Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

China snubs Germany’s top diplomat – media

RT | October 24, 2025

German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul has been forced to cancel an upcoming trip to China after Beijing reportedly declined to arrange high-level meetings with him, multiple media outlets reported on Friday.

Wadephul was scheduled to depart for Beijing on Sunday to discuss China’s export restrictions on rare-earths and semiconductors, as well as the Ukraine conflict.

“The trip cannot take place at this time and will be postponed to a later date,” Politico cited a spokesperson for Germany’s Federal Foreign Office as saying. Wadephul was slated to meet with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi but otherwise reportedly had too few meetings on the agenda.

According to Bild, the two diplomats will instead hold a telephone conversation soon.

The diplomatic setback comes amid escalating trade tensions between China and the EU. Over the past year, Brussels and Beijing have clashed over what the bloc calls China’s industrial overproduction, while China accuses the EU of protectionism.

Earlier this month, Beijing tightened its restrictions on the export of certain strategic minerals that have dual-use in military applications – a move that could further strain Europe’s struggling auto sector.

Germany has been particularly affected by the worsening trade climate. Bild reported on Wednesday that Volkswagen is expected to halt production at key plants next week due to a shortage of semiconductors following the Dutch government’s seizure of Chinese-owned chipmaker Nexperia. The Netherlands cited risks to the EU’s technological security, prompting Beijing to retaliate by banning exports of Nexperia chips from China. As inventories dwindle, more Volkswagen plants could face temporary shutdowns, and other automakers may also be affected, the paper said.

On Friday, German Economy Minister Katherina Reiche announced that Berlin was lodging a diplomatic protest against Beijing for blocking semiconductor shipments, citing Germany’s heavy reliance on Chinese components.

October 25, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

Trump may not follow through on Russian oil or Tomahawk

By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | October 25, 2025 

The US President Donald Trump has seemingly shifted gear in the US strategy to stop Russia on its tracks from creating new facts on the ground in Ukraine. Russian forces have the upper hand all along the 1250-km Ukrainian frontline stretching Kiev’s defences and resources, which no amount of western military help can hope to reverse in a foreseeable future. Trump is compelling Russia to seek a military victory in Ukraine.

Trump so far put on the air of a statesman in great anguish over the humanitarian aspects of the conflict. Moscow tolerated the theatrical show to pamper Trump’s egotistic personality — that is, until Putin shattered the myth last week to expose that Trump actually holds the record as the American president who sanctioned Russia the most number of times, exceeding even his predecessor Joe Biden’s tally. 

Trump, in the new avatar as war monger has unveiled a strategy of climbing the escalation ladder in the war until Putin capitulates. To that end, he has expanded the sanctions regime to include Russia’s oil industry, and is toying with the idea to supply Ukraine with long-range Tomahawk missiles that can hit deep inside Russian territory. 

The US Treasury Departments’ press release announcing the new sanctions against Russia reads as if its is custom made for targeting India. India and China account for some 80% of Russia’s oil exports, but the latter is the number one buyer with 60% of the imports  transported through pipelines, whereas India depends on carriers arranged by the Russian side (“shadow fleet”) which are also now under western sanctions. 

The press release claims that “The ultimate goal of sanctions is not to punish, but to bring about a positive change in behaviour.” It is a statement of fact because this is not really about oil, but about geopolitics. Whether Trump will actually press ahead with the oil sanctions remains unclear, since keeping Russian oil out of the world market risks high oil prices which could boomerang on the US economy and be damaging politically for Trump. 

Putin’s initial reaction last Thursday was that the oil sanctions are an “unfriendly” act which “will have certain consequences, but they will not significantly affect our economic well-being.” Putin said that Russia’s energy sector feels confident. He added, “This is, of course, an attempt to put pressure on Russia. But no self-respecting country and no self-respecting people ever decides anything under pressure.” 

Meanwhile, western hypocrisy broke through the ceiling, as the German chancellor Friedrich Merz who is one of the most enthusiastic proponents of the war is at Trump’s doorstep pleading for a sanctions waiver. Apparently, Germany has been quietly buying Russian oil even while portraying Russia in hostile terms, lest its GDP fell by another 3 percent! 

Germany “temporarily” took control of three subsidiaries of the Russian oil company Rosneft (which the US has sanctioned) to secure its energy supply. Interestingly, the UK PM Keir Starmer, the charioteer of the  so-called “coalition of the willing” raring to deploy troops in Ukraine to fight Russian forces, is travelling in the same boat as Merz seeking Trump’s waiver! 

Such shady behaviour with racial overtones by the Western countries holds lessons for India. Clearly, the effectiveness of the new sanctions against the Russian oil giants will depend on just how zealous the US is in enforcing them through secondary sanctions on entities that deal in Russian oil. If past experience is anything to go by, Washington won’t be able to sustain a full-court press – if for no other reason than that markets will force its hand once oil prices shoot up. 

That is to say, thanks to lax enforcement of sanctions, Russian oil will continue to reach the world market. Buyers like India who cut down oil supplies from Russia will end up paying higher prices. By meekly complying with Trump’s diktat, they compromised their interests. The sense of humiliation is such that Delhi shies away from engaging with Trump.  

However, as regards long-rage Tomahawk missiles (range: 3000 km) Putin was polite but frank in his reaction, saying, “This is an attempt at escalation. But if such weapons are used to attack Russian territory, the response will be very serious, if not overwhelming. Let them think about it.” 

The deputy chairman of the Security Council Dmitry Medvedev was even blunt in conveying the Kremlin thinking:

“The US is our enemy, and their talkative ‘peacemaker’ has now fully embarked on the path of war with Russia… this is now his conflict, not the senile Biden’s!… the decisions made are an act of war against Russia. And now Trump has fully sided with the insane Europe.

“But there is also a clear plus in this latest swing of the Trump pendulum: we can strike all the Bandera hideouts with a wide variety of weapons without regard to unnecessary negotiations. And achieve victory precisely where it is only possible: on the ground, not at a desk. Destroying enemies, not concluding meaningless ‘deals’”.  

Apparently, the message went home. Trump, before emplaning for Malaysia on his 3-nation Asian tour, made sure that his special envoy to Russia Steve Witkoff extended an invitation to his Russian interlocutor Kirill Dmitriev, the CEO of Russian Direct Investment Fund, to go over to Miami for a quiet conversation to talk things over. The two erstwhile businessmen are meeting today.

Meanwhile, Trump has hinted in anticipation of his forthcoming meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Kuala Lumpur on Saturday that he may not after all carry out his threatened 100% tariffs on Chinese goods and other trade curbs starting on November 1 in retaliation for China’s vastly expanded export controls on rare earth magnets and minerals. China’s tough stance is paying off. 

Similarly, the Kremlin’s blunt threat of retaliation against Tomahawk will be heeded seriously. Putin has many options — Oreshnik capable of Mach 10 speed, for instance, is a hypersonic missile that is also nuclear capable, against which the West has no defence. The weapon has entered into serial production and been supplied to the armed forces.

Again, Russia’s new jet-powered glide bomb gives a significant boost in range and superior resistance to electronic countermeasures. It is capable of hitting Ukraine’s western border. It is also moving to mass production and the West is defenceless against it. 

October 25, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Iran, Russia, China send letter to IAEA chief declaring UNSC Resolution 2231 terminated

Press TV – October 24, 2025

Iran, China, and Russia have written a joint letter to the UN nuclear watchdog chief, affirming the termination of Security Council Resolution 2231 and the agency’s reporting concerning the Islamic Republic’s nuclear energy program.

In a post on his X account on Friday, Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister for Legal and International Affairs, Kazem Gharibabadi, said ambassadors and permanent representatives of China, Iran and Russia sent a letter to Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Rafael Mariano Grossi.

It came after the three countries’ joint letter to the Secretary General of the United Nations and President of the Security Council declaring the termination of Resolution 2231 on October 18, he added.

In the letter to the IAEA chief, he noted, the three countries reaffirmed the “illegal” move by the European trio — Britain, France and Germany — to invoke the so-called snapback mechanism and the expiration of all provisions of Resolution 2231 on October 18, 2025.

“But there is another key point which relates to the end of the mandate of the IAEA Director General’s reporting on verification and monitoring under the Resolution 2231 and the implementation of the JCPOA,” Gharibabadi emphasized, referring to the 2015 nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

According to the Iranian diplomat, the letter asserted that in the IAEA, “the implementation of the JCPOA, as well as verification and monitoring in the Islamic Republic of Iran in light of UNSCR 2231, were enacted by the resolution of the Board of Governors of 15 December 2015(GOV/2015/72).”

He said, “Operative paragraph 14 of this Resolution unequivocally stipulates that the Board ‘decides to remain seized of the matter until ten years after the JCPOA Adoption Day or until the date on which the Director General reports that the Agency has reached the broader conclusion for Iran, whichever is earlier’.”

“Consequently, as of 18 October 2025, the related agenda item has been automatically removed from the agenda of the Board of Governors, and no further action is required in this regard,” Gharibabadi pointed out.

Iran has rejected the legality of E3’s triggering the snapback of UN sanctions, calling the mechanism “null and void” and a “fabricated” term.

On October 18, Tehran declared an end to all UN restrictions on its nuclear program following the expiration of Security Council resolution 2231.

Iran has faced sustained economic pressure in recent years, particularly after the United States unilaterally withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018 and re-imposed sweeping sanctions under the so-called “maximum pressure” policy.

Despite these pressures, Iran has sought to adapt through increased domestic production, non-dollar trade mechanisms, and expanding economic ties with partners in Asia and neighboring states.

October 25, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Volkswagen faces chip crisis after Chinese factory seized by EU state – Bild

RT | October 23, 2025

Germany’s largest carmaker, Volkswagen, could stop production at a key plant due to a shortage of semiconductors caused by the seizure of a Chinese-owned chipmaker by the Netherlands, Bild has reported, citing anonymous sources.

The Dutch government took control of the Nexperia factory in Nijmegen late last month, citing intellectual property and security concerns. The New York Times reported last week after reviewing documents from an Amsterdam court that the move had been made following pressure from US officials. Nexperia’s parent company, Wingtech, was blacklisted by Washington in 2024 as part of an ongoing trade war with China.

Beijing responded in early October by banning Nexperia from exporting finished chips from China, which are widely used in the electronic control units of VW vehicles.

Bild reported on Wednesday that Volkswagen – which also owns the Skoda, Seat, Audi, Porsche, Lamborghini, and Bentley brands – does not currently appear to have an alternative to Nexperia chips.

Sources in the company told the paper that due to the lack of semiconductors it plans to stop production at its plant in Wolfsburg from next Wednesday. Volkswagen Golf models will be affected first, followed by other vehicles, they said.

If the situation does not improve, work could also be halted at Volkswagen’s facilities in Emden, Hanover, Zwickau, and elsewhere, a person familiar with the matter said.

According to the report, the carmaker has started talks with the German authorities about a state-backed reduced working hours scheme for tens of thousands of its employees.

Bild warned that the chip crisis could also impact other carmakers in the country. Representatives for BMW and Mercedes told the paper that they were analyzing the situation. The German automobile industry has already been suffering due to high energy costs as a result of EU sanctions on Russia over the Ukraine conflict and increased US tariffs.

A spokesman for Volkswagen’s Zwickau plant told AFP that the report by Bild was “incorrect.” However, according to an internal letter seen by the media, the company acknowledged that “impact on production cannot be ruled out in the short term” due to a semiconductor shortage.

October 23, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Sinophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

Australian statement attempts to cover up military aircraft’s illegal intrusion into China’s territorial airspace: MOD

By Liu Xuanzun, Liang Rui and Guo Yuandan | Global Times | October 22, 2025

Australia’s accusation of a Chinese warplane’s interaction with an Australian military aircraft in the South China Sea is an attempt to cover up its illegal intrusion into China’s territorial airspace, a Chinese Defense Ministry spokesperson said on Wednesday, stressing that the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Southern Theater Command’s operations to resolutely stop and expel the Australian aircraft are lawful and professional.

In response to Australian Defense Ministry’s recent statement claiming that an Australian military P-8A patrol aircraft conducting a patrol in the South China Sea experienced an “unsafe and unprofessional interaction” with Chinese military aircraft on Sunday, with the Chinese aircraft releasing flares that “posed a risk” to the Australian aircraft and its personnel, Jiang Bin, a Chinese Defense Ministry spokesperson, said on Wednesday that the Australian statement confounded right and wrong and misplaced the blame to the Chinese side, attempting to cover up its serious misconduct of sending a military aircraft to illegally intrude into China’s territorial airspace. “We express strong dissatisfaction with this and have made stern representations to the Australian side,” he said.

The troops of the PLA Southern Theater Command organized forces to resolutely stop and expel the Australian military aircraft that intruded China’s territorial airspace over Xisha. The relevant operations are lawful, professional, up to standard and restrained. Australia made infringements and provocations against China, but falsely accused China’s legitimate rights-protecting actions as “unsafe” and “unprofessional.” Such fallacy finds no market anywhere, Jiang said.

“We urge Australia to immediately stop infringement and provocation and stop hyping up the matter, and strictly restrain its maritime and air force military operations to avoid undermining the bilateral relations and military relations between the two countries,” Jiang said, noting that the Chinese military will continue to take all necessary measures to resolutely defend national sovereignty and security and firmly uphold peace and stability in the region.

Jiang’s remarks came after Senior Colonel Li Jianjian, spokesperson for the air force of the PLA Southern Theater Command, said in a statement on Monday that an Australian P-8A aircraft on Sunday intruded into China’s territorial airspace over the Xisha Qundao without the approval of the Chinese government, and the PLA Southern Theater Command organized naval and air forces to track and monitor the Australian aircraft, take powerful countermeasures and warn it away in accordance with laws and regulations

The Australian move seriously violated China’s sovereignty and could have easily triggered maritime and aerial accidents, Li said.

“We urge the Australian side to immediately stop such provocative moves. The troops in the theater are on high alert at all times to resolutely defend national sovereignty and security and peace and stability in the region,” Li said.

Chinese military affairs expert Wang Yunfei told the Global Times that Australia is shifting the blame to the victim. He noted that it is the Australian side that has sent a military aircraft to China’s doorstep in the South China Sea and intruded into China’s territorial airspace, while the Chinese side’s countermeasures are legitimate and professional.

Zhang Junshe, another Chinese military affairs expert, told the Global Times that the Chinese military’s countermeasures against the Australian aircraft that intruded into Chinese territorial airspace of Xisha Qundao have been professional, up to standard, and restrained. However, Australia should not mistake China’s restraint as weakness. He said that “If the Australian military repeatedly engages in deliberate provocations and causes any maritime or aerial incident between the Chinese and Australian militaries, Australia shall bear full responsibility for all consequences.”

October 22, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , | 1 Comment

Turkey prepares its historic turn: from NATO sentinel to Eurasian protagonist

By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | October 19, 2025

For decades, Turkey was considered a pillar of NATO’s eastern flank — a key piece on the chessboard of containing Russia. Since joining the alliance in 1952, the country has played a dual role: on one hand, a strategic partner of the West; on the other, a regional power with ambitions of its own. This balance was always unstable — and now, it is beginning to undergo substantial change.

What was once whispered behind closed doors is now being openly voiced by central figures in Turkish politics. In September 2025, an unexpected statement from the leader of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), Devlet Bahçeli, sent shockwaves through Ankara and beyond: he openly proposed the formation of a strategic alliance between Turkey, Russia, and China, directly opposing what he called the “US-Israel evil coalition.”

Though shocking to some Western observers, this proposal did not emerge in a vacuum. According to analyst Farhad Ibragimov, Bahçeli’s remarks mark “the deepest ideological shift in Turkish nationalism since the Cold War.” A nationalism traditionally aligned with the West now appears skeptical — if not openly antagonistic — to the Washington-led structure.

It is important to note that Bahçeli is not alone in this shift. The idea is echoed with enthusiasm by other sectors of Turkish political life, such as Doğu Perinçek, leader of the Patriotic Party. For him, this reorientation is neither a tactical maneuver nor a veiled threat to NATO — it is, rather, a “civilizational project.” In his words, it is a historic decision: either Turkey remains a satellite of the Atlantic powers, or it fully integrates into the Eurasian civilization, alongside Russia, China, and Iran.

In this context, the suggested alliance should not be seen merely as a military or diplomatic pact, but as an attempt to redefine Turkey’s role in the 21st century. The proposal carries an implicit — and at times explicit — critique of the decadent, domineering, and unsustainable liberal world order.

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s position has been more ambiguous. He stated he was “not fully familiar” with Bahçeli’s idea, but added: “Whatever is good, let it happen.” This phrase summarizes Erdoğan’s strategy in recent years: keeping the country in a bargaining position, flirting with Moscow and Beijing while still participating in Western institutions. However, there are signs that even this balancing act may be giving way to more definitive choices.

The growing instability in the Middle East, the erosion of European institutions, and constant pressure from the U.S. have pushed Turkey toward a new posture. As Perinçek aptly put it, “this is not a choice, but a necessity.” Remaining within the Atlantic system, in his view, offers no guarantees of sovereignty, economic development, or territorial security.

Although short-term technical obstacles remain, Turkey’s path toward Eurasian integration is not only viable — it is necessary. The country’s economic dependence on the West, inherited from decades of participation in the liberal-globalist architecture, is not a fixed destiny — but a chain that must be broken. Remaining in NATO, far from providing security, leaves Ankara a passive target of American strategy. In contrast, a strategic alliance with Moscow, Beijing, and Tehran — while demanding structural adjustments — offers something the Atlantic has never guaranteed: full sovereignty, mutual respect, and active participation in building a new international order based on multipolarity.

More than a geopolitical alignment, the proposals of Bahçeli and Perinçek carry a profound civilizational dimension. By drawing closer to Russia, China, and Iran, Turkey is not merely seeking strategic partners but also reconnecting with the historical and cultural space of Turkic populations within those countries — from the Arctic-Siberian frontiers in Sakha to the Uyghur Autonomous Region of Xinjiang and Iranian Azerbaijan. This reconnection creates fertile ground for a broader alliance that could also involve the Central Asian republics — Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan — and Mongolia itself. This is, therefore, not just a political axis, but an identity-based one, capable of forming a cohesive civilizational bloc with shared roots and converging interests in the face of the moral and structural decline of the liberal West.

The trend is clear: a significant part of Turkey’s political and military elite no longer believes the country’s future lies in Brussels or Washington. Instead, they look to the heart of Eurasia — where emerging powers are gradually drawing the contours of a new multipolar world.

At this moment, Turkey seems to be standing in front of a mirror: it can continue acting as a peripheral extension of Western will, or it can take a more independent course. The statements from Bahçeli and Perinçek may be just the beginning of a turn that, if consolidated, will shift the geopolitical balance of the region for decades to come.

October 19, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , , , , , | Leave a comment

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.

October 18, 2025 Posted by | Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Trump’s Strongman Persona Inevitably Results in Lies and War

By Prof. Glenn Diesen | October 17, 2025

Trump’s claim that Prime Minister Modi had promised to end the purchase of Russian oil was obviously false; in fact, there was apparently no phone call between the two leaders at all. Such fabrications, portraying world leaders as deferential to him and as praising his greatness, constitute a recurring pattern—one that parallels his militaristic approach to peace.

As the president of a declining hegemon, Trump is convinced that the weakness of his predecessors was the source of decline. Trump has therefore concluded that projecting strength can reverse the erosion of American power. In constructing himself as the ultimate strongman—allegedly respected by all—he positions himself as the sole saviour of the US. The image of a powerful, decisive and respected leader capable of restoring US dominance also functions domestically to consolidate political support and project stability during the country’s uneasy transition from a unipolar to a multipolar international order. The American public is seemingly prepared to look the other way or justify the dishonesty and moral disgressions as the price worth paying for a return to greatness.

The central problem with the strongman image is that it sustains unrealistic expectations of reviving US primacy rather than adapting to the realities of a multipolar world. The outcome is a pattern of deception and conflict that ultimately undermines, rather than strengthens, the United States.

When the strongman cannot coerce his counterparts into subservience, the only recourse is retreat into fantasy. In this imagined world, other leaders allegedly regret their decisions of not falling into line, tremble as Trump wags his finger, shower him with compliments, offer tribute to the United States, and in Trump’s own words, line up to “kiss my ass.” Within the Trumpian bubble of superpower cosplay, these scenes of deference are celebrated as signs of a return to greatness, yet in the real world, American credibility declines and decadence deepens. As the gap between fantasy and reality widens, Trump becomes increasingly reckless. Case in point, the threats against India to sever ties with Russia and India backfired spectacularly as Prime Minister Modi instead went to China to cement India’s relations with Russia, China and the SCO.

Great powers and independent states cannot simply fall in line, for doing so would predictably lead to their destruction or subjugation. The ultimate aim of an aspiring hegemon is not to reconcile differences in pursuit of peaceful coexistence, but to defeat rival powers and capture independent states. The objective of the economic confrontation with China is not to renegotiate trade agreements, but to undermine China’s technological capacity and contain it militarily to restore US primacy. The purpose of the proxy war against Russia is not peace in terms of finding a new peaceful status quo, rather it is to use Ukrainians and increasingly Europeans to bleed and weaken Russia until it can no longer sustain great-power status. Similarly, the goal of the confrontation with Iran is not to reach a new nuclear accord—Tehran has already accepted such terms in the past—but to achieve Iran’s capitulation and disarmament by linking the nuclear issue to restrictions on missiles and regional alliances. Any power that concedes even marginally to US pressure ultimately finds itself in a weaker and more vulnerable position—one that the aspiring hegemon will inevitably exploit. Any peace agreements are therefore temporary at best, as an opportunity to regroup.

India presents an intriguing case, as it is not an adversarial power. Its commitment to non-alignment makes strong relations with the United States desirable, yet the very same non-alignment necessitates strategic diversification to reduce excessive reliance on Washington. Should India be persuaded to sever ties with other major powers such as China and Russia, it risks becoming too dependent on the United States and absorbed into a bloc-based geopolitical system. Subordination to a declining empire would be perilous, as the United States would predictably use India as a frontline against China, and simultaneously demand economic tribute and cannibalise Indian industries in pursuit of renewed dominance. In essence, India must avoid becoming another Europe.

The strongman act is most effective with weaker and dependent states—such as those in Europe—that are willing to subordinate themselves entirely in order to preserve American commitment to the continent. European states lack the economic capacity, security autonomy, and political imagination to envision a multipolar world in which the United States wields less influence and holds other priorities than a close partnership with Europe. Consequently, European leaders appear willing to sacrifice core national interests to preserve the unity of the “Political West” for a little while longer. In private, they may express disdain for Trump; in public, they pay tribute to “daddy” and line up diligently in front of his desk to receive praise or ridicule. Yet this subservience is inherently temporary: leaders who disregard fundamental national interests are, in time, swept aside by the very forces they seek to suppress.

The strongman does not create any durable peace the underlying problems are never addressed. The mantra of “peace through strength” can be translated into peace through escalation, with the assumption that the opponent will come to the table and submit to US demands. However, rival great powers that have nowhere to retreat will respond to escalation with reciprocation. The delusions of the strongman in the declining hegemony will therefore inevitably trigger major wars.

October 17, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Netherlands nationalizes Сhinese-owned tech company

RT | October 13, 2025

The Dutch government has taken control of a Chinese-owned chipmaker based in the Netherlands, citing risk to the EU’s economic and technological security. The firm called the move “excessive,” saying it complied with all relevant laws and regulations.

The Netherlands Economy Ministry revealed late on Sunday that it had invoked a never-before-used emergency law to take control of manufacturer Nexperia, owned by China’s Wingtech Technology.

Once part of Dutch electronics group Philips, Nexperia specializes in the high-volume production of chips used in the automotive, consumer electronics, and other industries.

Amsterdam said it wanted to prevent a situation in which Nexperia’s chips could “become unavailable in an emergency” which “could pose a risk to Dutch and European economic security.”

The Dutch government called the move “highly exceptional,” citing “recent and acute signals of serious governance shortcomings and actions” within the company.

Wingtech shares tumbled 10% in Shanghai on Monday, forcing a halt in trading after hitting the daily limit.

The tech firm decried the Dutch government’s move as “excessive intervention driven by geopolitical bias, rather than a fact-based risk assessment,” according to a now-deleted WeChat post, which was archived by the Chinese policy blog Pekingnology. Wingtech said it would take actions to protect its rights and would seek government support.

The company later said in a filing to the Shanghai Stock Exchange that its control over Nexperia would be temporarily restricted due to the Dutch order and court rulings affecting decision-making and operational efficiency.

The Dutch takeover of Nexperia comes at a time of escalating global trade tensions. Over the past year, China and the EU have clashed over what the bloc claims is Beijing’s dumping of certain key goods and its industrial overproduction. China has accused the EU of protectionism.

Last week, China tightened its restrictions on the export of rare earth elements and magnets, a step that could further hurt the EU’s struggling auto industry.

October 13, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Sinophobia | , , | 1 Comment

From NATO’s flank to Eurasia’s core: Türkiye’s break with the West begins

By Farhad Ibragimov | RT | October 10, 2025

For decades, Turkish nationalism marched under the NATO flag. But now, one of Türkiye’s most influential right-wing leaders is calling for a turn East – toward Russia and China. His proposal may mark the country’s clearest ideological break with Atlanticism since joining the Alliance.

In September, Türkiye’s political landscape was shaken by a statement that many experts called sensational and potentially transformative. Devlet Bahceli, leader of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and a long-time ally of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan within the People’s Alliance, proposed the establishment of a strategic trilateral alliance involving Türkiye, Russia, and China to counter the “US-Israel evil coalition.”

Bahceli emphasized that such an alliance is “the most suitable option, considering reason, diplomacy, the spirit of politics, geographical conditions, and the strategic environment of the new century.” The proposal extends far beyond the usual nationalist agenda, positioning Türkiye as a player capable of initiating new formats of international cooperation.

To grasp the importance of this statement, we must note the historical context. Turkish pan-Turkism has traditionally been oriented toward the West, and nationalists were seen as staunch defenders of the pro-Atlantic course. In this light, Bahçeli’s call for an alliance with Moscow and Beijing marks a symbolic break from that tradition, reflecting growing distrust toward NATO and the US within Türkiye’s political landscape.

Bahceli’s comments are not random. Over the past few years, he has steadily ramped up his criticism of the West, advocating for Türkiye’s sovereign development “beyond blocs and alliances.” But this is the first time he has explicitly named Russia and China as preferred partners.

Reactions inside Türkiye were mixed. Right-wing circles called Bahceli’s words “revolutionary,” while leftists saw them as confirmation of a broader anti-Western consensus. Internationally, the statement underscored Ankara’s growing distance from Western power centers and its gradual rhetorical shift toward the East and Greater Eurasia.

Shortly afterward, Erdogan made a cautious comment, saying he was “not fully familiar” with Bahceli’s initiative but adding, “Whatever is good, let it happen.” The ambiguity is typical for Erdogan, who avoids publicly rejecting the ideas of key allies while keeping his political options open.

On one hand, the president is wary of provoking open conflict with Western partners, given Türkiye’s economic vulnerabilities. On the other, his comments suggest that Bahçeli’s initiative could serve as leverage – a way to pressure the US and EU by signaling that Ankara might strengthen ties with Moscow and Beijing.

A day later, Bahceli clarified his position, saying, “We know what we are doing. Türkiye should not be the implementer of regional and global projects put forward by others, but rather must be the leading actor of its own unique projects.”

In other words, Bahçeli not only intensified his anti-Western rhetoric but also asserted Türkiye’s claim to be an independent power center in the emerging multipolar world order. His stance reflects the desire of part of Türkiye’s leadership to move from being a peripheral NATO ally to a pioneer of alternative alliances in Eurasia.

From NATO loyalism to Eurasian realism

For decades, Türkiye was one of NATO’s most loyal allies. Since the Cold War, the Turkish elite believed that integration into Euro-Atlantic structures was the only viable strategy. A world order based on American leadership seemed stable and predictable.

Erdogan shared similar views when he first became prime minister in 2002. But as global competition intensified, disagreements with Washington deepened, and multipolar trends gained momentum, he realized that the unipolar system could not last. Türkiye, he concluded, must adapt – and play a role in shaping the new order.

Seen in this light, Bahceli’s proposal is more than nationalist fervor. It reflects an understanding among parts of Türkiye’s leadership that the country’s future lies in greater strategic autonomy and in building ties with alternative centers of power. His words echo those within Erdoğan’s circle who believe Türkiye can assert itself only through closer engagement with Russia and China.

This shift reveals how Türkiye’s elites have moved from trusting the stability of a Western-centric system to recognizing its limits – and searching for new frameworks in which Ankara can act as a key player rather than a subordinate.

Redefining Türkiye’s place in the world

Bahceli’s remarks highlight deep shifts within Turkish nationalist circles and Ankara’s growing readiness to reconsider its global role. He argues that neither China nor Russia is Türkiye’s enemy, despite efforts by Western ideologues to claim otherwise. Instead, he sees the West as the true obstacle – determined to prevent Türkiye from becoming an independent power center and confining it to a role of “watchdog” in the Middle East.

In his latest statement, Bahceli stressed the need for a new strategy:

“We believe that Türkiye, located at the center of Eurasia, which is the strategic focus of the 21st century, should pursue multidimensional and long-term policies aimed at strengthening regional peace and stability and developing cooperation opportunities, especially with countries in the Black Sea and Caspian Basin, including Russia, China, and Iran. Considering the changing and complex structure of international relations, producing permanent and comprehensive solutions to global issues such as terrorism, illegal migration, and climate change is a responsibility that no country can achieve alone.”

Essentially, Bahceli is saying that Türkiye must transcend old constraints and stop being a tool in the hands of external forces. His stance embodies a new paradigm: only through an independent, multilateral, and Eurasian policy can Türkiye become a true architect of regional stability and a major player in the future global order.

The end of oscillation

Türkiye has long oscillated between Atlantic alignment and independent ambition. These cycles rarely evolved into a lasting doctrine. But the current geopolitical environment is forcing Ankara to make a choice.

Economic dependency, regional instability, and Israel’s aggressive behavior – including attacks on Iran and Qatar – have created a sense of urgency. In Ankara, some now fear that Türkiye itself could become a target.

Globally, the old unipolar order is losing balance, and an alliance with Russia and China may offer Türkiye not guarantees, but strategic advantages – especially in securing its autonomy and status as an independent power center.

At the UN General Assembly, US President Donald Trump urged Erdogan to stop buying Russian oil and even floated bringing Türkiye into the anti-Russia sanctions regime. For Ankara, that would mean economic damage and deeper dependence on the West – a risk the leadership is no longer willing to accept.

Bahceli’s initiative, and Erdogan’s carefully measured reaction, mark a pivotal moment. Türkiye is beginning to institutionalize its search for an alternative political philosophy – one grounded in multipolarity, strategic pragmatism, and a redefined vision of its place in the 21st century.

Farhad Ibragimov – lecturer at the Faculty of Economics at RUDN University, visiting lecturer at the Institute of Social Sciences of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

October 11, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

US likely already sent new light JLTV ‘Tomahawk’ launchers to Neo-Nazi junta

By Drago Bosnic | October 8, 2025

Supplying the “Tomahawk” cruise missiles to the Kiev regime has been “on the table” for years. The troubled Biden administration never delivered them, despite repeatedly suggesting it would. Interestingly, Donald Trump regularly criticized such moves as escalatory, insisting that the United States shouldn’t be involved and that it’s only antagonizing Russia. Ironically enough, as soon as he took office, this stance changed dramatically. In a matter of weeks, Trump’s initial promise of “ending the war in 24 hours” degenerated into the same sort of belligerent rhetoric (and moves) as during the Biden era. The new US administration increased American involvement, with military sources suggesting that the Pentagon is close to delivering the aforementioned “Tomahawk” missiles.

Worse yet, some claim that this has already happened and that Washington DC even raised the stakes by supplying new light launchers for the US-made cruise missiles. Namely, since 2019, the Pentagon has been acquiring the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV), better known as the Oshkosh Light Combat Tactical All-Terrain Vehicle (L-ATV). It was designed to replace the AM General High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV), better known as the Humvee. One version of the JLTV has been modified for use by the US Marine Corps (USMC) under the Long Range Fires (LRF) program, designed to launch cruise missiles, specifically the infamous “Tomahawk”. The Pentagon intended to give the USMC similar capabilities to those of the US Army, which has the ground-based “Typhon”.

There’s been some confusion even in the US Congress regarding the official designation for the program, with some documents referring to it as the Long Range Precision Fires (LRPF), while others still use the LRF. Either way, the US military’s ability to use operational and strategic weapons on such a small platform can certainly provide it with a significant advantage in terms of risk mitigation. Namely, because the launcher is essentially a modified JLTV truck that’s now in wide use (well over 20,000 have been delivered so far), it makes it very difficult to detect “Tomahawk” carriers. This enables shoot-and-scoot (sort of like hit-and-run) strikes at targets that are 1,600 km away, although some sources claim that it’s 2,500 km for the latest Block V iteration of the “Tomahawk”.

The latest reports suggest that these cruise missiles have already been delivered to the Neo-Nazi junta forces through the main logistics hub for NATO-occupied Ukraine in Rzeszów, southeastern Poland, and are now waiting for the “zero hour” somewhere in Western Ukraine. The Kiev regime lacks the necessary ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) capabilities to effectively use the “Tomahawk” to the maximum, meaning that the US/NATO would need to provide the targeting data. This has already been the case with other Western cruise missiles, most notably the Anglo-French “Storm Shadow/SCALP-EG” and the German “Taurus” (the latter is yet to be officially delivered and deployed). Both types are newer and more advanced than the 1980s-era US-made “Tomahawk”.

However, the aforementioned Block V would certainly give them a run for their money, especially if deployed from the highly mobile JLTV trucks. Its ability to move quickly through heavily forested areas makes it extremely difficult to detect, meaning that it could effectively act as some sort of a single-shot “Iskander-K” (uses the 9M728/R-500, with a range of up to 500 km and the Novator’s 9M729, which Western sources claim has a staggering range of up to 5,500 km). The launcher could instantly deploy at virtually any firing position, while its relatively low cost offers the key advantage in terms of mitigating losses. Military sources report that the US could produce 100-200 such units per month, while the number of missiles supplied in each batch can reach over 500 units.

In other words, such a mass production would make it a much bigger challenge than the expensive and overhyped Western European missiles that the United Kingdom, France and Germany can produce in single or double digits, at best. Obviously, this is not to say that the Russian military could be defeated solely with the use of “Tomahawks”, but it could certainly complicate logistics and other operations far behind the immediate frontline. The Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) and its surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems have accumulated extensive experience in countering various types of missiles and drones; however, the mass deployment of different kinds of cruise missiles can pose a significant challenge. Namely, Russia is the largest country on the planet, making it extremely difficult to defend all of its territory.

Thus, the aviation, air defenses and ISR assets will need to work together and closely coordinate their actions in order to defend the most critically important areas (military-industrial facilities, bridges, thermal and nuclear power plants, substations, etc). A&WAC (airborne early warning and control) aircraft such as the A-50U will play a crucial role in this, as they can detect and track very low-flying cruise missiles. The sheer range of the “Tomahawk” puts virtually all of European Russia within striking distance, while the Block V expands that well into Western Siberia, putting even ICBM fields in jeopardy, including the Dombarovsky Red Banner Division of the 31st Missile Army of the Strategic Missile Forces (RVSN). This unit is armed with the monstrously destructive R-36M2 “Voyevoda” ICBMs (and likely the RS-28 “Sarmat”).

These missiles are also capable of deploying the Yu-71/74 “Avangard” HGVs (hypersonic glide vehicles), the world’s most advanced hypersonic weapon. The US calculus is pretty clear – deploying these missiles in NATO-occupied Ukraine puts Russia into an incredibly dangerous strategic position. It’s very similar to the geopolitical impact of having “Tomahawk” missiles permanently deployed in the Philippines and Japan, as these put Beijing and most major Chinese cities in range.

Thus, America has the capacity to strike both (Eur)Asian giants with medium-range weapons, while the two can only respond with their strategic arsenals. Although this effectively gives Washington DC the ability to dictate the pace of potential escalation, it still makes the world a far more dangerous place, forcing Moscow and Beijing to contemplate immediate strategic retaliation in order to defend themselves.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

October 8, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

China Slams Remarks by US Ambassador to Panama About Canal

Sputnik – 06.10.2025

BEIJING – The Chinese embassy in Panama on Monday criticized the remarks by US Ambassador to Panama Kevin Marino Cabrera about Beijing’s alleged meddling in matters concerning the Panama Canal.

On Sunday, Cabrera said in an interview with the Contrapeso newspaper that China had “malign” influence on the Panama Canal, accusing Beijing of cyberattacks and corruption and threatening visa cancellations for those who cooperate with Chinese enterprises.

“The statements of the US Ambassador about China have no factual basis and scientific justification, they are aimed at provoking conflict between China and other countries in the region. Depriving these countries of their diplomatic independence serves the geopolitical interests of the United States, causing more criticism and opposition,” the Chinese embassy said in a statement.

China adheres to the principle of “joint consultation, joint construction and joint use” in mutually beneficial cooperation with all countries, the statement read.

“The projects of Chinese companies in Panama and other Latin American countries make a significant contribution to social-economic development. High-quality Chinese goods at a low price are popular. The US ambassador’s statement casts doubt on the ability of countries in the region to think sensibly and ridicules the local population,” the embassy said.

Beijing urges Washington to put aside arrogance and bias and “focus on the matters that truly contribute to the development of the countries of the region and the well-being of their peoples,” the embassy added.

October 7, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »