Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Moldovan Authorities Using Gutsul’s Trial to Intimidate Opposition – Gagauzia leader

Sputnik – 02.07.2025

The head of Moldova’s autonomous region of Gagauzia, Yevgenia Gutsul, told Sputnik that the Moldovan authorities are using the trial against her to intimidate members of the opposition.

Criminal cases have been opened against Gutsul in Moldova for allegedly violating the rules for managing electoral funds during the 2023 autonomy elections, illegally financing the banned Sor party, and forging documents. On Tuesday, Moldovan prosecutor Ghennadi Epure said that the prosecutor’s office was asking a Chisinau court to sentence Gutsul to nine years in prison and ban her from holding public office for five years.

“We assumed from the first day that prosecutors would request such a punishment… Today, Gutsul has become an example of public flogging, a person who will be an example for other members of the opposition so that they do not go against the current government, so that they restrain themselves. We know that the opposition is really strong and sees the problems and gaps that have been created over four years by the current government,” Gutsul said.

She thanked the judge for allowing journalists to attend the hearing and personally observe the “show” that was taking place in court.

The Moldovan authorities have used repressive measures against people who oppose the official course of Chisinau. Gutsul was detained at the Chisinau airport in March. A Chisinau court arrested her for 20 days on charges of violating campaign finance rules and falsifying documents. On April 9, the court placed Gutsul under house arrest for 30 days. Later, Gutsul’s house arrest was extended for another 30 days, until June 13, but on June 11, the measure was prolonged for the third time.

Moldova’s current government, led by President Maia Sandu, is pursuing a consistent course towards rapprochement with the European Union, setting a strategic goal – the country’s accession to the EU by 2030 – but public opinion is deeply divided. In the referendum held in October 2024, EU integration barely scraped by with 50.46% support, largely thanks to votes from Moldovans abroad. Inside the country, only about 46% of voters supported European integration, highlighting the nation’s sharp divide.

July 2, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | Leave a comment

Cracks in the Alliance: Poland reconsidering Ukraine’s cause?

By Uriel Araujo | June 28, 2025

Poland has long been one of Ukraine’s staunchest allies in Europe, offering unwavering support since the beginning of the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian full-scale conflict in 2022. From hosting millions of refugees to providing military aid and championing Kyiv’s integration into Western institutions, Poland’s commitment seemed unshakable to many. Yet, recent developments signal a shift: Poles are growing weary of Ukraine, so to speak, and this “Ukrainian fatigue” threatens to reshape regional dynamics at a time when Kyiv is increasingly isolated.  Albeit a new development, this had been potentially there for a long time.

A recent survey by IBRiS reveals in fact a stark decline in Polish support for the cause of Ukraine’s ambitions. Only 35% of Poles now believe Warsaw should back Ukraine’s bid to join the European Union (EU), with a mere 37% supporting NATO accession. In contrast, 42% oppose Poland’s endorsement of Kyiv’s path to both institutions—a dramatic reversal from 2022, when 85% and 75% favored EU and NATO membership, respectively. Even more concerningly, from Kyiv’s perspective, 46% of Poles now advocate halting or reducing military aid, a significant departure from the early war fervor. These figures reflect a growing sentiment that Poland’s generosity has stretched thin, compounded by domestic pressures and latent historical grievances.

The roots of this shift are multifaceted. Economically, hosting over a million Ukrainian refugees has somewhat strained Poland’s resources. While many Poles initially welcomed their neighbors with open arms, reports of rising anti-Ukrainian sentiment suggest a fraying social fabric. Refugees have faced verbal abuse and discrimination, with some recounting calls to “go back to Ukraine”. This backlash is not merely economic but also deeply rooted in historical tensions.

The legacy of the Volhynia massacres, where the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA)—today celebrated in post-Maidan Ukraine as national heroes—committed atrocities against Poles, remains a festering wound, as I wrote last year. Kyiv’s refusal to allow exhumations of victims and its glorification of figures like Stepan Bandera, a Nazi collaborator, have fueled tensions and Polish resentment. These historical disputes, often downplayed in the West, are not mere academic debates but visceral issues pertaining to the politics of memory, and to identity; they shape public opinion and policy.

Poland’s domestic politics further complicate its foreign policy toward Ukraine. The return of Donald Tusk’s government has prioritized a pro-EU stance, but it faces challenges from a resurgent nationalist right that capitalizes on anti-Ukrainian sentiment also. This internal polarization threatens Tusk’s ability to maintain Poland’s role as a regional leader in supporting Kyiv.

The nationalist revival in Poland mirrors a broader regional trend involving Ukraine’s neighbors, where ethnopolitical frictions play an important role. For instance, Romania and Hungary have both raised concerns over Ukraine’s treatment of their minorities, while Greece has criticized the plight of its ethnic kin under ultranationalist elements in Ukraine (including those with neo-Nazi links). Kyiv’s post-2014 push for a unified national identity, often at the expense of minority rights, has alienated potential allies at a critical juncture. Far from being a mere “Russian talking point”, this is an issue that, to different degrees, hampers Ukraine’s bilateral relations with virtually all of its neighbors—including Slovakia. Writing in 2023,  GLOBSEC think-tank researcher Dmytro Tuzhanskyi  acknowledges that this “ethnic trap” was a challenge of EU accession talks. The “Ukrainian Question” in fact is a threat to the European bloc itself, as I’ve argued before.

The broader geopolitical context further complicates matters for Kyiv. As Western attention pivots to the Middle East, with conflicts in Gaza and beyond dominating headlines, Ukraine risks fading from the global spotlight. The West’s finite resources—both financial and political—are increasingly stretched, leaving Kyiv to compete for attention and aid. NATO’s expansion, once a “holy cow” topic, finally faces some skepticism in Poland and beyond, in the context of an increasingly divided and scandal-ridden NATO.

The alliance’s eastward push, framed as a bulwark against threats, has not delivered the promised stability. Instead, it has entangled member states in a prolonged conflict with no clear resolution, prompting questions about its strategic value. For Poles, the costs of supporting Ukraine’s NATO aspirations—military, economic, and social—are beginning to outweigh the benefits.

This cooling of Polish support is not an isolated phenomenon but is indeed part of a broader regional fatigue. Ukraine’s aggressive nationalist policies, while aimed at consolidating statehood, have sown discord with neighbors who perceive them as chauvinistic, as mentioned. These tensions, often overshadowed by the larger conflict, play a considerable role in regional dynamics, and Poland, despite its strategic partnership with Ukraine, is not immune to such pressures.

The implications of Poland’s shifting stance are profound. As one of Ukraine’s key advocates in the EU and NATO, a less enthusiastic Poland could weaken Kyiv’s bargaining power in Western capitals. The decline in public support for military aid and integration efforts signals a broader reassessment of Poland’s role in the conflict. If this trend continues, Ukraine may find itself increasingly isolated, caught between a distracted West and strained relations with its neighbors. With Trump attempting to shift the Ukrainian “burden” onto Europe, the EU and NATO (already grappling with internal divisions), may hesitate to keep supporting the cause of Kyiv. Warsaw’s “retreat”, if it comes to that, could really have a domino effect.

This is not to suggest that Poland will “abandon” Ukraine outright. Strategic considerations, including the supposed need for a buffer (and its continental ambitions), should likely keep Warsaw engaged. However, the era of unconditional support is clearly over. Poles are reevaluating their priorities, driven by economic burdens, historical grievances, and a nationalist resurgence that demands a reckoning with the past. For Ukraine, the lesson is clear enough: alienating allies through ultranationalist policies and historical revisionism comes at a steep cost. And Kyiv, by all indications cannot afford to lose allies. Poland’s fatigue is thus a warning—not just for Ukraine but for the broader project of NATO and EU expansion, which risks overreaching in a world of competing crises.

