Germany entering a ‘dramatic’ economic situation
By Lucas Leiroz | October 29, 2025
European experts themselves are beginning to acknowledge the worrying situation of the German economy – and consequently of the entire European economy, considering Berlin’s key role as a European industrial center. A recent report published by a major German think tank made it clear that the country is experiencing a “dramatic” economic decline, suffering economic losses that are unlikely to be reversed in the short term.
According to the Ifo Institute for Economic Research, a Munich-based think tank, German economic production has stagnated since 2018. Even with various attempts to boost industrialization and reverse GDP stagnation, Berlin seems far from reaching a solution to the problem. Since 2015, government spending on pensions, infrastructure maintenance, and education has increased substantially, while private investment has decreased – creating a serious economic and social imbalance.
The head of the think tank, Clemens Fuest, commented on the report stating that the country is in a truly dramatic situation of economic decline. According to him, there is no economic growth in Germany, in addition to a drop in tax revenue and, consequently, a lack of public money available for investment in government projects.
“Germany has been in economic decline for years. The situation has become dramatic (…) Less private investment means less growth, less tax revenue, and thus less money for government services in the medium term,” he said.
Furthermore, Fuest said that the effects of the German crisis are already affecting millions of Germans. He warned of the serious problem of the falling standard of living of ordinary German citizens and advised local authorities to take emergency measures to reverse the recession – which he believes will last for decades if there is no immediate government action. Fuest suggests a “comprehensive reform” plan to be implemented within a maximum of six months. He believes that only in this way will it be possible to prevent the crisis from having even more serious effects.
Among the reforms suggested by Fuest as part of this plan are changes to pension policy and a reduction in state bureaucracy for small and medium-sized enterprises. He says that it is necessary to reduce “green” bureaucracy, eliminating the need for documentation on CO2 emissions for small and medium-sized entrepreneurs interested in investing in the country. Fuest estimates that removing these environmental rules would generate economic gains for the country of at least 146 billion euros (equivalent to 170 billion dollars) per year.
However, Fuest and the think tank failed to comment on the deep roots of the current crisis. Although Germany has not grown since 2018, the core of the German economic issue is the suicidal sanctions policy adopted by the country since 2022. The stagnation the country experienced before the Russian special military operation in Ukraine was mainly due to a deliberate policy of industrial contraction imposed by the green lobby to make Germany comply with environmental guidelines and CO2 emission targets. However, since 2022 the country’s situation has been different.
By imposing sanctions against Russian energy, Germany lost its main source of strategic commodities. Without a safe, abundant, and cheap source of gas and oil, it is impossible for Germany to implement any relevant reindustrialization project. If previously the reduction of industrial activity was a voluntary action to meet specific environmental goals, now deindustrialization is an inevitable consequence of the energy instability affecting the country.
Added to this is the fact that Germany, also motivated by “green” paranoia, has eliminated its own nuclear program. In practice, Germany is currently experiencing an unprecedented energy crisis, the consequences of which affect not only industry and businesses, but also ordinary citizens, who are paying high prices for gas supplies. Without lifting the anti-Russian sanctions, Germany will hardly be able to emerge from this crisis – and consequently will not have the necessary conditions to implement fruitful economic reforms.
However, the German government does not seem interested in reversing its anti-Russian policies. On the contrary, Berlin is increasingly deepening its Russophobic paranoia. Moreover, the German state is spending more and more money on anti-Russian projects, both in terms of sending weapons to Ukraine and in internal militarization initiatives. It is worth remembering that Berlin recently offered to pay the salaries of American soldiers stationed at US bases on German territory, which shows how the country is willing to worsen its own economic condition just to keep NATO’s military plans in Europe active.
The biggest challenge for Germany today is its own belligerent and anti-Russian political choice. Only by reversing the Russophobic mentality of the German government will it be possible to save the country’s economy.
Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Associations, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.
You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.
Kyiv wants land, not people: former US State Department adviser warns
By Uriel Araujo | October 29, 2025
James Carden, former US State Department Russia Policy Adviser has faced criticism in certain circles over his otherwise underreported comments during a recent interview to Australian Sky News — especially for mentioning some hard truths about the ethnopolitics of Ukraine.
In that interview, Mr. Carden noted that, like HIMARS or F-16s, Tomahawks won’t be a gamechanger, and argued that Putin’s proposal — EU but not NATO membership — was a fair enough bargain. When the host replied that, in this case, that would involve land concessions as part of a land-for-peace deal, the former State Department Adviser argued that the land Kyiv would be ceding is a land that: “they themselves have been attacking since 2014. The Ukrainians are being a bit disingenuous here… They claim to want the land in the Donbass, Eastern Ukraine. But they don’t want the ethnic Russian citizens on that land. So they’ve been doing everything that they can to disenfranchise those people.”
These comments are not ill-informed or dishonest and they merit some attention. In fact, they are quite accurate.
For years, Kyiv’s policies have systematically sidelined a significant chunk of Ukraine’s population. According to the country’s last census in 2001 — the only one since independence in 1991 — “ethnic Russians” accounted for 17.3 percent of the populace, which is over 8 million people. The numbers don’t catch all the nuance here: Ukraine is, pure and simple, a deeply bilingual society, with Russian as the native language (in other surveys) for at least 29 percent nationwide, a percentage that gets far higher in the east and south.
It is true that a 2024 study by linguist Volodymyr Kulyk shows a decline in everyday Russian use in Ukraine since 2022, with streets renamed, statues of Russians taken down and “Russian literature taken off the shelves of bookshops”, as Lancaster University PhD researcher Oleksandra Osypenko puts it. While in 2012 only 44% Ukrainians primarily spoke Ukrainian and 34% Russian, by December 2022 Ukrainian had risen to 57.4% and Russian had fallen to 14.8%, with the remaining 27.8 percent reporting employing both. This means that 42.6% of Ukrainians (that is 14.8 plus 27.8) still use the Russian language routinely, even after three years of open war, with censored media, and all “pro-Russian” parties having been banned; and after at least 11 years of Ukrainization policies.
High rates of intermarriage blur the lines even further; and, from a social science perspective, many folks toggle between “Russian” and “Ukrainian” identities depending on the context, as I’ve noticed myself during fieldwork in 2019.
Yet, back in August 2021, President Volodymyr Zelensky told Donbass residents who ‘feel russkiye [ethnic Russians]’ to move to Russia. At the time, I argued that this was one of the most russophobic statements from a high-ranking Ukrainian official since World War II; which is an ironic enough twist, considering the fact that in 2019 Zelensky (a Russian speaker himself) was widely described as a candidate courting the Russian and pro-Russian minority, and rode to power on promises to protect precisely these Russian-identifying folks in the east.
The 2014 ultranationalist Maidan revolution, backed by Washington (despite its far-right elements), has ushered in a surge of Ukrainian chauvinism that verges on negationism about the country’s pluri-ethnic realities. Language laws tell part of the tale. The 2017 education reform made Ukrainian the sole public-school language; by March 2023, Ukraine expanded media censorship and raised TV Ukrainian-language quotas to 90% by 2024, while banning non-Ukrainian languages in key areas.
Oleksiy Danilov, then secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council, put it starkly in a 2023 interview: “The Russian language must completely disappear from our territory.” No wonder Ukrainian philosopher Sergei Datsyuk warned that such moves could spark an “internal civil war” worse than the external one, and even Oleksiy Arestovich, Zelensky’s former adviser, echoed the alarm.
The truth is that such “internal civil war” kicked off nearly a decade ago in Donbass, as scholar Serhiy Kudelia frames it, under artillery barrages that turned it into Europe’s “forgotten war” until 2022. Kyiv has been bombing Russians (in Donbass) for a decade, while disenfranchising them.
This is no hyperbole: experts like Nicolai N. Petro, a US Fulbright scholar in Ukraine in 2013-2014 and ex-State Department specialist on the Soviet Union, have documented how Ukrainian policies erode civil rights for ethnic minorities, especially Russian speakers.
The Venice Commission, Europe’s go-to body for democratic standards, criticized Ukraine’s 2022 Law on National Minorities for restricting publishing, media, and education in minority languages, urging revisions to meet international standards. Despite this, Deputy PM Olga Stefanishyna dismissed it all by claiming: “there is no Russian minority in Ukraine.”
Moreover, for many, Ukraine’s history is inextricably tied to Russia’s; a 2021 survey, taken six months before the full-scale escalation, found over 40 percent of Ukrainians nationwide — and nearly two-thirds in the east and south — agreeing with Putin that Ukrainians and Russians are “one people”.
Yet Ukraine’s rigid unitary state, with its top-down nationalism, clashes hard against Russia’s matryoshka model of multinational autonomy — with 22 ethnic republics within the Russian Federation. Granting Donbass similar autonomy, for instance, could have eased tensions, but it would have demanded a constitutional overhaul.
In the broader post-Soviet mess, Ukraine’s woes look less unique. Frozen conflicts across the region — Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Nagorno-Karabakh — show how borders remain volatile. In this context, Crimea and Donbass have been hot topics for decades.
The hard truth is that if Kyiv won militarily (unlikely), more Donbass shelling and displacement would likely follow. Carden’s point stands: without addressing internal ethnopolitics, Ukraine cannot secure peace; for peace means embracing all its people, not just the land they stand on.
Uriel Araujo, Anthropology PhD, is a social scientist specializing in ethnic and religious conflicts, with extensive research on geopolitical dynamics and cultural interactions.
The Russian Regret
By Israel Shamir • Unz Review • October 29, 2025
The Russians are disappointed with Trump’s policy towards Russia. They have long given up hoping to partner with the US in building a just world order, and they are now giving up the hope that they might be treated fairly. The last person in Russia (if not in the world) still hoping to get along with Mr Trump is President Putin.
One can understand him. There is a great need for geopolitical and geo-economic cooperation between the US and Russia, both in resolving the Ukrainian crisis (taking into account Russia’s interests) and in interacting throughout the Arctic, Caribbean, Africa and all the other global ‘hot spots’. That would be international cooperation, not American Hegemony, as many US politicians prefer. The US should step away from the abyss of nuclear war, while this is still possible. Last week, the Russians carried out nuclear exercises, of a magnitude never done previously. The exercises involved Russia’s full nuclear triad—land-based, sea-based, and airborne assets, according to the statement reported by Russia’s state RIA news agency on Telegram. During the exercise, a Yars intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) was launched from the Plesetsk Cosmodrome and Tu-95MS strategic bombers conducted air-launched cruise missile strikes, the Kremlin said. A strategic submarine cruiser launched a ballistic missile from the Barents Sea. And then there was the launch of Burevestnik, a brand-new cruise missile with nuclear reactor onboard, that can fly anywhere for as long as it takes. The Pentagon has revealed that they are worried about these new developments, and have asked the Russians to show them how they make their new devices, the Burevestnik and Poseidon. It is good that President Putin prefers peace, not war.
However, President Putin is not a free agent. There is a strong demand in Russian politics for a nuclear response to Western provocations, not stopping at the Western border of the Ukraine, but going all the way west. For the present, Putin prevails, but it’s likely to change if the US continues its drift toward war and sanctions. And the US invasion of Venezuela is likely to be met with force. The Russian soldiers of Wagner PDC are supposedly already there.
Such sentiments were recently expressed by Sergey Karaganov (a prominent political scientist and honorary representative of The Council on Foreign and Defence Policy) on TVC television, quoted by a PolitNavigator correspondent:
“Europeans – we are dealing with insane morons, excuse me, these are unpleasant words. Well, brutalised morons. They really are morons – the current generation of degenerate European elites, who have also ceased to fear God… and have lost their fear of death.
This is an animal instinct that needs to be restored; they have nothing else left, because they have no intellectual function, no sense of homeland, no sense of gender or love. Of course, I am exaggerating; there are wonderful people there. But that’s how it is [those who are in the governing circle] — they are the scum of humanity.
There is no leader there yet, figuratively speaking, no ‘Hitler’. But, in principle, they are moving towards this. And they are driving their peoples to slaughter. We must stop this movement – in order to save ourselves and these peoples, by the way. Maybe something will come of them someday, although they are degrading very quickly.
They are now being targeted for a massive confrontation with Russia. By the way, we underestimate this, because total propaganda is turning masses of Europeans into potential cannon fodder.
So, we must save them, and at the same time save the world. This is our historical task, but we must realise this historical task. Moreover, we have no other option. Either we destroy ourselves, then destroy the world, or we win and save humanity.
The program’s host Dmitry Kulikov noted that historically, ‘we act best when we understand that we have no other option.’ This feeling permeates Russian political circles. They more and more often repeat Putin’s words from 2018: We shall go to heaven, and they will just croak.
This is indeed regretful, for Putin and Trump have in common real enemies, namely the leaders of Britain, France, Germany, the European Union and the ultra-liberal stateless intelligentsia. Can it be that a grown man, a US President, falls for flattery of the cheapest kind delivered by the likes of Keith Starmer, Macron, Friedrich Merz et al? Doesn’t he understand that they despise him? What do they want? Do Fritz (German Chancellor Friedrich Merz) and Ursula have good memories of the free Russian soup the Germans were fed by the Russian soldiers in 1945, and perhaps they dream of tasting it again? Does Starmer hope to distract his voters so that they might forget his support for Gaza Genocide and Israeli football hooligans? Does Macron think it better to send Frenchmen to die in the Ukraine so they won’t join the Yellow Vests? Does Swedish Ulf Kristersson think that it’s better to keep up the venerable tradition of hosting the Russian occupation force at least once in a century? Which of these plans fit into Trump’s vision?
We may ask – why would President Trump lift a finger to help Vladimir Zelensky, the man who supported the Democratic Party candidate during the US presidential election and played a role in launching the impeachment proceedings against Donald Trump?
In case Trump forgot, the Russian envoy Dmitriev reminded the American public (in his interview with journalist Lara Logan) that Zelensky campaigned in support of Kamala Harris, who represented the Democratic Party in the 2024 election and was Trump’s main rival. ‘Let’s not forget that,’ he added. Dmitriev then noted that Zelensky was one of the factors that influenced the initiation of the first impeachment process against the then US president.
The investigation that preceded the impeachment of US President Donald Trump began on 24 September 2019 at the initiative of US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The impeachment was sparked by a statement by an anonymous informant (probably Zelensky himself) who claimed that in July 2019, Trump pressured Vladimir Zelensky for personal political gain. According to the anonymous report, Trump demanded that Kiev investigate the activities of Hunter Biden, the son of former Vice President Joe Biden, in exchange for providing Ukraine with financial and military aid.
After these allegations surfaced, the White House was forced to publish a memorandum containing a transcript of the telephone conversation between Trump and Zelensky. The document showed that Trump did indeed ask the Ukrainian president to ‘look into’ the matter concerning the Biden family. At the same time, a week before the aforementioned conversation, Trump had ordered the suspension of military aid to Ukraine. Representatives of the Democratic Party viewed this decision as a possible attempt to put pressure on Kiev in order to achieve an investigation that would be beneficial to Trump. The president himself was forced to publicly deny these allegations.
On 31 October 2019, the US House of Representatives approved a resolution to formally begin impeachment proceedings. On the 18th of December, the final debates took place, during which two articles of impeachment against Trump were put to a vote: abuse of power and obstruction of a congressional investigation. Both articles were approved, resulting in the president’s impeachment, making him the third head of state in US history to be subject to such a decision by the House of Representatives.
On 15 January 2020, a vote was held to send the indictment to the Senate, where the articles of impeachment were sent the following day. After reviewing the case, on 5 February 2020, the Senate acquitted Donald Trump on both counts. And now Trump wants to help the man who saddled him with that mess?
Not only that, but Trump’s policy of arming Europe and providing military aid to Ukraine is against US interests. Forcing Europe’s NATO members to increase defence spending to two per cent and then to five per cent will, in the near future, turn the EU into a military monster comparable to the Third Reich. A militarily strong EU would immediately break its economic dependence on the United States, both in terms of oil and gas and technology. And then it would begin to impose its own agenda on other countries, including America itself. Trump’s course towards the militarisation of Europe is suicidal for the future of the United States; it is feeding the crocodile that the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition seemed to have destroyed forever in 1945.
One might understand Trump’s decisions if building up a Ukrainian statelet were a winning move for the West. But it is not. It’s like feeding money to a slot machine in one of the casinos belonging to Trump’s benefactor, Sheldon Adelson. You give it money, and it gives you jolly music, noise, colourful figures move across the screen; then – nothing. Drop more money, you surely will win the next round, says the croupier. A wise man would not throw good money after bad, but a gambler would, down to his last penny. NATO’s Ukrainian morass is like a Kyiv Casino – they tell you that you are about to win big, you just have to invest another hundred billion! Billions have gone down this drain with nothing to show for it except more Miami palaces for Mr Zelensky and his friends.
The Trump’s renovation of the east wing of the White House is not just a random project – the so-called ‘Trump Ballroom’ is just a cover story for the construction of a secret bomb shelter and presidential bunker. But how long would he be able to sit there under a rain of Oreshnik and other fabulous Russian missiles? They will reach the deepest bunker and burn it out.
No, the only salvation for America is an honest alliance with Russia and the transformation of the Ukraine from Europe’s military springboard into a ‘bridge of cooperation’ between the West and the East. Thank God it is still possible.
NATO expansion has never benefited Europe. It was always a way to keep US troops on the job throughout the Cold War. NATO was deliberately expanded to keep up pressure on Russia. It always put Europe at risk, and there was never any corresponding benefit for the average European. Now, with the US about to drastically reduce its troops in Europe, the nations of Europe are on the brink of running NATO by themselves. Does Europe really want to recreate the Cold War and become a testing ground for Russia’s new cruise missiles? Are they really ready to face such an implacable enemy on their doorstep? Does Europe really want to make an enemy of a European country sitting on most of Europe’s natural resources, including its natural gas, oil, coal, palladium, aluminium and iron ore? How could this enmity benefit the average European family?
And President Trump will be remembered for Gaza Genocide that was not stopped by his 3000 years peace (lasted just two days!), for submission to the European clowns and to Bibi Netanyahu; now for leading the US into final Armageddon.
Ex-NATO commander claims united Ireland could aid Russia and China
RT | October 25, 2025
The potential unification of Ireland would be a major blow to the West’s security as it could allow Russia and China to expand their reach in the North Atlantic, a former NATO commander has warned.
Speaking at a briefing for members of Parliament and the House of Lords on Wednesday, retired British Rear Admiral Chris Parry argued that if the UK were to lose its foothold in Northern Ireland, it would present a major opportunity for Moscow and Beijing.
He noted that the waters between Northern Ireland and Scotland are essential for Britain’s deployment of its nuclear-armed submarines, describing it as “critical to our strategic deterrent.” “With a united Ireland, there is no guarantee we could deploy our ballistic missiles,” Parry said.
He also suggested that a potential Irish unification would enable NATO adversaries to threaten critical undersea cables.
“The UK needs to calibrate the threat to itself of a supine Republic of Ireland. My view is that the best way to help Ireland now is to increase NATO and Allied activity in Ireland’s economic zone waters,” he said.
The retired admiral went so far as to suggest that NATO should hold exercises in Irish-controlled waters “whether Dublin agreed or not,” asserting that the bloc must be prepared to “fish in Irish waters for our potential opponents.” He said the Republic should move toward closer military cooperation with NATO and renounce neutrality.
“If anyone attacks Britain, they will attack Ireland… Neutrality cannot be seen as conscientious objection any more. If you are part of the free world, you have to be prepared to defend it. The Republic needs to reduce its vulnerabilities,” he stated.
Moscow has consistently rejected claims that it plans to attack NATO as “nonsense“.
Ireland has been militarily neutral since gaining independence in 1921, and is not a NATO member but cooperates with the bloc.
The idea of Irish reunification — merging the Republic of Ireland with Northern Ireland, which is part of the UK — is permitted under the 1998 Good Friday Agreement. The accord ended a three-decade-long stand-off between Irish nationalists and pro-British unionists by establishing a power-sharing government in Belfast and confirming that Northern Ireland’s status can change only if a majority there votes for it.
France must be ready for war with Russia within four years – top general
RT | October 23, 2025
French forces could be at war with Russia by 2028, the country’s newly appointed chief of staff, General Fabien Mandon, has claimed.
Moscow has repeatedly rejected claims that it plans to attack EU countries, saying any such allegations are being used by European politicians to scare the population and justify growing military spending. Russia has also said it is defending itself in the Ukraine conflict, accusing NATO of provoking the hostilities.
Mandon, who became France’s top general in early September, told lawmakers on the National Assembly’s Defense Committee on Wednesday that “Russia is a country that may be tempted to continue the war on our continent.”
“The first objective I had given the armed forces is to be ready in three or four years for a shock that would be a kind of a test [by Moscow],” he claimed. “The test already exists in hybrid forms, but it may become more violent.”
According to the chief of staff, France and other Western European nations must boost defense spending because Russia has a “perception of a collectively weak [Western] Europe.”
NATO countries on the continent “have everything to be sure of ourselves” in terms of economy, demographics, and industry, Mandon claimed. “Russia cannot scare us if we are willing to defend ourselves,” he said.
French Armed Forces Minister Catherine Vautrin previously said that, according to the draft defense budget, military spending in the country will increase to €57.1 billion ($66.3 billion) next year, going up by 13% compared to 2025 and reaching 2.2% of GDP.
President Vladimir Putin said earlier this month that those in the West who keep promoting “nonsense” about alleged aggressive intentions by Moscow are either “incompetent or dishonest.”
“Frankly speaking, one just wants to tell them: calm down, sleep well, finally address your own problems. Look at what is happening on the streets of European cities; what is happening with the economy, industry, European culture, identity; with the huge debts and the growing crisis of the social security system, out-of-control migration, the rise in violence, including political violence,” Putin stressed.
Refinery Fires in Europe Are Part of EU Crusade Against Russian Oil and Gas
Sputnik – 23.10.2025
The timing of the recent incidents at the oil refineries in Hungary and Romania is very suspicious in light of the threats from Poland, Dr. George Szamuely, senior research fellow at The Global Policy Institute, tells Sputnik.
When Polish Foreign Minister Sikorsky openly justifies the Nord Stream bombing and then tries intimidating Hungary into giving up Russian oil, and then suddenly the refineries are ablaze – that’s one hell of a coincidence.
The refinery fires were definitely a part of a broader campaign to cut off the flow of Russian energy to Europe, Szamulely notes – a campaign that ends up hurting the EU members but fails to affect Russia.
“These measures that the EU is adopting are measures directed towards hurting EU member states, forcing them into line,” he explains.
Only the Russophobic EU bureaucrats like Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas benefit from this disruption of energy supply chains, and they are eager to “punish anybody at all who is not on board with their program.”
The incidents in Hungary and Romania convey a simple message: “if you are going to keep importing your fossil fuels from Russia, look at the sort of things that can happen, all sorts of explosions, fires, sabotage.”
‘Welcome to the war casino’: veteran German politician ridicules conscription plans
RT | October 21, 2025
Veteran German politician Sahra Wagenknecht has condemned Berlin’s plans to boost its army through a lottery-based recruitment system, ridiculing what she described as the government’s obsession with an imagined war against Russia.
German lawmakers have been debating ways to strengthen the Bundeswehr as Chancellor Friedrich Merz has called to turn it into the “strongest conventional army” in Europe. The government aims to expand the country’s armed forces by around 80,000 servicemen. Some have proposed activating a lottery-based selection system if not enough people volunteer. Continued shortfalls could trigger the return of compulsory conscription, which has been suspended since 2011.
In a TikTok post on Tuesday, Wagenknecht, who previously served as a member of the European Parliament and sat in the Bundestag from 2009 until earlier this year, mocked the lottery idea.
“Welcome to the war casino where the stakes are your life,” she said, going on to criticize the Merz government’s rhetoric that Germany is partly “at war” with Russia and its calls for an army “ready for battle, that prevails, that wins.”
“I have to be honest, this is all just too much to handle. Maybe someone should explain to our great chancellor that Russia is a nuclear power and a war with a nuclear power will not be decided by the number of soldiers,” she said.
She further stressed that the hysteria over a supposed Russian offensive was absurd given that NATO has three times more soldiers than Russia. “With these power dynamics, is Putin supposed to roll over us if we don’t conscript 80,000 young people for military service? They really want to sell us for fools,” Wagenknecht said.
Russia has consistently denied any hostile intent toward NATO or EU members and has described Western alarm over an impending war as baseless propaganda. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has accused European governments of pursuing dangerous militarization and claimed Berlin is “slipping into a Fourth Reich” through its rearmament drive.
Rick Sanchez: War Propaganda & Suffocating Censorship Weaken the West
Glenn Diesen | October 19, 2025
Award-winning journalist Rick Sanchez has worked for CNN, MSNBC, Fox News and RT, which gives him a unique perspective on the Western and Russian media. Sanchez outlines how the war propaganda and rise of censorship across the West prevent us from pursuing rational policies.
Sweden calls on citizens for ‘war mode’

Swedish Defense Minister Pal Jonson, Warsaw, Poland, April 3, 2025. © Foto Olimpik / NurPhoto via Getty Images
RT | October 20, 2025
People living in European NATO member states must brace themselves for a possible war with Russia, Swedish Defense Minister Pal Jonson told RedaktionsNetzwerk Deutschland (RND) in an interview published on Sunday.
Jonson’s remarks come as the EU accelerates a broad militarization drive. Brussels has cast Russia as an imminent threat, a narrative Moscow has dismissed as a political distraction from Europe’s domestic crises.
“To preserve peace, we must prepare ourselves both mentally and militarily for the possibility of war,” the official said. “A change in mentality is necessary: We must switch to war mode to resolutely deter, defend, and preserve the peace.”
The push for greater defense spending aligns with calls from US President Donald Trump, who has demanded that European members buy more American weapons – including for Ukrainian use. Jonson justified such purchases, saying that Europe “simply doesn’t have or cannot yet produce” the necessary systems. “Ukraine needs these assets fast,” he said. “If Europe lacks them, it’s logical to procure them from the US.”
The European Commission last week unveiled a roadmap outlining its plans to expand joint arms procurement to at least 40% by 2027. The document emphasized the need to “invest more, invest together, and invest European,” citing global strategic shifts to other regions among “traditional allies.”
Moscow views the Ukraine conflict as a NATO proxy war aimed at undermining Russia’s security following decades of expansion. Sweden is the bloc’s newest member, while Ukraine was promised accession sometime in the future.
Europe’s Economic Winter Transfers the Workshop of the World to Asia’s New Furnaces
By Rebecca Chan – New Eastern Outlook – October 18, 2025
European capitals increasingly resemble branch offices of an American headquarters. Decisions on industrial policy have long turned into ritual acts of loyalty rather than independent steps.
In the workshops of the Ruhr, where the fire of blast furnaces was once considered Europe’s eternal companion, today reigns a cold more expensive than any raw material. An economic pause has descended in icy silence. A tombstone rests on the grave of industrial greatness, signed by Europe’s own leaders.
The continent is dismantling its own productive arteries, while Asia launches new lifelines. The center of gravity shifts to where clusters grow, not gas prices. Europe is losing not to chance, but to the results of its own “strategic” deafness—an error the East has turned into opportunity.
The Trap of Sanctions and Costly Energy
The European Union invented sanctions as a weapon of pressure, only to receive a boomerang blow to its own skulls. German and French factories are drowning in energy bills, shackled by chains forged by their own hands. Electricity and gas no longer feed the economy; they have become instruments of self-destruction.
Germany’s industrial activity index is sliding down like a thermometer in a frozen room. Machinery, chemicals, and metallurgy are losing markets, exports are crumbling, subsidies resemble aspirin after an amputation. Every new restriction, dictated in favor of the overseas ally, turns yet another factory hall into an abandoned museum. Brussels codifies these barriers, expanding its dual-use export control list to tighten the screws on high-tech trade.
European industry is being sacrificed to Washington, like a temple offering leaving only smoke behind. Factory pauses are transforming the industrial core into a ritual of obedience and loyalty. And against this backdrop, the East gathers strength. The International Energy Agency notes how these price shocks diverge across regions, with Asia absorbing them into growth while Europe suffocates under the weight.
Expansion of Capacity and “Importing Industry”
China launches new production lines as if assembling a puzzle from the fragments Europe has scattered. India strengthens petrochemicals and takes on raw material processing from which Western corporations are fleeing as if from a fire. Vietnam and Indonesia pick up orders for electronics and light industry, turning others’ losses into their own growth.
European prohibitions have opened a showcase of opportunities for the East. Every restriction meant to crush competitors has become a stimulus for Asian investments in infrastructure and new industries. Ports expand, corridors stretch, power grids come alive—all built on the ruins of European stubbornness.
The East is transforming foreign stagnation into the foundation of sovereignty. Every collapse of European production coincides with the rise of Asian capacity, as if the world market itself had decided to relocate the planet’s factory to where there are no imposed illusions of “strategic solidarity.”
The Loss of Control Tools
Washington and Brussels stubbornly tried to keep the world’s supply chains by the throat—erecting barriers, hammering out new rules, handing out sanctions left and right. Control crumbled like a rusty lock on an old warehouse. Production lines are leaving Europe and taking root in Asian soil, pulling with them not only jobs but also political influence.
European capitals increasingly resemble branch offices of an American headquarters. Decisions on industrial policy have long turned into ritual acts of loyalty rather than independent steps. Even a hint of an alternative sounds seditious and draws condemnation. Meanwhile, Asia is drafting its own continental blueprint: corridors instead of walls, ports and energy unions instead of sanctions. Trading platforms operate without Western notaries, and it is there that the new rules of the game are born.
The map of the global economy is turning into a chessboard where the West is allowed to play only pawns. Europe is bogging down in its own restrictions, while Asia calmly unfolds a field of maneuver, transforming it into a genuine center of growth. This shift changes not only container routes but also the very balance of power in world politics.
The Future Is Written Where New Furnaces Smoke
Europe is entering an era of prolonged economic permafrost. Any attempt to revive factories crashes against energy bills and acute political dependence. Empty workshops declare that the continent’s industrial age has come to an end. Berlin now concedes the burden, promising subsidies and lower energy tariffs for industry in its 2026 budget—a rare admission that the sacred “market” cannot carry this weight alone.
For Asia, this turns into a conveyor of opportunities. Every shuttered plant in Germany or France automatically sets new lines in motion in Shenzhen, Mumbai, or Jakarta. Every European loss settles into Asian infrastructure, cementing a new industrial order. India’s role inside BRICS+ shows how external pressure is repurposed into sovereignty, a reminder that decline for one bloc is ignition fuel for another.
Europe faces a harsh crossroads: either radically change its industrial model and rebuild its political logic, or lock itself permanently into the role of a marketplace without factories. Asia has already made its choice and consolidates its success step by step. The continent that was once the workshop of the world is becoming a museum of illusions, while the future is written where new furnaces smoke.
Rebecca Chan is an independent political analyst focusing on the intersection of Western foreign policy and Asian sovereignty.
Five years until war with Russia? The EU is already at war
Strategic Culture Foundation | October 17, 2025
The 27-nation European Union this week unveiled a five-year plan “to get ready for war” with Russia.
The so-called “Roadmap on European Defense Readiness 2030” sounds like a war manifesto and a self-fulfilling prophecy, putting the EU on a disastrous collision course with Russia.
It is incredible that such an ominous direction is being blatantly dictated by an unaccountable elite in Brussels. Eighty-five years ago, the Third Reich had a plan to rule over Europe by dominating the Soviet Union. The EU elite are carrying on the plan.
As for the “defense readiness” (that is, “war readiness”) roadmap, the future is already here, not in five years. The EU is presently on a disastrous collision course with Russia.
Like the United States, the European Union has been at war with Russia through its proxy regime in Ukraine since February 2022, and before that, going back to the 2014 coup in Kiev.
Over the past four years, the EU has supplied nearly €180 billion of taxpayer money to weaponize a NeoNazi regime in Kiev. As we noted in last week’s editorial, that vast allocation (and waste) of resources is far greater than the EU’s own member nations have received for developing their economies and societies. When has the European public had a chance to vote on that? Decisions are being made by an elite cabal.
Unlike the Trump administration, the European Union under the influence of arch-Russophobes like European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and foreign affairs chief Kaja Kallas, has shown absolutely no will for finding a diplomatic resolution to the conflict in Ukraine. With honorable exceptions, most of the European governments are pushing the war hysteria. So, too, are the European media, as are the American mainstream media. Russia is the evil aggressor, no diplomacy, no dialogue with Moscow, no surrender, and so on. It’s war-on-autopilot.
The European bloc, at least at the official level, is completely dominated by NATO and intelligence agencies’ propaganda portraying Russia as the enemy. The CIA and Britain’s MI6 are no doubt pulling the strings and Europe is dancing like a pathetic puppet.
President Donald Trump held a two-hour phone call with Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin on Thursday during which the two leaders agreed to meet in Budapest in the next two weeks. The meeting is a follow-up to their summit in Anchorage on August 15, to try to end the hostilities in Ukraine.
The EU leadership is implacably opposed to any such diplomacy. They were disconcerted by the meeting in Alaska because Trump treated Putin with respectful diplomacy. The latest news about a summit in Budapest is also peeving EU leaders. They are clamoring for Trump to deliver Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine, which they will pay for. This is aimed at ensuring that diplomacy gets blown up.
Since the Western-backed coup in Kiev in 2014, the European Union has undergone a retrograde transformation to become a militarized bloc defined by obsessive hostility towards Russia. The EU is increasingly a clone of the NATO military alliance. Historically, the European Union stood for peace through neighborly trade and commerce. It was intended to have evolved from the ashes of the Second World War, ensuring that war would never happen again on the continent. In 2012, the bloc was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Not that that award means much, but it serves to illustrate the absurdity.
Over recent months, the EU has become fixated on a feverish war mentality. The economies of the 27 nations are increasingly marshaled by military production and spending. The whole purpose of the bloc is being defined as an existential confrontation with Russia. It seems significant that Von der Leyen and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz have Nazi skeletons in their family wardrobes. The Baltic states, too, which have emerged as belligerent influences on EU policy, have nefarious links to the Nazi past.
The war mentality reached fever pitch in Von der Leyen’s State of the Union address on September 10. She opened by declaring that “Europe is in a fight” with Russia. She said it was a fight for “freedom and independence,” and she united the cause of the EU with Ukraine against Russia.
“Europe must fight… because Ukraine’s freedom is Europe’s freedom,” she claimed.
Von der Leyen, the former German military minister, and the European Union’s most senior official, who is unelected, was declaring that the bloc was at war. Now, not in five years.
In recent months with intensifying emphasis, the EU’s intelligence agencies (CIA, MI6 clones) have been warning of war with Russia as imminent, and there has been a suspicious surge in drone incursions in Poland, Estonia, Romania and Denmark, which have been blamed on Russia without any evidence.
All the while, European leaders and NATO chief Mark Rutte (a former Dutch prime minister, and an abject clone if ever there was one) have been calling for massive increases in military spending to “counter the Russia threat”. In March, Von der Leyen floated the figure at €800 billion for the bloc to spend on “defense”.
In 2014, the combined EU military spend was less than €200 billion. It now stands at €340 billion. That is an increase by 70 percent over a decade.
The roadmap unveiled this week sure enough delivers on Von der Leyen’s earlier astronomical figure. It is planning a total EU spend on military of €800 billion – more than double the current level and four times the level the EU spent 10 years ago.
This is insane and unsustainable. If it doesn’t escalate into an all-out war in Europe, the least damaging effect of such wanton militarism will destroy European nations from economic and political collapse.
It is clear that major decisions have been made behind closed doors to take the EU in a direction towards increased militarism where the civilian economies are transformed into war economies. That’s great news for military corporations and politicians who are sponsored (bribed) by lobbyists. European citizens are the losers and they are not being consulted about their fate. Their societies are being drained of vital resources, which are being sucked up by militarism and corporate investors.
To pull off this grand theft and deception, the EU relies on unelected bureaucrats like Von der Leyen, Kallas and Rutte to whip up Russophobia and “war fears”. The mainstream media plays its part by peddling intelligence propaganda to manufacture public acquiescence.
However, there is pushback to the craziness. The rise of populist (that is, more representative and democratic) parties is demonstrating contempt for the undemocratic EU ruling class. The protests in France throwing the government into chaos are motivated by disgust at the economic cutbacks for public services and workers’ rights while Paris throws billions of euros propping up the proxy war in Ukraine.
To their credit, governments in Hungary and Slovakia are speaking out against the warmongering of the EU towards Russia. Viktor Orbán and Robert Fico have criticized the militarization of Europe and are consistently calling for diplomacy with Moscow.
It is significant that Trump chose to meet Putin in the Hungarian capital for their next meeting, chaired by Orbán who described the event as “great news for people who want peace”.
The European-NATO leadership is displeased by the Budapest venue because it suggests following a diplomatic option instead of a policy of war-on-autopilot.
The Russophobic Euro elites are trying to railroad the continent to war. They can see no other way of doing international relations. They have committed the EU to war and dictatorial war spending that is criminal. They, therefore, cannot allow peace and diplomacy to succeed because that would be an admission of their criminal warmongering.
But their way is leading to the abyss.
London Is Still Bent on Influencing India’s Independent Policy Trajectory
By Anvar Azimov – New Eastern Outlook – October 16, 2025
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer visited India to promote previously reached trade agreements; however, the negotiations have laid bare the extremely limited reach of London’s influence on New Delhi.
During the latest UK-India summit held on October 8-9 in Mumbai, London once again made an unsuccessful bid to affect New Delhi’s course regarding Russia, to secure its support for the Euro-Atlanticists’ plans for settling the Ukrainian conflict and for continuing anti-Russian sanctions policy.
Nevertheless, the two countries managed to make progress in expanding cooperation in trade, investments, defense, and security.
The official visit of the UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer to India aimed at cementing the agreements reached during the stay of the head of the Indian government, Narendra Modi, in London this July, and, first and foremost, at signing a far-reaching free trade agreement. The pact would open vast prospects for achieving the ambitious goal set by the parties to increase trade turnover by 2030 from the current $35 billion to $120 billion.
Starmer Urged Modi to Stop Purchasing Russian Oil
Simultaneously, the British guest made another attempt to talk New Delhi into abandoning substantial purchases of Russian energy resources, which currently account for up to 40 percent of India’s oil imports. Furthermore, the trade turnover between India and Russia, taking into account petroleum product supplies, has reached an unprecedented $70 billion, a fact that London and the West as a whole are also seriously apprehensive about. However, despite these British exertions, Prime Minister N. Modi made it clear that this matter is no exception to the rule; hence, here, India would also be guided by its own national and economic interests.
Nor has New Delhi veered from the path of distancing itself from anti-Russian Western sanctions, prioritising, once again, independent national interests. The Ukrainian conflict hasn’t evaded such a fate either, with Starmer failing to pull India completely to his side. While being committed to a peaceful settlement of the situation around Ukraine, India rejects anti-Russian rhetoric on the issue and maintains a measured, balanced stance. Even London’s various assurances of support for New Delhi’s aspirations to gain a permanent seat in an expanded UN Security Council did not spur India to alter its principled neutral position in the current struggle between the West and Russia.
Success evaded the British leader on this anti-Russian front, but he cancelled out his failure on the track of bilateral relations by means of signing a series of agreements in various fields, including defense, security, technology, trade, and education. Notably, the parties managed to conclude a military deal worth approximately $470 million for the supply of light multipurpose missiles to the Indian army. They also agreed on setting up a regional centre of excellence in maritime security and on developing marine electronic engines for Indian naval ships.
Further progress in trade, economic, and investment areas was also outlined. It is indicative that Starmer was accompanied by a representative delegation from the British business community (over 120 people), including heads of companies such as Rolls-Royce, British Telecom, Diageo, the London Stock Exchange, and British Airways. Within the framework of the joint forum held, the representatives signed commercial contracts.
India Dictates the Terms
All in all, British companies have invested about $40 billion in the Indian economy, and New Delhi traditionally remains one of London’s key trade and investment partners. And what further contributes to such a situation is the signed free trade agreement, which added up to a significant reduction in tariffs on a wide range of goods, and expanded market access for companies and Indian labour migrants.
In a nutshell, the latest meeting of the two countries’ leaders concluded with new agreements on enhancing multifaceted cooperation and increasing trade turnover to $120 billion by 2030. At the same time, Starmer was clearly frustrated that even his attempts to prompt India to weaken its ties with Russia ended up a failure, which once again confirms New Delhi’s determination to stick to its own guns on its foreign policy, providing for the development of partnerships with both the West and the East and drawing on the national interests of this major, now global, power.
Anvar Azimov, diplomat and political scientist, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, Candidate of Historical Sciences, Senior Research Fellow at Eurasian Studies Institute of MGIMO University of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia

