Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Big tech hands in its DSA censorship reports to the EU

RT | September 24, 2026

The EU has published a wide range of reports detailing what social media companies like TikTok and Meta are doing to comply with its Digital Services Act (DSA). The reports detail the extreme censorship needed to stay on Brussels’ good side.

Under the European Commission’s “voluntary Code of Conduct on Disinformation,” the largest online platforms operating in the EU are required to submit biannual reports explaining their efforts to combat so-called “disinformation.” Although adherence to the code is described as “voluntary,” those who do not comply are subject to fines under the DSA, which came into force in 2023.

The commission published reports by Meta, TikTok, Google, Twitch, and more than two dozen other platforms on Wednesday. Each report spans hundreds of pages, and details the speech restrictions and censorship policies put in place at the behest of the EU.

These include restrictions on political speech surrounding elections, which the EU has mandated in every major European vote since 2024, under the pretext of fighting “Russian interference.” According to documents released by the US House Judiciary Committee earlier this year, these measures have almost always been used “to disadvantage conservative or populist political parties.”

In its report, TikTok admitted that it removed more than half a million posts concerning elections in Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Hungary, Malta, Portugal, and Slovenia this year. RT has covered the EU’s efforts to interfere in the Bulgarian and Hungarian elections in depth, and found that TikTok came under particularly intense pressure from Brussels, after its failure to implement sufficiently draconian restrictions during Romania’s presidential election in 2024.

Each report is hundreds of pages long, and every major social media company admitted that they now defer to EU-approved “fact-checkers” to police content on their platforms. Meta explained that it now automatically down-ranks content flagged by fact-checkers, while YouTube stated that it has trained AI models to pre-emptively remove content it thinks would fall foul of these groups.

Multiple reports specify that the platforms themselves must pay the fact-checkers’ salary. These fact-checkers flagged more than 14 million posts on Facebook in the first six months of this year alone.

Every social media platform devoted a chapter in its report to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, with Facebook noting that all posts on the conflict are subject to monitoring for “disinformation and misinformation” by pro-EU fact-checkers.

Russian media outlets are banned from Facebook, while Ukrainian outlets are free to operate, and Kiev is permitted to fundraise on the platform.

Despite mentioning “disinformation” more than a dozen times, the DSA does not define the term.

September 24, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Comments Off on Big tech hands in its DSA censorship reports to the EU

Integrity Initiative: UK-funded network framed dissent as Russian disinformation for years

Ben Swann and Elizabeth Lane delve into the workings of an organization behind coordinated influence campaigns

RT | September 23, 2026

A sprawling network of media influence “clusters” has existed in NATO member states for years, seeking to portray voices opposing the policies of the military bloc and the EU as Russian propaganda, RT America’s Ben Swann and independent investigative journalist Elizabeth Lane have learnt.

Founded in 2015, soon after the Western-backed coup in Kiev, the so-called Integrity Initiative program was designed to counter what it called Russia’s disinformation. It was run by the UK Foreign Office-funded Institute for Statecraft – an organization posing as an independent charity that was founded by Christopher Donnelly, a former adviser to a NATO secretary general, and Daniel Lafayeedney, a former Special Air Service officer.

The definition of ‘Russian propaganda’ developed by the organization, which received funding not just from London but also from the NATO-linked Atlantic Council, was so broad that it virtually included any criticism of NATO and the EU.

“They are not really after Russian disinformation,” Lane said. “They targeted independent journalists. And that’s very clear in their own communications.”

For the Integrity Initiative, Russian disinformation was “any position that is counter to the NATO position,” according to Swann.

Among the most prominent targets of the Integrity Initiative were former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and retired Spanish Army colonel Pedro Banos, who lost his appointment as director of national security in the Spanish government in 2018 amid a concerted campaign portraying him as a Russian asset.

The campaigns were focused on “killing the image” of any dissenter to the point where their political careers were ruined, Lane explained. “If you assassinate their image, no one wants to be associated to that person. And that’s what happened with Pedro Banos. That’s what happened with Jeremy Corbyn.”

The network established “clusters” of politicians and journalists it treated like “assets” in virtually all NATO nations, with many of them often unaware that they were part of a media influence network, according to Lane. “They are just given the script and they legit trust the story and they run the story and turns out they are part of the propaganda,” she said.

The Integrity Initiative came into the spotlight in 2018 when hackers, claiming to be linked to the Anonymous collective, leaked a trove of documents revealing the scale of its operations. The revelations led to an investigation into the Institute for Statecraft’s activities by the Scottish charity regulator OSCR, which concluded in 2019 that the organization was violating charity rules.

The institute then formally announced that it was terminating its involvement with the Integrity Initiative in 2019 but continued to operate until August 2023, when it was dissolved several months after being declared an “undesired organization” by the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office over what officials called “aggressive militarist rhetoric” and a “discreditation campaign” against the Russian authorities.

Watch the full episode of the exclusive investigative series here.

Bonus video.

September 24, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , , | Comments Off on Integrity Initiative: UK-funded network framed dissent as Russian disinformation for years

Italy to move military personnel from Taif base after missile strike

Al Mayadeen | September 22, 2026

The Italian government has decided to relocate a significant portion of its military personnel from an airbase in Taif, Saudi Arabia, following a missile strike that hit an Italian Eurofighter fighter jet stationed at the facility, the Italian newspaper Messaggero reported on Tuesday, citing sources.

The move concerns personnel from the Italian Task Force Air Arabia, which operates from the Taif airbase. The Italian contingent stationed there is estimated to number around 500 personnel.

The relocation is being described as a “restructuring” of Italy’s military deployment, rather than a complete withdrawal from the base, according to the report.

A significant portion of the Italian military personnel will be moved to a safer facility, which is also likely to be located in Saudi Arabia. The Taif airbase will not be left without operational coverage, with continuity of activities set to be maintained in line with Italy’s international obligations.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Defense Minister Guido Crosetto decided to strengthen security measures for the country’s military personnel after a missile struck an Italian Eurofighter stationed at the base overnight into Friday, Messaggero reported.

Is Italy backtracking on its plans? 

Only a few days ago, Italy was preparing to deploy up to four naval vessels, including frigates, to secure passage for its merchant fleet through the Bab al-Mandab Strait, Italian daily Corriere della Sera reported, citing sources.

Crosetto reportedly told EU foreign affairs and security chief Kaja Kallas in a letter that “the need to adopt effective and timely decisions” was urgent to prevent further disruption to maritime traffic through the strait, which links the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden.

Rome said it is prepared to act independently if other European Union member states do not move to reinforce the bloc’s Aspides maritime mission, though it expects to share the financial burden with fellow EU states if others step up.

The latest escalation was initiated by Saudi Arabia when it bombed Sanaa International Airport, while continuing the years-long siege imposed on Yemen. Sanaa had repeatedly demanded an end to the blockade and the reopening of the airport before launching its current counteroffensive.

Yesterday, Yemen’s national negotiating delegation held Saudi Arabia responsible for refusing to lift the blockade imposed on the country’s airports and ports, the Yemeni SABA news agency reported, citing an informed source.

September 22, 2026 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on Italy to move military personnel from Taif base after missile strike

Finland’s Stubb tells European leaders to calm down

RT | September 22, 2026

Finnish President Alexander Stubb has pushed back against warnings from fellow European leaders that Russia could attack NATO in the near future, saying Helsinki’s intelligence sees no evidence of an imminent military threat.

Moscow has repeatedly dismissed claims that it intends to attack NATO. Russian officials have argued that Western governments are exaggerating the prospect of a confrontation with Moscow to justify increased military spending and continued support for Ukraine.

Stubb made the comments in an interview with Politico on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York on Monday, after several European officials suggested that Moscow could target members of the US-led military bloc within months.

“We don’t see the evidence of that,” Stubb said. “In our intelligence we see that there is activity but no imminent military threat right now.”

“It is not in the interest of Russia nor in the capacity of Russia to go full-scale,” he added.

Stubb’s assessment contrasts with increasingly urgent warnings from several other European officials.

Last week, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk claimed Russia could fire drones or missiles into NATO countries backing Ukraine in “the next few months.” French President Emmanuel Macron described Tusk’s warning as “sound and well-documented.”

The head of the Czech Republic’s BIS security service, Michal Koudelka, likewise suggested that possible Russian actions could include “a limited incursion, false-flag provocations, [or] a massive influence campaign,” saying such scenarios could unfold within “months, not years.”

Stubb, whose country shares a 1,340-km (833-mile) border with Russia, described predictions that NATO countries could soon be targeted as an “overreaction” and urged his European counterparts to remain “cool, calm, and collected.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin said last week that “some European leaders are openly declaring that they are preparing for war with Russia,” accusing them of seeking to “salvage their declining ratings by covering up mistakes in their economic and social policies.”

“Instead of stopping and listening to their citizens, who have made it clear during the elections that they don’t want any war with Russia, these leaders continue to escalate the situation,” Putin said.

Finland abandoned its longstanding policy of military non-alignment and joined NATO in 2023, following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict the previous year.

Despite Stubb’s assessment that there is no imminent military threat, Helsinki has continued expanding its defense and civil preparedness. Earlier this month, Finland staged what AP described as Europe’s largest civil-defense exercise since World War II, involving more than 2,000 participants.

September 22, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , | Comments Off on Finland’s Stubb tells European leaders to calm down

Defeating Russia on battlefield impossible – Fico

By Lucas Leiroz | September 22, 2026

Not all NATO countries are willing to support the alliance in its relentless pursuit of conflict with Russia. In a recent statement on the matter, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico made it clear that he disagrees with NATO’s current policy regarding Russia. He described the war plans pursued by some of the bloc’s leaders as absolutely irrational and asserted that Russia cannot be defeated on the battlefield.

Fico made his statement in a video posted on social media. He commented on the situation in extremely realistic terms, asserting that there is no supranational force capable of compelling Russia to abandon the territories it has already reintegrated. Furthermore, he emphasized that Ukraine missed a major opportunity for peace back in 2022, when the Kiev regime refused to sign a peace agreement with Russia in order to follow the guidelines of what he calls the “Russophobic West.”

Not only that, Fico also made it clear that the Western strategy of continuing to fight in the long term – “to the last Ukrainian” – has already failed completely. According to him, it is unreasonable to insist on sending military and financial support to Ukraine when doing so merely prolongs the conflict indefinitely, further increasing the suffering of the Ukrainian people and creating serious tensions between Europe and Russia – thereby jeopardizing the entire regional security architecture.

However, the most important point of Fico’s speech was his criticism of NATO’s current attempt to escalate the war into a stage of direct confrontation with Russia. The Slovak leader stated that, given the impossibility of NATO defeating Russia through Ukraine, some bureaucrats within the bloc are now trying to heighten tensions to create a pretext for a direct conflict. He described these bureaucrats as “war hawks” who “have gone crazy.”

“There is no supranational force to compel Russia to withdraw from the militarily controlled Ukrainian territory (…) Ukraine made a huge mistake in April 2022, a few months after the start of the conflict, by listening to the Russophobic West and not signing the prepared peace agreement (…) [Western strategy] to support the war in Ukraine to the last Ukrainian soldier and defeat Russia has completely failed (…) Several politicians in the West believe that if it (victory over Russia) cannot be achieved through the Ukrainian army and its full support, everything must be done to provoke a conflict between NATO and Russia (…) some war hawks in NATO are trying at all costs to turn this war into a conflict between Russia and NATO (…) Someone must have gone crazy here [because] Russia cannot be defeated in a conventional war,” he said.

Subsequently, in another social media post, Fico stated that NATO’s attempt to wage war against Russia is actually a distraction intended to mask the current Western liberal order’s inability to address the real problems of the contemporary world – such as energy security and illegal migration. European leaders who support a conflict with Russia ultimately seek to hide their own inability to solve the problems currently affecting Europe.

Furthermore, he emphasized that while he holds the office of Prime Minister, he will not allow Slovakia to participate in these war plans. He vowed to prevent Slovak soldiers from being mobilized to fight in a conflict that does not concern the country’s interests.

“The West’s military rhetoric and the search for a pretext for a military conflict with Russia are intended to distract from the liberal world’s inability to address basic challenges such as the price and availability of energy and fuel, as well as illegal migration. As long as I am Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic, I will not agree to Slovak soldiers taking part in any military adventure provoked by anyone within NATO,” he added.

Fico’s words sound like a sign of rationality amidst the current Russophobic frenzy. Few leaders in Europe are willing to criticize the Western bloc’s war plans; Fico stands as an example for other Europeans to follow regarding his willingness to establish a sovereign, pragmatic, and pro-peace foreign policy.

Unfortunately, however, most countries in the Western alliance – especially the UK and key EU members – persist in escalating tensions with Russia. Moscow is doing everything possible to prevent a worst-case scenario from becoming reality, yet European hostility is creating a serious security crisis on the continent.

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

You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

September 22, 2026 Posted by | Russophobia | , , | Comments Off on Defeating Russia on battlefield impossible – Fico

How Real Is the Impact of Western Sanctions on Israel?

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – September 20, 2026

Europe is getting tougher on Israel in rhetoric and sanctions, but its latest measures may be designed to create political distance from Israel without creating enough economic pain to make Israel change course in the West Bank or anywhere in Palestinian territories.

On September 8, Britain, France, Canada and a group of other European governments announced new measures against Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. Twelve countries—Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom—said they would introduce national restrictions, support European restrictions or consider further measures against trade in goods from settlements considered illegal under international law. Britain, France and Canada said they would move toward national bans.

The language accompanying the measures is strikingly forceful. The governments say that Israeli actions in the West Bank are undermining the possibility of a two-state solution and demand that Israel halt settlement expansion, stop extending civilian administrative powers and ensure accountability for settler violence. They specifically singled out the planned E1 settlement project, which they regard as a threat to the territorial viability of a future Palestinian state.

Yet the economic arithmetic behind the sanctions tells a very different story. Britain offers the clearest example. UK-Israel trade was worth approximately £6 billion in 2025. By contrast, the British government estimates that trade between the UK and the Occupied Palestinian Territories was only around £38 million in the same year. That is roughly 0.6 percent of the value of UK-Israel trade.

The £38 million figure is not equivalent to the value of settlement exports. Because Israel and the Palestinian territories operate within an interconnected customs system, precise figures for trade originating specifically in settlements are difficult to establish. But that is precisely the point. Even the broader figure for UK trade with the Occupied Palestinian Territories is tiny compared with the overall UK-Israel commercial relationship. The British government is therefore not threatening the economic relationship that matters most to Israel. It is targeting a small and geographically defined segment of economic activity associated with the occupation while leaving the overwhelming bulk of bilateral trade untouched.

There is, of course, a legitimate argument for banning settlement goods regardless of their economic impact. A government may reasonably conclude that it should not facilitate or normalize economic activity in territory it regards as illegally occupied. The measures also create a legal and commercial distinction between Israel within its internationally recognized borders and settlements in occupied territory. That distinction may prove important over time. But that is different from claiming that the sanctions constitute serious economic pressure on Israel. They do not.

Sanctioning the Settlement, Not the State

This reveals a deeper contradiction in Europe’s emerging policy. The governments imposing these measures are not primarily confronting an autonomous settler economy operating outside the Israeli state. They are responding to Israeli government policy. Their own statement makes that explicit: “The Government of Israel’s actions in the West Bank” are, they argue, undermining the two-state solution. Yet the principal economic response is directed at goods produced in settlements, not the Israel state and government themselves. Thus, the policy totally ignores the fact that the settlement enterprise is consequently embedded in the institutions and policies of the Israeli state. Sanctioning settlement products therefore addresses one manifestation of the policy while leaving the broader economic relationship with the state largely intact.

Britain’s approach illustrates this particularly well. London has sought to distinguish between economic relations with Israel and activities connected to settlements. The House of Commons Library notes that Britain has long maintained that settlement goods should not receive the same preferential treatment as goods produced within Israel’s internationally recognized territory. Before the latest announcement, however, the government had resisted a comprehensive ban, partly because of the difficulty of distinguishing the interconnected Israeli and Palestinian economies. The new measures are therefore a significant political escalation, but not a fundamental economic rupture with Israel itself.

That distinction is crucial. If the objective were simply to demonstrate opposition to settlement expansion, the measures make sense. If the objective is to force the Israeli government to abandon or substantially reverse its West Bank policy, they are much less convincing. Serious coercive sanctions would have to affect actors whose economic interests can influence government policy. They might target major financial institutions, companies involved in settlement infrastructure, state-linked enterprises, investment flows or preferential trade arrangements. But none of that is happening.

The Political Value of Doing Something

For European governments, there is considerable political value in demonstrating that they are no longer prepared to treat Israeli settlement expansion as business as usual. Public opinion has shifted sharply in many European countries, and governments face growing pressure to respond to the humanitarian and political consequences of Israeli policy in Gaza and the West Bank. But imposing serious economic pressure on Israel would be a very different undertaking.

Israel is a major European security and trading partner. Europe also has interests in intelligence cooperation, technology, defence, regional security and diplomatic coordination. A comprehensive economic sanctions regime would therefore impose costs not only on Israel but on European governments and businesses themselves.

Settlement sanctions offer a politically convenient middle ground. They allow European governments to say that they are imposing consequences on Israel’s policies while preserving most of their economic relationship with Israel. That makes the sanctions politically useful even if their coercive capacity remains limited. The distinction can be put simply: they create symbolic distance without creating leverage.

The danger for Europe is that symbolic sanctions eventually become an end in themselves: a way for governments to demonstrate moral distance while the underlying policy they condemn continues to deepen. If settlement expansion continues despite successive rounds of European restrictions, the credibility of European coercive diplomacy will gradually erode.

The next phase will therefore be decisive. Europe can continue refining a system of differentiation between Israel and the occupied territories, gradually increasing the economic costs of the settlement enterprise. Or it can conclude that protecting a future Palestinian state requires confronting the broader Israeli state policy that makes settlement expansion possible. The difference between those two approaches is not semantic. It is the difference between signaling disapproval and changing incentives. Europe has now demonstrated that it can punish the settlement enterprise. Whether it is willing to impose enough costs to change the policy behind it remains an open question. If history is any guide, it is unlikely to openly confront the state of Israel to the extent where a real economic rupture looks possible and feasible.

Salman Rafi Sheikh, research analyst of international relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs

Follow new articles on our Telegram channel

September 20, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , | Comments Off on How Real Is the Impact of Western Sanctions on Israel?

EU bans former Zelensky aide from parliament

RT | September 16, 2026

The EU banned a former aide to Vladimir Zelensky from entering the European Parliament on Wednesday, when she was due to speak at an event promoting diplomacy instead of escalation in the Ukraine conflict.

Yulia Mendel, who was Zelensky’s top communications liaison from 2019 to 2021 and who has since become a consistent critic of her former boss, had been invited to speak on the same day Ursula von der Leyen delivered her State of the Union speech.

According to Germany’s Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, Mendel was invited to give a speech in an EU Parliament session, “Ukraine: Daring for Peace. Diplomacy Instead of Escalation.” She had hoped to “shed light” on the conflict’s central political issues and discuss its possible end.

“On the day of my speech, I was barred from entering the European Parliament. I directly attribute this to Zelensky’s sanctions,” Mendel wrote on X on Wednesday.

“But the speech will go ahead anyway, because I know that I represent a huge segment of society that longs for peace and wants to be heard.”

Zelensky imposed sweeping sanctions on his former spokeswoman last week after accusing her of promoting Russia’s speaking points in his latest crackdown on critics at home.

In a May interview with American journalist Tucker Carlson, Mendel unleashed a series of allegations against her former boss, accusing him of corruption, habitual drug use and obstructing peace efforts.

Mendel has suggested that the sanctions were timed to undermine her EU Parliament speech.

Moscow has accused both Kiev and Brussels of censoring voices which oppose their escalatory chosen political course.

Video Report

September 16, 2026 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Militarism | , | Comments Off on EU bans former Zelensky aide from parliament

Reporters Without Borders calls for EU to close loopholes allowing Europeans access to censored Russian media

RT | September 4, 2026

The EU- and US-funded press watchdog, Reporters Without Borders (RSF), has called for tighter controls on AI-based search technology, after discovering that chatbots bypass European censorship laws and present Russian media sources banned by in Western Europe to users.

The Paris-based RSF, which lists EU and the US National Endowment for Democracy among its backers, found that popular AI services can provide RT articles, links, excerpts, and news summaries to web users. “Public chatbots can access these websites and redistribute their content,” a statement by the organisation claimed on Wednesday.

The EU and UK have banned numerous Russian news outlets since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, including RT and Sputnik. Moscow has denounced the EU-wide ban as an attempt to silence coverage of the conflict that contradicts Brussels maximalist political stance.

The censoorship has since spread across virtually every publishing channel, including websites, apps, chats and social media. RT has been blocked and removed from practically all Western tech platforms, while RT France was forced to close in 2023 after its accounts were frozen and RT America suffered a similar fate in 2024.

Though VPN technology is used by a significant portion of netizens, making RT’s counter-mainstream reporting accessible to its loyal audience, in July, the EU’s top court ruled that even individuals running free, non-commercial websites can be found guilty of redistributing RT content.

RSF asked popular AI services to retrieve international news exclusively from sanctioned outlets, including RT, Sputnik, and RIA Novosti.

ChatGPT and Grok emerged as the “leading bots for circumventing EU sanctions,” retrieving headlines and providing links, excerpts and detailed summaries. ChatGPT complied “without reservation,” according to RSF, while Claude responded with “unfailing consistency.”

French AI-bot Vibe located the requested material on VKontakte (known as ‘Russia’s Facebook’) and through an app carrying Telegram posts. RSF praised its “remarkable ingenuity” and described the bot as a “resourceful sleuth.”

Gemini cited sanctions to refuse requests while Meta AI, whose parent company unilaterally banned RT from Facebook and Instagram in September 2024, was the only chatbot tested that “consistently refused” to provide the requested material.

RSF called on the European Commission to investigate ChatGPT under the EU’s Digital Services Act – a raft of legislation that allows the EU to manufacture consensus and alienate dissent from narratives it wishes to impose on its population. The RSF, which is funded by the bloc and the controversial US NED called for cases to be taken over other AI services capable of providing access to sanctioned Russian media.

Video Report

September 4, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Comments Off on Reporters Without Borders calls for EU to close loopholes allowing Europeans access to censored Russian media

Sanctioning a Ghost: Europe’s Empty Gesture Against Iran

By Larry C. Johnson | SONAR21 | September 3, 2026 

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced today that the European Union has “officially joined” the American sanctions campaign against Iran — Operation Economic Outcast — and framed Tehran’s choice in the usual absolutes: complete global isolation and a subsistence economy, or a path back to normalcy. It made a commanding headline. It is a hollow one. You cannot embargo a trading partner you have already stopped trading with, and in economic substance that is precisely what Europe did years ago. Today it merely issued a press release about it.

The trade Europe is threatening to withdraw barely exists

One number frames the entire affair. In 2025 the whole of the European Union traded about €3.7 billion in goods with Iran — roughly $4 billion — against Iran’s total foreign trade of some $182.6 billion. Europe therefore accounts for about 2 percent of Iran’s commerce. That is the sum of the leverage now being brandished: a rounding error dressed up as a thunderbolt.

And it is a hollow 2 percent, because the flow runs almost entirely one way. Europe still sells Iran a little machinery, chemicals, and pharmaceuticals — about €3 billion, or 4 to 5 percent of Iran’s import bill. It buys almost nothing back: EU imports from Iran were €0.76 billion, under 1 percent of Iran’s exports, since Europe no longer takes meaningful Iranian oil. Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands make up nearly two-thirds of even this remnant. Withdraw it in full and you bruise a few exporters in Stuttgart and Milan far more than you trouble the treasury in Tehran.

Europe’s leverage was spent years ago

The collapse Europe is now formalizing already happened, slowly, over more than a decade. EU–Iran trade topped €27 billion in 2011 and reached €20.7 billion in 2017, during the nuclear-deal window — a period when Europe genuinely was a major Iranian partner, on the order of 15 to 20 percent of Tehran’s trade. The 2018 US withdrawal began bleeding it out; the trend never reversed; a fresh EU sanctions package in January 2026 drained it further. By 2025 it stood at €3.7 billion. Europe dismantled its own bridge to Iran plank by plank across seven years, and Iran long since built new ones — to China above all, which takes the bulk of its oil, and to the UAE, Turkey, and Iraq for the rest. The marginal Iranian barrel is priced in Shandong, not Rotterdam. There is nothing left in Europe’s hand to take away.

Sanctioning from a sickbed

Here is what makes the gesture worse than empty: Europe is declaring economic war on Iran at the precise moment its own major economies can least afford one — and while they are being bled by the very war Europe is now underwriting.

The eurozone crawled through the first quarter of 2026 at 0.1 percent growth, its weakest in nearly a year, with the composite PMI stuck in contraction and energy inflation running near 11 percent. That last figure is the tell, because it is a direct transmission of this war: the Iran shock and the throttling of the Strait of Hormuz sent fuel prices surging into economies that, unlike the United States, import their energy. The European Central Bank has warned that a prolonged conflict could tip Germany and Italy into technical recession by year’s end.

The particulars are grim. Germany — Iran’s largest European trading partner, and thus the country with the most of that thin trade to forfeit — is also the continent’s biggest casualty. It has already endured two straight years of recession, its manufacturing base has shrunk some 15 percent from its 2017 peak in what economists now call outright deindustrialization, its automotive crown jewel is shedding tens of thousands of jobs, and unemployment sits at a twelve-year high. A recession in 2026 would be its fourth in four years, an outcome with no post-war precedent. France is paralyzed in parallel — a deficit near 5.1 percent of GDP, its fifth prime minister in two years, growth downgraded toward 0.4 percent. Italy limps along near 0.5 percent, its consumers acutely exposed to exactly the energy swings this war is producing.

So the tableau is this: a bloc whose largest economy is deindustrializing under an energy shock, whose second-largest is fiscally ungovernable, and whose third is one bad quarter from recession, has volunteered to prolong the conflict driving its energy bill — by forgoing a trickle of trade that costs Tehran almost nothing and its own exporters rather more. Germany torches a bridge it could use while standing in a house that also is burning.

The one caveat, and why it fails too

In fairness, Operation Economic Outcast was never really about Europe’s own thin trade with Iran. It is a secondary-sanctions weapon — the threat to bar any firm or nation dealing with Iran from the dollar system — and Europe’s theoretical value lies not in the goods it stops selling but in the financial and shipping chokepoints it controls: euro clearing, European banks, the reinsurance and protection-and-indemnity clubs that underwrite tankers. But that leverage aims at Iran’s trade with third countries, chiefly China — and Bessent has conspicuously declined to say whether Washington will actually sanction Chinese banks, because everyone understands what that would cost. Iran, meanwhile, has spent seven years rebuilding its commerce on Chinese banks, yuan settlement, barter, and a shadow tanker fleet engineered to be untouchable by European paperwork. The US naval blockade ostensibly has done more to choke Iranian exports this year than any designation list will. Europe adding its signature raises the compliance risk for the handful of European firms still tempted by Iran. It does essentially nothing to the Chinese refiners who are the actual market.

A sanction is worth what it denies a target that the target cannot easily replace. By that measure Europe’s hand is all but empty: its direct trade with Iran has withered to roughly 2 percent of Tehran’s commerce, in goods Iran already sources from China, Turkey, and the Gulf, and the one channel where Europe might still matter points at a Beijing that Washington will not confront. What makes the move not merely futile but faintly self-destructive is that Europe is making it from a sickbed — its industrial engine stalling, its energy costs inflated by this very war — in order to prolong the fight that is inflating them. The announcement signals Western unity and puts the EU on the record. As a blow against Iran, it is a spent cartridge fired from a trembling hand.

September 4, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on Sanctioning a Ghost: Europe’s Empty Gesture Against Iran

Europe enters winter with ‘dangerously low’ gas reserves amid Persian Gulf supply shock: Report

The Cradle | September 3, 2026

Europe is heading into winter with dangerously low natural gas reserves, Bloomberg reported on 3 September, amid high prices driven by the US-Israeli war on Iran and rising competition for supply in the global market.

According to the European Commission’s most recent update, gas storage levels in the EU are at 65 percent.

To meet its lowest storage target of 75 percent, Europe will need to purchase 100 terawatt-hours of gas before the end of the year, Bloomberg calculations show.

Such purchases would cost more than $8 billion at current prices, making stockpiling uneconomical.

Governments and utilities across Europe have delayed natural gas purchases in hopes that additional supply becomes available and prices fall in time to refill before winter.

Gas prices have doubled since February due to the US-Israeli war on Iran as the Strait of Hormuz remains effectively shut, disrupting exports of gas from Qatar, a major international supplier.

European countries have sought to build inventories ahead of each winter following natural gas shortages resulting from the Russia–Ukraine war that began in 2022.

Europe has deliberately sought to limit its own purchases of Russian gas in response to the war. Additionally, the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline, which supplied cheap gas from Russia to Germany, was destroyed in September 2022 under mysterious circumstances benefiting the US, Ukraine, and Poland.

US natural gas producers have benefited from both the destruction of Nord Stream and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

The US has become the world’s top exporter of natural gas after rushing to fill the gap in lost Qatari and Russian gas supplies by providing more expensive liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipped by tankers across the Atlantic and Pacific oceans to Europe and Asia.

Germany and other EU nations are not expected to suffer gas shortages this winter, as they can pay for the needed gas supplies despite the higher prices.

However, late European purchases at high prices could cause shortages and energy blackouts in poorer countries that lack the funds to compete to purchase the same LNG cargoes.

“The potential for a global ‘fight for fuel’ is there, particularly in a colder winter,” stated Go Katayama, principal insight analyst for LNG at maritime data tracking platform Kpler.

Bangladesh and Pakistan are among those countries most vulnerable to shortages. Both countries suffered blackouts and factory closures after the natural gas crisis in 2022.

However, more expensive gas purchases will drive higher inflation in Europe and expand the risk of a long period of stagnation, sluggish growth, and de-industrialization.

September 3, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on Europe enters winter with ‘dangerously low’ gas reserves amid Persian Gulf supply shock: Report

Belgium blocks latest EU push to seize Russian assets

RT | September 2, 2026

Belgium has rejected an attempt by Sweden, Poland, Spain, and the Netherlands to resurrect the EU’s plan to seize frozen Russian assets to finance Ukraine.

“This is non-negotiable,” Defense Minister Theo Francken told VRT on the weekend. “That door is closed.”

Kiev’s Western backers froze around $300 billion in Russian central bank assets following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, around $240 billion of which is held at Belgium-based Euroclear. The EU has already redirected profits generated by the funds to Kiev but has stopped short of confiscating the underlying assets.

Ukraine has warned of a €30 billion hole in its defense budget, despite receiving the first tranche of a €90 billion loan from Brussels.

Sweden, Poland, Spain, and the Netherlands urged the European Commission last week to once again explore ways of using the frozen Russian assets for Ukraine, while spreading the legal and financial risks among EU member states.

Belgium, which would bear much of the fallout because Euroclear holds the bulk of the assets, opposes confiscation. Francken said Prime Minister Bart De Wever will not change course and warned other EU members, particularly the Baltic states, against repeatedly putting Belgium “in a corner.”

“Our prime minister will stand firm,” he said.

De Wever has argued that outright confiscation would cross a dangerous legal and political line. “You cannot simply take someone else’s money. We are not at war with Russia. Europe is not at war with Russia,” he said earlier this year, adding that “immobilized money, even during WWII, was never confiscated.”

The Belgian prime minister warned that seizing the funds would amount to a declaration of war against Russia, and urged the EU to pursue negotiations instead.

De Wever was also instrumental in blocking an earlier proposal to use the assets as backing for a ‘reparations loan’ to Ukraine. EU members ultimately agreed on a €90 billion loan financed through joint borrowing.

Euroclear also opposes confiscation and warned that it could sue the EU if it attempts to seize the assets. Other EU officials have raised concerns that the move could undermine international law and damage the bloc’s reputation among global investors.

Moscow has denounced any attempt to appropriate its sovereign assets, calling it “theft” and warning that confiscation would trigger retaliation, potentially including measures against Western assets held in Russia.

September 2, 2026 Posted by | Economics | , , | Comments Off on Belgium blocks latest EU push to seize Russian assets

EU surrenders sovereignty to US coercion, becomes accessory to economic terrorism: Iran FM spokesman

Press TV – August 31, 2026

The European Union has surrendered its sovereignty, laws, values and ethics to American coercion and turned itself into an accessory to Washington’s lawless economic war against Iran, Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei has said.

In a statement posted on his official X account on Monday night, Baghaei pointed to the EU’s own Blocking Statute, which prohibits European operators from complying with extraterritorial laws of third countries and treats such measures as contrary to international law.

“How, then, can the Union now support the most predatory and unlawful unilateral coercive measures against Iran?” he asked.

Baghaei contrasted today’s posture with 1996, when the EU resolved to act independently in defense of its sovereignty against the American sanctions regime and adopted the Blocking Statute.

“Today it has become an accessory to Washington’s lawless conduct,” he said.

The Union’s endorsement of America’s unlawful economic war constitutes a grave violation of international law, the spokesman added. Every EU member state will be held accountable for the consequences of its contribution to this wrongful act.

“The European Union cannot endorse Washington’s economic terrorism against Iran while claiming to seek de-escalation and regional stability. The two positions are mutually exclusive,” Baghaei stated. “This irresponsible stance is evidence of the EU’s moral decay and political incompetence.”

Iranian officials have repeatedly described US secondary sanctions and naval blockade measures as economic terrorism and a violation of the UN Charter’s principles of sovereign equality.

Tehran has long maintained that Europe’s failure to enforce its own Blocking Statute against Washington’s extraterritorial dictates exposes the gap between Brussels’ rhetoric on a rules-based order and its actual conduct.

The statement comes as the Islamic Republic continues to reject any attempt to impose terms of settlement through coercion and insists that the only viable path out of the current crisis is a return by the United States to the commitments it signed in the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding.

The Islamabad MoU, brokered with Pakistani mediation and signed in June, provided for an immediate halt to military operations, the lifting of the US naval blockade, Iranian arrangements for the Strait of Hormuz, a path toward sanctions relief, and a $300 billion reconstruction framework.

However, the US violated the deal by conducting deadly aerial assaults on Iran and imposing a naval blockade of the country.

Pakistan had previously played a pivotal role in securing the April 8 ceasefire that brought an end to the 40-day criminal US-Israeli aggression against Iran.

September 1, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on EU surrenders sovereignty to US coercion, becomes accessory to economic terrorism: Iran FM spokesman

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »