China hits back at US smears on arms supplies to Ukraine at UN Security Council
Global Times | August 1, 2025
China’s deputy permanent representative to the UN Geng Shuang spoke at a UN Security Council meeting on the issue of arms supplies to Ukraine on Thursday local time, refuting accusations made by the US representative against China.
Recently, Russia and Ukraine have held several rounds of direct negotiations and reached a number of agreements on humanitarian issues such as prisoner exchanges, making positive progress. At the same time, however, the crisis continues, with no signs of the war coming to an end. A large volume of weapons and ammunition continues to flow into the battlefield, causing new casualties and damage to infrastructure, Geng noted.
What is particularly concerning is that the types and scope of weapons entering the battlefield are expanding, with their lethality and destructiveness constantly increasing, Geng said. Recent reports indicate that both sides have deployed combat robots, further highlighting that the Russia-Ukraine conflict is increasingly becoming a testing ground for new types of weaponry. This suggests that the nature of warfare could undergo dangerous changes, he added.
“I would like to reiterate that while weapons may win wars, they cannot bring lasting peace. The reckless transfer of arms to the battlefield will only intensify the conflict, prolong the fighting, increase the risk of proliferation, and inflict more casualties and suffering on people in both the conflict zone and the broader region,” Geng said.
The Chinese diplomat pointed out that the urgent priority now is for both parties to work together to de-escalate the battlefield situation as soon as possible, maintain the momentum of dialogue and negotiation, continue building consensus, and ultimately reach a comprehensive, durable, and binding peace agreement.
In response to US representative’s false narratives and malicious smearing of China on the issue, Geng said “this is completely unacceptable,” saying that he responded to such accusations on multiple occasions in past meetings. “Since the US insists on repeating the same rhetoric, I find it necessary to set the record straight once again,” Geng said.
First, China is not the creator of the Ukraine crisis, nor is it a party to the conflict. China has never provided lethal weapons to any party involved in the conflict. We have always strictly controlled the export of dual-use items, including drones, the Chinese diplomat said.
Second, the UN Security Council has not imposed sanctions on any party to the conflict. China maintains normal trade relations with both Russia and Ukraine, in full compliance with international law and without breaching any international obligations, he said.
China’s legitimate and lawful rights and interests must not be infringed upon. “In fact, the US itself continues to engage in trade with Russia to this day. Why should it be acceptable for the US to do so, but not for others? Isn’t this ‘only allowing oneself to set fires while forbidding others from lighting lamps?’” Geng asked.
Third, the Ukraine crisis is currently at a critical juncture, with a genuine prospect for a political resolution. The US cannot on the one hand ask China to play a constructive role in ending the war, while on the other hand continuously smear and pressure China, he said, urging the US to stop playing the blame game and scapegoating others, and instead contribute positively to efforts for a ceasefire, de-escalation, and the promotion of dialogue and negotiation.
The Chinese diplomat emphasized that China maintains normal economic and trade relations with both Russia and Ukraine – this does not violate international law, nor does it breach any international obligations. “The US itself continues to conduct trade with Russia, so why should China be prohibited from doing the same?” he said.
“It is the US that repeatedly engages in smearing, slandering, and attacking other countries in the UN Security Council chamber. Does the US not recognize how different its behavior is from that of other Council members?” Geng asked.
What the resolution of the Ukraine crisis requires is unity and cooperation, not division and confrontation. Once again, we urge the US to stop its baseless accusations and scapegoating, to invest more in diplomatic efforts, and to contribute genuinely to promoting a ceasefire, de-escalating the conflict, and advancing peace talks, the Geng said.
Estonian defense chief reveals failure of Pentagon meeting
RT | July 31, 2025
The Baltic states have failed to secure any guarantees from Washington regarding the continued deployment of US forces in the region, Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur has said.
Pevkur and his respective Latvian and Lithuanian counterparts met with US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth last week in hope of convincing him to reinforce the US military presence in the Baltic region, which they claim is necessary to counter the threat allegedly posed by Russia.
Moscow has repeatedly denied having hostile intentions toward NATO states, dismissing such claims as fearmongering meant to justify increased military spending.
According to Pevkur, US officials declined to promise that even the current troop level of about 2,000 in the Baltic states would be maintained. Instead, the ministers were simply told that any future changes to the American force posture on the continent would be coordinated with NATO and would not come “as a surprise” to Europe.
Pevkur claimed that there have been no signs of an imminent drawdown of American forces in the Baltics since the meeting. He added, however, that Washington is preparing to review its European deployments in the fall.
Earlier this year, Politico reported that the US could withdraw around a third of its troops from Europe, equivalent to roughly 20,000 soldiers, according to unnamed NATO officials. The US currently has between 90,000 and 100,000 troops stationed across the continent.
Both President Donald Trump and Hegseth have previously indicated that the US may scale back its overseas presence. They have also called on European allies to increase their own defense spending instead of relying on American support.
NATO members have since agreed to raise their military spending target to 5% of GDP by 2035.
Moscow has criticized the bloc’s continued militarization and cited NATO’s policies as a key factor behind the Ukraine conflict. At the same time, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said the spending increases would pose no threat to Russia.
Canada continues arms transfers to Israel despite official denials: Report
Press TV – July 30, 2025
Canada has continued to supply weapons to the Israeli regime during its genocide in Gaza, contradicting official claims that such exports had stopped, a new investigation reveals.
Published by Arms Embargo Now Campaign (AEN) on Tuesday, newly uncovered shipping records and Israeli regime data show 47 documented shipments of military components from Canadian manufacturers to Israeli weapons firms between October 2023 and July 2025.
This includes over 421,000 bullets, with one shipment of 175,000 in April 2025.
Three cartridge shipments from a Quebec-based General Dynamics facility were also sent just nine days after Canada pledged to block munitions exports. These exports primarily supplied Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest arms manufacturer.
This comes as former Foreign Minister Melanie Joly and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, as well as current Prime Minister Mark Carney, have repeatedly insisted that Canada has restricted arms exports to Israel, this report uncovers.
In March 2024, Canada’s parliament passed a non-binding motion urging the government to suspend further arms sales to Israel.
As pressure continued to mount, in September of last year, Joly announced that the government had not approved any new export permits for Israel since January 8, 2024.
This report, however, unveils the hidden reality behind Canada’s public statements on arms exports to Israel, revealing a systematic deception that has enabled the flow of Canadian-made weapons directly into one of the deadliest military aggressions in modern history.
Canada is currently breaching its own domestic legislation and international legal obligations by continuing to supply arms to Israel amid the ongoing ethnic cleansing and widespread starvation of Palestinians in Gaza.
Several Western countries have continued to supply lethal weapons to the Israeli regime despite the enormous human toll caused by its genocide in the Palestinian territory.
At least 60,034 Palestinians have been killed, mostly women and children, and another 148,870 individuals injured in the brutal Israeli onslaught on Gaza since October 7, 2023.
Kicking the peace can down the road
In discussion with Glenn Diesen
Ian Proud | July 28, 2025
Nice to catch up with Glenn Diesen to discuss recent developments, including my article on Trump’s 50-day ultimatum to Putin, which has now been reduced to 10-12 days, whatever that means. I continue to judge that the threat of secondary sanctions against Russia’s trading partners will have a greater impact on the US than on China, India or any other country that does business with Russia.
Meanwhile, Zelensky’s short-lived attempt to shut down anti-corruption organisations closing in on his cronies has been a big wake up call, not just for European political leaders and journalists, but more importantly, citizens.
Faced with admitting defeat in Ukraine and throwing Zelensky under the bus and continuing with an ineffective foreign policy towards Russia, I judge that Starmer, VdL and others will keep kicking the peace can down the road.
Yet every day the war continues, Ukraine loses more ground and more lives on the battlefield, and slides further towards the status of a failed state. My optimism remains low that the war will end in 2025.
Robert Taft Foresaw the Dangers of NATO
By James Rushmore | The Libertarian Institute | July 29, 2025
On July 26, 1949, Ohio Senator Robert Taft delivered a speech in which he explicated his reasons for voting against ratification of the North Atlantic Treaty. His remarks included the following:
“If we undertake to arm all the nations around Russia from Norway on the north to Turkey on the south, and Russia sees itself ringed about gradually by so-called defensive arms from Norway and Denmark to Turkey and Greece, it may form a different opinion. It may decide that the arming of Western Europe, regardless of its present purpose, looks to an attack upon Russia. Its view may be unreasonable, and I think it is. But from the Russian standpoint, it may not seem unreasonable. They may well decide that if war is the certain result, that war might better occur now rather than after the arming of Europe is completed.
How would we feel if Russia undertook to arm a country on our border; Mexico, for instance?”
Taft correctly anticipated a future in which NATO expansion would provoke a military response from Russia. He also foresaw the rationale behind Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine; namely the fact that NATO’s encirclement of Russia would make Moscow feel threatened.
In September 2014, NATO began delivering arms to Ukraine as part of an effort to combat pro-Russian separatist forces in the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts. In June 2015, the United States proposed a deployment of tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles to Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania as part of an effort to shore up NATO training exercises. In December 2015, Poland considered participating in a NATO program in which countries without nuclear weapons would be able to borrow them from the United States. In January 2017, NATO carried out a “large-scale defensive drill” along the Polish-Lithuanian border. In March 2018, the U.S. provided “chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear defense training” to the Estonian military. And in August 2019, NATO upgraded a ballistic missile defense system in Romania.
Taft’s dire prediction elucidated the contradiction at the heart of the North Atlantic Treaty. In attempting to guarantee the security of Western Europe, it instead increased the likelihood that the region would face hostilities from the east. It was only a matter of time before Russia took stock of the military activity to its west and decided that a preventive strike would be its best course of action.
Taft also said:
“Under the new pact, the president can take us into war without Congress. But above all, the treaty is a part of a much larger program by which we arm all these nations against Russia. A joint military program has already been made. It thus becomes an offensive and defensive military alliance against Russia. I believe our foreign policy should be aimed primarily at security and peace, and I believe such an alliance is more likely to produce war than peace.”
Taft’s speech echoes the sentiments expressed by President George Washington in his 1796 farewell address. Washington warned against “interweaving [America’s] destiny with that of any part of Europe.” To do so would “entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice.”
Taft’s commentary also exemplified the foreign policy tradition of the Old Right, which rejected foreign military adventurism in favor of non-interventionism. Old Right luminaries like Taft laid the groundwork for the foreign policies advanced by Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, and Thomas Massie. Taft himself initially opposed U.S. entry into World War II. While he voted in favor of the war after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, he remained an opponent of the ascendant internationalism that characterized the period.
At the core of Taft’s pronouncements is a recognition of the fact that U.S. military intervention begets both domestic and international turmoil. Proponents of a proactive foreign policy often accuse non-interventionists of being naïve and unrealistic. But Taft understood the folly of militarism. A realist foreign policy is predicated on an appreciation for the limits of American power. The inherent difficulty of reshaping foreign borders, in Eastern Europe or elsewhere, coupled with the potential for retaliation, ought to give more interventionists pause. The speciousness of such a foreign policy agenda certainly convinced Taft to reject the lofty ideals represented by NATO.
On February 1, 2008, William Burns, then the U.S. ambassador to Russia and future director of the CIA, sent Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice a memorandum warning against NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia. Burns wrote:
“Ukraine and Georgia’s NATO aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region. Not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests. Experts tell us that Russia is particularly worried that the strong divisions in Ukraine over NATO membership, with much of the ethnic-Russian community against membership, could lead to a major split, involving violence or at worst, civil war. In that eventuality, Russia would have to decide whether to intervene; a decision Russia does not want to have to face.”
On February 24, 2022, Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine, thus fulfilling the prophecy outlined by Taft. That conflict is now in its fourth year. By all accounts, it is unlikely to end anytime soon, even with an additional series of peace talks currently taking place in Istanbul.
Nearly thirty-five years after the end of the Cold War, NATO remains a relic of a bygone era. The West insisted that its preservation would ensure peace. They claimed that expanding NATO eastward would forestall or prevent Russian aggression, guaranteeing freedom and prosperity for Eastern Europe. They were wrong.
Germany steps up arms race and targets Russia by acquiring Tomahawk missiles
US also scrambles to produce more Tomahawk missiles for its own Navy and Army
By Ahmed Adel | July 29, 2025
Germany wants Tomahawk cruise missiles and Typhon missile launchers to attack Moscow, writes Military Watch Magazine. The magazine highlights that Germany, which is actively militarizing, considers Russia its main adversary and target of a potential missile attack, so Berlin wants to have such weapons.
“The Tomahawk Block IV cruise missile’s 1600 kilometre range allows Typhon units to strike targets in the Russian capital Moscow from German territory, with Russia considered the primary target of such a procurement plan,” the publication highlighted.
According to the magazine, on May 22, the German Army inaugurated the 45th Armored Brigade in Vilnius, Lithuania. This militaristic step by Berlin reinforced its advanced mechanized warfare capabilities, just 150 km from Minsk and less than 800 km from Moscow.
Furthermore, in early 2022, the German Ministry of Defense selected the US F-35A stealth fighter to upgrade its nuclear strike capabilities while maintaining wartime access to US B61 nuclear warheads through a sharing agreement.
“Russia and Belarus are considered the primary potential targets of this improved nuclear strike capability, of the major new ground force procurements and deployments, and of the new mobile cruise missile launch vehicles being procured, ensuring that Berlin makes a far greater contribution to NATO’s collective military pressure on Moscow that was previously the case,” the article noted.
The article opines that the effectiveness of the Tomahawk cruise missile for deep strikes into Russia is uncertain, as its Cold War-era subsonic design relies on navigation over close terrain to avoid long-range detection.
“Modern Russian air defence systems, and the country’s fighter and interceptor aircraft such as the MiG-31BM, are considered highly capable of shooting down such targets over significant distances,” the publication said.
Thus, the magazine concluded that the high efficiency of these complexes that Berlin aims to achieve is doubtful due to modern Russian anti-aircraft defense systems and interceptors.
Germany’s quest for more Tomahawks is amid the US’s struggles to attain the long-range missiles.
The US military is running out of Tomahawk missiles, and the country’s military industry is struggling to produce enough of these missiles to meet the demand of the US Armed Forces, according to 19FortyFive.
The portal highlighted that the US Navy was consuming missiles faster than the defense sector could replace them.
“But for more than two years, the US Navy had been firing the missiles faster than the defense industry can replace them. According to the Navy, the opening strikes in 2024 of the escalating conflict in Yemen expended more than 80 Tomahawks to hit 30 targets,” the article highlighted.
It is noted that the production lines for Tomahawk missiles, one of the most important weapons in the US Army’s arsenal, have been maintaining the lowest possible production rate for some time. The publication noted that the minimum sustainment rate required to keep production lines running is 90 Tomahawks per year, but this rate is not being achieved.
“The Army and Marine Corps are barely sustaining that production with their buys of experimental land-launched versions of the missile,” the portal emphasized.
Thus, the article concluded that only five Tomahawk missiles will be produced per month in the near future, due to a shortage of essential components, such as rocket engines, which makes it difficult to increase production.
Yet, despite struggles to attain more Tomahawk missiles, Germany also wants to send Patriot missile systems to Kiev, even though the US can only replace the system in 2026. Germany will receive the first Patriot air defense system from the US to replace those transferred to Ukraine within a maximum of eight months, as German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius insists on accelerating the delivery of the systems, German media reported, citing sources.
According to Der Spiegel, it will take even longer for the US to deliver all other systems to its partners. According to the media outlet, the US plans to put the countries that transferred the Patriot to Kiev at the top of the list of candidates for new systems from the US company RTX Corporation.
German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius told the inquiry that he is negotiating with the manufacturer to expedite production and deliveries, and that he may also discuss the matter with his US counterpart, Pete Hegseth. The minister reportedly noted that delivery times for the new systems should be “months, not years.”
In this way, Germany maintains grand ambitions against Russia, but its industrial capacity does not match this. No country has been more affected by the anti-Russia sanctions than Germany, with the sanctions having completely backfired as cheap Russian energy is no longer powering German factories. Yet, it appears that decision-makers in Germany are yet to accept this reality and still want to support Ukraine’s futile attempts to roll back Russian forces.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
The US Is Buying Ukraine 33,000 Modules to Create AI-Powered Drones
By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | July 28, 2025
Ukraine will soon receive tens of thousands of drone modules powered by artificial intelligence and resistant to electronic warfare.
According to the Financial Times, the Department of Defense is funding the sale. The drone kits are produced by the US-German software company Auterion. Chief executive Lorenz Meier said the firm received a $50 million contract from the Pentagon for the order.
Meier said Auterion would complete the delivery of Skynode S modules to Ukraine by the end of the year. He explained the modules are “strike kits” that allow the drone to operate autonomously. Meier referred to the system as the “next evolution in warfare.”
“What we are providing is leapfrogging what’s on the battlefield right now, which is to go to AI-based targeting and swarming,” he added. Auterion claims drones equipped with the module can hit targets one kilometer away.
Drones have become a pivotal weapon in the Ukraine war. Russia is firing hundreds of drones into Ukraine most nights. Ukrainian President Zelensky has rolled out a plan to build thousands of interceptor drones to combat the Russian salvos.
Preliminary reflections on the war between Cambodia and Thailand
By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | July 28, 2025
The current clash between Thailand and Cambodia is more than an isolated episode of instability; it is a direct reflection of the accumulated tension between two civilizations descended from ancient empires. The battleground, the temple of Preah Vihear, goes beyond a mere territorial dispute: it is a spiritual, political, and historical symbol that has reemerged as a focal point of a conflict with deep roots. Behind the artillery fire and border skirmishes lies an old rivalry dating back to the decline of the Khmer Empire and the rise of Ayutthaya — a clash between two legacies that helped shape Southeast Asia.
Located in the Dângrêk Mountains, the temple of Preah Vihear was initially built in the 9th century by King Jayavarman II, founder of the Khmer Empire, with the purpose of worshiping Shiva and consolidating the doctrine of devaraja, the divine kingship of the ruler as an absolute sovereign. Although Cambodia’s historical path later embraced Theravāda Buddhism, the temple never lost its symbolic value. For Cambodians, it represents the spiritual continuity of their nation. For Thais, descendants of the conquering Ayutthaya Empire, the site retains elements of a shared heritage they also claim as their own. Throughout the 20th century, and especially following the colonial border demarcations imposed by European powers, this small enclave became a persistent flashpoint, reigniting nationalist passions on both sides.
But it is not just history that fuels the present. The current context contains explosive elements. Thailand, though formally part of BRICS+ and economically aligned with China, still maintains strong ties with the West and is embroiled in a complex internal struggle for power between civilians and the military. The recent suspension of Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, following embarrassing leaks related to the border conflict, has undermined the authority of the civilian government and brought the military back into the spotlight. The Thai army, frequently involved in coups and weakened by recent scandals, may have seen in this confrontation an opportunity to reassert its position before the national public. Launching a limited offensive against a weaker neighbor like Cambodia could be interpreted as an attempt to boost morale and reclaim control over the nationalist narrative.
On the other side, Cambodia remains a strategic partner of China in the region, deepening its economic and military dependence on Beijing. Infrastructure projects like the canal linking Cambodia’s interior to the sea — bypassing the delta controlled by Vietnam — carry significant geopolitical implications. Beijing sees Phnom Penh as a loyal ally in the Southeast Asian chessboard, reinforcing Cambodia’s resolve not to yield to Thai pressure — especially when what’s at stake is a symbol of national identity. Despite the imbalance in military capabilities, Cambodia is relying on international diplomacy and historical symbolism to hold its ground.
This escalation, therefore, is not the product of external manipulation (though such influence exists and plays a role), but of an autonomous process deeply embedded in the national psyches of both peoples. It is a conflict where religion, military pride, domestic politics, and civilizational memory interlace in complex ways. The temple on the contested border is not just a stone structure atop a mountain, but a mirror of Southeast Asia’s soul — a soul torn between a glorious past and a turbulent present.
In times of global security crises, historical and local tensions more easily erupt into open conflict. The conflict in Asia is not a direct result of NATO–Eurasia tensions, but it is influenced by them — and thus, it could soon become a new theater for great power confrontation.
The outcome remains uncertain, but what is clear is that the ghosts of history continue to shape the present.
Pentagon Eyes Ukraine as Drone Testing Ground After Alaska Failures
Sputnik – 28.07.2025
WASHINGTON – The US Department of Defense (DOD) views Ukraine to be a potential polygon for drone testing after it ran into difficulties during the June trials in Alaska, Defense News reported, citing sources in Pentagon.
Earlier this summer, five US companies underwent drone testing in Alaska to see if their prototypes were able to withstand GPS disruption and if they were ready to transition to the military services.
“Providing an opportunity for these companies to assess their products in a contested environment against a notional threat is really valuable, one, for the DOD to assess their product in that way. But it’s also important for the companies to see where they’re succeeding or where they’re falling short so they can make tweaks and have a better product,” one of the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) officials told Defense News.
Commercial companies, especially small ones, do not have access to test spaces that are similar to field conditions, so the Pentagon needs to provide such conditions if it wants to achieve new technologies fast and efficiently, the report said.
“If we want to succeed, we have to embed engineers with warfighters, and we have to be out in the field testing. We have to do it all the time,” DIU’s Trent Emeneker was quoted as saying by Defense News.
To solve this issue, Emeneker proposed testing drones on the Ukrainian front lines, adding that “there’s no better place in the world” to do it. However, according to the report, it is difficult for the Department of Defense to officially send start-ups to Ukraine for in-country testing after US President Donald Trump assumed office, and the political tension between the current administration and the Ukrainian government increased.
On Friday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he had reached an agreement with US President Donald Trump on the supply of Ukrainian-made drones worth $10-30 billion to the United States.
UK cautions it could fight China over Taiwan
RT | July 27, 2025
The United Kingdom could resort to military force against China in the event of an escalation over Taiwan, British Defense Secretary John Healey has said, though he emphasized that London continues to prefer a diplomatic resolution.
Speaking to The Telegraph during a visit to Australia, Healey said Britain would “secure peace through strength” if necessary – marking one of the clearest signals yet from a senior UK official regarding the possibility of direct confrontation with Beijing.
Healey made the remarks as the HMS Prince of Wales, a British aircraft carrier equipped with F-35 fighter jets, docked in the northern Australian city of Darwin. It is the first time in nearly 30 years that a British strike group has arrived in the region. The carrier is on a nine-month Pacific deployment, participating in Australia’s Talisman Sabre exercise and visiting ports in Japan and South Korea.
”If we have to fight, as we have done in the past, Australia and the UK are nations that will fight together. We exercise together and by exercising together and being more ready to fight, we deter better together,” Healey said when asked what London would do in case of an escalation around Taiwan.
The secretary then said he was speaking in “general terms.” According to Healey, London’s approach to Taiwan has not changed.
China considers the island of Taiwan part of its territory under the One-China principle, and insists on eventual reunification. According to the Chinese government, peaceful reunion is preferable, but it reserves the right to use force if necessary.
Taiwan has been self-governed since 1949, when nationalist forces retreated to the island after losing the Chinese Civil War. Most nations, including Russia, recognize Taiwan as part of China. The UK, as well as the US, also formally stick to the One-China principle while maintaining informal ties with Taiwan and supplying it with weapons and ammunition.
Last month, Beijing criticized a British warship’s passage through the Taiwan Strait in Chinese territorial waters. Such actions “deliberately cause trouble” and undermine peace in the area, it said.
Russia’s Laser Weapon Supremacy: Short Guide
Sputnik – 27.07.2025
While the US and its European pals can only dream about developing laser weaponry, Russia is already light years ahead of them.
Unlike kinetic weapons, lasers do not use ammo and do not require reloading, only a power source, Russian military analyst Alexander Artamonov explained to Sputnik.
Lasers can also display a better rate of fire and would be much harder to evade than, for example, a missile.
“It is more efficient in terms of cost and the rate of fire, depending on the nature of the target you want to hit, and in terms of the time it takes to hit the target,” Artamonov remarked.
Nowadays, Russia, the United States and China run laser weapon programs. When it comes to actual working laser weapons, only Russia can present tangible proof.
Peresvet is a Russian mobile laser system designed to ‘blind’ enemy optical and optical-electronic surveillance systems, including drones, reconnaissance aircraft and even satellites. It has already been adopted by the Russian Armed Forces.
“Peresvet lasers are currently deployed not only in the Moscow region but on the front line as well,” Artamonov said, referring to the Ukrainian conflict zone.
Meanwhile, the US simply lacks the technology and know-how – like, for example, a sufficiently powerful and compact power source – to achieve comparable results.
“They conducted tests in the Indian Ocean. The US lasers perform poorly in water mist – under adverse weather conditions, that is,” Artamonov said.
Simply put, Russia’s Western rivals cannot field actual laser weapons whereas Russia is already developing more advanced and deadly military lasers.
Featured Video
The Lobby USA – Abridged
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Police Detective: 50% of sudden infant deaths happen within 48 hours of vaccination — But no one’s allowed to say it
By John-Michael Dumais | The Defender | October 2, 2023
A former police detective claimed that around 50% of the 250 sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) cases she investigated over seven years happened within 48 hours after the infant received a vaccine. About 70% happened within one week.
She argued this timing proves vaccines are behind SIDS because the correlation would not be observed if the deaths were occurring randomly.
The detective, who worked in a “major city” of over 300,000 people and identified herself simply as “Jennifer,” shared her story with Steve Kirsch in a video and Substack article published last week. … Full article
Blog Roll
Aletho News- US approves $5 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia as it renews aggression against Iran
- Israel’s destruction of Gaza’s sewage system triggers algal bloom, shutting down Israeli desalination plants
- How Britain built a war network around Russia
- JD Vance Falsely Claims the US Does Not Murder Civilians
- German sponsorship of Zionist settlements exposed
- The dangerous European illusion about a war with Russia
- 6-Week-Old Amish Infant With Fatal Genetic Condition Died From Measles, Coroner Confirms
- The Fall of Brazil’s Tyrannical Judge May Be Imminent: Moraes and His Sleaze Are Exposed
- Reporters Without Borders calls for EU to close loopholes allowing Europeans access to censored Russian media
- Two Palestinians killed, others injured in Israeli attacks on Gaza
- If Americans Knew
- US rejects Israel’s plan to ethnically cleanse Gaza: Daily Update
- ‘What About Gaza’s Amputees?’ Adidas Under Fire Over Israeli Soldier’s Disability-Inclusive Shoe Ad
- ‘They Keep Beating Me’: Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya Gives New Testimony from Israeli Prison
- Palestinian American returns to besieged West Bank home but Israeli settlers remain
- US House passes bill penalizing universities that participate in boycott of Israel
- Israeli Defense Minister Ben Gvir posts Palestinians on conveyor belts to detention camps. The world is silent
- “Board of Peace” Billionaire Backs AIPAC Fund Targeting Pro-Palestine Candidates
- What do you do when you can’t hear the bombs? Being deaf during the Gaza genocide.
- Ben Gvir: After Gaza genocide, we ethnically cleanse the rest – Daily Update
- ADL head Jonathan Greenblatt says ADL doesn’t exist “for some universalist ideal, we exist to protect the Jews”
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: Antarctic Ice Melt Has Contributed Less Than 1 Centimeter To Sea Level Rise In The Last 30 Years
- Fear Of Debate: Alarmist German Climate Scientist Calls On Mainstream Media To Discredit Skeptic Voices
- End-Of-August Arctic Sea Ice Extent Hasn’t Fallen In 20 Years, Official Data Show!
- News-Making Nepal Region Has Had As-Warm Or Warmer Periods Than The 2000s In The 1600s, 1700s, 1800s
- 2025 Study: ‘There Exists No Unequivocal Experimental Evidence For The CO2 Greenhouse Effect’
- 2026 Atlantic Cyclone Energy Index Running At 85% Below Normal!
- New Research Shows Soil Respiration And Temperature Drive CO2 Change, Not Humans
- Comparison Of Two German Weather Forecasts: From 25 Years Ago And From Today
- Veteran Swiss Meteorologist On Germany’s Recent Heat Wave: “You’re A Really Crazy Country”
- New Research Documents The Lack Of Any Net Decline In GBR Coral Cover Since The 1980s
Aletho News 