Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Babiš attacks EU elites and calls for ‘renaissance of principle’ in fiery CPAC speech

Czech opposition leader Andrej Babiš branded Brussels a “technocracy without a soul” and warned that Europe is being dismantled from within

Remix News | May 29, 2025

Former Czech prime minister and current opposition leader Andrej Babiš delivered a blistering speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Hungary on Thursday, accusing the European Union’s ruling class of betraying its founding values and urging European nations to reclaim sovereignty and common sense from what he called a failing liberal global order.

Speaking just months before a general election in which he is widely expected to return to power, Babiš portrayed the EU as a decaying institution ruled by unelected bureaucrats, ideologues, and activist networks who have imposed censorship, economic sabotage, and uncontrolled migration on member states. He warned that the Brussels establishment has replaced cooperation among sovereign nations with a coercive, centralized system that punishes dissent and erodes national identity.

“We are standing at the historic crossroads in a time marked by deep divisions and mounting tensions,” Babiš declared. “The elites who built and profited from this system now look on in disbelief, confusion, and anger as it falls apart. But they have only themselves to blame. They betrayed the citizens who trusted them.”

In a wide-ranging speech, Babiš accused EU leaders of undermining the very foundations of European civilization. He denounced Brussels for replacing love of country with “hollow globalism,” burying common sense under “endless layers of bureaucracy,” and attempting to substitute the natural population growth with “mass migration.”

He reserved specific criticism for three key EU initiatives: the Digital Services Act, the Green Deal, and the new Migration Pact. He accused the first of ushering in online censorship, the second of sabotaging Europe’s economy under the guise of environmentalism, and the third of forcing nations to accept migrant quotas in violation of their sovereignty.

“Under this law, dissent can become a punishable offense,” Babiš said of the Digital Services Act. “This isn’t about safety. It’s about silencing.”

On the Green Deal, he argued that while China is expanding coal and nuclear power, Europe is deliberately impoverishing itself for symbolic environmental virtue. “This is not sustainability,” he said. “It’s economic self-sabotage dressed up as an environmental virtue.”

Turning to migration, he described the EU’s new asylum system as “coercion,” not solidarity, and said it “undermines cohesion, public safety, and national identity.”

Babiš framed these developments as part of a broader ideological drift in Brussels, where he said freedom is being replaced with surveillance, culture with identity politics, and values with apology. “They no longer defend our heritage, they apologize for it,” he said. “Instead of protecting Europe, they deconstruct it.”

Calling for a “renaissance, not just of policy, but of principle,” Babiš urged the EU to return to its original form: a voluntary community of nations rooted in mutual respect, diversity, and national self-determination.

“Europe is not Brussels. It is Prague, Warsaw, Budapest, Rome, Paris, Madrid,” he declared. “It is the voices of citizens who want to be heard. It is the right of nations to govern themselves.”

“The age of patriots has begun,” Babiš concluded. “Not because we want to divide Europe, but because we want to save it.”

His appearance at CPAC Hungary — an event known for bringing together conservative leaders from across Europe and the United States — further cemented his alignment with other nationalist voices in the region, including Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, Germany’s Alice Weidel, and Austrian Freedom Party leader Herbert Kickl.

May 29, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | Leave a comment

Sanctions as Self-Harm: The West’s Strategic Blind Spot in Confronting Russia

By Ricardo Martins – New Eastern Outlook – May 28, 2025

This article critically analyzes the latest EU sanctions on Russia, arguing they are strategically flawed and economically self-destructive. Drawing from past failures, it shows how the West’s punitive measures are backfiring, hurting Europe and the U.S. more than isolating Russia.

What is the New Sanctions Package About?

The EU has unveiled a new sanction package targeting Russia, predominantly focusing on the energy sector, specifically oil and diesel exports. This builds upon earlier restrictions intended to cripple Russia’s economic capacity to sustain its military operations in Ukraine. The new sanctions include tighter enforcement mechanisms on the oil price cap, restrictions on ship-to-ship transfers in international waters, and efforts to curtail Russia’s access to Western insurance and logistics networks. But like the previous measures, they raise a fundamental question: Will they work?

The Status of Past Sanctions: Buying While Punishing

Historically, sanctions against Russia have been inconsistent and riddled with loopholes. Despite strong rhetoric, Europe has continued purchasing Russian commodities under various exemptions. The EU still imports significant quantities of Russian diesel, liquefied natural gas (LNG), coal, uranium, and even agricultural products like grain and fertilizer. The result is a paradox: while aiming to isolate Russia, the West remains economically entangled with it. This undermines the moral and strategic coherence of sanctions and allows Russia to adapt and thrive despite Western pressure.

Sanctions Hit Europe More Than Russia

While sanctions are theoretically aimed at weakening Russia’s economy, the practical consequences have disproportionately hit European industries and households. Russian exports are fungible: oil, coal, and fertilizers find alternate markets in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Meanwhile, Europe has struggled with soaring energy prices, industrial shutdowns, and declining competitiveness. Diesel shortages, energy rationing, and inflation have become the new norm, particularly in Germany, which once depended heavily on Russian inputs for its industrial base.

Russia, by contrast, has localized production, developed new markets, and implemented mercantilist strategies to reduce dependence on Western technology and finance. As one Russian analyst put it, sanctions have become “psychological warfare,” increasingly irrelevant to daily life in Russia.

Oil and Diesel: The Inflation Time Bomb

The crux of the new sanctions is oil and diesel. But can the U.S. and EU afford to forgo Russian, Venezuelan, and Iranian crude without catastrophic inflation? The answer appears to be no.

Russia exports about 7.5 million barrels of oil per day, or nearly 10% of global supply. Taking that offline—especially in conjunction with sanctioned Venezuelan and Iranian oil—would create a massive global shortfall. Western refineries, particularly in the U.S. Gulf Coast, are calibrated to process heavy sour crude like Russia’s Urals blend. Without it, refineries operate suboptimally, and gasoline prices spike.

In the U.S., diesel drives nearly all logistics trucks, trains, and ships. Removing a major global supplier like Russia tightens global supply, causing diesel prices to surge and supply chains to buckle. Already, diesel refills for trucks cost over $2,000, with potential spikes threatening food prices and consumer goods. Inflation will soar again, just as it had started to cool.

Baltic Sea Escalation: Tankers and Arrests

The geopolitical tension is intensifying. Russian oil tankers, often flagged under third countries, are now escorted by Russian naval vessels in the Baltic Sea. An incident involving an Estonian ship attempting to halt a tanker, which ended up detained in Russian waters, demonstrates the volatility of the situation. This marks a dangerous escalation, with the potential for military clashes over enforcement of maritime sanctions—an area traditionally governed by international law, not unilateral action.

Western Industrial Decline: No Shipyards, No Leverage

Sanctions enforcement is further complicated by Western logistical decline. The U.S., Britain, and France have largely lost their shipbuilding industries. Insurance and shipping markets have globalized, and London no longer dominates maritime underwriting. Russian entities are increasingly self-insuring their fleet, rendering sanctions on Western insurers irrelevant.

Furthermore, without a domestic merchant marine, the U.S. relies on foreign ships even for military logistics—a vulnerability in any prolonged conflict. Meanwhile, China and Russia continue expanding their shipping capabilities and influence over global supply routes.

The Legal Quandary: Sanctions and Sovereignty

From a legal standpoint, unilateral sanctions that attempt to compel third-party countries to comply (so-called secondary sanctions) strain the legitimacy of the “rules-based international order.” It is lawful for the West to impose its own sanctions, but not to mandate their enforcement by sovereign nations like India or Brazil. Such overreach risks global backlash and accelerates moves toward de-dollarization and alternative trade systems, such as the BRICS currency initiative.

Is the EU Addicted to Sanctions?

The EU appears increasingly reliant on sanctions as a primary foreign policy tool. Yet, their efficacy is questionable. Past sanctions have not altered Russian behavior, destabilized its economy, or improved Western leverage. Instead, they’ve fostered economic nationalism in Russia, weakened EU industries, and exposed the strategic shallowness of Brussels and Washington’s policies.

Sanctions are not a strategy; they are a tactic. And overuse risks turning them from a deterrent into a diplomatic crutch—one that Europe may not survive intact if economic pain continues to mount.

Conclusion: A Strategy of Self-Harm

Sanctions as Self-Harm: The West’s Strategic Blind Spot in Confronting Russia

In sum, the latest sanctions package is more of the same: punitive in intent, performative in practice, and counterproductive in outcome. The West, particularly Europe, will likely bear the brunt of energy shortages, inflation, and industrial decline. Meanwhile, Russia’s diversified exports, strategic alliances with China and India, and robust internal adaptation mechanisms render sanctions increasingly futile.

History has shown that attempts to isolate Russia through economic pressure are not only ineffective—they risk reinforcing the very state structures they aim to dismantle. Unless sanctions are part of a broader diplomatic and economic strategy, they will continue to hurt the sanctioning powers more than their target.

Ricardo Martins ‒PhD in Sociology, specializing in policies, European and world politics and geopolitics

May 28, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

EU has isolated itself, not Russia – Luxembourg MEP

RT | May 28, 2025

Luxembourg MEP Fernand Kartheiser has argued that the EU’s confrontational approach to Russia during the Ukraine conflict has led to its own isolation.

The lawmaker made the remarks in an interview with RT released on Tuesday while on a trip to Russia that he was forced to fund personally due to the European Parliament’s restrictions.

“Some people in the European Parliament… have an attitude toward Russia that identifies it as a big threat,” Kartheiser said. “They think that if we put pressure on Russia and isolate it diplomatically, that might help to find solutions in the context of the conflict in Ukraine… it is not the discussion that we should have.”

Kartheiser noted that the entire EU approach toward the Ukraine conflict and Russia has been counterproductive.

“What we have now internationally is that basically everybody talks to Russia. We even have the US coming back and having high-level contacts… the anti-Russia stance is diminishing,” he stated. “So this policy of isolation of Russia basically has failed. The only ones who are isolated in a way are the EU itself.”

The lawmaker’s visit to Moscow at the invitation of the Russian State Duma aimed to discuss bilateral relations and the situation in Ukraine. The visit, however, drew criticism from hawkish EU lawmakers. The European Conservatives and Reformists group threatened to expel Kartheiser, claiming he had “crossed a red line.” The MEP called the threat “a regrettable part of the picture” and lamented that some EU lawmakers remain opposed to re-engaging with Moscow.

“The discussion that we should have is what kind of relationship do we want with Russia in the future? We have to open the dialogue again. That is most important,” he said, adding that there are politicians whose opinions towards Russia are shifting, while many ordinary Europeans would also like to see ties restored.

The MEP emphasized that if the EU “wants to be taken seriously as an actor in international relations,” it must abandon the anti-Russia policy and “have some kind of relationship” with the country again.

“If we, Western Europeans, are expected to take a larger responsibility for our own security, one way to assure this is by negotiating an agreement with Russia, ensuring at the same time our security as Western Europeans and guaranteeing the security of Russia’s western border. So, negotiation and diplomacy before rearmament and arms race,” he concluded.

May 28, 2025 Posted by | Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Ukraine in the EU? 5 reasons why it would crush Hungary (and Europe)

Remix News | May 28, 2025

The political elite in Brussels is increasingly trying to achieve that Ukraine’s planned EU accession takes place as soon as possible, preferably before 2030. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, stated in early May that the accession process must be accelerated.

Von der Leyen previously stated in Kyiv that if the process continues at this pace and quality, accession could occur even earlier than 2030.

The EU often does what it wants now and simply bypasses all the old treaty rules. The EU migration pact, which basically amounts to migrant quotas, was supposed to be the type of law that passes with the unanimous consent of the member states. In other words, countries like Hungary and Poland should have had a veto. Instead, Brussels snuck it through the backdoor and passed this “pact” with a qualified majority of the EU’s interior ministers.

Something similar is bound to happen with Ukraine. They will bypass Hungary’s veto in violation of all treaty rules because they have the power — at least for the foreseeable future.

However, it is worth noting that this will not only harm Hungarians, but all of Europe. Mandiner news outlet compiled five reasons it will hit Hungary hard, but many of these reasons apply to a broad swathe of Europe’s population.

1. The wages of Hungarian workers would decrease

With Ukraine’s accession, at least 30 million Ukrainians would have the opportunity to work in any country in the European Union. This would expand the European labor market by about 7 percent. In Hungary, the average net salary is currently about three times that of Ukraine. It is clear that many people would decide that it is worth moving to neighboring Hungary, as well as other EU nations.

Ukrainian workers arriving with lower wage demands would create a competitive situation in Hungarian sectors already struggling with labor shortages (construction, hospitality, agriculture), and this could result in a real wage decrease of up to 10-20 percent.

It is the classic example of cheap labor flooding the market, which while good for owners of capital and big business, can decimate labor markets and undercut labor power.

This would be most prevalent among lower-skilled workers, but jobs requiring secondary education would not necessarily be secure either. The proportion of Ukrainian guest workers in Hungary reached 5 percent in the agricultural and construction sectors by early 2025. Now, 30-40 percent of commuters [itinerants] working in this sector are Ukrainian citizens. After accession, this number would increase dramatically, turning into permanent commuting and settlement in Hungary and other EU nations, which would further drive down basic wages and long-term unemployment in rural regions, further increasing social tensions.

Hungary is spending a fortune on families and social programs for its population. Suddenly, financing family benefits, child-rearing benefits and the 13th month pension would also face serious difficulties, and the cost of the system would increase by 200–300 billion forints annually with Ukraine’s EU accession. This amount can only be raised in the government budget at the expense of public services, healthcare and education. According to analysts, if wages were to fall by 5-10 percent, consumption would also fall by 3-4 percent, and this could mean an additional loss of 0.5-1 percent of Hungarian GDP growth on an annual basis, the compilation highlights.

2. The rapid accession of Ukrainians could cause a new migration crisis

With Ukraine’s accession to the EU, the immigration crisis that has plagued the European Union since 2015 would reach a new level, and this would put Hungary in a very difficult situation. In its study previously published on Mandiner, the Hungarian Institute of Foreign Affairs cites data from the 2023 research of the Ukrainian Future Institute, according to which 6.5 million people have left Ukraine, which had a population of 41-44 million before the war, in recent years, and there are also 3.5 million internal refugees.

With Ukraine’s accession, at least 30 million Ukrainians would have the opportunity to work in any country in the European Union, and a good number of them would understandably leave the collapsed country in the hope of a better life.

This internal, legal migration would significantly burden the EU – and since Hungary is a neighboring country, this would also affect the Hungarian healthcare system.

In addition, illegal migration could also gain momentum. It is currently unknown where Ukraine’s borders will be after the settlement of the Russian-Ukrainian war, but a new, currently unknown and unsettled border section of several hundred – perhaps a thousand – kilometers long will certainly be created.

If the Ukrainians are admitted, this line will separate the European Union and Russia. Controlling it is a task that neither the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (FRONTEX) nor the Ukrainian authorities would be able to cope with.

New migration routes could open up from Asia, and the EU would have to deal with new waves of migration coming from the east through Ukrainian soil. More people would try to enter the EU from Central Asia and Afghanistan through the new external borders. Some of the incoming migrants would try to reach the territory of the Western member states via Hungary. If Ukraine were also allowed to join the Schengen area, migrants would be able to travel across Europe at will, easily avoiding controls.

3. It would ruin Hungarian farmers

Ukraine’s accession to the EU would significantly increase the size of the EU’s 157 million hectares of agriculture by 41 million hectares.

Ukraine would become the largest beneficiary of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), pocketing about a third of the total budget, thereby undercutting farmers who comply with strict EU regulations, including Hungarian producers.

A large part of the budget’s agricultural subsidies are currently distributed on a regional basis, and due to money given to Ukraine, farmers in other member states would receive less of this amount. This reallocation of agricultural subsidies would mean Hungarian farmers would also receive orders of magnitude less EU funding than before, according to calculations by the Hungarian Institute of Foreign Affairs.

With Ukraine’s accession, the Hungarian agricultural sector is expected to suffer an annual loss of 672 billion forints (€1.68 billion) due to the loss of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) funds.

A loss of resources of this magnitude, in addition to the aforementioned competitive disadvantage, would likely destroy the entire sector and could certainly bankrupt small and medium-sized family farms, Mandiner emphasizes.

Ukraine is one of the world’s largest grain producers and exporters, with vast acreage and excellent resources, but our eastern neighbor has much looser regulations than the European Union, and labor is much cheaper, which is why their production costs are much lower. If they were to enter the EU market, farmers from other European member states would be at a huge competitive disadvantage.

If Ukraine joins the EU, it would account for 15 percent of European wheat production, 49 percent of corn production, and 20 percent of overall grain production. This dumping would result in depressed prices, and Hungarian farmers would be unable to compete with cheap, often inferior-quality Ukrainian products.

4. The European Union would also import war by admitting Ukraine

According to a study by the Hungarian Institute of Foreign Affairs, Ukraine’s accession to the EU would necessitate the introduction of new coordination mechanisms, but it is clear that the European Union is currently unable to guarantee Ukraine’s security. Realistically, Ukraine’s accession to NATO has practically zero chance, so the security guarantees of the Ukrainian state could only be resolved through bilateral agreements.

The European Union’s mutual assistance clause is very similar to NATO’s famous Article 5. If a country is attacked, it can activate it independently, i.e., without the consensus of the European Council, and in this case the other member states must come to its aid.

This means that if Ukraine were an EU member, it could activate the article, which would – at least legally – automatically make all EU member states belligerents.

This is probably what Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán meant when he said, “If the European Union admits Ukraine, it will also be admitting war.” The aforementioned article has no implementing regulations, so it would cause an unprecedented debate on its interpretation, which would lead to divisions among the member states. On the other hand, the adversary could automatically consider the European Union a belligerent party, and if this were to happen, NATO would also have to deal with the issue.

It is unprecedented in the history of the European Union for a country at war to join the community, but even if peace were to be concluded, the aftermath of a legally closed conflict would pose dangers that the Union would be unable to deal with. The Russian-Ukrainian war will almost certainly end with a peace treaty that would change Ukraine’s current internationally recognized borders.

If the European Union were to include Ukraine as a member, it would be adding a conflict zone with a constant threat of war, with the associated tasks and costs. This step would eliminate the buffer zone between the European Union and Russia, which Ukraine has so far represented, with the two directly bordering each other. This would also drastically change the security situation of the European community.

5. We would allow the Ukrainian mafia into the EU

Ukraine is one of the most corrupt countries in Europe, where organized crime was very strong even before the war, but the situation is even worse now. A lot of weapons from the arms shipments that have flowed into the country have ended up on the black market and then in the hands of criminal groups. The Ukrainian mafia will not have HR problems either.

The rehabilitation of demobilized soldiers is currently unresolved, and many of them are likely to be unemployed and traumatized, but there is one area in which they have gained serious expertise in recent years, and this is very useful knowledge if someone wants to join organized crime.

If Ukraine were to join the EU at an accelerated pace, as the European Commission envisions, this problem would also affect Hungarians. With the possibility of free movement in the European Union and the avoidance of border controls, Ukrainian organized crime groups would be able to conduct their business much more easily in the territory of other member states, and due to our geographical proximity, this would definitely be felt in Hungary.

The domestic drug situation is already very serious, and it seems to be getting worse with the spread of synthetic drugs, and the Ukrainians’ “entry into the market” would not help this, just as Hungarian society does not want clashes between expanding criminal gangs back in their everyday lives.

Of course, the state of public security would not be improved by the fact that Ukraine’s accession to the EU would certainly lead to an increase in the intensity of migration and the number of migrants residing in Hungary. This in itself carries a serious public security threat. The examples of England, Germany, Sweden and France all show that integration attempts, which are impossible in the short term anyway, almost always fail, and the number of crimes increases in direct proportion to the increase in the number of immigrants, and in many cases new organized criminal networks are created in migrant communities.

Hungary’s opposition pushes for Ukraine’s EU membership

Charles Michel, the former president of the European Council, and Manfred Weber, the president of the European People’s Party (EPP), which has the largest faction in the European Parliament, both support the EU’s push for Ukrainian membership. The party of Hungarian opposition leader Péter Magyar has also joined the EPP.

It is no coincidence that the German politician, Weber, made it clear to Magyar before the Tisza Party could join his faction that he only works with those who are pro-Ukraine, pro-Europe, and pro-rule of law, and he expects the same from Péter Magyar’s party.

The Tisza Party is apparently trying to comply with this, as in April, in line with the People’s Party line, they voted for a proposal that urges Ukraine to become an EU member, and would even provide a large amount of support (approximately €35 billion) to the war-torn country to facilitate this.

Apparently, the majority of their supporters expect this from Péter Magyar’s party: in the Voice of the Nation poll, the majority of Tisza respondents support Ukraine’s accession to the EU (58.18 percent yes, 41.82 percent no).

Manfred Weber stated in relation to Ukraine’s EU accession that Ukrainians have the same right to belong to the European Union as we Hungarians.

The Hungarian government, on the other hand, takes the position that accelerating Ukraine’s EU accession would have a catastrophic impact on Hungary and the surrounding countries, as in addition to the fact that there is currently a war in the country and the process itself would cost an incredible amount of money, this step would bring serious long-term negative changes in many areas of life, affecting the lives of European people.

May 28, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics | , , | Leave a comment

EU state blasts Germany over Russia threats

RT | May 28, 2025

Slovakia will not be bullied into changing its foreign policy, Prime Minister Robert Fico has said, calling German threats to cut EU funding due to its stance on Russia “aggressive and unacceptable.”

Fico’s remarks came in response to German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who said member states that resist the EU’s policies on Russia could face financial consequences.

“Member states that violate the rule of law can be confronted with infringement proceedings,” Merz warned at the WDR Europaforum in Berlin on Monday. “There is always the option of withdrawing European funds from them.”

Merz mentioned both Slovakia and Hungary in response to a question about countries resisting the EU’s policies on sanctions and military aid for Ukraine.

Fico hit back at Merz. “Slovakia is not a little schoolchild that needs to be lectured,” he said on Tuesday on X. “Slovakia’s sovereign positions do not stem from vanity, but are based on our national interests.” He added that “the politics of a single mandatory opinion is a denial of sovereignty and democracy.”

He went on to describe Merz’s remarks as “aggressive” and an indication that “we are not heading into good times.”

“The words of the German Chancellor are absolutely unacceptable in modern Europe. If we don’t obey, are we to be punished? This is not the path toward cohesion and cooperation,” Fico said.

Since returning to office in 2023, Fico has halted Slovak military assistance to Ukraine and has been critical of Western sanctions on Russia. He has also called for economic ties with Moscow to be rebuilt once the conflict with Kiev is over. Late last year, he became one of the few Western leaders to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss energy supplies to Slovakia, which were jeopardized by Ukraine’s refusal to extend a gas transit agreement.

On Monday, Merz also said Ukraine’s European backers are no longer restricting the country from launching long-range strikes into Russia using Western-made weapons, later adding that the decision was made months ago. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, however, said he had not received the go-ahead, while suggesting that it could happen later.

Responding to Merz, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov warned of a “serious escalation,” adding that the potential move “severely undermines attempts for a peaceful settlement” of the conflict.

May 28, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

Greenland eyes Chinese investment amid ‘new world order’

RT | May 27, 2025

Greenland is weighing the possibility of inviting Chinese investment to develop its mining sector in light of tensions with the US and limited engagement with the EU, the island’s business and mineral resources minister, Naaja Nathanielsen, told the Financial Times on Tuesday.

An autonomous territory of Denmark, Greenland holds vast but hard-to-exploit reserves of minerals such as gold and copper. Foreign capital is essential for developing the resources, yet recent geopolitical tensions have made it difficult to secure reliable partnerships.

“We are trying to figure out what the new world order looks like,” Nathanielsen said, adding that Greenland was “having a difficult time finding [its] footing” in evolving relationships with its Western allies.

The Arctic island signed a memorandum of understanding with the US on mineral development during President Donald Trump’s first term. However, according to Nathanielsen, it’s coming to an end. The government in Nuuk had tried, unsuccessfully, to renew it during the administration of former US President Joe Biden.

Following Trump’s return to office in January, Greenland hoped to revive discussions of renewing the memorandum. Instead, the US president talked about purchasing the island and refused to rule out using military force to assert US sovereignty over it.

Nathanielsen called such statements “disrespectful and distasteful,” adding that Greenland “has no wish to be American.”

China has shown interest in the Arctic’s mineral wealth, including oil, gas, and minerals. It has invested in Russian energy projects and has expressed interest in Greenland’s mining sector. No Chinese companies, however, are currently operating active mines in Greenland, although one firm holds a minority stake in an inactive project.

According to Nathanielsen, Chinese investors might be holding back because they don’t want “to provoke anything.”

“In those terms, Chinese investment is of course problematic, but so, to some extent, is American,” she said.

Greenland would prefer closer cooperation with the EU, which aligns more closely with its environmental priorities, the minister said. However, the bloc’s engagement has been slow, with only one project, led by a Danish-French consortium, currently in development. The mine is expected to begin operations within five years.

At present, Greenland has two functioning mines: one for gold, operated by the Icelandic-Canadian firm Amaroq Minerals, and another for anorthosite, a light-colored industrial rock, managed by a subsidiary of Canada’s Hudson Resources.

May 27, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | Leave a comment

German Chancellor Merz threatens to cut EU funding for Hungary and Slovakia

By Thomas Brooke | Remix News | May 27, 2025

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has warned that the European Union could withhold even greater funds from Hungary and Slovakia if they refuse to adhere to the values imposed upon member states by Brussels.

Speaking at the WDR Europaforum on Monday, Merz said, “Member states that violate the rule of law can face infringement procedures, and there is always the possibility of withdrawing European funds. If necessary, we will take care of it.”

“We cannot allow the decisions of the entire EU to depend on a small minority,” he added, in a thinly veiled attack on the nationalist-led governments in Bratislava and Budapest. Both countries have already seen parts of their EU funding frozen over legal and political disputes with Brussels.

His remarks come as Hungary faces renewed criticism over a bill targeting foreign-funded NGOs and media, while Slovakia, under Prime Minister Robert Fico, has raised alarm in Brussels following his recent visit to Moscow and long-held opposition to further European intervention in the Russo-Ukrainian conflict.

Following the trip, Brussels ramped up pressure on Slovakia with the arrival of a delegation of Members of the European Parliament from the Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT), led by Czech MEP Tomáš Zdechovský, to investigate alleged misuse of European subsidies.

Slovak Interior Minister Matúš Šutaj Eštok has dismissed the delegation’s visit as a politically motivated “punitive expedition” orchestrated by Brussels, accusing Eurocrats of defamation. “A carefully selected group is coming here with the aim of presenting Slovakia in Brussels as a black hole on the map of Europe,” he claimed.

Skepticism over Brussels’ approach to the war in Ukraine has been a point of contention in Hungary and Slovakia for the duration of the conflict, and Merz expressed his intention to advocate for punitive measures against the two member states should they seek to block European support to Kyiv.

“We will not be able to avoid this conflict with Hungary and Slovakia if we continue on this course,” Merz said.

Last month, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán accused Brussels of conspiring with his country’s political opposition to bring about a change in government, remarks made after Hungarian left-wing MEP Kinga Kollár acknowledged the devastating effect that the withholding of EU funds for Hungary has caused, caveating her remarks by stating that “the deteriorating standard of living has actually strengthened the opposition and I am very positive about the ’26 elections.”

“They agreed to destroy the Hungarian economy, the Hungarian healthcare system, and to destroy the living standards of Hungarians, in order to help the Tisza party come to power,” Orbán said of the European Commission.

In response to Merz’s remarks, Hungarian Economy Minister Márton Nagy said on Monday that Budapest should reconsider its overdependence on trade with Berlin.

May 27, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

Russia could restrict return of Western brands – Izvestia

RT | May 27, 2025

The Russian parliament is set to pass a law that would regulate the right of foreign companies to reclaim assets sold during their exit from the country, Izvestia reported on Tuesday. The draft has reportedly been approved by the Finance Ministry and will be considered by the State Duma in its second and third readings simultaneously.

Numerous US, European, and Asian companies pulled out of Russia due to supply problems caused by unprecedented sanctions imposed on Moscow by the West after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Other firms left due to the risk of facing secondary sanctions or public relations pressure.

The bill, reviewed by Izvestia, allows Russian authorities or current owners to reject asset buybacks under certain conditions. Grounds for refusal include the foreign seller being from a country that has imposed sanctions on Russia, the repurchase price being below market value, or if more than two years have elapsed since the original deal with the Russian owner fulfilling obligations to employees and creditors.

The Russian authorities may also block asset buybacks if a company operates in sectors deemed vital to the country’s socio-economic stability, including defense or finance, the outlet said. In such cases, asset repurchase would require presidential approval.

According to Izvestia, the new measures will be voted on in June and could affect at least 18 foreign companies with buyback options, including Renault and McDonald’s. The draft law also reportedly stipulates that foreign businesses denied repurchase could be eligible for compensation, the amount of which would be determined by the government. However, if former owners failed to fulfill obligations before their exit, compensation could be reduced by court decision.

In March, Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the government to draft regulations for Western firms seeking to return to the country’s market, which would prioritize the adequate protection of local businesses.

Following the exodus of foreign firms, the Russian market has largely adapted by promoting domestic and Chinese brands, making re-entry more challenging for Western companies. In sectors such as automotive and fashion, local alternatives have filled the void left by departing Western firms.

Putin said on Monday that foreign tech firms that continue operating in Russia while acting against the country should be “squeezed out.”

“They are trying to squeeze us, so we must respond in kind,” Putin said in response to a question about possible measures against companies such as Zoom and Microsoft. The president added that Russia had not expelled any companies and had instead created favorable conditions for their operations.

May 27, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , , , , | Leave a comment

Merz’ Missile Intimidation Tactics Won’t Work Because America Calls the Shots in Germany

Sputnik – 26.05.2025

“In short, you shouldn’t take the Germans too seriously,” veteran German legal scholar and ex-AfD MEP Gunnar Beck told Sputnik, commenting on Chancellor Merz’ announcement that Germany, the UK, France and the US are no longer restricting how far Ukraine can strike using its NATO-sourced missiles, potentially including Taurus.

“Germany today only needs to be taken seriously if it acts as a US satellite… We are not an independent nation. We are governed partly by the EU and partly by the US. Did the EU and the US agree?” That’s the real question, according to Beck.

Merz’ threats are meant as an intimidation tactic, the observer says, but Berlin doesn’t “seriously consider that it may be a crucial step in terms of escalating the conflict so that ultimately Germany herself could be involved either in terms of ground troops in Ukraine or even being affected by the war.”

No One to Challenge ‘Governor Merz’

“Merz as much as previous German chancellors, doesn’t really regard himself as a representative of Germany’s interests. He doesn’t really want to pursue ends which serve Germany’s. He regards himself as something like a governor of Germany for the interests of the globalist elite,” Beck stressed.

He doesn’t have opposition against the CDU-CSU-SPD-Green “uniparty,” which controls two thirds of parliament and is opposed only by AfD and Linke, nor among the financial and media elite (the latter “owned and effectively managed by the government,” apart from Springer Group, “essentially controlled by transatlantic interests”).

Bottom Line?

“Europe is not capable and probably reluctant to take independent action, whatever they may be saying. America still calls the shots in Europe because there’s just such a huge disparity in terms of economic and military power. We have to bear in mind that the EU is in decline. It is, economically speaking… in the worst economic position of all the industrialized countries, including Japan,” Beck summed up.

May 26, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

The West pressures Moldova’s president to launch a blitzkrieg against Transnistria

By Sonja van den Ende | Strategic Culture Foundation | May 24, 2025

As Russia celebrated Victory Day on May 9 – honoring the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II, known in Russia as the Great Patriotic War – tensions in Europe, particularly in Moldova and Romania, have reached a boiling point.

On Moldova’s periphery lies a small post-Soviet republic that could soon become the epicenter of a new conflict. Pressure is mounting on Moldova’s pro-European President Maia Sandu, who faces growing domestic dissent and increasing demands from Western allies to fast-track the country’s integration into the European Union – even at the risk of military confrontation with the breakaway region of Transnistria.

Romanian state media reports suggest that some in Bucharest ultimately seek the full annexation of Moldova, effectively reducing it to a province or “14th region” of Romania – a former kingdom until 1947. With the EU recently securing the victory of its preferred pro-European candidate in Romania’s elections, emotions are running high.

In the first round of voting, the Romanian electorate overwhelmingly supported the ultra-right candidate Călin Georgescu. Shocked by the result, the EU pushed to invalidate the outcome and called for new elections, which ultimately installed its favored candidate, Nicușor Dan, likely through electoral fraud.

Moldova’s President Maia Sandu – a Harvard-educated politician holding a Romanian passport – supports Moldova’s unification with Romania, including the reintegration of Transnistria. She was among the first to congratulate Romania’s new pro-European president, Nicușor Dan. Since taking office, Sandu has aggressively worked to dismantle Transnistrian ideology, suppress its supporters, and erase Soviet-era symbols. Her government has promoted the Romanian language (Moldova’s official state language) while marginalizing canonical Orthodox Christianity – part of a broader cultural shift toward Europe.

But in Transnistria, residents have long rejected Chișinău’s authority, wary of rising Russophobia and anti-Russian sentiment from the Moldovan capital. Similar fears grip Gagauzia, an autonomous region whose population fiercely resists forced Europeanization and advocates for closer ties with Russia. Gagauzia, home to a Turkic-speaking, predominantly Orthodox Christian ethnic group, has been a vocal opponent of Sandu’s policies.

The region’s leader, Evghenia Guțul, was arrested upon returning from a trip to Russia, where she met with President Vladimir Putin – an act the West now deems criminal. Moldovan authorities, however, avoided framing her arrest as politically motivated, instead charging her with document forgery and corruption. Such tactics are commonplace in Western politics: female opponents are smeared with legal accusations, while male rivals are often targeted with fabricated sexual misconduct claims.

Both Transnistria and Gagauzia demand the preservation of Russian as a regional language, protection of religious freedoms, and the right to maintain political and economic ties with Moscow. Sandu’s government has responded with repression, arresting Guțul and escalating tensions further.

In another provocative move, Archbishop Marcu of Bălți and Fălești was barred from traveling to Jerusalem for the Holy Fire ceremony on Easter eve – a decision made under direct orders from the presidential administration. Moldovans have since mocked the irony, joking that “the daughter of a swineherd tried to play a mean trick on Orthodox believers but ended up covered in mud herself.” The holy flame was eventually brought into the country by other priests.

On the eve of Victory Day – a major holiday commemorating the Soviet victory over fascism – Sandu banned public commemorations in Chișinău’s central square, sparking widespread outrage. Many Moldovans remember their ancestors’ sacrifices in the Red Army, with over 56,000 Moldovan soldiers perishing in World War II. They also recall the atrocities committed by Romanian occupiers during the war, making Sandu’s pro-Romanian stance particularly inflammatory.

Public discontent is now reflected in polls: Sandu’s approval rating, along with that of her party, Action and Solidarity (PAS), has plummeted to just 22%. Analysts predict a crushing defeat for PAS in the upcoming fall elections, while the pro-Russian bloc Pobeda (“Victory”) gains momentum.

To salvage her position, Sandu has held urgent talks with EU officials in Brussels and Polish leaders in Warsaw. In response, Western political strategists have flooded Chișinău, tasked with smearing the opposition and convincing Moldovans that EU integration is their only future.

Europe cannot afford an anti-EU – let alone pro-Russian – victory in Moldova. Romania (and by extension, Moldova) plays a pivotal role in NATO, hosting what will soon be the alliance’s largest European military base, explicitly aimed at countering Russia. Construction began in 2024.

Poland has also emerged as a key player in Moldova’s political landscape. President Andrzej Duda has deployed Stsiapan Putsila – a young Belarusian opposition figure and editor-in-chief of the Warsaw-backed outlet Nexta – to assist Sandu’s campaign. Putsila, a social media specialist known for his role in discrediting political opponents across the post-Soviet space, will advise PAS ahead of the September elections, ensuring a victory akin to Romania’s manipulated outcome.

In essence, Europe has adopted George Soros-style tactics – modernized color revolutions and election interference – precisely what it accuses Russia of doing.

Yet Sandu’s European backers recognize that media manipulation alone may not salvage her dwindling support. Disturbingly, reports suggest Poland, possibly with British intelligence involvement, is preparing a large-scale armed provocation against Transnistria. Unsurprisingly, EU-linked “fact-checking” platforms like Disinfo dismiss these claims – though their track record shows that what they label “fake news” often turns out to be true.

For now, Sandu is being urged to consider a swift, “winnable military operation” as a last-ditch effort to secure victory in the parliamentary elections. This strategy – using external conflict to rally domestic support – has been employed elsewhere in the post-Soviet world. Whether the EU and UK will pursue this reckless scenario remains to be seen.

The critical question is whether Sandu will take such a suicidal gamble – for both her country and herself.

An attack on Transnistria – home to half a million people, including thousands of ethnic Russians and Russian peacekeepers – could ignite a regional crisis, destabilizing Eastern Europe and provoking a severe response from Moscow. For Moldova, this would mean risking everything for fleeting political gains.

The current turmoil in Moldova is more than a local power struggle. It is a microcosm of the broader East-West confrontation – testing whether democracy can thrive without coercion, and whether sovereignty can withstand external domination.

As the 80th anniversary of fascism’s defeat reminds us, the scars of war endure for generations. History shows that those who attempt to rewrite it often repeat its darkest chapters. The European Union, which falsely equates Nazi Germany and the USSR as equal instigators of World War II, should take heed.

May 25, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Scott Ritter: Will Trump Own the Ukraine War or Walk Away?

Glenn Diesen | May 23, 2025

Scott Ritter is a former intelligence officer in the US Marine Corps and a former UN Weapons Inspector. He expects that the negotiations will fail, and Trump will distance himself from the war. Thus, the failure of negotiations will hurt Ukraine and Europe the most.

Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:

Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/

X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_DiesenPatreon:   / glenndiesen  

Support the channel: PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/glenn…

Buy me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/gdieseng

Go Fund Me: https://gofund.me/09ea012f

May 24, 2025 Posted by | Video | , , , | Leave a comment

Ireland Clashes with EU Over Hate Speech Laws as MEP Michael McNamara Denounces Brussels’ Legal Threats

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | May 23, 2025

Ireland’s refusal to fully adopt the European Union’s “hate speech” directives has ignited tensions in Brussels, with Independent MEP Michael McNamara voicing staunch opposition to what he calls a misguided and authoritarian push to punish noncompliance. He dismissed the EU’s legal threats as deeply flawed, asserting that there is no evidence” that these laws accomplish their stated goals of reducing discord or promoting unity.

According to McNamara, attempts to legislate acceptable speech do little more than sow fear and resentment. “People resent the fact that they’re threatened with prosecution for expressing their views,” he said, highlighting a growing unease across Europe as more individuals feel unable to voice opinions, whether popular or not. He warned that such policies do not alter underlying beliefs, they simply force them underground.

Instead of fostering a more harmonious society, McNamara argued that these measures build resentment. “It doesn’t affect how people think in any way, it just affects what they are afraid to say and what they resent,” he said. He drew a parallel to the United Kingdom, where, he noted, citizens are witnessing elderly individuals facing prosecution for speech offenses, while police resources are increasingly diverted from public safety to policing online expression.

“Hate speech laws are counter-productive. They are also profoundly illiberal. They’ve damaged the UK and we don’t want the same,” he wrote in a message on X, calling on the European Commission to abandon any proceedings against Ireland related to speech legislation.

The EU’s position, outlined in a recent notice from the Commission, faults Ireland and Finland for not yet implementing legal measures to criminalize specific categories of speech, including statements denying historical atrocities or inciting hatred against protected groups. While Ireland has made partial moves, Brussels remains unsatisfied and has issued formal opinions giving the two nations two months to comply before potential escalation to the European Court of Justice.

Despite an earlier attempt to introduce hate speech legislation, one that passed easily through the Dáil, the lower house of the Irish parliament, the Irish government eventually shelved the bill.

Resistance from the Seanad and significant public discontent led to its demise, with many viewing the proposal as a direct threat to civil liberties.

That backlash is widely believed to have influenced the outcome of the March 2024 referendums, where voters rejected two constitutional amendments by wide margins.

McNamara reiterated his stance before the European Parliament, stating plainly that pressing charges against Ireland over its refusal to implement these rules would be “misguided.” He urged the Commission to reconsider, framing the issue as one of national integrity and democratic principles rather than regulatory compliance.

May 24, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »