Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

China Chokes Western Defense Supply With Minerals Stranglehold – Reports

Sputnik – 04.08.2025

China is restricting supplies of critical minerals to Western defense firms, delaying production and forcing them to seek alternatives in other markets, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing sources at the companies.

For example, the newspaper points out, one drone manufacturer that supplies the US military was forced to delay orders for up to two months while it searched for a replacement for Chinese magnets made from rare earth metals.

Traders told the newspaper that some materials needed by the Western defense industry were now selling at prices five or more times higher than they were before China imposed the restrictions.

More than 80,000 components used by the Pentagon contain minerals that are subject to China’s export restrictions, the publication recalled. At the same time, almost all of the US military’s supply chains for these minerals depend on at least one Chinese supplier, so Beijing’s restrictions could cause major problems for the US military.

In addition, Western buyers told the newspaper that China was requesting detailed information about the purpose of the purchased minerals so that they were not used by Western companies in military production.

In early April, the Chinese Commerce Ministry said that Beijing had placed 16 US companies on an export control list to control the export of dual-use goods. As the New York Times noted, Beijing has suspended the export of a wide range of critical minerals and magnets, which are needed, in particular, to assemble cars, drones, robots and missiles.

In June, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing people familiar with the matter, that China had agreed to resume issuing rare earth export licenses to US automakers and industrial plants, but limited the permits to six months. Reuters also reported, citing people familiar with the matter, that China had not committed to granting export permits for some specialized rare earth magnets that US military suppliers need for fighter jets and missile systems.

Rare earth elements are a group of 17 metals that are widely used in high-tech devices, including computers, televisions, and smartphones, as well as in defense technologies, including missiles, lasers, transportation systems, and military communications.

August 4, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

China hits back at US smears on arms supplies to Ukraine at UN Security Council

Global Times | August 1, 2025

China’s deputy permanent representative to the UN Geng Shuang spoke at a UN Security Council meeting on the issue of arms supplies to Ukraine on Thursday local time, refuting accusations made by the US representative against China.

Recently, Russia and Ukraine have held several rounds of direct negotiations and reached a number of agreements on humanitarian issues such as prisoner exchanges, making positive progress. At the same time, however, the crisis continues, with no signs of the war coming to an end. A large volume of weapons and ammunition continues to flow into the battlefield, causing new casualties and damage to infrastructure, Geng noted.

What is particularly concerning is that the types and scope of weapons entering the battlefield are expanding, with their lethality and destructiveness constantly increasing, Geng said. Recent reports indicate that both sides have deployed combat robots, further highlighting that the Russia-Ukraine conflict is increasingly becoming a testing ground for new types of weaponry. This suggests that the nature of warfare could undergo dangerous changes, he added.

“I would like to reiterate that while weapons may win wars, they cannot bring lasting peace. The reckless transfer of arms to the battlefield will only intensify the conflict, prolong the fighting, increase the risk of proliferation, and inflict more casualties and suffering on people in both the conflict zone and the broader region,” Geng said.

The Chinese diplomat pointed out that the urgent priority now is for both parties to work together to de-escalate the battlefield situation as soon as possible, maintain the momentum of dialogue and negotiation, continue building consensus, and ultimately reach a comprehensive, durable, and binding peace agreement.

In response to US representative’s false narratives and malicious smearing of China on the issue, Geng said “this is completely unacceptable,” saying that he responded to such accusations on multiple occasions in past meetings. “Since the US insists on repeating the same rhetoric, I find it necessary to set the record straight once again,” Geng said.

First, China is not the creator of the Ukraine crisis, nor is it a party to the conflict. China has never provided lethal weapons to any party involved in the conflict. We have always strictly controlled the export of dual-use items, including drones, the Chinese diplomat said.

Second, the UN Security Council has not imposed sanctions on any party to the conflict. China maintains normal trade relations with both Russia and Ukraine, in full compliance with international law and without breaching any international obligations, he said.

China’s legitimate and lawful rights and interests must not be infringed upon. “In fact, the US itself continues to engage in trade with Russia to this day. Why should it be acceptable for the US to do so, but not for others? Isn’t this ‘only allowing oneself to set fires while forbidding others from lighting lamps?’” Geng asked.

Third, the Ukraine crisis is currently at a critical juncture, with a genuine prospect for a political resolution. The US cannot on the one hand ask China to play a constructive role in ending the war, while on the other hand continuously smear and pressure China, he said, urging the US to stop playing the blame game and scapegoating others, and instead contribute positively to efforts for a ceasefire, de-escalation, and the promotion of dialogue and negotiation.

The Chinese diplomat emphasized that China maintains normal economic and trade relations with both Russia and Ukraine – this does not violate international law, nor does it breach any international obligations. “The US itself continues to conduct trade with Russia, so why should China be prohibited from doing the same?” he said.

“It is the US that repeatedly engages in smearing, slandering, and attacking other countries in the UN Security Council chamber. Does the US not recognize how different its behavior is from that of other Council members?” Geng asked.

What the resolution of the Ukraine crisis requires is unity and cooperation, not division and confrontation. Once again, we urge the US to stop its baseless accusations and scapegoating, to invest more in diplomatic efforts, and to contribute genuinely to promoting a ceasefire, de-escalating the conflict, and advancing peace talks, the Geng said.

August 1, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , | Leave a comment

Kicking the peace can down the road

In discussion with Glenn Diesen
Ian Proud | July 28, 2025

Nice to catch up with Glenn Diesen to discuss recent developments, including my article on Trump’s 50-day ultimatum to Putin, which has now been reduced to 10-12 days, whatever that means. I continue to judge that the threat of secondary sanctions against Russia’s trading partners will have a greater impact on the US than on China, India or any other country that does business with Russia.

Meanwhile, Zelensky’s short-lived attempt to shut down anti-corruption organisations closing in on his cronies has been a big wake up call, not just for European political leaders and journalists, but more importantly, citizens.

Faced with admitting defeat in Ukraine and throwing Zelensky under the bus and continuing with an ineffective foreign policy towards Russia, I judge that Starmer, VdL and others will keep kicking the peace can down the road.

Yet every day the war continues, Ukraine loses more ground and more lives on the battlefield, and slides further towards the status of a failed state. My optimism remains low that the war will end in 2025.

July 29, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Video | , , , , , | Leave a comment

UK cautions it could fight China over Taiwan

RT | July 27, 2025

The United Kingdom could resort to military force against China in the event of an escalation over Taiwan, British Defense Secretary John Healey has said, though he emphasized that London continues to prefer a diplomatic resolution.

Speaking to The Telegraph during a visit to Australia, Healey said Britain would “secure peace through strength” if necessary – marking one of the clearest signals yet from a senior UK official regarding the possibility of direct confrontation with Beijing.

Healey made the remarks as the HMS Prince of Wales, a British aircraft carrier equipped with F-35 fighter jets, docked in the northern Australian city of Darwin. It is the first time in nearly 30 years that a British strike group has arrived in the region. The carrier is on a nine-month Pacific deployment, participating in Australia’s Talisman Sabre exercise and visiting ports in Japan and South Korea.

”If we have to fight, as we have done in the past, Australia and the UK are nations that will fight together. We exercise together and by exercising together and being more ready to fight, we deter better together,” Healey said when asked what London would do in case of an escalation around Taiwan.

The secretary then said he was speaking in “general terms.” According to Healey, London’s approach to Taiwan has not changed.

China considers the island of Taiwan part of its territory under the One-China principle, and insists on eventual reunification. According to the Chinese government, peaceful reunion is preferable, but it reserves the right to use force if necessary.

Taiwan has been self-governed since 1949, when nationalist forces retreated to the island after losing the Chinese Civil War. Most nations, including Russia, recognize Taiwan as part of China. The UK, as well as the US, also formally stick to the One-China principle while maintaining informal ties with Taiwan and supplying it with weapons and ammunition.

Last month, Beijing criticized a British warship’s passage through the Taiwan Strait in Chinese territorial waters. Such actions “deliberately cause trouble” and undermine peace in the area, it said.

July 27, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | 2 Comments

Russia’s Laser Weapon Supremacy: Short Guide

Sputnik – 27.07.2025

While the US and its European pals can only dream about developing laser weaponry, Russia is already light years ahead of them.

Unlike kinetic weapons, lasers do not use ammo and do not require reloading, only a power source, Russian military analyst Alexander Artamonov explained to Sputnik.

Lasers can also display a better rate of fire and would be much harder to evade than, for example, a missile.

“It is more efficient in terms of cost and the rate of fire, depending on the nature of the target you want to hit, and in terms of the time it takes to hit the target,” Artamonov remarked.

Nowadays, Russia, the United States and China run laser weapon programs. When it comes to actual working laser weapons, only Russia can present tangible proof.

Peresvet is a Russian mobile laser system designed to ‘blind’ enemy optical and optical-electronic surveillance systems, including drones, reconnaissance aircraft and even satellites. It has already been adopted by the Russian Armed Forces.

“Peresvet lasers are currently deployed not only in the Moscow region but on the front line as well,” Artamonov said, referring to the Ukrainian conflict zone.

Meanwhile, the US simply lacks the technology and know-how – like, for example, a sufficiently powerful and compact power source – to achieve comparable results.

“They conducted tests in the Indian Ocean. The US lasers perform poorly in water mist – under adverse weather conditions, that is,” Artamonov said.

Simply put, Russia’s Western rivals cannot field actual laser weapons whereas Russia is already developing more advanced and deadly military lasers.

July 27, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Tehran’s new war plan: Build an anti-NATO

Russian FM Sergey Lavrov attends a meeting with foreign ministers of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in Beijing, China. © Sputnik / Russian Foreign Ministry
By Farhad Ibragimov | RT | July 27, 2025

What if the next global security pact wasn’t forged in Brussels or Washington – but in Beijing, with Iran at the table?

This is no longer a theoretical question. At the mid-July meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Council of Foreign Ministers in China, Iran made it clear: Tehran now views the SCO not just as a regional forum, but as a potential counterweight to NATO. In doing so, it signaled a profound strategic pivot – away from an outdated Western-dominated system and toward an emerging Eurasian order.

The summit highlighted the increasing resilience of multilateral Eurasian cooperation in the face of growing global turbulence. Russia was represented by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who also met with Chinese leader Xi Jinping – an encounter that underscored the strength of the Moscow-Beijing axis. On the sidelines, Lavrov held bilateral meetings with the foreign ministers of China, Pakistan, India, and notably, Iran. His talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi focused on diplomatic solutions to the nuclear issue and emphasized deepening strategic coordination.

The Iranian side used the platform with purpose. Araghchi expressed his appreciation for the SCO’s solidarity amid Israeli aggression and stressed that Iran views the organization not as symbolic, but as a practical mechanism for regional unity and global positioning.

A platform that works – despite the skeptics

India’s full participation also contradicted predictions in Western circles that geopolitical tensions would paralyze the SCO. Instead, New Delhi reaffirmed its commitment to the platform. The implication is clear: unlike NATO, where unity depends on compliance with a central authority, the SCO has proven flexible enough to accommodate diverse interests while building consensus.

For Russia, the SCO remains a cornerstone of its Eurasian strategy. Moscow serves as a balancing force – linking China with South and Central Asia, and now, with an assertive Iran. Russia’s approach is pragmatic, multi-vector, and geared toward creating a new geopolitical equilibrium.

Iran’s strategic breakout

The heart of the summit was Abbas Araghchi’s speech – an assertive and legally grounded critique of Israeli and American actions. He cited Article 2, Section 4 of the UN Charter, denounced attacks on Iran’s IAEA-monitored nuclear facilities, and invoked Resolution 487 of the UN Security Council. His message: Western aggression has no legal cover, and no amount of narrative control can change that.

But beyond condemnation, Araghchi delivered a concrete roadmap to strengthen the SCO as a vehicle for collective security and sovereignty:

  • A collective security body to respond to external aggression, sabotage, and terrorism

  • A permanent coordination mechanism for documenting and countering subversive acts

  • A Center for Sanctions Resistance, to shield member economies from unilateral Western measures

  • A Shanghai Security Forum for defense and intelligence coordination

  • Enhanced cultural and media cooperation to counter cognitive and information warfare

These are not rhetorical gestures – they are blueprints for institutional transformation. Iran is operationalizing a new security doctrine built on multipolarity, mutual defense, and resistance to hybrid threats.

SCO vs. NATO: Two models, two futures

While NATO is structured around a rigid hierarchy dominated by Washington, the SCO embodies a post-hegemonic vision: sovereignty, equality, and civilizational plurality. Its member states represent over 40% of the global population, possess vast industrial capacities, and share a collective desire to break the unipolar mold.

Tehran’s bet is clear: the SCO offers not just a geopolitical shelter, but a platform for advancing a new global logic – one rooted in strategic autonomy, not dependency.

The sophistication and clarity of Araghchi’s initiatives suggest that Tehran is preparing for the long game. Behind closed doors, the summit likely featured discussions – formal and informal – about deepening SCO institutionalism, perhaps even rethinking the organization’s mandate.

Araghchi made that vision explicit: “The SCO is gradually strengthening its position on the world stage… It must adopt a more active, independent, and structured role.” That’s diplomatic code for institutional realignment.

The West responds – predictably

The Western response was immediate. Within days of Iran’s proposals, the EU imposed new sanctions on eight individuals and one Iranian organization – citing vague claims of “serious human rights violations.” Israel, by contrast, faced no new penalties.

It is geopolitical signaling. Tehran’s push to turn the SCO into an action-oriented bloc is seen in Brussels and Washington as a direct threat to the current order. The more coherent and proactive the SCO becomes, the harsher the pressure will grow.

But that pressure proves Iran’s point. The rules-based order is no longer rules-based – it is power-based. For countries like Iran, the only path to sovereignty is through multilateral defiance and integration on their own terms.

The stakes ahead

Iran is not improvising. It is positioning itself as a co-architect of a post-Western security order. Its vision for the SCO goes beyond survival – it is about shaping an international system where no single bloc can dominate through sanctions, information warfare, or coercive diplomacy.

This strategy has implications far beyond Tehran. If the SCO embraces Iran’s proposals and begins to institutionalize them, we could be witnessing the early formation of the 21st-century’s first true alternative to NATO.

The West may dismiss this as fantasy – but in Eurasia, the future is already being drafted. And this time, it’s not happening in English.

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

July 27, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

US should be ashamed of its groundless accusations against China: Chinese envoy

Xinhua | July 26, 2025

The United States should be ashamed of its repeated groundless accusations against China at the UN Security Council this week, said a Chinese envoy on Friday.

Geng Shuang, China’s deputy permanent representative to the United Nations, rejected the U.S. representative’s accusation against China for the so-called export of dual-use materials to Russia.

“China did not start the Ukraine crisis, nor is it a party to it. China has never provided lethal weapons to any party to the conflict and has always strictly controlled the export of dual-use materials, including drones,” Geng told the Security Council. “We urge the United States to stop shifting blame over the Ukraine issue and creating confrontation, and instead, to make concrete efforts to promote ceasefire and peace talks.”

On Tuesday, the U.S. representative took advantage of an open debate of the council to attack and accuse China over the South China Sea issue. On Thursday, when the council held an open meeting on cooperation between the UN and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the U.S. representative, once again, started provocation by slandering and smearing China on Xinjiang-related issues.

“Within a single week, the United States has made groundless accusations against China at the Security Council multiple times. This has proved that what the United States cares about is not maintaining international peace and security or promoting the political settlement of wars and conflicts, but rather using this council to attack and suppress other countries and engage in political manipulation to serve its own agenda,” said Geng.

“As a permanent member of the Security Council, the United States should be ashamed of and disgraced by its own words and deeds,” he said. “China urges the United States to change course at an early date and engage constructively in the work of the Security Council.”

On the issue of Ukraine, China has been calling for a ceasefire and is committed to promoting peace talks, Geng said, adding that China’s efforts have been widely recognized by the international community.

“For the United States, I would like to say that the international community needs solidarity and cooperation instead of division and confrontation in the face of so many hotspot conflicts and a complex international situation,” he said.

July 26, 2025 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite, Sinophobia | , | 1 Comment

Visit of the Prime Minister of Australia to the PRC

By Vladimir Terehov – New Eastern Outlook – July 26, 2025

The official visit of the Prime Minister of Australia, Anthony Albanese, to the PRC, which took place from July 12 to 18 this year at the invitation of his Chinese counterpart Li Qiang, became a notable event in the rapidly developing process of reshaping the situation in the Indo-Pacific region.

Formally, Albanese’s visit was considered a reciprocal event following the visit to Australia by Chinese Premier Li Qiang in June last year, during the latter’s regular tour of several countries in the region. However, the current visit of the Australian Prime Minister coincided with a period of rapid acceleration in the long-anticipated transformation of the global order and therefore deserves special attention.

Geopolitical uncertainty stimulates the continuation of the China-Australia dialogue

The very fact and nature of this visit serve as yet another testament to the increasing relevance of the “strategy of balancing,” which is being adopted by all more or less significant participants in the current phase of the “Great Game.” This is especially evident in its focal point, which is rapidly shifting toward the Indo-Pacific. One of the most striking examples of this trend toward “balancing” has previously been noted in the policy of one of the leading Asian powers — Japan. To reiterate, this trend itself is a characteristic feature of the reshaping of the world order that began with the end of the Cold War, and it is inevitably accompanied by the emergence of various factors of uncertainty in global politics.

Lately, particularly significant among those factors are the ones triggered by the “tariff war,” launched on April 2 of this year by the 47th President of the United States. Although outwardly motivated by fairly understandable considerations of a “purely economic” nature, it has inevitably affected the sphere of political relations. And this includes countries with which Washington remains in military-political alliances that were once formalized through binding agreements.

Australia belongs to such countries. Along with New Zealand, it has been part of the trilateral ANZUS alliance (Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty) with the U.S. since 1951. Although the alliance had shown few signs of life after the end of the Cold War — primarily due to New Zealand’s de facto boycott — the sharp escalation of the international situation that began at the end of the last decade, as well as the coming to power of the conservative National Party in Wellington in early 2023, appear to be breathing new life into the pact. Australia also participates in “politically non-binding” configurations with the United States (Quad, AUKUS).

All these alliances and configurations are aimed, directly or indirectly, at Washington’s current primary geopolitical opponent — China — which, however, has been Australia’s main trading partner for over ten years. This fact constitutes a fundamentally important departure from the Cold War era and compels Canberra to maintain constructive relations with Beijing in order to ensure the prosperity of Australia’s export-oriented economy.

Let us note that in 2023, Australia exported various goods (mainly from the mining and agricultural sectors) to China worth an enormous $220 billion. At that time, the volume of accumulated Chinese investment in the Australian economy had reached almost $90 billion.

One would think Washington should appreciate the risks Canberra takes by joining overtly anti-Chinese actions in the South China Sea or in matters related to the increasing importance of controlling the Pacific Ocean’s waters. Yet the inclusion of Australia in the list of countries targeted by the “tariff war” waged by the current U.S. President does not suggest that such assessments are present in the thinking of U.S. leadership.

By contrast, the longstanding demand for Australia to “more clearly” demonstrate its stance on the Taiwan issue was once again voiced by the current architect of U.S. defense strategy, Elbridge Colby — and precisely on the eve of Albanese’s visit. In response, during the visit itself, the Australian government issued a reply along the following lines: guided by national interests, our troops will not be sent abroad based on hypotheses regarding the situation in specific regions.

Just a few years ago, Australia’s “older brothers” nearly forced the country into AUKUS, promising to build it a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines. But now, the same Elbridge Colby is pondering the possibility of the U.S. pulling out of the project.

In short, Anthony Albanese, who resumed his post as Prime Minister of Australia following the most recent general elections, had ample reason to choose this visit as his first trip abroad — in order to “clarify the situation” in relations with a political adversary.

Some outcomes of the Australian Prime Minister’s visit to the PRC and the prospects for bilateral relations

The entire week-long visit of Albanese to the PRC can be divided into three components: “business,” “general political,” and “associated.” The first was held mainly in Shanghai with the participation of relevant ministers and business representatives; the second took place in Beijing; and the third, involving representatives of public organizations, was held in Chengdu, the capital of Sichuan Province. Regular meetings were held on several bilateral platforms, including those at the level of prime ministers and ministry heads. The high-ranking Australian guest was received by the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping.

Following the events, several documents were adopted. Of particular note is the “Joint Statement” outlining the outcomes of the latest meeting between the prime ministers. This document includes ten equally important points, of which we will briefly highlight a few here.

Point 3 reaffirms the relevance of maintaining and further developing the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership, as well as the commitment to “wisely overcome” differences. In point 4, the Australian government reiterated its adherence to the “One China” principle — essentially reaffirming the aforementioned response to U.S. demands concerning the Taiwan issue. A message to the same effect is conveyed in point 6, which emphasizes the importance of a “fair, open, and non-discriminatory business environment,” along with its chief regulator, the WTO. Point 8 refers to the intention to further develop this environment within the framework of the Free Trade Agreement concluded in 2015.

Finally, let us point out the potentially greatest challenge to the continued constructive relations between Australia and the PRC. This may turn out to be not so much the renewed U.S. focus on the 1951 alliance, but rather the development of the process of forming (still, it should be repeated, quasi-) allied relations between Australia and Japan. Even more so, since the current leadership of the Philippines is showing increasingly clear interest in joining this emerging regional alliance.

However, within the Philippines itself, resistance to anti-Chinese political trends is growing. In particular, in July of this year, a retired general questioned the usefulness of the well-known 2016 ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague (in favor of the Philippines) regarding territorial disputes in the South China Sea. According to this general, the only practical result of that decision is turning the country into a “second Ukraine.”

It seems that the word “Ukraine” is beginning to acquire a symbolic meaning and now plays a role in global politics similar to that of “Baba Yaga” in children’s fairy tales — stories that are better left unread before bedtime.

Australia would also do well to avoid a prospect defined in such terms. Today, Canberra has every reason to do so, and those reasons were only strengthened during the visit of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, as discussed here.

Vladimir Terekhov, expert on Asia-Pacific issues

July 26, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Thai-Cambodian Сonflict Only ‘Suits’ America

Sputnik – 24.07.2025

Earlier on Thursday, there was an escalation of clashes between troops of Thailand and Cambodia on the border, which began with a shootout between ground forces in a disputed area.

The US sees the Thailand-Cambodia escalation “through the lens of divide and rule,” Brian Berletic, geopolitical analyst and former US Marine, told Sputnik.

He warned that if the conflict spirals out of control, it could add to regional conflicts the US is also playing a hand in.

“It will create regional instability, slow growth and development, and give the US an opportunity to reassert influence over the region,” Berletic pointed out.

The analyst noted that the standoff sets back the very economic and political unity China has encouraged across the region. That unity allowed many regional nations “to work out from under generations of Western primacy and outright colonialism,” according to him.

“While both the US and China see the region as a sphere of interest – China sees it through the lens of cooperation and joint development,” Berletic emphasized.

China enjoys close relations with both Cambodia and Thailand, he stressed, adding that Chinese authorities “will almost certainly encourage peace and stability and a quick resolution of the conflict.”

July 24, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | 1 Comment

Russia, China, and Iran to hold nuclear talks – Tehran

RT | July 21, 2025

Russia, China, and Iran will hold talks on Tuesday to discuss Tehran’s nuclear program, Esmaeil Baghaei, a spokesman for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, has announced. He noted that a separate round of talks with European nations is scheduled for later this week.

Speaking to reporters on Monday, Baghaei said that the trilateral talks would also focus on the threats by Britain, France, and Germany to reimpose UN sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program. In particular, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot warned of a potential sanctions snapback next month if no meaningful progress is made in limiting Iran’s nuclear activities.

Baghaei noted that Russia and China remain members of the 2015 nuclear deal and hold significant influence in the UN Security Council. He added that Iran had had “good consultations” with the two countries regarding the potential sanctions snapback. “Legally and logically, there is no reason for the return of sanctions lifted under the [nuclear deal],” he stressed.

The spokesman also confirmed that Iran would hold a separate meeting at the deputy foreign minister level with Britain, France, and Germany in Istanbul on Friday, adding that Tehran has “no plans to talk with the US” at this time.

One of the key stumbling blocks has been Iran’s decision to suspend cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which was monitoring Tehran’s nuclear program. Tehran has accused the IAEA of releasing a biased report, which was allegedly used as a pretense by Israel to launch a 12-day war against Iran.

The Israeli attack came after Iran-US nuclear talks ended up at an impasse due to Washington’s demand that Tehran fully abandon uranium enrichment. While the US has argued that Iran could use the capacity to create a nuclear bomb, Iran has dismissed any plans of doing so, insisting that it needs enrichment to fuel its civilian energy industry.

Both Russia and China maintain that the Iranian nuclear crisis can only be resolved through political and diplomatic means.

July 21, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Trump’s ultimatum to Russia is bluster and bluff to hide proxy war defeat

Strategic Culture Foundation | July 18, 2025

What’s behind Trump’s angry ultimatum to Russia this week? The short answer: failure and frustration. Donald Trump promised American voters that he would end the Ukraine war in 24 hours upon his election in November 2024. Six months into his presidency, Trump has failed to deliver on his boastful promises.

This week, Trump flipped his pacemaker image by pledging billions of dollars worth of new American weaponry to Ukraine. He also issued a warning to Russia to call a ceasefire within 50 days or else face severe secondary tariffs on its oil and gas exports. The tariffs, quoted at 100 percent, will be applied to nations purchasing Russian exports, primarily Brazil, China, and India. The latter move indicates that the U.S.-led proxy war in Ukraine against Russia is really part of a bigger geopolitical confrontation to maintain American global hegemony.

In any case, Moscow dismissed Trump’s ultimatum. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that Moscow would not comply with pressure and that Russia would not back down from its strategic goals in Ukraine to counter NATO’s historic aggression.

It is clear that Trump and his administration have failed to understand Russia’s strategic position and the root causes of the conflict.

Trump’s supposed diplomacy is seen to operate on a superficial basis more akin to showbiz, with no substance. He wants a peace deal with Russia to show off his vaunted skills as a business negotiator and to grab the limelight, headlines, and adulation.

Resolving a conflict like Ukraine requires deep historical understanding and genuine commitment to due diligence. Moscow has repeatedly stated the need to address the root causes of the conflict: the expansion of NATO on its borders, the CIA-sponsored coup in Kiev in 2014, and the nature of the NATO-weaponized Neo-Nazi regime over the past decade.

Trump and his administration have failed to appreciate Russia’s viewpoint. Thus, expecting a peace deal based on nothing but rhetoric and vacuous claims about “ending the killing” is futile. It won’t happen.

This failure, based on unrealistic expectations, has led Trump to adopt an increasingly bitter attitude towards Russian President Vladimir Putin in recent weeks. Ironically, Trump has accused Putin of duplicity and procrastination when, in reality, it is Trump who has shown no serious commitment to resolving the conflict.

Now, with chagrin and bruised ego, Trump has reacted with frustration over what are his own failings by issuing ultimatums to Russia. Trump’s 50-day deadline for a Russian response to his demands has a similarity to the 60-day deadline he threatened Iran with, after which he carried out a massive bombing attack on that country. Trump’s aggression towards Iran has turned out to be a fiasco and failure. Threatening Russia is even more useless.

This proclivity for threatening other nations has the hallmark of a Mafiosa megalomaniac. It is also causing Trump to lose support among his voter base, who believed he was going to end “endless wars.” It’s shambolic. Biden’s war is becoming Trump’s war because, at the end of the day, it is the U.S. imperial deep state that rules.

Trump’s mercurial switch from professing peace in Ukraine to ramping up the promise of weapons shows that his previous aspirations were always hollow and contingent on other interests.

It seems that the 47th American president did not want peace after all. What was driving his apparent desire to end the conflict in Ukraine – what he deprecated as “Biden’s war” – was simply to cut American financial costs.

What has appealed to Trump is that the proposed new supplies of American weapons to Ukraine will be paid for by Europe. Money and profit are all that matter to him. It is significant that when Trump announced the new arms racket scheme, he was sitting beside NATO chief Mark Rutte in the Oval Office. Rutte has a knack for wheedling, previously referring to Trump as “daddy” and this week absurdly praising the U.S. as the world’s policeman for securing peace. It seems that the NATO and transatlantic ruling establishment have found a way to manipulate Trump. Tell him that the Europeans will henceforth directly subsidize the U.S. military-industrial complex.

The trouble for Trump and the NATO establishment is that it is all an unworkable bluff. For a start, the U.S. arsenal of Patriot missiles and other munitions has been depleted and destroyed by Russia over the past three years in Ukraine. There are no “wonder weapons” that can alter the battlefield dominance of Russia.

Secondly, the European economies are broke and can hardly sustain the proposed purchase of U.S. weapons for Ukraine, even if such supplies were feasible, which they are not. At least four European states, including France, the Czech Republic, Italy, and Hungary, have said they will not engage in any scheme of buying American weapons for Ukraine.

Thirdly, Trump’s threat of secondary sanctions against Brazil, China, India, and others for doing business with Russia is a blatant assault on the BRICS and Global South that will only garner international contempt. Trump’s bullying is neither viable nor credible. His earlier trade war against China has already failed and shown that the United States is an impotent giant whose power is a thing of the past. Trump had to climb down from his hobby horse towards China.

So, threatening to hit China and others with 100 percent tariffs for doing business with Russia is like a former prizefighter shaking a feeble fist while sitting in a wheelchair. He is liable to incur more self-harm.

Lastly, Russia is decisively winning the NATO-led proxy war in Ukraine. The Kiev regime’s air defenses are non-existent at this stage. Therefore, Russia can and will press its strategic terms to end the conflict because it is the military victor.

Trump’s ultimatum to Russia is nothing but bluster and bluff. He once mocked Ukraine’s puppet president Zelensky, that he had no cards to play. Trump, for all his bravado, has only a couple of deuces himself.

In 50 days, Trump will have a serious amount of egg on his face when Russia’s defeat of the NATO proxy war becomes more evident.

July 19, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

World rallies behind Syria as Israel tears away at it

Press TV – July 18, 2025

International organizations and a whole host of countries have expressed outright condemnation of the Israeli regime’s escalating deadly and destructive attacks against Syria under the pretext of protecting the country’s Druze minority.

A torrent of statements followed the regime’s attack on various areas in the country on Wednesday, including areas lying in its south, in reported support for the Druze.

The attacks came as fighting between members of the minority and Bedouin tribes has killed hundreds of people, with the Israeli involvement being feared to be aimed at intensifying the confrontations and further destabilizing Syria.

UNSC calls for end to Israel’s ‘impunity’

Addressing the situation, Pakistan, which holds the United Nations Security Council (UNSC)’s rotating presidency, denounced the Israeli aggression.

Ambassador Asim Iftikhar Ahmad noted that the attacks resembled Tel Aviv’s atrocities against the Gaza Strip, Lebanon, Iran, and Yemen, all of which violated the international law. The envoy also called for an end to the regime’s impunity.

Mohamed Khaled Khiari, UN assistant secretary-general, denounced the Israeli escalation on the part of the world body’s chief, Antonio Guterres.

He said the attacks amounted toa violation of Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and further destabilized the country amid the already sensitive situation.

The official also advised that Tel Aviv respect the 1974 agreement that has mandated its refusal to conduct violations against the Arab nation.

China calls for Israeli withdrawal

Geng Shuang, China’s deputy UN ambassador, said Beijing called on “Israel to immediately cease its military strikes on Syria and withdraw from Syrian territory without delay.”

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian also said the attacks amounted to a flagrant violation of international law and Syria’s sovereignty, saying the Arab country had to be spared of whatever measure that could lead to further crisis and tension.

Turkey: ‘Terror state’ Israel using Druze as excuse

Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called the Israeli regime a “terror state.”

“Israel, using the Druze as an excuse, has been expanding its banditry into neighboring Syria over the past two days,” he said in a televised speech.

Erdogan said Turkey would not allow Syria’s partition, saying Tel Aviv’s actions showed it was not after peace.

PGCC: Israel after irresponsible escalation

The Persian Gulf Cooperation Council’s Secretary-General, Jasem Mohammed Albudaiw,i also said the Israeli regime’s atrocities indicated its efforts at irresponsible intensification of standing tensions.

The Israeli aggression, he added, also showed the regime’s disregard for the international community’s efforts at realizing stability and ensuring security in Syria.

Hamas: Israeli aggression ‘systematic terrorism’

The Palestinian resistance movements, Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, called the atrocities “organized terrorism.”

The latter also said Tel Aviv was trying to fragment the region through violence, reaffirming solidarity with Syria and supporting its right to resist by all means.

Ansarullah: Israeli attacks part of ‘imperialist scheme’

Yemen’s Ansarullah resistance movement denounced the Israeli strikes as part of a larger “imperialist scheme” to dominate the Arab and Muslim world.

It called for a unified Arab-Islamic response and an end to silence in the face of the aggression.

Muslim states hold intensive talks

Foreign ministers from various regional Muslim countries have, meanwhile, held intensive talks concerning the state of affairs.

The talks were held among top diplomats from Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, Lebanon, and Egypt.

The discussions that were held with the aim of helping the countries in question adopt a unified stance in the face of the situation saw the officials reiterate support for Syria’s security, unity, stability, and sovereignty.

They called on the UNSC to assume its legal and moral duties towards guaranteeing the withdrawal of the Israeli regime from Syria, and bringing about an end to its aggression by obliging it to abide by the 1974 agreement.

Malaysia: Israel threatening international peace

Malaysia also called for the international community “not to tolerate the continued aggression by the Israeli Zionist regime against other countries, threatening regional and international peace and security.”

Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim said after decades of hardship, the Syrian people deserved peace, not further violence and external interference.

Norway’s foreign minister has also said he was “deeply concerned about recent Israeli airstrikes and rising domestic tensions.”

July 18, 2025 Posted by | Illegal Occupation | , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »