EU queen Ursula preached transparency – then did backdoor deals with Big Pharma
By Rachel Marsden | RT | May 16, 2025
Well, this is awkward. How many times has Ursula von der Leyen, European Commission president and unelected de facto ruler of the EU, delivered sermons about transparency like she’s the high priestess of some kind of parallel Brussels Vatican? And now the EU’s own top court has called her out in a ruling for neglecting to practice what she preaches.
Back in 2023, during her State of the European Union address, doing her finest impression of someone elected by the actual public, von der Leyen declared the need to douse any and all sketchiness in sunlight in order to “not allow any autocracy’s Trojan horses to attack our democracies from within.”
“Transparency should characterize the work of all the members of the Commission and of their cabinets,” she said as far back as 2019. “I have asked commissioners…to engage more and be more transparent,” she proclaimed in a speech to EU parliamentarians last year. Transparency and accountability also figured prominently in her bid for reappointment by the EU’s ruling elites last year.
Great news! She can now finally embark on this noble mission, and begin her journey with little more than a simple glance in the mirror. Because the European Court of Justice – the body that rules on whether EU institutions have actually crossed into illegality, not just occupying their usual territory of elite-grade idiocy – has just decided that Queen Ursula’s Commission can’t just wave away a pile of her own Covid-era text messages by going, “Whoops! They disappeared. Oh well, what do you do?” Which is basically what the Commission’s response was to the New York Times when it asked to see those messages.
And how did the Times know that these texts even existed? Because Ursula literally told them, bragging in an interview about how she scored so many vaxxes because she’s super tight with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla. All this was for a piece spotlighting her Covid efforts, published in April 2021: “How Europe sealed a Pfizer vaccine deal with texts and calls.”
The article featured the same kind of glamour photography reminiscent of the good ol’ days when Ursula was Germany’s defense minister from 2013 to 2019, under former Chancellor Angela Merkel, and doing photo shoots in front of military hardware while accusations swirled that she had bungled the budget with shady defense contracts, even as the Bundeswehr was stuck using brooms for guns during a NATO exercise, as the Atlantic Council reported in 2015.
“For a month, Ms von der Leyen had been exchanging texts and calls with Bourla, the chief executive of Pfizer… Pfizer might have more doses it could offer the bloc – many more,” the NYT piece reads, referring to the “personal diplomacy” that “played a big role in a deal” for 1.8 billion Pfizer anti-Covid doses.
So the Times hears about these text messages and was like, “Oh, cool. Let’s see!”
Suddenly Queen Ursula became a lot less chatty. So the Times took the matter to the EU’s own top court to get the disclosure. And now this court has said, in legal terms, that Ursula can’t just ghost the Times – and the public by extension – without giving a real reason. That there has to be a “plausible explanation to justify the non possession” of the texts. And also, the court says that “the Commission has failed to explain in a plausible manner” why it thought that these messages were so trivial that they could be vaporized like they were just her Eurovision contest text voting and not a matter of public record which, by definition, should be maintained.
Out of these little chats came €71 billion in Covid jab contracts with Big Pharma’s Pfizer and AstraZeneca – 11 of them to be precise, totaling 4.6 billion doses, paid for with cash taken straight from EU taxpayers. Enough for ten doses for every EU citizen.
Turns out that freewheeling it may have resulted in some consequences that could have been avoided had a diverse group of minds been engaged on the issue, as protocol normally dictates, and not just Ursula’s. It’s not like there hasn’t been a costly fallout from all this. A big chunk of the EU, including Germany, Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary, Lithuania, Estonia, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic, is shouting about surplus doses for which they’re on the hook, urging Brussels to renegotiate the contractual terms with Big Pharma. Germany alone has reportedly trashed 200 million of them. Tricky to negotiate, though, when no one’s even sure what the terms were, as the second-highest European court pointed out last year. “The Commission did not give the public sufficiently wide access to the purchase agreements for COVID-19 vaccines… The Commission did not demonstrate that wider access to those clauses would actually undermine the commercial interests of those undertakings,” it ruled.
The details of these contracts – how they were made, what they say, and how anyone’s supposed to back out of them if citizens politely decline to max out their ten-jab punch card – remain a mystery.
Back in 2024, Brussels more or less shrugged and suggested that it could really only be as transparent as the courts forced it to be. So hey, what can you do? “In general, the Commission grants the widest possible public access to documents, in line with the principles of openness and transparency,” the EU said, underscoring that the lower court ruling “confirmed that the Commission was entitled to provide only partial access.”
Well, good news, guys! Your very own top court just ruled that you can now be a lot more transparent! So go crazy. Be the change that you keep saying you want to be in the world. Nothing is holding you back now. If transparency were a vaccine, this court just gave Ursula a booster. So we’ll see if it takes. I won’t hold my breath.
Another Report on Israel’s Genocide. More Silence & Complicity From The Liberal West
By John J. Mearsheimer | May 11, 2025
The UN Human Rights Council has issued a lengthy report titled “Anatomy of a Genocide.” As the title indicates, it describes in detail the ongoing Israeli Genocide in Gaza.
Despite the abundance of evidence regarding Israel’s savagery, the liberal West not only does virtually nothing to stop it, but is actually complicit in the genocide.
Where are all those liberal academics, activists, journalists, and policymakers who have spent much of their adult life preaching about human rights and the virtues of the liberal international order? They are AWOL in the face of one of the great crimes of modern times.
Alex Lo, the distinguished columnist for The South China Morning Post, hits the nail on the head in his recent column, which is titled: “The Western World Has Already Dug Its Own Grave in Gaza War.”
He goes on to say: “By enabling Israel to unleash its genocidal impulse, most leaders of developed nations have crossed a moral red line that cannot be undone.”
The following three paragraphs from Lo are especially worth considering:
The most extraordinary censorship is being exercised across many Western countries, but especially in the United States and Germany, to silence anyone who tries to speak out what everyone already knows is going on in Palestine. It is no accident that the two countries that make the most of the Holocaust as universal civic education are the two countries that most actively enable a real-time genocide being committed and shown live on our computer screens and social media pages.
Silencing the victims’ cries so the killers can continue with the butchery, and criticism is considered racial hate speech against the killers and their apologists. Who does that?
The West cares more about the feelings of the butchers than the lives and limbs of victims. Western ‘civilisation’ now sounds like a contradiction in terms.
FM: Raising concerns about Iran’s peaceful nuclear work while ignoring Israel’s nukes ‘unacceptable’
Press TV | May 10, 2025
Iran has called attention to the double standards of the international community regarding nuclear weapons, calling it “unacceptable” for Western powers to raise alleged concerns over the country’s peaceful nuclear energy program while overlooking the Israeli regime’s extensive nuclear arsenal.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi made the remarks during an extended address during the Fourth Round of Iranian-Arab Dialogues conference in the Qatari capital Doha on Saturday.
The top diplomat reminded that the Islamic Republic’s nuclear energy activities were a peaceful and legitimate pursuit in contrast to the nuclear weapons possessed by the Israeli regime.
He reaffirmed that Iran did not seek nuclear weapons and that weapons of mass destruction had no place in the country’s security doctrine.
The foreign minister pointed out that the country was one of the initiators of a nuclear-weapon-free zone concept in Asia and called on Western countries to abandon their double standards regarding nuclear proliferation.
“Iran is committed to the international non-proliferation regime,” Araghchi explained, denouncing Western countries’ and their allies’ decades-old way of raising uncalled-for alarm about the nation’s peaceful nuclear energy program while turning a blind eye to the Israeli regime’s nuclear arsenal.
For decades, the United States, its European allies, and Washington’s allied parties elsewhere across the globe have been using allegations of Iran’s pursuing non-conventional arms to either enact or agitate anti-Iranian policies, including sanctions, and anti-Iranian discourse.
This is while Iran’s leadership has categorically ruled out such endeavor in line with moral and religious imperatives.
The Islamic Republic’s refusal to either pursue, develop or stockpiles such weaponry has also been unexceptionally proven during the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)’s inspections, making the country the most-verified member of the United Nations nuclear watchdog.
‘Israel greatest threat to regional peace’
Pointing again to the Israeli regime’s nuclear weapons program and arsenal and instances of its deadly adventurism and expansionism across the West Asia region, the official said, “The existence of the Zionist regime remains the single greatest threat to peace in the region.”
He condemned the United States for supporting the regime unwaveringly and exponentially, calling Washington an accomplice in the regime’s atrocities, including its acts of violence and injustice targeting Palestinians.
The foreign minister described the regime’s ongoing genocidal and other aggressive measures as a direct attempt to erase the Palestinian nation.
Such prospect, he said, would amount to complete colonial erasure of the Palestinian nation through the most horrific forms of violence and forced displacement.
He identified the so-called “two-state solution” as a myth used to delay the realization of Palestinian rights for decades, and reminded that the regime, itself, had ruled out even that prospect.
Iran-US talks: A clarification on nuclear rights
As the fourth round of indirect talks between Iran and the United States was set to begin the following day, Araghchi said, “We will continue our discussions with the United States — and concurrently with Europe, Russia, and China — in good faith.”
However, he made it clear that if the goal of these discussions was to ensure that Iran was not pursuing nuclear weapons, that objective had already been achieved.
The official also firmly stated that if the aim was to deny Iran its legitimate nuclear rights and impose unrealistic demands, the Islamic Republic would not yield. “The Islamic Republic of Iran will never, under any circumstances, surrender any of the legitimate rights of the proud Iranian nation.”
In the same context, he underscored that Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy, including enrichment, was non-negotiable.
On regional cooperation, the path forward
Araghchi stressed the importance of regional convergence as the path forward for Western Asian nations.
He called for deeper trust-building and mutual understanding, advocating for cooperative initiatives in areas like cultural exchange, trade, and tourism.
According to Araghchi, prosperity in the region depends not on the rise of dominant nations, but on the success of a strong region as a whole.
Why Could The UK and France Recognize Palestine? Spoiler – It’s Not About Sympathy
Sputnik – May 1, 2025
There’s a bigger game at play, geopolitical analyst Mehmet Rakipoglu tells Sputnik.
- Strategic autonomy: Recognizing Palestine may not yield immediate political gain – but it could be a move to challenge US hegemony, noted the researcher at UK-based Dimensions for Strategic Studies think tank. It could send a message that London and Paris are not pawns of the US and Israel or fully aligned with Donald Trump policies, he added.
- Public pressure: The British and French governments are not suddenly sympathetic to the Palestinian cause – domestic protests and global outrage over Israel’s genocidal actions in Gaza have forced their hand, argues the pundit. Anti-Zionist sentiment is surging in all Western capitals, with silence no longer an option for British and French leaders.
- ️Ethical crossroads: If the UK and France claim to uphold Western values, staying silent on Israel’s war in Gaza creates a moral dilemma, noted the analyst, since you cannot preach human rights and ignore genocide.
Iran: French threat to reimpose sanctions is ‘economic blackmail’
Press TV – April 30, 2025
Iran’s ambassador to the UN has lambasted the French foreign minister’s open threat to reimpose sanctions lifted under a 2015 deal on Tehran’s nuclear program.
“Resorting to threats and economic blackmail is entirely unacceptable and represents a clear breach of the principles enshrined in the UN Charter,” Amir Saeid Iravani wrote in letters to UN chief General Antonio Guterres and Security Council head Jérôme Bonnafont.
French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said on Monday that his government along with Germany and Britain “will not hesitate for a single second to reapply all the sanctions” lifted a decade ago if European security is threatened by Iran’s nuclear activities.
Iravani said France’s threat to trigger the so-called snapback mechanism despite its own failure to honor its commitments contradicts the fundamental principles of international law that preclude a party from claiming rights under an agreement while simultaneously failing to fulfill its obligations.
“Such an action is legally and procedurally flawed, unacceptable, and invalid, and would undermine the credibility of the Security Council,” he added.
The snapback mechanism is triggered simply by the assertion of significant non-compliance on the part of a participating state, a prerogative the West might abuse based on its accusations.
Iravani further reaffirmed Iran’s commitment to diplomacy and constructive engagement, but “genuine diplomacy cannot be conducted under threats or pressure”.
“If France and its partners are truly interested in a diplomatic resolution, they must abandon coercion and respect the sovereign rights of States under international law.”
Iravani said France’s credibility on non-proliferation is fundamentally undermined by its own record as it continues to modernize and expand its nuclear arsenal, remains silent about, and is complicit in the Israeli regime’s undeclared nuclear weapons program.
France has also yet to fulfill its disarmament obligations under Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), he added.
The ambassador rejected the French foreign minister’s accusations that Iran sought to acquire nuclear weapons,
“Allegations that Iran is ‘on the cusp’ of developing nuclear weapons are entirely unfounded and politically irresponsible. The Islamic Republic of Iran has never pursued nuclear weapons, and its defensive doctrine has not been changed,” Iravani said.
“Iran unequivocally rejects all weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), including nuclear arms,” he said. “As a founding member of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), Iran remains fully committed to its obligations under the treaty.”
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), he said, “continues to monitor and verify the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program. Its reports have consistently verified that there has been no diversion of nuclear material for non-peaceful purposes.”
Barrot’s allegations about Tehran’s peaceful nuclear program reflect either a fundamental misunderstanding or deliberate distortion of Iran’s legal rights under international law, Iravani said.
The claims also demonstrate a selective interpretation of facts and exemplifies a persistent pattern of double standards by a country that bears specific responsibilities as a permanent member of the Security Council, he added.
Dutch commentator slams double standards as government caters for refugees while EU migrant workers are exploited
Remix News | April 25, 2025
Dutch Minister of Asylum and Migration of the Netherlands Marjolein Faber was given a few billion euros extra in the Spring Memorandum to house asylum seekers. Some 10,000 asylum seekers now “endlessly vacation” in what Marianne Zwagerman in De Telegraaf calls “extremely expensive” hotel rooms.
According to Zwagerman, over 100 hotels benefiting from this scheme “are laughing their heads off” as the government currently pays far more than an average Booking.com user, with rates breaching €300 per night.
The bill for catering for asylum seekers staying in other places is also getting completely out of hand.
Citing one hotel in Rijswijk, she says that while it was once bustling with businessmen, it is “now full of asylum seekers.” She also takes a jab at the EU’s Green deal: “Formerly full of Shell employees who flew in from all over the world to be retrained on the production of oil and gas. But yes, a country that drives away businesses, bans fossil energy, and opens its borders to everyone ends up with hotels full of asylum seekers instead of businessmen.”
“It is a nice place. Our beds are washed for us, we get food, and we get help with everything we need to arrange,” says Ukrainian Yevheniia, who has been living in the Rijswijk hotel for three years with her husband and children. Zwagerman notes that she hopes to stay in the Netherlands even after the war.
Sadly, migrant workers from within the EU are treated drastically differently, in what Zwagerman calls a “modern slave industry run by rock-hard temp agencies.” Low wages, hard work, no guarantees, and no future.
A 42-year-old female Polish migrant worker, Julia, whose story Zwagerman notes was told by RTV Utrecht, sleeps in a homeless shelter, “scared and lonely, with a drunk neighbor next door.” She had moved to the Netherlands for more opportunities, but got picked up by one of the agencies that eagerly recruit Eastern Europeans looking for a better life and in need of a job.
Despite working in the Netherlands for 12 years, she had no permanent contract and no savings. Then she lost her warehouse job for being too slow. Returning to Poland is not an option either. Her family there does not have the means to accommodate her.
“No work means no shelter. Sick for a week? F**k off. Ten others are waiting for your job.” Julia was apparently “lucky,” as many migrant workers sleep outdoors in tents. Zwagerman says an update from RTV Utrecht indicated that Julia found new work. One may ask how many haven’t.
Meanwhile, the Dutch government is busy prepping for war. Mark Rutte, former Dutch PM and current NATO secretary general, is prepping for the NATO summit in The Hague and rallying members to spend hundreds of millions more on war. Of course, all this only means more migrants fleeing and in need of work.
More Julias, scared, hungry, and maybe too slow.
Carnegie Endowment cancels Iran FM’s speech under ‘orchestrated pressure’ from Israel lobby: Report

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi
Press TV – April 21, 2025
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (CEIP) cancels Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi’s keynote address at its 2025 Nuclear Policy Conference.
Citing sources familiar with the matter, Iran Nuances reported that the cancellation on Monday followed an “orchestrated pressure” campaign from “Israeli-affiliated hawkish elements” and officials of former US presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama.
Araghchi was scheduled to deliver a virtual address at the conference, which will bring together politicians, diplomats, and nuclear experts from around the world to discuss critical challenges in nuclear nonproliferation, arms control, disarmament, deterrence, energy, and security.
Iran’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations confirmed in a statement that Araghchi’s speech has been canceled.
According to the mission, the cancellation occurred after the conference organizers decided to change the format of the Iranian foreign minister’s speech to a debate.
Expressing regret over the matter, the mission said that the full text of the now-canceled speech will be made available to the news media.
French contradictions: Macron’s Palestine play – too little, too late?

By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | April 16, 2025
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s vehement opposition to a Palestinian state aligns perfectly with a long-standing Zionist ideology that has consistently viewed the establishment of a Palestinian state as a direct threat to Israel’s very foundation as a settler colonial project.
Thus, the mere existence of a Palestinian state with clearly defined geographical boundaries would inevitably render the state of Israel, which pointedly remains without internationally recognised borders, a state confined to a fixed physical space.
At a time when Israel continues to occupy significant swathes of Syrian and Lebanese territory and relentlessly pursues its colonial expansion to seize even more land, the notion of Israel genuinely accepting a sovereign Palestinian state is utterly inconceivable.
This reality is not a recent development; it has always been the underlying truth. This, in essence, reveals that the decades-long charade of the “two-state solution” was consistently a mirage, meticulously crafted to peddle illusions to both Palestinians and the broader international community, fostering the false impression that Israel was finally serious about achieving peace.
Therefore, it came as no surprise that Netanyahu reacted with considerable fury to French President Emmanuel Macron’s recent announcement of France’s intention to recognise the State of Palestine next June.
In a phone call with Macron yesterday, Netanyahu predictably resorted to his familiar nonsensical rhetoric, outrageously equating the establishment of a Palestinian state with rewarding “terrorism”.
And, with equal predictability, he trotted out the well-worn and unsubstantiated claims about an Iranian connection. “A Palestinian state established a few minutes away from Israeli cities would become an Iranian stronghold of terrorism,” Netanyahu’s office declared in a statement.
Meanwhile, Macron, with a familiar balancing act, reiterated his commitment to Israeli “security”, while tepidly emphasising that the suffering in Gaza must come to an end.
Of course, in a more just and reasonable world, Macron should have unequivocally stressed that it is Palestinian security, indeed their very existence, that is acutely at stake, and that Israel, through its relentless violence and occupation, constitutes the gravest threat to Palestinian existence and, arguably, to global peace.
Sadly, such a world remains stubbornly out of reach.
Considering Macron’s and France’s unwavering and often obsequious support for Israel throughout the years, particularly since the onset of the Israeli genocide in Gaza, some might cautiously welcome Macron’s statement as a potentially positive shift in policy.
However, it is imperative to caution against any exaggerated optimism, especially at a time when entire Palestinian families in Gaza are being annihilated in the ongoing Israeli genocide as these very words are read. It is an undeniable truth that France, like many other Western governments, has played a significant role in empowering, arming and justifying Israel’s heinous crimes in Gaza.
For France to genuinely reverse its long-standing position, if indeed that is the current trajectory, it will require far more than symbolic and ultimately empty gestures.
Palestinians are, understandably, weary and disillusioned with symbolic victories, hollow rhetoric, and insincere gestures.
The recent recognitions of the State of Palestine by Ireland, Norway and Spain in May 2024 did offer a fleeting spark of hope among Palestinians, suggesting a potential, albeit limited, shift in Western sentiment that might exert some pressure on Israel to cease its devastating actions in Gaza.
Unfortunately, this initial and fragile optimism has largely failed to translate into broader and more meaningful European action.
Consequently, Macron’s recent announcement of France’s intention to recognise the State of Palestine in June has been met with a far more subdued and skeptical reaction from Palestinians.
While other European Union countries that have already recognised Palestine often maintain considerably stronger stances against the Israeli occupation, France’s record in this regard is notably weaker.
Furthermore, the very sincerity of France’s stated position is deeply questionable, given its ongoing and concerning suppression of French activists who dare to protest the Israeli actions and advocate for Palestinian rights within France itself.
These attacks, arrests, and the broader crackdown on dissenting political views within France hardly paint the picture of a nation genuinely prepared to completely alter its course on aiding and abetting Israeli crimes.
Moreover, there is a stark and undeniable contrast between the principled positions adopted by Spain, Norway and Ireland and France’s steadfast backing of Israel’s brutal military campaign in Gaza from its very inception, a support underscored by Macron’s early and highly symbolic visit to Tel Aviv.
Macron was among the first world leaders to arrive in Tel Aviv following the war, while Palestinians in Gaza were already being subjected to the most unspeakable forms of violence imaginable.
During that visit, on 24 October 2023, he unequivocally reiterated, “France stands shoulder to shoulder with Israel. We share your pain, and we reaffirm our unwavering commitment to Israel’s security and its right to defend itself against terrorism.”
This raises a fundamental and critical question: how can France’s belated recognition of a Palestinian state be interpreted as genuine solidarity while it simultaneously remains a significant global supporter of the very entity perpetrating violence against Palestinians?
While any European recognition of Palestine is a welcome – if overdue – step, its true significance is considerably diminished by the near-universal recognition of Palestine within the global majority, particularly across the Global South, originating in the Middle East and steadily expanding worldwide.
The fact that France would be among the last group of countries in the world to formally recognise Palestine (currently, 147 out of 193 United Nations member states have recognised the State of Palestine), speaks volumes about France’s apparent attempt to belatedly align itself with the prevailing global consensus and, perhaps, to whitewash its long history of complicity in Israeli Zionist crimes, as Israel finds itself increasingly isolated and condemned on the international stage.
One can state with considerable confidence that Palestinians, particularly those enduring the unimaginable horrors of the ongoing genocide in Gaza, prioritise an immediate cessation of that genocide and genuine accountability for Israel’s actions far above symbolic acts of recognition that appear primarily aimed at bolstering France’s relevance as a global power player and a long-standing supporter of Israeli war crimes.
Finally, Macron, while reassuring Israel that its security remains paramount for the French government, must be reminded that his continued engagement with Benjamin Netanyahu is, in itself, a potential violation of international law. The Israeli leader is a wanted accused criminal by the International Criminal Court, and it is France’s responsibility, like that of the over 120 signatories to the ICC, to apprehend, not to appease, Netanyahu.
This analysis is not intended to diminish the potential significance of the recognition of Palestine as a reflection of growing global solidarity with the Palestinian people. However, for such recognition to be truly meaningful and impactful, it must emanate from a place of genuine respect and profound concern for the Palestinian people themselves, not from a calculated desire to safeguard the “security” of their tormentors.
Funding the PA is for the benefit of Israel and the EU, not the Palestinians
By Ramona Wadi | MEMO | April 15, 2025
Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas met with the EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Kaja Kallas, in March. The meeting was replete with the usual hyperbole that still clings to the defunct two-state paradigm, the PA’s reform and funding for this purpose.
Yesterday, Reuters reported that the EU will be funding the PA with a three-year package worth $1.8 billion to support reform. According to European Commissioner for the Mediterranean Dubravka Suica, “We want them to reform themselves because without reforming, they won’t be strong enough and credible in order to be an interlocutor, not for only for us, but an interlocutor also for Israel.”
The reasoning is warped.
It only spells one thing clearly: the EU wants the PA to be strong enough to act against the Palestinian people and prevent them from being their own interlocutors in a political process that concerns them much more than the PA.
Speaking about the EU funding for the PA, Kallas said, “This will reinforce the PA’s ability to meet the needs of the Palestinian people in the West Bank and prepare it to return to govern Gaza once conditions allow.” No time frames, of course, because the conditions will always depend on Israel. Funding buys time for Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Meanwhile, the PA, which has not only neglected the needs of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, but also exacerbated their humanitarian and political neglect as evidenced in Jenin, for example, can rest assured of some more years of EU support. That is, as long as the humanitarian paradigm remains relevant to the illusory state-building funded by Brussels.
From the allocated budget, the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) will receive €82 million per year.
The most telling clause in the European Commission’s statement detailing its assistance is found right at the end. “This designation shall not be construed as recognition of a State of Palestine and is without prejudice to the individual positions of the Member States on this issue.”
France’s announcement that it might recognise the State of Palestine by June this year, symbolic as the gesture is, only shows the EC’s urge to detach itself from all possibilities, no matter how remote, of Palestinian independence. Which brings one back to the big question:
Why is the EU really funding the PA’s state-building to prevent the eventual formation of a Palestinian state?
Funding a Palestinian entity for Israeli and EU purposes does not bode well for Palestinians, who are still only spoken of in terms of humanitarian matters. The political purpose is reserved only for Israel’s allies, the PA being one of them, as seen in many instances of its collaboration with the occupation state.
But Western diplomats would do well to recall that one major democratic implementation postponed repeatedly by Abbas – democratic legislative and presidential elections – has not featured once in the EU’s vision of a post-war Gaza, determined as it is to have the PA take over political authority in the enclave and bring Palestinians under different forms of misery. How scared is the EU of having Palestinians being allowed to vote freely and possibly electing alternatives that have nothing to do with the current Fatah-Hamas bipolarisation? Funding the PA indeed serves a purpose; that of destroying Palestinian democracy.
The end of La Grande illusion democratique
By Stephen Karganovic | Strategic Culture Foundation | April 11, 2025
Only the incurably naïve were shocked by the brazen and deliberate rigging of the French Presidential elections. Granted, the outrageous infringement of collective West’s verbally proclaimed democratic electoral canons in Romania, which took place shortly before, could have been taken by alert observers as a reliable signal of what might imminently occur in other precincts of the “European garden.” Blinded by cultural racism however some of them might have mistaken electoral rigging in Romania, a recently acquired patch of that garden, as a sui generis case, entirely attributable to Balkan primitivism. But they would have overlooked conveniently the now well established fact that instructions to corrupt Romanian bureaucrats to eliminate inconvenient candidate Georgescu did not emanate from Bucharest alone. We now know that they were issued imperatively from the idyllic Garden’s ideological centre, which is in Brussels.
Without diminishing, in the electoral disqualification and penal punishment of Marine Le Pen, the influence of the local French branch of the globalist cabal (it would be unpardonably incorrect to call that scum “elite”) there also the nefarious role of the nerve centre in Brussels must be stressed.
The arbitrary mechanism which allows the cabal to target virtually anybody it perceives as unsuitable or as a threat was laid bare by Croatian European Parliament deputy Mislav Kolakušić. The core charge pressed against Le Pen, let us recall, was of a basely pecuniary nature, namely that as an EU deputy she partially used her office employees in Strassbourg to do political work on behalf of her French political party, the Front National, improperly remunerating them with European Union funds. The outspoken EU parliamentarian Kolakušić knows of what he speaks because he was himself charged with this ghastly infraction, an accusation from which he managed to successfully defend himself only thanks to having kept meticulous records. It appears that acting with Gallic abandon Marine Le Pen or her office manager were not nearly as fastidious record keepers and they are now paying the political and penal price for the oversight.
What Kolakušić reveals about the inner workings of the system, based on his own experience and observation, is most unsettling and strongly suggests a deliberately built-in trap ready to be sprung on anyone who gets out of line. His remarks are in Croatian, but their gist is as follows. The way the European Parliament interprets its own rules, its officials are authorised to determine as they deem fit whether parliamentary deputies or their staff on any given day had worked a full eight hours as required on tasks exlusively related to matters pertaining to European Parliament affairs, or not. If not, there are unpleasant consequences that can be made to follow. That portion of salaries alleged to have been paid out from European funds for performing tasks deemed unrelated to European Parliament work is refundable on demand, as subjectively assessed by investigators who are empowered to act with arbitrary discretion. But that is the least of it. More ominously, the arbitrariness extends to the determination of how the matter shall be treated. It could be considered a harmless lapse curable with a reprimand and a refund. But if the powers that be take a particularly dim view of the alleged malefactor, it could also be treated as an act of moral turpitude, having been committed with the element of mens rea, which creates grounds for the imputation of criminal liability. It is by opting for the latter interpretation, of course, that with the helpful assistance of the French judiciary (that some naive folks had thought to be so incorruptible) that they got Marine Le Pen.
“Such a procedure,“ Kolakušić explains further, “is unprecedented anywhere else in the world or in any other parliament, but it is a perfect weapon for settling accounts with dissidents, be they of the so-called extreme right or extreme left, or independent parliamentarians, which is to say the only members of the European Parliament who think using their own brains and who formulate their own original positions on major issues.“
Before over-sentimentalising the plight of Madame Le Pen and showering her with excessive sympathy, some of which she undoubtedly deserves but not uncritically and always in prudent measure, her own responsibility for the situation she faces should be honestly confronted. At some point she made a conscious decision to play ball with the cabal that is now persecuting her. In order to try to accomodate them she went as far as reneging on her filial duties and renouncing her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, the founder of the political party she now heads, which she virtuously relabelled from Front National to Rassemblement national in an attempt to make it more palatable and sound less “extremist“ to her enemies. She then went on to ease her father’s associates out of the picture and replace them with a more “modern“ and “progressive“ crew, with the same goal in mind of ingratiating and reinventing herself as a “mainstream“ political actor (or actress, if you wish). Needless to say, she presided also over an ideological shift in her party’s political orientation which, whilst remaining verbally committed to sovereignism and the promotion of French national interests, conspicuously lost the sharp edge that previously had made it distinctive in the French political landscape.
And now, with the Presidency of France within her grasp, the French people having become utterly disgusted with the alien cabal that is running their country into the ground and ready to vote for her, what has Marine Le Pen got to show for her accomodations? She can boast a multimillion euro fine, a four year prison sentence, half of it suspended but the other half very much in effect, and a five-year ban on political activity, crashing her dream of becoming President of France for a long time, and more likely forever.
Madame Le Pen has now learned the hard way a painful lesson that Russians also have had to grasp gradually and at considerable cost to themselves. It is that the cabal are недоговороспособныe, or in plain English “not agreement capable.” All attempts to curry favour with them are futile. They have their trusted agents, “Mr. and Mr. Macron” being prime examples, whom they cultivate to do their bidding. No substitutes are solicited or accepted from the ranks of the profane, no matter how hard and long the newcomers have laboured to ingratiate themselves.
The massive outpouring of anger by the disenfranchised French people, who are rightfully furious at being deprived of the opportunity to vote for the candidate of their choice, may be of some consolation to Marine Le Pen, just as similar expressions of popular anger that have been going on in Romania for weeks may assuage the wounded feelings of Calin Georgescu, but will otherwise have no palpable effect.
Madame Le Pen may waste her time appealing the French court’s scandalous decision if she so wishes. She may publicly fume and denounce her persecutors to her heart’s content. (Humiliatingly, the video recording of one of her scathing denunciations, where she delusionally likens her electoral disqualification to a “nuclear bomb,” was removed from YouTube shortly after being posted, as can be verified by clicking on the hyperlink above.) But it is unlikely that any sort of commotion in the streets will produce significant changes in the dispensation that has from on high been decreed, either in France or in Romania.
Instead of wasting her time in the courts, which are as rigged as the electoral system, Marine Le Pen could perhaps have some fun and play a little game with her tormentors. Our advice to her is to pull a Perón stunt and delegate her super smart and photogenic niece Marion Maréchal Le Pen, an EU Parliament deputy and political figure in her own right, to take up the Le Pen mantle and with the blessing of aunt Marine run for President of France in 2027. It may be recalled that in the 1970s Juan Perón was in exile and similarly disqualified in Argentina to run for political office. He outwitted his opponents by designating Hector Cámpora to run on the Peronist party ticket in his stead. Cámpora won, annulled the impediments blocking Perón’s return to power and resigned in Perón’s favour. Surely Marion could do the same for aunt Marine.
Will Marine Le Pen have the creativity to step out of the box and twist the lion’s tail just a bit? We will soon find out.
Exposing the UN’s hypocrisy of humanitarian aid and ceasefires
By Ramona Wadi | MEMO | April 10, 2025
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres told the Security Council this week that, “As aid has dried up, the floodgates of horror have re-opened. Gaza is a killing field – and civilians are in an endless death loop.” With not a single mention of the word genocide in his entire speech, Guterres stated, towards the end, “The world may be running out of words to describe the situation in Gaza, but we will never run away from the truth.”
A correction is needed here. The world is not running out of words to describe the situation in Gaza — “genocide” will do for the moment — and the UN is indeed running away from the truth.
Guterres’s statement is evidence of this, as is over a year of prioritising Israel’s security narrative and purported concern about the hostages, while Israel itself bombs them along with Palestinian civilians in Gaza. “Certain truths are clear since the atrocious 7 October terror attacks by Hamas,” said Guterres.
But he uttered not a single word about Israel bombing the Gaza Strip.
As expected, because the international community follows its own trends rather than the facts on the ground, Guterres maintained the rhetoric of ceasefires and humanitarian aid shamelessly. Ceasefires work, said the UN Secretary General, allowing for the release of hostages and the delivery of humanitarian aid. “That all ended with the shattering of the ceasefire,” he added, without bringing Israel’s culpability into the equation. The ceasefire just “shattered”.
It is the UN’s tactic of portraying the delivery of humanitarian aid as a form of neutrality that has enabled this façade of helplessness for so long. Humanitarian aid is highly politicised, which is one reason why there is always less money for it than there is for arms and ammunition. It is the reason why corrupt power remains at the helm; starving people need nourishment and they are forced to wait for it in the name of human rights. Meanwhile, the politics of liberation, of decolonisation, of autonomy, are not only marginalised but eliminated altogether.
Why? Because international law is forced to revolve around the demands of the oppressor and its accomplices.
Guterres should say something about this. Some truths from the halls of power would clarify why Gaza has been abandoned in the name of humanitarian aid and ceasefires.
In the absence of truth, though, Guterres would have the world believe that all that Gaza needs is linked to the delivery of humanitarian aid, and that the hostages can be released if a ceasefire is maintained. However, humanitarian aid can no longer even gloss over colonial violence; the Gaza Genocide is too visible to ignore. Negotiations for ceasefires take months due to Israel’s insistence on completely wiping out Palestinians from Gaza — more talks give the occupation state more time to finish the job — which make the correlation between ceasefires and the hostages’ release very minimal.
To further his humanitarian paradigm, Guterres reminded Israel of its obligations under international law which, of course, Israel will ignore. Again, however, the travesty of reminding a colonial enterprise – “an occupying power” as Israel is usually described to avoid describing its occupation as colonialism – to be mindful of its humanitarian duties is the way the UN pretends to make international law work.
But how about a reminder from Guterres that the colonised people are entitled to decolonisation under international law, instead of ensuring – against international law – that colonial entities are apparently entitled to commit genocide?
US cares about human rights only to target adversaries: Former State Department analyst
Press TV – April 10, 2025
A former US State Department analyst, who resigned over American complicity in the Gaza genocide, says the US government ignores human rights issues when it comes to weapons sales to allies.
In an article for Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, Annelle Sheline outlined how the US uses human rights as a tool against adversaries while ignoring such issues for friendly governments.
“American leaders have consistently instrumentalized human rights concerns to target perceived adversaries while tossing aside such concerns when they apply to US partners” Sheline wrote.
Sheline also said the US government’s desire for global military primacy and weapon sales overrides concerns for human rights and even US law.
“[US] law stipulates that the United States will not provide security assistance to any country whose government engages in a “consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.” Yet this law, Section 502B of the Foreign Assistance Act, which Congress passed in 1976, has never been applied.”
Sheline worked for the US State Department’s Bureau of Human Rights, Democracy, and Labor’s Office of Near Eastern Affairs (DRL/NEA) from March 2023 until March 2024, when she resigned in protest over US complicity in the Gaza genocide.
In the article, Sheline described how the Democratic and Republican parties both similarly disregard human rights for military and own foreign policy goals.
“To the extent that a partisan divide exists, it is primarily rhetorical. Democratic administrations usually talk more about human rights than Republican administrations… but neither party has upheld America’s legally binding commitment to not sell to governments that engage in gross violations of human rights.”
Sheline said President Donald Trump’s new foreign policy is not fundamentally different from that of previous administrations.
“President Trump nakedly pursues what he sees as US self-interest, while previous presidents largely preferred to cloak similar decisions in the language of morality and mutual benefit.”
The former State Department analyst also said that the United States has given full support to Israel’s genocide in Gaza.
“The decision by the US government to directly enable Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza has severely damaged American credibility. Although Israel’s destruction of Gaza represents the most egregious example, the American government has almost never applied laws intended to punish human rights abusers in Israel.”
Sheline believes the US support for Israel is influenced by the pro-Israel lobby, in addition to being driven by foreign policy and military exports concerns.
On the other hand, according to Sheline, the US frequently uses human rights as a tool to apply pressure against governments that it sees as adversaries.
“The US primarily highlights human rights abuses by adversarial governments. As a result, human rights concerns tend to factor only into policies designed to counter perceived US enemies. The US government does not sell weapons to hostile powers, so criticizing these governments does not endanger weapon sales.”
Sheline outlined how US foreign policy shaped its human rights rhetoric in West Asia.
She said Israel’s human rights abuses receive “special dispensation” on the part of the US, which, ironically and in the absence of the lack of an existing relationship with certain governments like Iran, frequently criticizes and imposes sanctions on them for alleged human rights abuses.
“This suggests that human rights concerns did not drive US foreign policy, but rather were used as a means of justifying the policy the administration already wished to pursue.”

