EU and UK preparing naval blockade of Russia – Putin aide
RT | April 22, 2025
The EU and the UK are gearing up to impose a naval blockade on Russia, Nikolay Patrushev, a senior aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin, has said. He warned that Moscow has a fleet powerful enough to respond to any such move.
In an interview published on Monday by Kommersant, Patrushev, who chairs Russia’s Maritime Board, a body which oversees national policy in this domain, stated that Moscow is facing escalating threats and challenges at sea amid growing geopolitical tensions.
“The collective West no longer hides its intentions to expel our shipping from the seas, while sanctions plans mulled, for example, by the British and some EU members increasingly resemble a maritime blockade,” he said.
Patrushev warned that these steps would “meet an adequate and proportionate response” from Moscow. “If diplomatic or legal instruments do not take effect, the security of Russian shipping will be ensured by our navy. The hotheads in London or Brussels need to clearly understand this,” he said.
Patrushev emphasized that Russia is pursuing a large-scale naval modernization program, including the development and deployment of unmanned systems while refining navy tactics. However, Moscow does not intend to get involved in a “naval arms race,” he added.
Western countries introduced maritime restrictions on Russia in 2022 over the Ukraine conflict, and have sanctioned dozens of Russian ships for allegedly circumventing an oil price cap. Russian ships have also faced major obstacles in accessing EU ports, insurers, and financial institutions.
The British Navy has been shadowing Russian ships passing near its waters for months, citing concerns about a perceived threat to national security and maritime infrastructure.
Maritime tensions have also been heightened in recent months following several ruptures in underwater infrastructure in the Baltic Sea. While there has been speculation about alleged Russian involvement, Western officials have offered no evidence. The Kremlin has dismissed the speculation as “absurd.”
NATO has increased its military presence in the Baltic Sea following the sabotage allegations, prompting Russia to warn that it would respond appropriately to any “violations” by the bloc’s vessels.
Facing Prison Time in Germany for Criticizing an Israeli Journalist: The Case of Hüseyin Dogru
By Alan MacLeod – MintPressNews – April 20, 2025
Amid a crackdown on pro-Palestine voices in Germany, a journalist regularly attacked as a Russian operative is facing up to three years in prison for defamation of an Israel-based journalist. Hüseyin Dogru, founder of red. media, has been charged with defamation for actions relating to a spat with Nicholas Potter, a German state-funded reporter working for the Israeli outlet, The Jerusalem Post.
In December, Potter, a self-styled counter-extremism expert, published a lengthy exposé in The Jerusalem Post, claiming that red. media, MintPress News, and The Grayzone were part of a network of far-left outlets promoting extremism and anti-Semitic conspiracy theories.
Worse still, he strongly insinuated that all three were promoted and funded by the governments of Russia, Syria, and Iran.
The charges are false (see MintPress’ rebuttal here), and are particularly ironic, coming as they do from a journalist who is funded by the German Foreign Office. One who, amid a genocide, moved to Israel to work for an outlet headed by a former Israeli Defense Forces spokesperson.
Moreover, Potter himself arguably holds extreme views on the subject. Just weeks after attacking us for our journalism, he penned an article titled “Can Journalists Be Terrorists,” which attempted to justify many of Israel’s killings of Palestinian media workers.
Both red. and MintPress immediately highlighted much of this important context, and our content went viral.
From Viral Criticism to Criminal Charges
A sticker about Potter, based on a red. media graphic, was spotted in Berlin. The sticker took the outlet’s criticism of him, and plastered the phrase, “The German Hurensohn” — “The German Son of a Bitch” — over the top. That sticker is the centerpiece of the prosecution’s allegation of a coordinated “hate campaign” against Potter led by red. media. Potter claims that he has suffered harassment and threats to his life, and some have tried to link this back to red. media’s graphic.
The accusations provoked a storm of articles in German media, all supportive of Potter. Many echoed U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s claims that red. media is a Russian government-controlled influence operation.
A red. media post criticizing journalist Nicholas Potter, left, appears as a modified sticker in Germany, right. Photo provided to MintPress
Dogru denies these allegations, although he was previously a key part of Red Fish, a platform financed by Ruptly, a Germany-based outlet partially funded by the Russian state-controlled network, RT. After the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Dogru closed Red Fish and started his own independent outlet. He insists it has no connection to Russia and is dedicated to making revolutionary and educational content. He also denies having any information or involvement in producing anti-Potter stickers.
Germany Criminalized Palestinian Solidarity
Potter’s support for Israeli policies has certainly drawn the ire of many in the pro-Palestine movement in Germany. Yet he is far from alone. The German government has offered its full support to Israel and has gone so far as to ban pro-Palestine demonstrations and lock up countless activists, including Jewish people. The phrase “From the River to the Sea” has effectively been criminalized, with Berlin announcing that it would deny citizenship to anyone using it. New German citizenship laws require all applicants to sign what is, in effect, a loyalty oath to the State of Israel, declaring that it has a “right to exist.”
Berlin is currently deporting foreign residents for their participation in lawful protests supporting Palestinian rights. Dogru’s legal team has advised him that his wife and son could be deported as well.
Commentators have warned that, with these actions, Germany is lurching towards the authoritarian right. With the far-right AfD Party surging in the polls (a recent survey found they are now the most popular party in Germany), many inside the country are ringing the alarm bells.
“For decades, Germany has stuck with Israel and its narratives in the Middle East,” Dogru told MintPress, adding: “Since October 7, we see that the German government is violently repressing activists to make sure there are no voices in Germany critical of Israel. Activists here have paid a high price to make sure that they can protest.”
According to Dogru, this is a test case. Ultimately, the suppression of speech is not about Israel, but an attack on its own society.
Germany is preparing to assert itself as a leading military and political force in NATO and the EU. To do that, it must eliminate resistance — not just abroad, but at home. This isn’t driven by historical guilt or solidarity. It’s about silencing dissent and disciplining society. By targeting the most marginalized, the German state is disciplining its population — silencing opposition before it grows.”
The message from the German government is clear, Dogru claims: “fall in line, or be crushed.”
NATO’s War Narratives Collapse
Aaron Maté & Glenn Diesen
Glenn Diesen | April 18, 2025
Investigative journalist Aaron Maté discusses how NATO’s war narratives are falling apart. Maté is renowned for debunking the Russiagate hoax, yet the lessons about the dangers of embracing false stories have not yet been appreciated.
Exposed: Real Agenda Behind Scrapped $2 Million US Media Grant in Moldova
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 17.04.2025
US taxpayers will no longer have to foot a $2 million bill for ‘Newsroom Sustainability’ in a post-Soviet republic 5,000 miles away after DOGE sniffed out another $215 million in State Department foreign aid waste.
Layers Within Bureaucratic Layers
The scrapped ‘Expanded Newsroom Sustainability and Engagement’ project was run by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL), a USAID-linked State Dept sub-agency promoting ‘democracy, human and labor rights’ abroad through cash injections to the right actors.
Officially, the $2 million grant was meant to ‘support independent newsrooms and increase civic engagement through professional journalism’.
In reality, it was part of a vast web of US and EU-financed media in Moldova and other post-Soviet countries pushing the pro-Western, pro-EU and anti-Russian narrative.
Green Light for Attack Dog Journalism
The DRL, USAID, the European External Action Service and the Council of Europe have spent tens of millions of dollars annually funding Moldovan media like Recorder, ZDG and NewsMaker.
These outlets drag opposition parties (like Sor, now banned) and figures (like former president Igor Dodon) through the mud in corruption investigations and exposés, but ignore the alleged corruption and wrongdoing of ruling PAS Party elites.
While pro-EU media has flourished, independent and opposition outlets have faced shutdowns, sanctions and harassment, from fake tax inspections to legal threats.
This was made possible by draconian “anti-fake news” and “disinformation” laws, overseen by the country’s powerful Audiovisual Council and supported by the EU.
Could State Department’s Move Level the Playing Field?
$2 million in lost funding may not seem like much, but every little bit helps. USAID alone has already nixed $32 million in media support to Moldova and $22 million in elections-related aid this year ahead of September’s crucial parliamentary vote.
Cuts won’t bring back banned outlets, but they could deamplify the pro-West media narrative, and accordingly the political and media power of the Sandu government.
Democrats’ Push for Ukraine Support Tries to Micro-Manage Trump’s Foreign Policy
Sputnik – 15.04.2025
Democrats in the US House of Representatives have introduced the Ukraine Support Act, aiming to force President Donald Trump’s administration to give Kiev security funding, reconstruction aid and slap heavy sanctions on Russia.
“It clearly appears to be an attempt seriously to encroach upon the President’s powers in the area of foreign relations,” says Stephen B. Presser, leading American legal historian and Professor of Law at Northwestern University.
The move is “an attempt to micro-manage what the President does in his efforts to arrive at a means of ending the conflict between Russia and Ukraine,” he adds.
The bill is unlikely to pass a Republican-controlled House or Senate and is “an abysmal idea,” the academic says.
“One can only guess what motivates the bill’s authors, but Ukraine lobbyists are likely involved,” Presser notes.
With peace talks at a delicate stage, the bill’s timing couldn’t be worse. But if it passes, the pundit expects the courts to overturn it.
Leaked files reveal the Steele Dossier was discredited in 2017 — but sold to the public anyway
By Kit KLARENBERG | MintPress News | April 8, 2025
On March 25, Donald Trump signed an executive order declassifying all documentation related to Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI’s 2016 investigation into alleged collusion between Russia and then-presidential candidate Donald Trump. The order has unexpectedly resurrected buried documents that cast new light on the Steele dossier — and when it was known to be false.
It is unclear what new information will be revealed, given substantial previous declassifications, two special counsel investigations, multiple congressional inquiries, several civil lawsuits, and a scathing Justice Department internal review. It has long been confirmed the FBI relied heavily on Steele’s discredited dossier to secure warrants against Trump aide Carter Page, despite grave internal concerns about its origins and reliability, and Steele’s sole “subsource” for all its lurid allegations openly admitted in interviews with the Bureau he could offer no corroboration for any of the dossier’s claims.
Such inconvenient facts and damning disclosures were nonetheless concealed from the public for several years following the dossier’s January 2017 publication by BuzzFeed News, now defunct. In the intervening time, it became the central component of the Russiagate narrative, a conspiracy theory that was a major rallying point for countless mainstream journalists, pundits, public figures, Western intelligence officials, and elected lawmakers. In the process, Steele attained mythological status. For example, NBC News dubbed the former MI6 operative “a real-life James Bond.”
Primetime news networks dedicated countless hours to the topic, while leading media outlets invested enormous time, energy and money into verifying the dossier’s claims without success. Undeterred, legacy reporters relied on a roster of mainstream “Russia experts,” including prominent British and U.S. military and intelligence veterans, and briefings from anonymous officials to reinforce Steele’s credibility and the likely veracity of his dossier. As award-winning investigative journalist Aaron Maté told MintPress News :
Media outlets served as unquestioning stenographers for Steele. If his dossier’s claims themselves weren’t sufficient to dismiss it with ridicule, another obvious marker should have set off alarms. Reading the dossier chronologically, a clear pattern emerges – many of its most explosive claims are influenced by contemporary media reporting. For instance, it was only after Wikileaks published the DNC emails in July 2016 that the dossier mentioned them. This is just one example demonstrating the dossier’s true sources were overactive imaginations and mainstream news outlets.”
Even more damningly, leaked documents reviewed by MintPress News reveal that while Western journalists were hard at work attempting to validate Steele’s dossier and elevating the MI6 spy to wholly undeserved pillars of probity, the now-defunct private investigations firm GPW Group was, in early 2017, secretly unearthing vast amounts of damaging material that fatally undermined the dossier’s content, and comprehensively dismantling Steele’s previously unimpeachable public persona. It remains speculative what impact the firm’s findings might have had if they had been released publicly at the time.
‘Financial Incentives’
“In order to build a profile of Christopher Steele… as well as the broader operations of both Orbis Business Intelligence and Fusion GPS,” which commissioned the dossier on behalf of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee, GPW consulted “a variety of sources.” This included “U.S. intelligence figures,” various journalists, “private intelligence subcontractors” who had previously worked with Steele and Orbis, and “contacts who knew the man from his time with [MI6]…and, in one instance, directly oversaw his work.”
The picture that emerged of Steele sharply contrasted with his mainstream portrayal as a “superstar.” One operative who “acted as Steele’s manager when he began working with [MI6] and later supervised him at two further points” described him as “average, middle of the road,” stating he had never “shined” in any of his postings. Another suggested Steele’s founding of Orbis “was the source of some incredulity” within MI6 due to his underwhelming professional history and perceived lack of “commercial nous.”
Yet another suggested Steele’s production of the dossier reflected his lack of “big picture judgment.” Sources consulted by GPW were even more critical of Fusion GPS chief Glenn Simpson. One journalist described him as a “hack” without “a license or the contacts to do… actual investigations,” instead outsourcing “all” work ostensibly conducted by his firm to others while skimming commissions. They also “openly admitted” to disliking Simpson, described by GPW as “not an uncommon attitude amongst those to whom we spoke.”
GPW also scrutinized “credibility and perceptions of the dossier in Russia,” specifically whether Steele‘s claims that high-ranking Kremlin-linked sources in Moscow provided him with information had any merit. The firm consulted “Western and Russian journalists, former officials from the FSB and the Russian security services more broadly, a former high-ranking official at the CIA who oversaw the agency’s Russian operations, and several private-sector intelligence practitioners operating in Moscow” for this purpose:
The prevailing sentiment from our contacts was one of extreme skepticism as to the accuracy of… the [dossier]. Most found it unimaginable… senior Russian officials would risk life imprisonment (or worse) by speaking to a former foreign intelligence official about such sensitive issues. At the very least… it would have cost Steele a great deal more… than he could afford… Former intelligence operatives (from both the U.S. and Russian services) seriously doubted Steele would have been able to retain Russian sources from his time in MI6.”
GPW also examined “possible sources for the dossier” that had been hypothesized in the media to date. Among them was former FSB General Oleg Erovinkin, who was found dead in his car in Moscow in December 2016. After the dossier’s release, the Daily Telegraph suggested his death was “mysterious” and could have resulted from providing information to Steele. A former high-ranking official in U.S. intelligence mockingly dismissed the proposition, noting that career security and intelligence officer Erovinkin was “unlikely to have needed the money.”
While conceding that financial incentives could encourage such a breach… [if] Steele had offered Erovinkin £100,000, the mooted budget for the entire project, ‘Erovinkin would have said he needed to see three more zeros before opening his mouth. It’s just a ridiculous proposition to think he would speak to a former intelligence officer from the UK, or anyone else for that matter, for such a paltry sum of money.’”
Overall, GPW concluded: “The quality and level of the sourcing was greatly exaggerated in order to give the dossier and its allegations more credibility.” This impression was reinforced by “informed sources from both government and the private sector” in Russia who were “very dismissive” of the dossier’s content. Many pointed to “woeful inaccuracies” contained therein “and its author’s general lack of understanding around Russian politics and business.” This “deficiency was particularly acute with respect to the dossier’s coverage of Alfa Bank.”
‘Reputational Damage’
GPW’s investigation also proved prescient in other areas. For example, several knowledgeable sources the company consulted — including former senior Russian and U.S. intelligence officials — suggested the dossier’s “most likely sources” were Russian émigrés, “providing… their own views.” They also noted the Steele dossier’s “hyperbole and inaccuracies” were “typical of the hyperactive imaginations of the subcontractors widely used in the business intelligence sector.” This was not confirmed until July 2020.
That month, the Senate Judiciary Committee released notes taken by FBI agents during February 2017 interviews with Igor Danchenko, Steele’s “subsource” and the dossier’s effective author. A Washington think tank journeyman jailed years earlier on multiple public intoxication and disorderly conduct charges and investigated by the FBI for potentially serving as a Kremlin agent, Danchenko admitted he had been fed much of the dossier’s salacious content by his Russian drinking buddies, who lacked any high-level access. Steele then embroidered their dud information further.
Other striking passages in the leaks refer to a conversation between GPW and “a source from within the business intelligence sector in London [who] knows Christopher Steele well, both socially and professionally, and is familiar with his company.” They relayed various details and “commentary” gleaned “directly from speaking to Steele.” For example, they noted that contrary to its self-description as a “leading corporate intelligence consultancy,” Orbis was “not a major operation” and seemed to employ just two junior analysts “who looked like recent graduates.”
The source revealed that “other, larger firms in the sector were approached before Steele and turned the work down before he took it on,” and the dossier was his solo project. “The rest of the company wasn’t involved at all, either to help on the research side of things or to look through the product before it went out,” and “Steele basically collated the information himself.” They further suggested the dossier’s sources let their imaginations run wild, believing their claims would never see the light of day:
I think they got carried away — they didn’t think the material would ever be made public because at that point it was very unlikely that Trump was going to get into power…Steele was rather naive about the whole thing. He didn’t think that it would get exposed in the way it did.”
In other investigative briefs, GPW noted it was unusual that “Steele would have permitted (or indeed facilitated) the distribution of such questionable material under his name,” given the dossier’s apparent falsity. The firm postulated that “in sharing the material with U.S. government figures,” the former MI6 operative “may have thought he was currying favor with them by doing so,” but ultimately, “he never intended for the dossier to be made public in the manner it was.”
One possible answer to this question is found in a defamation case brought against Orbis by Petr Aven, Mikhail Fridman, and German Khan in Britain in May 2018. In July 2020, a British court ruled that the dossier’s allegations against them and Alfa Bank were “inaccurate and misleading,” awarding damages “for the loss of autonomy, distress and reputational damage.” During the trial, Steele made a notable disclosure:
Fusion’s immediate client was law firm Perkins Coie… it engaged Fusion to obtain information necessary for Perkins Coie to provide legal advice on the potential impact of Russian involvement on the legal validity of the outcome of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election. Based on that advice, parties such as the Democratic National Committee and [“Hillary for America”] could consider steps they would be legally entitled to take to challenge the validity of the outcome of that election.”
In essence, the dossier was commissioned by Clinton’s campaign as a contingency in the event she lost the election. However, as GPW’s source close to Steele noted, when the MI6 operative took on the work, the prevailing perception was that “it was very unlikely” Trump would win. As a result, Steele may have had the motivation to fill the dossier with unverified material, believing it would never be used for its intended purpose. He also had a commercial incentive to exaggerate his high-level access. A serving CIA official told GPW:
Steele was known to have been ‘up and down the alley’ pitching for business – a reference to the major defense firms, such as Lockheed Martin, which are located close to one another in Arlington, Virginia. She did not know which firms Steele had worked for in particular, if any, but he has visited several of them in person at their headquarters.”
A core mystery at the heart of the Steele dossier saga has never been satisfactorily resolved — one that Trump’s latest declassification order could help illuminate. In his December 2019 report on Crossfire Hurricane, Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz criticized the FBI’s use of the dossier to obtain warrants against Carter Page but insisted Steele’s assorted claims “played no role” in the bureau opening its investigation of Trump’s campaign, reportedly on July 31, 2016.
As extensively documented by Aaron Maté, this claim is difficult to reconcile with the numerous contacts and meetings between Steele and senior FBI and Justice Department officials in the weeks leading up to that date. The former MI6 officer provided material that would later comprise the dossier to senior U.S. government officials, including Victoria Nuland, prior to the official opening of Crossfire Hurricane. Nuland reportedly encouraged the bureau to investigate the contents.
According to the FBI’s electronic communications that initiated Crossfire Hurricane, the probe’s founding predicate was a vague tip provided to the bureau by Australian diplomat Alexander Downer. He claimed that low-level Trump campaign staffer George Papadopoulos had “suggested” to him over drinks in London that “the Trump team had received some kind of suggestion [emphasis added] from Russia that it could assist… with the anonymous release of information during the campaign that would be damaging” to Clinton. The EC further acknowledged that “It was unclear whether he or the Russians were referring to material acquired publicly or through other means. It was also unclear how Mr. Trump’s team reacted to the offer.”
As Maté told MintPress News, this was an “extraordinarily thin basis upon which to investigate an entire presidential campaign.” He added that “upon officially opening Crossfire Hurricane, FBI officials immediately took investigative steps that mirrored the claims in the Steele dossier, even though they were supposedly unaware of it.” The FBI’s first probes into individual Trump campaign figures — Carter Page, Michael Flynn, and Paul Manafort — began in August 2016. All are mentioned in the dossier. Maté concludes:
To accept the official timeline, one has to stipulate that the FBI investigated a Presidential campaign, and then a President, based on a low-level volunteer having ‘suggested’ Trump’s campaign had received ‘some kind of suggestion’ of assistance from Russia. One would also have to accept that the Bureau was not influenced by the far more detailed claims of direct Trump-Russia connections – an alleged conspiracy that would form the heart of the investigation – advanced in the widely-circulating Steele dossier.”
AfD leader slams latest German military aid to Kiev as ‘catastrophic’
Al Mayadeen | April 11, 2025
Germany’s plan to ramp up military support for Ukraine has drawn sharp criticism from Alice Weidel, co-leader of the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party. Speaking on Friday, Weidel condemned Defense Minister Boris Pistorius’ announcement of further arms deliveries, warning that the move fuels conflict rather than advancing peace.
According to a report by RedaktionsNetzwerk Deutschland (RND), Pistorius revealed that Berlin will allocate an additional 8 billion euros ($9 billion) in military assistance to Ukraine by 2029. This comes on top of roughly 7 billion euros worth of equipment pledged for delivery in 2025. Germany has already committed nearly €44 billion in aid to Ukraine since the war began in 2022, including military, financial, and humanitarian support, making it one of Kiev’s largest backers in Europe.
Responding to the announcement on social media platform X, Weidel said: “Pistorius announces new arms deliveries to Ukraine. This makes it clear: the small coalition continues the catastrophic course of escalation carried out by the ‘traffic light’ coalition. This is explosive. We must support the US efforts to achieve a ceasefire.”
Weidel and the AfD have long opposed German military aid to Ukraine, arguing that continued arms shipments escalate tensions and jeopardize German national interests. She has also criticized sanctions on Russia, warning they disproportionately harm Germany’s economy. In her public statements, Weidel has urged Berlin to adopt a neutral foreign policy stance and support diplomatic initiatives, particularly those backed by US President Donald Trump.
Russian officials have frequently argued that Western weapon supplies prolong the war and position NATO countries as active participants in the conflict. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reiterated that any shipment containing arms intended for Ukraine is considered a valid military target under Russian policy.
Here’s why the AfD is destined for the German government
By Tarik Cyril Amar | RT | April 12, 2025
Germany has an undeserved reputation for dour rationality and lacking an appreciation of the absurd. In reality, however, Germany is a – for want of nicer terms – very counterintuitive country.
If you are running a regime in Kiev (at least according to the official story) and blow up Germany’s vital energy infrastructure, Germans will say thank you and throw money and arms at you, while also helping you blame someone else (the Russians, of course: Germany has never been an imaginative country).
If you are in Washington and certainly had a hand in blowing up that infrastructure, and then go on to fleece the Germans by selling LNG at a high cost and promoting their deindustrialization by filching their companies, good Germans get very, very angry – at China.
If you happen to be the single most popular and perfectly legal political party in Germany, get ready to never be allowed to actually participate in governing. Because Germany is also a country in which that single most popular party – the Alternative for Germany (Alternative für Deutschland, commonly known simply as AfD) – is locked out of building governing coalitions. By definition.
That system is called a “firewall” – against that nasty most popular party that makes life so difficult for all those other, no longer popular parties. It has absolutely no basis in the constitution or in law.
Come to think of it, as the “firewall” systematically and deliberately treats the votes of AfD voters as somehow less effective than those of others, it may well be the “firewall” itself that is unconstitutional, at least in spirit if not even by the letter of the law. So much for Germany, the country that allegedly loves order and rules.
In reality, the “firewall” amounts to a dirty political cartel and a form of disenfranchisement: The traditional parties, feeling threatened by the insurgent AfD have simply decided that they do not care what the voters say and won’t have anything to do with it. Since German governments are virtually always based on coalitions, which means that the AfD and its voters are treated as inferior. That this means that, as of now, in particular voters in the former East Germany are subject to this kind of discrimination, adding a West-East aspect to it that sits very badly with talk about German unity.
To get one thing out of the way: For now, it is only one poll that shows the AfD in the lead; other polls still have it in (barely) second place after the mainstream conservatives of the CDU/CSU bloc (which, in reality, functions as one party) of soon-to-be chancellor Friedrich Merz. But these differences are irrelevant. What matters is that the AfD’s rising trend is unbroken. That is definitely a blow to Merz, even before he has officially assumed office, as international observers are noting. Especially in view of the fact that Merz’s own poll numbers are cratering at the same time.
Yet there is a broader point, too: The whole “firewall” strategy is malfunctioning extremely badly. Sensible observers have long predicted it, and now it is becoming ever more obvious: Freezing the AfD out only serves to make it stronger.
One thing that does not make Berlin’s ruling parties, the CDU and SPD, any more popular is that they have concluded their negotiations on how to divvy up the spoils of ministries and other goodies. Indeed, it is extremely embarrassing for the new governing coalition of conservatives and Social-Democrats (SPD) that the most recent AfD milestone breakthrough is happening now. It is a coincidence from hell: there they are, the traditional parties, seemingly safe behind their “firewall” and all ready to go, and the voters – uncouth as they can be – show them just how unpopular they are.
Germans expect little from them, even now: A fresh poll shows that two thirds do not believe that things will change under the new coalition of tired old parties.
Note that most Germans have been deeply unhappy with the status quo, as we also know from recent polls: In February, Ipsos found that the general mood was “as bad as never before.” Only 17 percent of citizens – less than a fifth – believed their country was “on a good trajectory.” The other 83 percent were not indifferent or neutral but felt Germany was on the “wrong” trajectory. Even for a nation with something of a culture of angst and doom, those are atrocious figures.
Hence, expecting no change now amounts to deep pessimism: Germans have felt for a while already that they are in dire trouble; and a preponderant majority thinks that that is where they will be stuck under new old management as well.
A senior AfD leader, Alexander Gauland, is already more than confident: “It’s a natural law that we’ll be ahead of the CDU at the next elections,” he recently declared. That may be jinxing it. The AfD is, after all, much less unlike other parties than the latter like to pretend: The AfD as well may end up squandering its current good luck with infighting, for instance, over how to react to US President Donald Trump’s tariff attacks, which will severely harm Germany.
Yet there is no doubt that the traditional parties are doing their utmost to repel not only voters but even their own members. In particular Merz’s CDU is in barely contained rebellion: its members and voters are fuming at having voted conservative and yet being saddled with a massive deficit spending program. The pretext that all of this is needed because of – drum roll – Big Bad Russia is not dampening down the anger.
One local CDU organization has already rebelled openly. In the state of Sachsen-Anhalt, formerly part of East Germany, CDU members from the Harz district have gone public with an official resolution making two points and one demand: There is “massive” unrest among the CDU’s base of ordinary party members, and in Germany’s “East,” that is, what used to be the former German Democratic Republic, the CDU has decisively lost the last federal elections. The demand is to tear down the so-called “firewall” against the AfD and start collaborating with it systematically. It is symptomatic that this very local rebellion is making news all over the country.
“What a scandal! Opening the gates to the far right!” many will scream. Yet they have it all upside down: Disregarding the fact that, in reality, the CDU/CSU conservatives and the AfD mostly see eye-to-eye ideologically, one day, in the not so far away future, the AfD may well enter and perhaps even dominate a German government. The irony is that when that happens, those who have upheld the, frankly, moronic “firewall” will have only themselves to blame. Because the real question is not if the AfD will enter government in Berlin but how and, in particular, how strong. The longer the “firewall” is kept up, the more likely the AfD will not just participate but dominate.
Tarik Cyril Amar, a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory
NATO needs Romania to launch WWIII – Georgescu
RT | April 11, 2025
Calin Georgescu, a former Romanian presidential candidate whose bid was controversially invalidated earlier this year, has claimed that NATO wants to “launch World War III from Romania.” In an interview with US journalist Tucker Carlson, he said his staunch pro-peace stance was among the main reasons why he was barred from running for president.
The right-wing politician, known as an outspoken critic of NATO, the EU, and Western support for Ukraine, scored a surprise win in the first round of November’s presidential election, receiving 23% of the vote. However, the country’s Constitutional Court swiftly moved in to annul the result over alleged “irregularities” in his campaign. Later, Georgescu was stripped of his right to run for office.
Appearing on Carlson’s podcast on Thursday, the former Romanian presidential candidate alleged that NATO wants to “launch… World War III from Romania.” The politician cited the fact that the “largest military base of NATO is in Romania,” coupled with the 380-mile (612 km) long border that his country shares with Ukraine.
“In this situation of course Romania is the asset for [the] European Union, for [French President Emmanuel] Macron in order to launch the war,” Georgescu insisted.
“They want to turn NATO [into] an offensive force” and are “pushing for war,” he alleged, adding that “my position was exactly against them.”
According to Georgescu, “all my campaign was just concentrate[d] on peace[.] When I said… the word ‘peace’, they immediately alerted… because they need war.”
The right-wing politician went on to say that the “majority of Romanian people… have this position against any intervention and any participation [in] war.”
“I was denied [the right to run for president] by the globalist mafia,” the former candidate alleged, further claiming that the people behind the invalidation of his candidacy were the same people who attempted to derail Donald Trump’s presidential campaign in the US, using similar smear tactics.
Appearing on ‘The Shawn Ryan Show’ in January, Georgescu similarly suggested that NATO military infrastructure in Romania could be used to launch a major offensive against Russia.
Bucharest, a NATO member since 2004, has been expanding the MK Air Base to make it the largest NATO installation in Europe.
Moscow has described the base as “anti-Russian” and warned that it would be among the first targets for retaliatory strikes in a military conflict.
Zelensky mustn’t govern Russians he despises – Lavrov
RT | April 11, 2025
Vladimir Zelensky’s openly declared hatred for Russians means he must not and will not govern people living in former parts of Ukraine that Kiev seeks to retake, Moscow’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has stated.
In a late March interview with the French daily Le Figaro, Zelensky expressed his disdain for “Russians who killed so many Ukrainian citizens,” asserting that this “hatred” fuels his leadership.
Lavrov referenced the comments during a press conference at the Foreign Ministry on Friday, underscoring why Moscow has deemed Kiev’s territorial claims unacceptable.
“Who would even hypothetically consider handing over those people to such an individual? Nobody. No way,” he emphasized.
Since the Western-backed coup in Kiev in 2014, five Ukrainian regions plus the city of Sevastopol have voted to break away and join Russia. The Ukrainian government has dismissed these referendums as a “sham.”
Lavrov also reminded journalists of Zelensky’s previous derogatory remarks, including statements made prior to the conflict’s escalation in 2022. In 2021, Zelensky urged Donbass residents who identified as Russian to relocate to Russia. That same year, he referred to politicians targeted by his government with personal sanctions as another “species.”
The minister accused the Ukrainian government of “legislatively eradicating everything related to Russia and the Russian world: the Russian language, Russian-speaking media, the Orthodox Christianity represented by the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church, and much more.”
Such discriminatory policies, he argued, justify labeling the Zelensky administration “neo-Nazi” and contribute to ongoing hostilities. Lavrov asserted that US President Donald Trump recognizes Russia’s red lines and considers “the return to the 1991 borders, as Zelensky keeps demanding” impossible.
The Trump administration seeks to mediate a peace deal between Moscow and Kiev, while the UK and France are leading discussions on a proposed “reassurance force” to be deployed in Ukraine if a truce is achieved. Moscow has firmly rejected the idea of NATO troops being stationed in Ukraine.
USAID paid Czech groups to ‘wage war’ against Russia – former police chief
RT | April 9, 2025
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) financed a long-running anti-Russian campaign in the Czech Republic, former Czech police chief Stanislav Novotny has told RT. In an exclusive interview on Wednesday, Novotny said Washington’s primary channel for funding political projects abroad had played a major role in shaping Czech-Russian relations.
According to the former police chief, who is now a lawyer and journalist, US billionaire George Soros has also had a significant influence on the deterioration of ties between Prague and Moscow through his Open Society Foundations.
“A lot of money was poured into civil society organizations of political nature which were waging a war against Russia,” Novotny said. “Such organizations should simply be removed,” he added, accusing the Czech government of spending taxpayers’ money on stoking anti-Russian sentiment by contributing financially to the organizations.
US President Donald Trump launched the process of dismantling USAID shortly after returning to office in January, citing high costs and limited benefits associated with its programs. He also started negotiations with Russia aimed at improving ties and resolving the Ukraine conflict.
While commenting on the developments around USAID in early February, Novotny described the agency as “the monster that has taken over the world,” alleging it “orchestrated wars, organized mass migration, broke up national cohesion and destroyed indigenous cultures.”
The Czech Republic was formed in 1993 after the Velvet Revolution of 1989 and the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. Prior to those events it was part of communist Czechoslovakia, a key member of the Soviet Union-led Eastern Bloc.
Prague has adopted a notably anti-Russian stance in recent years, particularly in response to the events in Ukraine, becoming one of Kiev’s staunchest supporters and labeling Russia a “terrorist state.”
Hundreds of Soviet-era monuments have been removed or modified in the EU state since the 1990s, with a renewed wave of demolitions after the 2014 armed coup in Kiev, Crimea’s decision to join Russia, and the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022.
The campaign to demolish the monuments was “among the policies that were aimed at provoking fear and hatred towards the Russians,” Novotny argued.
Novotny, who founded the Independent Media Association in the Czech Republic, said he came to Moscow to give the RT interview because “talking to Russian journalists is practically prohibited.” RT and other Russian media have been banned in the EU since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict.
Featured Video
Stanislav Krapivnik: Russia-Iran Cooperation & Escalation in Ukraine
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Frlom the Archives
Are the Jews indigenous to Palestine?
By David Miller | Al Mayadeen | August 3, 2022
There is a rising tide of claims from apologists for the crimes of Zionism that they have been misunderstood. Palestinians might be indigenous to Palestine, but the Jews definitely are. What is called the ‘Israel-Palestine’ conflict, they say, is competition over the same small piece of land by two rival groups of indigenous people. But are the Jews indigenous to the Levant? And what are the consequences of the argument?
In fact, most of the power structure of the Zionist state is dominated by Ashkenazi Jews who have no ancestral link to Palestine. Overall despite very significant financial and infrastructural contributions from Western European countries (especially the US, UK and France, for example via the Rothschild family), Eastern European Ashkenazim have been at the centre of the Zionist power structure since the early years of the 20th Century. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Iran warns of consequences after US strike on water plant
- US Bases in Middle East Fail to Secure Nations & Become Safety Risk – Expert
- Iranian Crisis Becomes Embarrassment for US Military That Can’t Protect Anyone – MidEast Analyst
- IAEA Never Had Reasons to Forgo Talks With Iran — Russian MFA Spox
- Iran pledges to ‘respect sovereignty of neighbors’, declares US-Israel assets ‘primary targets’
- USA and Israel: Who is the lord and who is the colony?
- Indian journalist reveals severe Israeli censorship after escape from occupied territories
- Majority of Israelis Back War with Iran as Anti-War Minority Faces Stigmatization
- Are the Jews indigenous to Palestine?
- Stanislav Krapivnik: Russia-Iran Cooperation & Escalation in Ukraine
- If Americans Knew
- US, Israel ravage Iran and Lebanon; 4 killed in Gaza – Not a ceasefire Day 148
- US troops were told war on Iran was ‘all part of God’s divine plan’, watchdog alleges
- Trump wants to run the show in Iran, but doesn’t know what he’s doing – Not a ceasefire Day 147
- ‘Dirty Work’ :The truth about how Israel was founded
- Mass Expulsion in Lebanon as Israel Expands War: “We Don’t Know Where to Go”
- Lies, distortions, and propaganda: how the U.S. mainstream media coverage on Iran hides the truth
- Palestinians in Gaza fear famine returning as Israel cuts off food amid Iran war
- AIPAC, other pro-Israel groups enter midterms with $100 million to spend
- Iranian girls killed by ‘double-tap’ strikes on Minab school
- Bari Weiss Is Going Full ‘Propaganda-Palooza’ With the Iran War
- No Tricks Zone
- Televised! Leading German Political Candidate Tells Schoolchildren CO2 Makes Sun Hotter!
- New Study: A Century Warming Of 1.1°C Is ‘Commonplace’ And ‘Not Unusual’ During This Interglacial
- New Study: ‘Internal Noise’ And Volcanic Forcing Can Trigger 10-15°C Warming Within Decades
- Glaciers Worldwide Are Suddendly Surging, Experts Blame Warming!
- Surprising Discovery: Sahara Is Greening…Billions Of Trees Where Once Thought To Be Barren
- New Research Reaffirms Clouds, Aerosols, And Surface Solar Radiation Are ‘Driving The Climate System’
- Germany: Electric Car Catches Fire At Charging Station, Sets Off Local “Inferno”, Widespread Damage
- New Study: Canada’s New Brunswick Was 1°C Warmer Than Today During The Medieval Warm Period
- Coal Power Back In Trend As Globe Tries To Keep Pace With Growing Demand For Power
- New Study: A 4°C Warmer Beaufort Sea Had ‘No Sea Ice’ 11,700 – 8200 Years Ago
Aletho News 