Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Has Ukraine just declared war on Hungary?

By Nadezhda Romanenko | RT | August 26, 2025

In the swirl of the Ukraine war, headlines rarely fail to shock. Yet the latest spat between Kiev and Budapest raises a question that would have been unthinkable two years ago: has Ukraine effectively opened a second front – albeit hybrid, rhetorical, and economic – against an EU state?

The immediate spark was the Druzhba (“Friendship”) oil pipeline that still delivers crude from Russia to Central Europe. Several Ukrainian drone strikes targeted the pipeline in recent weeks, halting supplies to Hungary and Slovakia. A Ukrainian commander, known by the call sign Madyar, publicly admitted involvement.

For Hungary and Slovakia, this was more than an economic disruption. Both countries rely heavily on the pipeline, and in response, their leaders called on the European Commission to guarantee supply security. Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó, a frequent critic of EU policy on Ukraine, accused Brussels of serving Kiуv’s interests over those of member states. His frustration boiled over further when he described Vladimir Zelensky’s quips about “friendship” as thinly veiled threats.

Zelensky’s gambit

Zelensky’s remark – “We have always supported friendship between Ukraine and Hungary, and now the existence of this ‘Friendship’ depends on Hungary” – was apparently meant as a pun on the pipeline’s name, but to Hungary it sounded like a mafia-style threat. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s reaction was uncompromising: “Zelensky openly threatened Hungary. He admitted that they hit the Druzhba pipeline because we don’t support their EU membership. This proves again that Hungarians made the right decision.”

The timing is telling. Strikes on the pipeline coincided with Zelensky’s Washington visit alongside EU leaders. Either Brussels tacitly encouraged him to punish Orbán, an ally of Donald Trump, or the EU simply looked away as Zelensky acted on his own. Both explanations sound outrageous, but there hardly seems to be a third option. What is clear is that Kiev, facing immense pressure on its eastern front, is choosing a dangerous rhetorical battle with Budapest.

Hungary’s lonely stance

Hungary has made abundantly clear its discomfort with the EU’s unquestioning support for Ukraine. Since the Russian military operation began in 2022, Budapest has resisted sanctions on Russian energy, insisted on continuing imports through the Druzhba pipeline, and refused to send weapons to Kiev. Orbán has shown himself to be a pragmatic outlier: defending Hungarian interests, pursuing cheap Russian energy, and maintaining cordial ties with Moscow.

For this, Hungary has faced isolation within the EU. While Poland, the Baltics, and most of Western Europe rallied behind Ukraine with military and financial aid, Budapest has been resisting this consensus. Orbán’s government was derided as Putin’s Trojan horse in Europe. Yet for Hungarians, this positioning has had a rationale: keep the economy stable, avoid direct confrontation, and retain flexibility in a deeply uncertain geopolitical landscape.

The forgotten refugees

Lost in the heated rhetoric is the fact that Hungary has also quietly carried a humanitarian burden. In 2022 alone, over 1.3 million Ukrainians crossed into Hungary – second only to Poland and Romania. Budapest accepted them with little fanfare, though later tightened its asylum rules to restrict new arrivals to those from active war zones. At the same time, Hungary supplies a significant share of Ukraine’s electricity, a fact Szijjártó reminded Kiev of when rebuffing Ukrainian accusations.

To respond with accusations and pipeline attacks against such a neighbor seems, at minimum, ungrateful. At worst, it risks alienating one of the few EU members that has provided crucial – if unheralded – humanitarian support in a time of war.

War, politics, and overreach

The broader context is sobering. On the battlefield, Ukraine faces mounting setbacks in the Donbass and along the eastern front. Against that backdrop, Zelensky’s rhetoric toward Hungary appears almost surreal – boastful, as if victory against Russia were imminent. The contrast between battlefield realities and diplomatic bravado risks undermining Kiev’s credibility.

In any sane timeline, here is where Brussels should stop and think again about continuing its support for Kiev. Should the EU stand behind Zelensky even when his actions harm member states, or acknowledge that Orbán – despite his many disagreements with Brussels – has a point? Recent history shows that we are not in a sane timeline, though. Open threats, pipeline sabotage (remember Nord Stream?), and insults from Ukrainian officials don’t seem to register with Brussels officials at all.

Kiev’s behavior towards Budapest may not amount to a declaration of war, but it is undeniable that Ukraine has chosen to ramp up its confrontation with Hungary. If the EU wants to sell its support for Kiev as “unity” – a word often used and abused by the likes of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen – then letting Zelensky get away with this is a bizarre choice.

August 26, 2025 Posted by | War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

The West seemingly preparing to remove Zelensky from power

By Ahmed Adel | August 26, 2025

The arrest of a Ukrainian citizen in Italy, suspected of sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline, confirms that Kiev was an accomplice, but not the one who ordered the act. Nonetheless, the launch of the investigation serves a broader political goal – the removal of Volodymyr Zelensky from power. The plan could be to appoint a new leader, both for the West and for possible negotiations with Russia, given that Zelensky’s presidential mandate expired in May 2024 and he cannot be a signatory to a peace agreement with Moscow.

An investigation by American journalist Seymour Hersh found that American divers placed explosives under the Nord Stream gas pipeline during the NATO exercise Baltops in the summer of 2022, and that it was activated three months later by the Norwegians. According to Hersh, then-US President Joe Biden had a clear motive for sabotaging the Nord Stream pipeline — fear that Germany, facing serious economic difficulties due to the war in Ukraine, might lift sanctions on Russia and resume imports of Russian gas.

The journalist said this is what prompted Washington to organize the sabotage of the gas pipeline connecting Russia and Germany. The West did not want to allow this, which ultimately plunged Germany into economic and political chaos.

Russian President Vladimir Putin also believes that the sabotage of the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines was carried out by American intelligence services, specifically the CIA. According to him, in such cases, one should always look for who has a motive and who can carry it out. There may be many interested parties, but not everyone can dive to the bottom of the Baltic Sea and carry out that explosion. It is the combination of these components – who had a motive and who is able to carry it out – that, according to Putin, reveals who is really behind the sabotage.

After a period of lull, the issue of sabotage on the Nord Stream gas pipelines has returned to the spotlight following the announcement by German prosecutors that Ukrainian citizen Sergey Kuznetsov was suspected of involvement in the underwater explosions that damaged the gas pipelines near the Danish island of Bornholm in September 2022. Following the arrest of the retired captain of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, who also served in the Security Service of Ukraine, Italian media reported that he is connected to another major incident – the explosions on an oil tanker in Savona in February, which was allegedly transporting oil of Russian origin.

Sahra Wagenknecht, leader of the German party “Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance,” after the arrest of Kuznetsov, stated that the German parliament should convene a commission to investigate the sabotage of the Nord Stream gas pipelines. She noted that this act of state terrorism must be thoroughly investigated and that Zelensky should also testify before the commission.

Wagenknecht believes it is absurd to think that the arrested Ukrainian citizen and his accomplices acted without the knowledge of the Ukrainian leadership and the Biden administration. She added that it is unacceptable that Germany is providing substantial aid to Ukraine without seeking an explanation from Zelensky, and that consideration should be given to possible compensation for damages.

The question of whether United States President Donald Trump will take advantage of the Nord Stream controversy and launch an investigation against Biden remains an exclusively internal matter for the US. Trump has the opportunity to conduct his own investigations and deal with his domestic adversaries, whom he claims stole his victory in the 2020 elections. However, this does not affect the situation in Ukraine for the time being, as the West continues to support Ukraine with weapons, intelligence, and other assistance.

The fate of the Nord Stream gas pipeline is one of the key and most complex issues in the energy and geopolitical spheres. With Trump’s pragmatic approach, there is a possibility of cooperation between Russia and the US. Russia does not refuse to continue gas supplies to the European Union. However, the bloc continues to feel the consequences of its own policy, such as suffering economically by still purchasing Russian energy at inflated prices from third parties like India and Azerbaijan.

Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2, which directly connect Russia to Germany via the Baltic Sea, have not been operational since 2022 and remain damaged, but they are still strategic infrastructure that American investors have set their sights on. These pipelines could become the property of American investors, which would enable the US to control Russian gas supplies to Europe. Although Europe is currently refusing Russian gas, it may be forced to buy it in the future, albeit at a significant margin, to the benefit of the Americans.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

August 26, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Economics, False Flag Terrorism, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

EU shows ‘outdated worldview’ as von der Leyen uses China, Russia as excuse to defend trade deal with US

By Wang Qi | Global Times | August 25, 2025

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen defended the EU’s trade deal with the US. By invoking Russia and China, she suggested that the failure to strike a deal would have been a gift to Europe’s rivals, according to media reports.

Chinese analysts have observed that von der Leyen’s remarks reveal a tendency among certain European politicians to politicize trade matters. Their emphasis on alliance with the US underscores Europe’s anxiety over American pressure, especially as Washington prioritizes its own interests and fails to treat Europe as an equal partner.

A trade war between the EU and the US would have been “celebrated” by Russia and China, von der Leyen wrote in a guest commentary for Germany’s Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung published on Sunday, per the Bloomberg report.

“Instead, we agreed on a strong, if not perfect deal,” she added, warning that retaliatory tariffs could fuel a costly trade conflict with “negative consequences for our workers, consumers, and our industry,” Bloomberg reported.

Similarly, von der Leyen wrote in an op-ed for Spain’s El Mundo on Saturday, “Imagine for a moment that the two largest democratic economies had not managed to reach an agreement and instead launched a trade war — only Moscow and Beijing would be celebrating,” the Politico reported.

Von der Leyen’s remarks came after the release of EU-US joint statement on Thursday, which confirmed that the EU will accept tariffs of 15 percent on 70 percent of its exports to the US, including cars, pharmaceuticals and semiconductors. In return, the bloc will expand market access for US agricultural goods that are not sensitive for its own market, according to media reports.

Although von der Leyen described the move as a choice for “stability and predictability over escalation and confrontation,” the controversial trade deal with the US has drawn criticism. Former director-general Pascal Lamy has warned the accord risks undermining Europe’s credibility as a defender of rules-based trade, the Politico reported

Cui Hongjian, director and professor of the Center for European Union and Regional Development Studies at Beijing Foreign Studies University, told the Global Times on Monday that von der Leyen’s comments primarily serve to justify her compromises, as the US-EU trade agreement has substantially undermined European interests.

“Ironically, when the US imposes tariffs on Europe, it prioritizes its own interests, clearly not treating Europe as an equal partner,” Cui said, “Yet, Europe is willing to endure losses in its dealings with the US to maintain ongoing cooperation, in order to counter what it perceives as a greater ‘threat’ from non-Western economies, an approach [that] blatantly politicizes trade matters.”

Cui said such actions reveal that some European politicians cling to an outdated worldview, unwilling to face the reality of the US gradually distancing itself from its traditional alliance with Europe. “Their emphasis on the alliance only underscores their anxiety over the losses and economic shocks inflicted by the US, not by China and Russia.”

The South China Morning Post said the Thursday deal did not explicitly mentioned China, however, “veiled references appeared throughout” in terms of AI chips, as EU pledged to purchase $40 billion of AI chips from the US, and that it would adopt US security standards to “avoid technology leakage to destinations of concern.”

According to Cui, China and the EU are scheduled to engage in high-level interactions in the latter half of the year, which requires fostering a constructive atmosphere, adding that China will judge Europe more by its actions than its words.

If Europe takes actions that harm China’s interests, China will undoubtedly respond with countermeasures. However, when EU politicians exploit criticism of China for political gain, it sows discord in China-EU relations and even risks creating conflict, which would in turn affect China’s relationships with individual member states. This is a situation China cannot accept as well, said the expert.

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

The End of the Conflict in Ukraine at Sight?

Zelensky and the Europeans in Washington in Search of Saving Face

By Ricardo Martins – New Eastern Outlook – August 25, 2025

Seven European leaders rushed to Washington under the official banner of solidarity with Volodymyr Zelensky. Yet, the real motive was less about unshakable support for Ukraine and more about damage control.

Zelensky and the Europeans in Washington in Search of Saving Face

With negotiations advancing — and with Ukraine’s loss of territories and NATO membership already ruled out by Donald Trump — Europe’s leaders were scrambling to craft a narrative to their domestic audience that could justify defeat without admitting failure.
The Struggle to Save Face

For three years, the European mantra has been that “Russia cannot win.” Yet on the battlefield, it is Moscow that has the upper hand. The tactic, therefore, was to insist that Russia, as the supposed aggressor, must accept the obligations of the loser. But the reality is moving in the opposite direction: Europe now seeks symbolic concessions to sell to its public.

One of these face-saving gestures is the return of “kidnapped” Ukrainian children, based on contested numbers but useful as a talking point. Another is security guarantees for Ukraine — not NATO membership, but something that can be framed as protection. Zelensky, keen to please Trump, asked for $100 billion in arms, to be funded by Europeans but manufactured in the U.S. NATO’s Secretary-General eagerly echoed this line, presenting himself as a loyal messenger to “Daddy” Trump at Europe’s expense.

Meanwhile, territorial concessions remain taboo in European discourse. To admit them would be to acknowledge Putin’s victory, a political sin for leaders who have invested heavily in a narrative of inevitable Ukrainian triumph.

The Casting: Putin Absent, Yet Present

The most striking absence in Washington was also the most palpable presence. Putin was not in the room, but Trump invoked his name repeatedly, even phoning him for 40 minutes while Europe’s leaders waited. Each mention of Putin’s name drew visible discomfort across European faces, an unmistakable reminder of their diplomatic impotence.

As Djoomart Otorbaev, former Prime Minister of Kyrgyzstan, put it: “Here’s the uncomfortable truth: Putin didn’t earn Trump’s respect through backroom schemes. He earned it on the battlefield and at the negotiating table. And that reality says more about today’s shifting world order than any rumour.”

Trump’s deference to Putin was not ideological; it was grounded in recognition of Russia’s gains. Western efforts to reverse the war’s trajectory have not succeeded, despite supplying Ukraine with advanced weaponry.

Europe’s Century of Humiliation Has Started

Europe’s frantic arrival in Washington — “like the Middle Ages, to homage their master” — symbolised a humiliating dependency: the continent’s leaders reduced to courtiers around a U.S. president already imagining his Nobel Peace Prize.

The delegation was a tableau of weakness. Ursula von der Leyen, in the name of the European Commission, reconfirmed the one-sided trade arrangements: 15% tariffs on European goods entering the U.S., zero tariffs on U.S. exports to Europe, $750 billion in energy and arms purchases, $600 billion in European investments in the U.S., and €150 billion earmarked for EU rearmament. A transfer of wealth and sovereignty dressed up as transatlantic unity.

The body language told its own story. Giorgia Meloni’s irritation was poorly disguised; Friedrich Merz remained wooden; Emmanuel Macron projected disdain; Keir Starmer hid behind note-taking. Von der Leyen managed only a strained smile, Mark Rutte melted into insignificance, and Zelensky — who should have been the central figure — appeared isolated at the margin, dignified but sidelined. Putin, a former KGB officer, and Trump, a former reality TV star and a real estate millionaire, both despised by the Europeans, loomed as the peace brokers. As put by a French analyst: “Quel cirque”.

The Security Guarantees Conundrum

The question of security guarantees has become the crux of European debate. Openly, leaders say territorial concessions are for Ukrainians to decide. Privately, they know the map is already shifting. What remains is an attempt to provide Ukraine with protections that appear credible, but that does not include NATO membership.

POLITICO reported that the Pentagon’s top policy official made clear the U.S. intends to play only a minimal role in guarantees. “There’s the dawning reality that this will be Europe making this happen on the ground,” admitted a NATO diplomat. In other words, Europe is on its own.

European capitals, however, still plead for U.S. assets: fighter jets stationed in Romania, access to American satellites for GPS and reconnaissance. Russia, through its envoy Mikhail Ulyanov, flatly rejected any foreign troops in Ukraine, while Sergey Lavrov dismissed Western security schemes without Moscow and Beijing as “a road to nowhere.”

Ukraine itself is unimpressed. Ten nations, including France and the U.K., have floated the idea of deploying troops, but Kiev sees such proposals as vague, amorphous, and unlikely to provide real guarantees. Former foreign minister Dmytro Kuleba captured the mood: “The so-called security guarantees are so amorphous. The only news is that the U.S. is willing to take part.”

Europe’s Internal Fractures

Even as leaders paraded unity in Washington, Europe’s internal divisions deepened. The European Parliament announced it would sue the Council over being excluded from negotiations on the €150 billion SAFE defence loan scheme.

In a telling sign of institutional fragility, Parliament was sidelined by Ursula von der Leyen’s Commission in the rush to fund rearmament. As Euractiv reported, 18 member states have already expressed interest in loans totalling €127 billion, but without parliamentary oversight, Europe’s democratic deficit widens.

In sum, the “road to nowhere” that Lavrov mocked may yet prove prophetic, not only for Ukraine’s elusive guarantees but for Europe’s strategic autonomy itself.

Ricardo Martins, PhD in Sociology, specializing in International Relations and Geopolitics

August 25, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

‘Don’t threaten us’ – EU state to Zelensky

RT | August 25, 2025

Hungary has warned Ukraine to stop disrupting its energy supply from Russia after Kiev targeted a key pipeline delivering oil to Central Europe.

Ukrainian forces struck the Soviet-era Druzhba (Friendship) pipeline three times this month, sparking outrage in both Hungary and neighboring Slovakia. The flow through the pipeline was last halted on Friday.

At a press conference during Independence Day celebrations in Kiev on Sunday, a reporter asked Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky how the attacks relate to Hungary’s opposition to Ukraine’s EU and NATO ambitions.

“We have always supported friendship with Hungary, but now the very existence of this friendship depends on Budapest’s position,” Zelensky replied with a smile, playing on the pipeline’s name.

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto issued a sharp rebuke on X. “Zelensky used Ukraine’s national holiday to threaten Hungary. We firmly reject the Ukrainian President’s intimidation,” Szijjarto wrote. He described the attack on Hungary’s energy supply as “an attack on sovereignty.”

“A war to which Hungary has nothing to do with can never justify violating our sovereignty. We call on Zelensky to stop threatening Hungary and to end the reckless attacks on our energy security!” he added.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrey Sibiga responded on X, writing to Szijjarto: “You don’t need to tell the Ukrainian President what to do or say, and when.” He urged Budapest to “diversify and become independent from Russia, like the rest of Europe.”

Szijjarto shot back: “Stop attacking our energy security! This is not our war!”

Unlike many EU countries, Hungary has refused to send weapons to Kiev and has heavily criticized Brussels for imposing sanctions on Moscow. The country maintains that Ukraine’s NATO membership could trigger an all-out conflict with Russia.

August 25, 2025 Posted by | Economics, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

EU asks “Daddy” to make Hungary stop

The EU wants Hungary to drop its opposition to Ukraine’s membership in the EU

Remix News | August 20, 2025

U.S. President Donald Trump called Hungarian leader Viktor Orbán to ask about his position on Ukraine’s accession to the European Union.

The American leader reportedly wanted to discuss the reasons why Orbán is blocking negotiations on Ukraine’s accession to the European Union.

“The call was the result of Trump’s conversations with a group of European leaders who had gathered at the White House to discuss ways to end Russia’s war with Ukraine. At one point, they asked Trump to use his influence with Orbán to persuade the right-wing populist to drop his opposition to Ukraine’s EU membership,” Bloomberg writes.

During a telephone conversation with Trump, Hungary expressed interest in holding another round of talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky.

Orbán, a close ally of Trump, is widely seen as an inspiration for the U.S. president’s political ideology as well as other right-wing politicians around the world.

On Tuesday, Orbán issued a statement suggesting that he understood Ukraine’s request for EU membership but did not intend to back down from his position.

“Ukraine’s membership in the European Union offers no security guarantees. Therefore, linking membership with security guarantees is unnecessary and dangerous,” he said.

Previously, Orbán has repeatedly said that Ukraine should not join the European Union so as not to bring the war to Europe, and should instead become a “buffer” country between Europe and Russia. Instead of accession, he offered Kyiv “strategic” cooperation – “pragmatic, flexible and based on common interests.” Orbán also considers EU sanctions against Russia ineffective. He has repeatedly criticized them as useless and harmful to the European economy, and in the past he has managed to secure the lifting of EU sanctions against several Russians.

August 21, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | Leave a comment

Hungary on the brink of existential decision: confront Kiev and break with NATO or remain hostage to Ukrainian terror?

By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | August 21, 2025

The recent Ukrainian attack on the Druzhba pipeline — vital for the oil supply of Hungary and Slovakia — marks a turning point in the geopolitical conflict in Eastern Europe. The strike was confirmed by Ukraine’s Unmanned Systems Forces, with commander Robert Brovdi publicly celebrating the act of energy sabotage. Far from an isolated incident, this was a deliberate act of aggression against EU member states that have pursued a sovereign foreign policy contrary to NATO’s warmongering agenda.

The attack was not merely military. It was political, economic, and — above all — symbolic. By targeting the core infrastructure that sustains Hungary and Slovakia, Kiev is sending a clear message: dissent within the EU will not be tolerated. Budapest and Bratislava’s opposition to sending weapons to Ukraine and denouncing illegal sanctions against Russia has made them, in practice, targets of the Ukrainian nationalist regime.

Budapest responded firmly. Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó did not hesitate to call the attack “outrageous and unacceptable.” But Kiev’s arrogance remains unshaken. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sibiga not only dismissed Hungary’s criticisms but also claimed that the blame lies with Moscow, demanding that Hungary abandon its “dependence” on Russian energy. This is a perverse inversion of reality, typical of the Zelensky regime, propped up by Washington, London, and Brussels.

But the issue goes beyond oil supplies. Ukrainian hostility toward Hungary is not new — it is only deepening. Since 2014, Hungarians in Transcarpathia have lived under what can only be described as an ethnic apartheid regime. A barrage of cultural and linguistic persecution measures has taken hold: systematic closure of Hungarian-language schools, bans on national symbols, restrictions on the use of the mother tongue in public spaces, and even efforts to erase Hungarian place names in historically Hungarian areas.

Even more alarming is the practice of forced military conscription, disproportionately targeting young Hungarians in the region. There are growing reports, confirmed by independent observers and human rights organizations, that Hungarian recruits are being sent to the most dangerous frontlines in eastern Ukraine — used as cannon fodder in a campaign of collective punishment and population control. Cases of murders during forced enlistments by Ukrainian recruiters have already been documented — but are systematically silenced by a Western media eager to portray Kiev’s crimes as “democratic resistance.”

In this context, Hungary faces a question that can no longer be postponed: how much longer can Ukrainian terror be tolerated? This is no longer a mere diplomatic dispute. It is an existential issue for the Hungarian nation and for the 150,000 ethnic Hungarians who live under oppression in Transcarpathia. The logical answer would be the launch of a Hungarian special military operation on Ukrainian territory — much like what Moscow undertook in defense of the Donbass’ Russians. The objective would be clear: to liberate the ethnic Hungarians and restore historical justice in the region.

At the same time, Budapest must reconsider its membership in NATO and the European Union — structures that have proven hostile to national sovereignty, complicit with the Kiev regime, and sources of regional instability. NATO has armed Ukraine, dragged the continent into war, and now remains silent in the face of aggression against one of its own members. The EU, for its part, treats Hungary’s legitimate concerns over security and cultural identity with contempt, all while financing a failed war machine.

The decision that Viktor Orbán and his government must make is difficult — but inevitable: remain a hostage to the Western powers, or lead the way in a new European realignment, alongside nations that respect sovereignty and traditional values — such as Russia.

The attack on the Druzhba pipeline was not merely an assault on Hungary’s energy infrastructure. It was a warning. Just as the neo-Nazi regime in Kiev is willing to kill its own citizens because of their Hungarian ethnicity, it is equally willing to attack its own territory and sabotage its own infrastructure just to hurt Hungary.

The continued existence of the Kiev Junta is an existential threat to Hungary. And like all existential threats, it demands a response of equal magnitude.

August 21, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Russia Backs Istanbul 2022 Security Guarantees, Rejects Other Ideas – Lavrov

Sputnik – 21.08.2025

Russia supports the principles of security guarantees agreed upon in Istanbul in 2022, while all other proposals are futile ventures, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said.

In essence, Europe is proposing foreign intervention on part of Ukrainian territory, which is absolutely unacceptable for Moscow, the Russian Foreign Minister stressed.

Ukraine’s position indicates that Kiev wants to undermine the US efforts for a settlement, while Moscow is closely cooperating with Washington on this track to address the root causes of the crisis, Lavrov added.

Significant progress has been made at the Russia-US summit in Alaska in terms of defining the parameters of the Ukrainian conflict settlement, Lavrov said.

“Following the Russia-US summit in Alaska, where significant progress was made in moving towards defining the contours and specific parameters of a settlement, when following this event, European countries followed Mr. [Volodymyr] Zelensky and went to Washington and they tried to promote their agenda there… of course, this cannot cause us any feelings other than complete rejection,” Lavrov told a press conference.

Ukraine is clearly showing that it is not interested in a sustainable and long-term settlement of the conflict, Lavrov added.

“The goals that remain with the current Ukrainian leadership, and these goals are certainly fueled by the Western sponsors of the Kiev regime, are directed against the efforts that [US] President Trump is making, with whom we are actively and specifically cooperating in finding long-term sustainable ways to resolve in order to eliminate the root causes [of the conflict in Ukraine],” Lavrov said.

August 21, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Jurij Kofner: Europe Enters Century of Humiliation?

Glenn Diesen | August 20, 2025

Jurij Kofner is an economist and an economic policy advisor to AfD. Kofner discusses the de-industrialisation and economic decline in Germany, and the wider socio-economic and political challenges that continue to threaten the relevance of Europe.

August 20, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia, Video | , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine and EU attempt to hinder peace process started in Alaska

By Lucas Leiroz | August 20, 2025

On August 18, US President Donald Trump hosted Ukrainian and European representatives in Washington to discuss possible peace negotiations regarding the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. The Washington summit was seen as a kind of “reaction” to the previous summit, held on August 15 in Alaska between American and Russian representatives. Outraged that the US president was open to listening to Russian demands, the Ukrainian president and his European supporters headed to Washington to show their “terms”.

The conversations were marked by diplomatic tensions. People familiar with the matter explain that the illegitimate Ukrainian dictator Vladimir Zelensky didn’t know how to behave with the American president. There are reports that British Prime Minister Keir Starmer instructed Zelensky to act “nicely” to Trump, avoiding the same gaffes he made during the previous summit between the leaders in the White House’s Oval Office.

Apparently, Zelensky didn’t fully understand Starmer’s instructions, as there are reports that he acted exaggeratedly, such as repeating “thank you” to Trump over the course of a few minutes of conversation (about a dozen times) — a reaction to Trump’s previous description of him as “ungrateful.”

The discomfort during the summit was clear to everyone. Western analysts described the meeting as “deeply weird” and “worse than the last time Trump met Zelensky.” In an analytical article, an Independent’s reporter showed absolute despair when describing the scenes at the White House, making clear his antipathy towards Trump for the way he treats Zelensky:

“I’ll admit to believing that it couldn’t get worse than the school bully-style treatment of Zelensky last time he visited Washington, but this was worse. To listen to this press conference, you’d think Biden really was the one rolling tanks into Donetsk. A grievance recital that used the background of war for the foreground of Trump’s hurt feelings is so much less than what the world deserves,” the article reads.

Regardless of these details, negotiations have reached an absolute impasse. Zelensky arrived in the US ready to take the war to its ultimate consequences, stating that he would never accept any agreement that involved “ceding” territories to the Russian Federation. The EU similarly made clear its full endorsement of Ukrainian demands. This obviously impedes any peace talks, since Russia is also in no position to negotiate its legitimate sovereignty over the New Regions, which independently voted for the right to reunification with Russian territory.

However, after the meeting, Zelensky confirmed to reporters that territorial changes are still on the list of conditions for a peace dialogue. He appears to have recognized his inability to enforce the so-called “Ukrainian demands,” when the winning side (Russia) and the leader of the pro-Ukrainian coalition (the US) agree to change the map of Ukraine to meet the needs of the Russian-speaking people. The European leaders present at the White House were also unable to convince Trump to drop the territorial issue from negotiations with Putin, tacitly acknowledging the inevitability of a Ukrainian defeat.

It’s important to emphasize that Trump interrupted the conversation with Zelensky and the European leaders to call Putin. Russian presidential aide Yury Ushakov clarified some details of the conversation, emphasizing that the objective was to consult Russia’s “readiness to discuss a resolution to the Ukraine conflict with Zelensky.”

There isn’t much information available yet about what the two presidents talked about but Russian representatives have previously clarified that Putin is willing to participate in a trilateral meeting with Trump and Zelensky, as long as the event is merely formal and ceremonial to sign a peace agreement previously agreed upon between the parties. In other words, Putin won’t risk wasting time on fruitless negotiations in a face-to-face meeting, hoping that such an event will merely confirm something already previously deliberated.

Western analysts interpreted Trump’s attitude as disrespectful. The arrogance of the EU and Ukrainian leaders prevents them from having a summit interrupted for less than an hour for an important call whose subject is, at least in theory, precisely the same as the one being discussed at the meeting (to advance the peace process). However, realistically, Trump is absolutely right to inform Putin of every detail of the dialogue with Kiev and the EU.

The one with the real power to “stop the war”—that is, effectively halt military action—is Russia, since Moscow is the winning side in the conflict. It is necessary to know whether the Russians are ready to continue negotiations to advance a fruitful peace process, regardless of how European arrogance interprets this.

However, there is one situation that still needs to be resolved: Russia’s willingness to find a peaceful solution, possibly even in a meeting to sign a peace agreement, will only be possible if Ukraine agrees to respect Russia’s sovereignty over the New Regions (in addition to Crimea). No ceasefire or peace is possible while Ukrainian troops are on Russian constitutional territory.

By merely acknowledging the possibility of negotiating with Zelensky, Russia is already making a major concession, considering that Zelensky is no longer the legitimate president of Ukraine. In fact, it is the Russian side that is showing the greatest interest in peace, and it does so solely for humanitarian reasons, considering that it has all the necessary conditions to end the war militarily.

If Zelensky and the Europeans are even remotely interested in what is best for the Ukrainian people, they will have to quickly accept Russia’s conditions rather than impose even more obstacles to peace.

Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Associations, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.

You can follow Lucas on X and Telegram.

August 20, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

European military stocks fall on Ukraine peace talks progress

RT | August 20, 2025

European military stocks have tumbled, defying broader positive market sentiment, as traders assessed the White House meeting that brought fresh hope for a Ukraine peace deal.

On Monday, US President Donald Trump met with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky and key Western European backers. The talks came two days after Trump’s summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska, which both sides described as a step toward peace between Russia and Ukraine.

The STOXX Europe Total Market Aerospace & Defense Index fell 2.6% on Tuesday, as traders viewed the ongoing negotiations as a chance to take profits following a strong rally in the sector. Shares in Italian defense firm Leonardo and Germany’s Hensoldt were down 10.1% and 9.5%, respectively. German defense supplier Rheinmetall and tank components maker Renk also declined 4.9% and 8.2%, respectively.

“Any de-escalation of tensions between Russia and Europe, and talk of spending more on US equipment, is negative for these companies,” Craig Cameron, head of European equities at Franklin Templeton, told the FT.

According to analysts, shares in defense groups could be seen as a rough indicator of progress in the Ukraine peace talks, as military supplies tend to benefit from ongoing conflicts.

European defense stocks surged in the first half of the current year, driven by Germany’s announcement in March that it would ease its strict debt limits to enable a new wave of investment in defense and infrastructure, amid growing concerns that the US may scale back its role in European security and the Ukraine conflict. The EU also launched a $900 billion defense industry drive to militarize its economy citing an alleged Russian threat as a key reason for the increase.

The latest US-brokered talks reportedly ended with an agreement in principle to arrange a face-to-face meeting between Putin and Zelensky, although the Kremlin has yet to confirm the plan.

AFP reported on Tuesday that Putin has offered to host the talks in Moscow, but Zelensky rejected the proposal, insisting on a neutral location.

August 20, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Kiev’s backers fail to sway Trump on Russia – analyst

RT | August 19, 2025

The White House meeting on Monday between US President Donald Trump and Ukraine’s European backers produced no major results, political analyst Sergey Poletaev has told RT.

Trump met to discuss the Ukraine conflict with Vladimir Zelensky and some European leaders in Washington just days after holding a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska.

“Just like in Anchorage, no decisions were announced afterward. And that, in itself, is a sign that something important is happening,” Poletaev said, noting that the talks are part of a larger diplomatic struggle, the ultimate goal of which is to win over the US president.

He suggested that Moscow is seeking to draw Washington out of the conflict, while Europe and Ukraine are pushing to keep the US firmly entangled. Following what Poletaev called Putin’s “gambit” in Anchorage, the European delegation hurried to Washington to persuade Trump to toughen sanctions against Moscow and maintain weapons deliveries to Kiev.

So far, it looks like they came up empty.

Poletaev pointed out that, unusually for the US president, he did not repeat European talking points after the meeting. Instead, Trump reminded the European leaders at the start of the summit that “they had no real power,” the analyst said.

While the immediate effort may have failed, “most likely, Europe will soon try again,” Poletaev stressed.

According to the analyst, the key issue at Monday’s summit was security guarantees for Ukraine. Russia has insisted “from day one” that any such commitments must be tied to “neutrality and disarmament,” he said.

Europe and Kiev, meanwhile, are desperately trying – by hook or by crook – to preserve Ukraine’s armed forces, and even to push for a NATO presence on Ukrainian soil.

According to Poletaev, the attempts are “naive and desperate,” but whatever form security guarantees take in any eventual peace deal will ultimately determine “the fate of the Kiev regime.”

“For now, there’s no compromise in sight,” Poletaev concluded. “And as Ukraine continues to lose ground on the battlefield, the room for maneuver – for both Kiev and its European backers – is shrinking fast.”

August 19, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »