or a low-level exchange of fire, but not a return to full-scale war, Tehran is comfortable with a possible deal or a full-scale war, but not with a low-level exchange of fire that erodes Iran’s deterrence and allows for Trump’s “blockade of the blockade” to become effective.
The area where both can actually be comfortable is some sort of a deal. Reaching it, however, is a different story.
The murder of 21 Russian students at a college dormitory on May 22 has yet to be fully understood in terms of the exact involvement of NATO states.
The university building in Starobelsk, Lugansk, was attacked in the early hours of the morning with 16 drones in three consecutive waves of assault. The targeting of the dormitory was deliberate. There were no Russian military installations in the vicinity.
NATO’s involvement in this act of terrorism is on multiple levels. Ukraine’s use of unmanned aerial vehicles has ramped up in recent months, in line with the massive financial support provided by the European Union in the form of a €90 billion loan, most of which is dedicated to boosting Ukraine’s drone arsenal, with European manufacturing companies working in partnership.
At another level, the Western corporate news media have largely ignored the Starobelsk atrocity and NATO’s involvement. The Western media have distorted the de facto war crime by highlighting implausible denials from the Ukrainian regime. In short, covering up.
At yet another level is the new and remarkable efficiency of Ukrainian-launched drones to evade Russian air defenses. Since the conflict in Ukraine escalated in 2022, NATO intelligence from satellite surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft has been supplying the Kiev regime with targeting data to attack Russian units.
But in recent months, NATO information flow and data analysis have taken a quantum leap regarding targeting range and lethality. Thus, the close partnership between Ukrainian and NATO drone manufacturing is amplified by the involvement of U.S.-based Palantir Technologies in operating systems.
Palantir was cofounded in 2003 by German-U.S. billionaire Peter Thiel. It has grown to become the “brains” behind operating weapon systems for the Pentagon, as well as the Israelis in their genocide in Gaza and Lebanon, and aggression towards Iran.
Palantir’s CEO Alex Karp visited Kiev on May 12, where he met with the regime leadership to firm up military partnerships for using Artificial Intelligence in attack drones. Karp was ecstatic about the global business opportunities accruing to Palantir by using the Ukraine war as a laboratory for developing technology.
He boasted that his company’s software was the “operating system” for Ukraine’s military deploying against Russia. Significantly, the Palantir boss remarked that the real-time learning and development of his company’s systems were giving Palantir a huge commercial advantage that could not be achieved in peacetime laboratories. In other words, the killing fields of Ukraine are plugging into Palantir’s profitability and global status as a company.
“It’s our software primitives or infrastructure and your people building things that are completely different from what we would have ever built on top of this,” Karp said in an interview with Ukrainian media.
“You’re doing it on the battlefield with a very small number of people and then showing the world how these things work.”
This strategic collaboration between the Kiev regime and Silicon Valley’s hottest company was also revealed in an exclusive report this week by CNN. The CNN report did not mention Palantir by name, but screenshots reposted clearly showed that the Ukrainian drone operators were using the company’s PRISMA software. As reported, the software allows the processing of vast amounts of aviation and radar data in seconds, which is then used to deploy drones that evade Russian air defense systems and hit deep inside Russia.
The success of Ukrainian-NATO drones to strike deep inside pre-war Russian territory has improved dramatically. The air strikes have reportedly damaged 24 out of a total of 33 of Russia’s top oil refineries. Last month alone, it was reported that six refineries were hit, as well as major fuel depots. The installations, such as at Saratov and Volgograd, are hundreds of kilometers inside Russia. The disruption in fuel supplies has necessitated the Kremlin’s imposition of rationing on public purchases.
Palantir’s data processing and AI are such that interception of Ukrainian drones by Russian air defenses is incorporated into the targeting programs, which permits subsequent drone waves to circumnavigate anti-aircraft systems. This feedback loop brings new challenges for defense systems.
The increase in EU and NATO drone funding and technology would account for the quantitative surge in attacks on Russian territory. The complicity of NATO states, primarily the Baltic states, in lending their territories as launch sites is also a factor. The NATO propaganda machine, too, plays a role in minimizing the civilian deaths and thereby blindsiding European and American public opposition to a dangerous provocation and escalation of war with Russia.
But the involvement of Palantir in increasing the kill machine is another crucial qualitative dimension in the escalation, whereby Ukrainian-NATO drones are evading Russian defenses and increasing their capability at hitting its deep interior and vital infrastructure.
The massacre at the Starobelsk college in Lugansk points to the systematic involvement of Palantir in executing such a deadly attack.
Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Nikolay Azarov (2010-14) expressed his astonishment at how 16 drones were able to penetrate Russian air defenses and hit the college in three waves. Azarov toldTass, the Russian news agency: “I think [NATO countries] are involved. Because, first, the drones that were sent flew right past all Russian air-defense systems, which means that someone guided them through. And you can only guide them if you have space reconnaissance data – it was a whole wave of 16 drones, and they passed by air-defense systems. It means they were guided through, solely thanks to the intervention of Western intelligence agencies. I think that, strictly speaking, they [NATO states] were behind this provocation,” he said.
Azarov did not mention Palantir per se. But the complex navigation ability of the NATO drones to thread through layers of Russian defense is the very kind of qualitative edge that the American software company is giving to the Ukrainian operators.
The other grave implication is that the extensive mapping of Russian targets, from oil refinery installations to fuel depots, suggests that the information supplied by the NATO “brains” has a detailed picture of what is being targeted. There is no way that the air strikes on a college dormitory could be confused with military installations that are not even present in the area.
That means Palantir and its multi-billionaire bosses like Alex Karp and Peter Thiel have blood on their hands, no matter how much they scrub their hands at their company’s newly opened office in Kiev.
In a perverse sidenote, Thiel, who was a friend of pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, has a personal interest in the topic of the Anti-Christ, traveling the globe delivering exclusive lectures to wealthy audiences about Armageddon and the end of times. It’s not clear what his exact views are on manifestations of the Anti-Christ. But the murder of teenage student girls sleeping in their beds should surely be relevant to his lectures.
The US is weighing whether to expand NATO’s nuclear-sharing framework by inviting more alliance members to host American dual-capable aircraft—warplanes configured to deliver nukes, reports the Financial Times.
At present, the arrangement includes Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkiye and the UK.
Under its terms, the US retains full custody of the nuclear warheads, which are stored at select European bases, while allied air forces train for nuclear deterrence missions using aircraft such as the F-35, F-15, and Tornado.
The discussions are reportedly driven in part by a need to reassure European allies of Washington’s enduring commitment to NATO’s nuclear deterrent—even as the US scales back some conventional troop deployments on the continent and pushes allies to shoulder more defense responsibility.
The talks remain at an early, highly confidential stage, with no imminent decisions anticipated.
Nevertheless, nations on NATO’s eastern flank—notably Poland and several of Russia’s neighbors—have already signaled interest in a possible expansion of the nuclear-sharing deal.
Russia has repeatedly cautioned that any deployment of nuclear-capable assets close to its borders would be seen as a destabilizing factor, and a direct threat to its national security.
Ukraine launched explosive-laden drones towards Finland, triggering an alert that affected 1.8 million people, Helsingin Sanomat reported on Monday, citing sources familiar with the matter.
The incident took place on May 15 and set off a major security alert in the southern Finnish region of Uusimaa, which includes the country’s capital, Helsinki. The warning halted air traffic at Helsinki-Vantaa Airport and triggered a lockdown order by the authorities.
Finnish officials did not initially disclose details of the alert, stating only that the drones could be approaching from Russia, creating the impression that the threat was linked to Moscow.
According to HS, however, the emergency measures were prompted by a warning from Ukraine, which said it had accidentally sent drones carrying explosives toward Finland.
The Finnish Defense Forces later said no violation of Finnish airspace had been detected. HS reported that it remains unclear why the drones never entered the country, noting that Russian air defenses may have shot them down en route.
The report has prompted criticism from Finnish lawmakers. Members of the Foreign Affairs Committee said they were not told that the warning came from Ukraine, which was essential information that should have been shared immediately.
The case adds to a growing list of incidents in which Ukrainian drones have entered or approached foreign airspace while apparently en route to targets in Russia. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Finland have all reported similar episodes in recent months.
Last month, Estonia shot down an alleged Ukrainian drone over its territory for the first time, while Latvia saw Ukrainian drones hit oil storage facilities near the Russian border, which ultimately led to the collapse of Prime Minister Evika Silina’s government.
Moscow has repeatedly accused NATO countries of quietly allowing Ukraine to use their airspace for attacks on targets in northwestern Russia, particularly energy infrastructure in Leningrad Region. Russian officials have also warned that Kiev could stage provocations involving drones to draw NATO deeper into the conflict.
Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo previously said he had told Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky that Helsinki considers Ukrainian aircraft entering its airspace “unacceptable.” Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur has likewise urged Kiev to keep its drones away from Estonian territory and to “control their activities better.”
Iran has halted negotiations with the US over the ongoing Israeli offensive in Lebanon, moving to block maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, Tasnim news agency has reported, citing sources.
Israel has intensified its bombing campaign in Lebanon in recent days, against what it describes as sites used by the Hezbollah militant group. The Israeli military has pushed deeper into the country’s south, seizing Beaufort Castle, a 900-year-old Crusader fortress and a key vantage point in the region.
While Iran made an end to the war in Lebanon a condition for its Pakistani-mediated negotiations with the US, the hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah have continued despite a supposed ceasefire announced in mid-April.
In response to the escalation in Lebanon, Tehran is stopping the “negotiations and exchange of messages through a mediator,” according to Tasnim.
Iran has reportedly demanded an “immediate cessation of hostilities” in the country, as well as in the Palestinian enclave of Gaza, making it a condition for continuing the contacts with the US.
Tehran and its regional allied groups have also expressed readiness to seal off the Strait of Hormuz, as well as to “activate other fronts,” including disrupting maritime traffic in the Bab al-Mandab Strait, according to the agency.
NATO’s proxy war in Ukraine is morphing into a direct EU-Russia war. And the war hawks in Brussels are further escalating by attacking civilians in the Donbas and Russia proper. The doves in the Kremlin are running out of options to keep their own hawks under wraps. As things stand now, an all-out EU-Russia war is not only a possible, but by now a likely scenario. But to what end?
The murder of 21 Russian teenage students at a teacher-training college last week was an abominable moment of truth with far-reaching, grievous implications.
A grim, consequential watershed in the West’s conflict with Russia has arrived.
The victims were mainly girls aged between 14 and 18 who were killed when their university dormitory in Starobelsk, Lugansk, was attacked overnight on May 22.
What is absolutely revealing is how the Collective West has shown no remorse or restraint about the crime, going as far as denying responsibility and adding insult to the memory of the dead. The perpetrators have an obscene sense of impunity and inhumane entitlement.
The attack involved 16 drones that targeted the college in a wave of three assaults. There can be no doubt that the air strike was a deliberate act. That makes it an act of cold-blooded mass murder; an act of terrorism.
Vassily Nebenzia, Russia’s ambassador to the United Nations, stated: “The blood of the children from Starobelsk is on the hands of the West whose nations are supplying the terrorist regime [in Ukraine] with money, intelligence, weapons, and ammunition for years, inspiring it to commit new crimes against the civilian population, and then covering it up by presenting the Kiev regime as a victim.”
The corrupt NeoNazi regime in Kiev under Vladimir Zelensky and his cronies is only a bit player in this crime. The regime, which, by the way, gave burial honors to a World War Two Nazi collaborator this week, is merely the scum atop the Western criminal organizations behind this and other atrocities, and indeed the entire conflict with Russia.
Several respected international authorities have repeatedly pointed out that the nearly five-year war in Ukraine that erupted in February 2022 is the culmination of a long-term policy to embattle Russia with NATO aggression. Professors John Mearsheimer, Jeffrey Sachs, Alfred de Zayas, among others, have cogently explained how this conflict in Europe – the biggest since WWII – has come about.
The Kiev regime has been armed to the teeth by the United States and its Western partners, bankrolled by Washington and the European Union, and directed by NATO military intelligence. The attacks on Russian civilian centers could not happen without the direct support of the “Collective West”.
More recently, the European Union, which has emerged as the de facto political and fundraising wing of NATO, has stepped up its funding and coordination of drone armaments for the Kiev regime. Britain has also become an important supplier of Ukrainian drone technology, while the Baltic states and Finland are acting as launch sites for deeper strikes into Russia.
A drone crash in Romania this week elicited much theatrical condemnation of Russia as the perpetrator. More likely, given the surge in drones operating from NATO states, the Romanian incident was an own goal or a Ukrainian false-flag provocation. Telling, too, was the paroxysm of Western media coverage blaming Russia for the “reckless” drone, compared with the negligible reporting by these same media on the massacre in Starobelsk only days before.
The European NATO states are in effect becoming the Luftwaffe of the Kiev regime. As Russia’s envoy, Dmitry Polyansk, to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, warned this week, the drums of war are beating louder across the continent. European politicians like German Chancellor Friedrich Merz are calling for more NATO forces to build up along Russia’s borders, while the EU’s so-called top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, disparages peace diplomacy with Russia as a “Kremlin trap.”
Alfred de Zayas, professor of international law at the Geneva School of Diplomacy and a former UN independent expert, gave the following assessment to Strategic Culture Foundation regarding the NATO alliance. He said that it is now urgent to recognize that “it is a criminal organization” within the meaning of the Nuremberg rulings delivered in 1946 against Nazi war criminals, when aggression was defined as the supreme war crime.
De Zayas notes that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was founded nearly eight decades ago, in 1949, supposedly to defend the West from the Soviet Union. Since the Soviet Union ceased to exist in 1991, along with its Warsaw Pact military bloc, NATO should have also disbanded at that time.
“NATO has morphed from being a defensive alliance into a war coalition that has committed heinous crimes since the 1990s in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and elsewhere,” he said. “While NATO forces, since the 1990s, have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity, what is important today is that world public opinion recognizes NATO as a threat to the peace and security of humankind.”
From the end of the Cold War, the United States-led military alliance has more than doubled its member states to the current 32, several of which border Russia. Under the UN Charter, regional security organizations are supposed to be subordinate to the UN Security Council. But the NATO bloc presumes to be above the law. It is a rogue force that attacks other nations at will, as we are seeing currently with Russia.
Says de Zayas: “It is not a legitimate regional organization under article 52 of the UN Charter, because it acts against the purposes and principles of the UN and has relentlessly committed the crimes of aggression, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.”
The mass murder of college students in Starobelsk and numerous other civilian casualties of NATO drone attacks on Russian territory are a testament to the terrorist nature of NATO.
De Zayas adds that it is also important to identify the sinister role of the Western corporate-controlled news media. The media have systematically distorted the conflict in Ukraine as “unprovoked Russian aggression” while whitewashing NATO and the NeoNazi regime for their litany of crimes, the latest being the atrocity at Starobelsk.
“Relentless propaganda and public relations have convinced the Western public that NATO is a good organization, legitimate, respectable, interested in peace and defense. This is total brainwashing,” said de Zayas.
“When the media indoctrination and propaganda about NATO is exposed as false, when the perception in Western countries moves from positive to negative, when people realize that NATO is a criminal institution, it will be possible to wind it down. Ultimately, NATO must be recognized not only as a criminal organization, a blustering vestige of a moribund Western imperialism, but as a mortal danger to the survival of civilization on Earth.”
All this confers on our editorial to draw several inescapable implications: the political leaders of the United States and the European Union, who make this NATO aggression happen through deliberate policies, must also face the same indictment. They are war criminals.
The Western media that propagandize for war and war crimes are also indictable as complicit in these crimes.
Furthermore, it is now clearer than ever that Russia is at war with an aggressive Collective West, and its manifestations, including the United States, the EU, NATO, and the Kiev regime. Therefore, Moscow has the legal and moral right to hit the decision-making centers that have Russian blood on their hands. All the more so because these Western decision-making centers presume impunity and the ghoulish right to drench their hands with even more Russian blood.
BY LAURENT GUYÉNOT • UNZ REVIEW • SEPTEMBER 6, 2022
Is it true that “9/11 was an inside job”? Yes, insofar as Israel is “inside” the U.S. But for the 9/11 truthers who have identified Israel as the main perpetrators, “9/11 was an inside job” is at best a half-truth, and at worst an integral part of the Zionist operation, like a secondary flag sewn as a lining under the false flag of Islamism. Victor Thorn (1963-2017) wrote in his book 9/11 made in Israel: The Plot Against America (2011): “In essence, the ‘9-11 truth movement’ was created prior to Sept. 11, 2001 as a means of suppressing news relating to Israeli complicity. . . . The slogan ‘9-11 was an inside job’ was quite possibly the greatest example of Israeli propaganda ever devised.” In milder terms, it is “controlled opposition”.
A genuine truth movement would have pointed to Israel as the prime suspect from the start. From day one, it was obvious who would benefit. … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.