Uriel Araujo, Anthropology PhD, is a social scientist specializing in ethnic and religious conflicts, with extensive research on geopolitical dynamics and cultural interactions.

June 28, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Washington’s unprecedented political war on Europe

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – June 27, 2025

A dramatic U.S. political broadside against Europe signals not just strained transatlantic ties, but a deeper ideological rupture — one that could push the EU toward redefining itself as a fully autonomous global actor.

Notwithstanding tensions surrounding US tariffs on the EU, the future and role of NATO, and the conflict in Ukraine, US-EU tensions are escalating to an outright political and ideological rivalry. Washington’s political attacks on European states and their policies mark a significant shift towards the end of transatlantic unity and an opportunity for the EU to rediscover itself.

Washington’s political attacks on Europe

On May 27th, 2025, the US State Department published an essay that could go down in history as Washington’s charge sheet on Europe, expressing the depth of contention and resentment colouring the Trump administration’s ties with the continent currently. However, once set along this path of confrontation, there may not be a return to normal, transatlantic ties in the foreseeable future. The essay begins with narrating the history and depth of US-Europe ties. Immediately afterward, however, it shockingly mentions what was unthinkable until a few years ago. The US State Department sees Europe as a ‘different world’, different from what the US itself (supposedly) represents. To quote the letter: “What endures [in Europe] instead is an aggressive campaign against Western civilization itself. Across Europe, governments have weaponized political institutions against their own citizens and against our shared heritage. Far from strengthening democratic principles, Europe has devolved into a hotbed of digital censorship, mass migration, restrictions on religious freedom, and numerous other assaults on democratic self-governance”.

Liberalism is Bad

It is not just European politics facing Washington’s assault; it is also the underlying liberal political order of Europe itself. The letter accuses Europe of restricting political space and criminalising dissenting political voices. The reason is the failure of liberalism, according to the letter. “Our concerns are not partisan but principled. The suppression of speech, facilitation of mass migration, targeting of religious expression, and undermining of electoral choice threatens the very foundation of the transatlantic partnership. A Europe that replaces its spiritual and cultural roots, that treats traditional values as dangerous relics, and that centralizes power in unaccountable institutions is a Europe less capable of standing firm against external threats and internal decay. To this end, achieving peace in Europe and around the world requires not a rejection of our shared cultural heritage, but a renewal of it”, adds the letter.

This, according to the letter, is not a good sign for the future of US-European ties. It mentions Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is said to have made clear that “Europe’s democratic backsliding not only impacts European citizens but increasingly affects American security and economic ties, along with the free speech rights of American citizens and companies”.

Beyond Mistrust

This letter reveals many things. Most importantly, it reveals the level of mistrust and gap that now divides the transatlantic world. It is no longer mere tactical disagreements over petty issues. This mistrust has at its roots in the political thinking of the Trump administration. Donald Trump understands the EU as a political arrangement created to “screw” the US. He and his political advisers are now trying to unscrew this arrangement to ‘free’ the US from the decades-old political bonds.

For Europeans, this is a major challenge. A report in the UK-based Financial Times said that Europe “is quickly becoming the latest front in a culture war Trump has unleashed against the bastions of liberalism. Most of his targets — elite universities, government agencies such as USAID, public broadcasters — have been domestic. But the Samson essay shows Maga’s ambitions go much further, and the movement is now prepared to deploy far beyond America’s borders”. According to this report, it is not the EU, which is the real threat to the US, but the US is the biggest threat to Europe itself.

How will Europe respond to this attack, which now has both political and cultural underpinnings? There is little denying that Europe needs to grapple with prospects of a potential ‘de-coupling’ from the US.  This de-coupling will create, at least in the immediate future, an urgent need for policy correction on several fronts. From negotiating the trade war with the US—which Europeans will understandably find hard to win—to shared security, the continent needs to change its direction fundamentally from seeking US compliance with the written and unwritten obligations of the transatlantic alliance to totally redefining—and changing—them.

This policy correction requires the EU to do a thorough reassessment of its ties not just with Washington but with Russia and China as well. It needs to reject notions—many of which were fanned out by the Biden administration most recently —of Russia being a security threat and/or Russian expansionism. Instead, it needs to realise that the Trump administration might be its best chance in the last seven decades or so since the end of the Second World War to come out of Washington’s shadow and become a truly autonomous player capable of both defining and defending its interests. In other words, instead of seeking to mend ties with the US to make them ‘normal’, it should further the ‘de-coupling’ and reinforce its continental interests as its own responsibility. There is arguably no alternative for Europe to survive this situation without losing its strength and standing internationally.

June 27, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

Hungary blocks EU accession talks with Ukraine

RT | June 27, 2025

Hungary has vetoed a joint EU statement on Ukraine at the bloc’s Foreign Affairs Council in Brussels, effectively blocking Kiev’s accession talks, according to a communique published on Thursday on the European Council’s website.

The statement, which urged the council to open membership negotiations with Ukraine, was “firmly supported by 26 heads of state” out of 27 EU members, the document read. As unanimous approval is required, talks cannot begin until Hungary reverses its stance. The communique noted that the council will revisit the issue at its next meeting in October.

While the document did not name Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orban confirmed the veto in comments to reporters.

“We stopped Ukraine’s EU accession with the votes of Voks2025, and I needed it, because I was almost swept away by the public anger when I announced that Hungary would not agree to start negotiations with Ukraine,” Orban said, referencing the national referendum which concluded on June 20. More than 2 million Hungarians, or 95% of voters, rejected Ukraine’s EU bid, according to the prime minister.

“I had to remind [the council] that the most important criterion [for accession] is that there is in fact a country,” he said. “There must be a defined identity, borders, a population, a territory, and in the case of Ukraine, none of these apply.”

Ukraine made EU accession a national priority in 2019, formally applying in 2022 shortly after the escalation of its conflict with Russia. The EU granted Kiev candidate status later that year and set a 2030 target for membership.

While Brussels supports the move, critics argue that Ukraine’s institutions and economy are unprepared, and the cost would strain the bloc. Budapest opposes EU membership for Ukraine, warning it could escalate tensions with Russia and burden EU taxpayers with decades of military aid. Alongside Hungary, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico and Polish officials have raised concerns. A recent IBRiS poll shows only 35% of Poles support Ukraine’s EU bid, down from 85% in 2022.

Moscow strongly opposes Ukraine joining NATO, but had previously taken a neutral stance on its EU ambitions, with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov saying in March that Ukraine has the “sovereign right” to join if the bloc remains focused on economics. However, with Brussels ramping up defense spending, Russian officials have recently grown critical. Peskov earlier this week called EU militarization “rabid,” while former President Dmitry Medvedev said the bloc has become “no less of a threat” to Russia than NATO.

“This is a politicized, globalist, and fiercely Russophobic organization,” Medvedev wrote on Telegram on Wednesday. “Thus, the so-called ‘Ukraine in the EU’ is a danger to our country.”

June 27, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

EU nation to veto new Russia sanctions – PM

RT | June 26, 2025

Slovakia will block the EU’s 18th sanctions package against Russia unless Brussels resolves its concerns over the planned phase-out of Russian energy, Prime Minister Robert Fico has announced. Although the energy measures are set to be presented as trade legislation – thus needing only a qualified majority for approval – Fico argues that they relate to sanctions and should be treated as such.

The issue stems from the European Commission’s RePowerEU plan, which aims to eliminate all Russian energy imports by 2028. The initiative is due to be discussed at the EU Foreign Affairs Council in Brussels, alongside the new sanctions package, which mostly targets Russia’s energy and financial sectors. Fico has insisted the measures against Russian energy actually fall under the bloc’s sanctions regime and should be unanimously approved. Fico said Slovakia will request a postponement of the vote and, if denied, will vote against it.

“As for tomorrow’s vote, Slovakia will not vote on the 18th sanctions package,” he stated at a parliamentary committee meeting on Thursday. “We consider it to be one package that includes RePowerEU, and we believe that unless the fundamental issues are resolved, we cannot adopt any further sanctions.”

He warned that the regulation would endanger Slovakia’s energy security and cause price hikes. He also noted that Brussels has yet to provide answers on how it would compensate for rising gas prices or handle potential arbitration with Gazprom. Fico warned that if Slovakia breaks its long-term supply contract with the Russian energy giant, it could face up to €20 billion ($23 billion) in penalties.

“Let’s take this seriously. Slovakia has gone from being a country at the beginning of the pipe to a country at the end of the pipe…There may be shortages, prices will go up… RePowerEU is harmful,” he said, calling the initiative “ideological nonsense.”

Hungary has also voiced opposition to the plan. Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said Budapest and Bratislava had jointly blocked the package when it was discussed at the foreign ministers’ meeting earlier this week, warning that the proposed phase-out would “destroy Hungary’s energy security” and sharply raise utility costs. He signaled that Hungary also planned to vote against the new sanctions package.

Moscow has repeatedly condemned sanctions as illegal and self-defeating, particularly those targeting energy, noting how energy prices in the EU surged after the initial measures against Russia were imposed in 2022. Commenting on the sanctions debates, Kremlin investment envoy Kirill Dmitriev praised Slovakia and Hungary on X for “doing what Brussels won’t: fighting to keep the EU globally competitive.”

June 26, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

Orbán says Hungary will block Ukraine’s EU accession after 95 percent vote against it

By Thomas Brooke | Remix News | June 26, 2025

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has declared that Hungary will not support Ukraine’s accession to the European Union, citing an overwhelming mandate from a national vote in which 95 percent of participants opposed Ukrainian membership.

Speaking in Brussels, Orbán revealed that 2,168,431 Hungarian citizens voted against Ukraine joining the EU, out of a total of 2,278,000 valid votes cast. Just 5 percent supported the idea.

“I came here with a strong mandate. My voice has grown deeper — after all, I will speak today in the voice of more than 2 million Hungarians when I say during negotiations that Hungary does not support Ukraine’s EU membership. These are the stark facts,” he said.

Orbán stressed that Hungary cannot be circumvented in this process, noting that EU accession requires unanimous approval from all member states. “Even to open a negotiation cluster, unanimity is required — and that’s not there. So, this won’t happen. Nothing can happen today that would have any legal effect on Ukraine’s accession to the EU,” he said. “People can make statements and talk, but the EU will not have a common position, because Hungary does not support it. Those who disagree with us — 26 or however many there are — can say what they want, that’s also freedom.”

The Hungarian leader also warned that admitting Ukraine into the bloc would mean importing the conflict with Russia into the heart of Europe. “The problem is the war. If we were to integrate Ukraine into the European Union, we would be integrating the war along with it. And we don’t want to be in a community with a country that is at war, which poses an imminent danger to us,” he said. “Because if the EU includes a country at war, then the EU is at war, and we don’t want that.”

Hungary is one of the few EU member states whose government appears to be acting on the popular opinion of its voters when it comes to Ukraine’s EU membership.

A survey published this week from Poland showed just 35 percent of Poles support Ukraine’s accession to the EU, with 42 percent opposing its membership, yet Poland’s liberal government under Donald Tusk continues to adhere to the will of Brussels and Kyiv.

Similarly, polling conducted last year in Germany found 52 percent of citizens were not in favor, with an EU-wide average of 60 percent opposing Kyiv’s accession to the bloc.

Even Slovakia, which is frequently aligned with Hungary on matters related to Ukraine — in particular its opposition to arms sales and its support for immediate peace talks — has green-lighted talks on EU membership.

Speaking earlier this month, Prime Minister Robert Fico told journalists, “The Slovak government wishes Ukraine European development. If Ukraine wants to join the EU, this is its sovereign decision, and we support this decision.”

While he indicated that Kyiv was not yet ready to join, he expressed his support for preliminary accession talks to commence.

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

Europe bears ‘share of the blame’ for Israel’s attack on Iran – Russia

RT | June 24, 2025

European leaders pressured the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to issue a negative assessment of Iran and “bear a share of the blame” for Israel’s attack on the Islamic Republic, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said.

Israel attacked Iran shortly after the UN nuclear watchdog declared Tehran to be in breach of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), despite Iran’s claims its uranium enrichment program is peaceful. The US joined the Jewish state’s air campaign to strike Tehran’s nuclear sites shortly before Washington announced a ceasefire had been reached between Israel and Iran.

Speaking at the Primakov Forums meeting in Moscow on Tuesday, Lavrov accused European leaders of pressuring the IAEA’s director, General Rafael Grossi, into publishing an accusatory report on Iran.

“The Europeans have taken a purely neocolonial position… They were actively preparing Grossi so that he would put the most ambiguously negative formulations into his report,” the top diplomat said.

The UK, France, Germany, and later, the US ran with the IAEA assessment and pushed a resolution through the IAEA Board of Governors that condemned Iran for allegedly violating the NPT, he added.

“A few days later, Israel launched its attacks,” Lavrov said.

The Europeans bear a share of the blame for this happening and for the fact that such attacks were carried out.

This highlights that the West “exerts very serious influence on international organizations, and has even privatized them to an extent,” Lavrov said, adding that most such bodies are no longer “guided by the requirement of impartiality.”

Weeks before the escalation, Reuters cited anonymous diplomats as saying that Western powers were pressuring the IAEA to declare Tehran in breach of its NPT obligations, at the height of US-Iran nuclear talks.

Tehran has since accused Grossi of taking sides and turning a blind eye to Israel’s attacks on Iran’s nuclear energy facilities. Multiple IAEA resolutions state that any use of force against peaceful nuclear facilities is illegal under international law.

Moscow has condemned Israeli and US attacks against Iran as “illegitimate.” The recent ceasefire, announced by US President Donald Trump on Tuesday, “can and should be welcomed,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. Moscow hopes that it “proves to be sustainable,” he added.

June 24, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Dissatisfaction with the old elites is growing in Europe

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

Lately, it has become increasingly evident that European citizens are growing weary of their political elites and the entrenched system of rotating figureheads who perpetuate the same policies year after year. The political establishment exhibits a rigid adherence to outdated approaches, and their arrogance – manifest in a belief that they operate above democratic accountability – is glaringly apparent in their mainstream media channels, which are themselves staffed by the same elite journalists who have dominated the airwaves for decades.

Whether it is their reckless plans to fund military escalations through EU citizens’ taxes – such as the proposed five percent increase in NATO spending, justified by the unfounded fear of a Russian invasion – or the diversion of public funds to arm Israel, a state which commits genocide against the citizens of Gaza and which has now escalated to bombing nuclear facilities in Iran alongside its perpetual war partner, the United States, the disconnect between rulers and ruled has never been clearer.

Recently, widespread outrage erupted among citizens (and even some alternative politicians) over statements by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who declared that Israel and Ukraine were performing the Drecksarbeit (“dirty work”) for Germany and Europe. The remark was so brazen that even Germany’s state broadcaster, ZDF – part of the mainstream media apparatus – reacted with shock. Beyond confirming what many already suspected, this episode laid bare Germany’s geopolitical stance 80 years after the end of World War II.

“It would be good if this mullah regime came to an end,” Chancellor Merz asserted in an ARD interview, emphatically defending Israel’s military actions while insisting Iran must never acquire nuclear weapons. “Germany is also affected by the mullah regime.”

This rhetoric is emblematic of the German elite’s worldview. Merz is no outlier; his stance reflects the consensus within his party, the CDU – a so-called Altpartei with roots stretching back to the Nazi era. Many of its former members held high-ranking positions in the Third Reich, only to seamlessly reintegrate into postwar governance as if history had never happened. Merz’s own grandfather, the mayor of Brilon, was a card-carrying member of the NSDAP.

The Netherlands fares no better, currently mired in political chaos. Governments collapse with alarming frequency, yet power merely circulates among the same old parties, all aligned on fundamental policies – particularly in foreign affairs. Take the CDA, a party that dominated Dutch politics for decades. Its most famous figure, Joseph Luns, served as Foreign Minister across multiple cabinets from 1952 to 1971. Less known is his membership in the NSB – the Dutch Nazi party – in 1934. He was, like Mark Rutte, Secretary General of NATO, and incidentally the longest-serving Secretary General of NATO! But actually he was complicit in colonial crimes, including endorsing the 300-year exploitation of Indonesia, which only gained sovereignty in 1948.

Many Dutch citizens hoped for change when Geert Wilders’ far-right PVV ascended to power in 2024. Yet they were deceived once more: the PVV has proven to be little more than an extension of the neoliberal VVD, augmented by ultra-Zionist fanaticism and overt anti-Arab, anti-Islam vitriol. Historically, such a platform would have been labeled an apartheid party – akin to South Africa’s Dutch-derived Nasionale Party. The parallels are undeniable, though the targets have shifted: where Afrikaner nationalism oppressed Black South Africans, today’s Zionists, backed by Europe and the U.S., are exterminating Palestinians.

In their hatred of Islam, the PVV and its ilk fail to grasp that they are fueling the very refugee crises they claim to oppose. War breeds displacement, as Europe witnessed in 2015. Meanwhile, ostensibly left-wing parties like the Dutch PvdA-GL rely on Muslim migrants as a voting bloc, knowing they will never support the right. Thus, the cycle perpetuates itself – a self-reinforcing loop that must be broken.

The situation is equally dire elsewhere in Europe. In France, the ruling elite has resorted to banning opposition figures, even imprisoning them. Marine Le Pen, convicted of embezzling EU funds, received a four-year sentence (two suspended) and a five-year electoral ban. Though she avoids jail via ankle monitoring, the precedent is chillingly reminiscent of NSDAP tactics – a softer fascism, but fascism nonetheless.

Belgium mirrors this decay. After two years without a government, it banned the Flemish nationalist Vlaams Blok in 2004 for racism, only for the party to rebrand as Vlaams Belang. Now, its leader, Dries Van Langenhove, faces imprisonment. Meanwhile, the Baltics embrace open fascism: demolishing Soviet monuments, persecuting Russian speakers, and hosting marches glorifying locals who joined the Wehrmacht and SS.

These snapshots – from Western Europe to the Baltics – paint a disturbing portrait. The nations that founded NATO and the EU remain fascist at their core, cloaked in modernist rhetoric. What passes for left-wing politics in Europe today is, in reality, fascist leftism: a push for a genderless, LGBTQIA+-dominated society that paradoxically depends on Muslim immigration to marginalize the right. At its heart lies a new state atheism, with traditional Christianity supplanted by woke dogma and Russia cast as the arch-enemy precisely because it upholds the values Europe has abandoned.

The so-called right-wing and centrist parties, meanwhile, champion family and Judeo-Christian identity (never Islam), though many are merely Zionist proxies serving U.S.-Israeli interests. While they oppose the Ukraine war and advocate diplomacy with Russia, they misunderstand Moscow’s pluralism – its 25-million-strong Muslim community defies their binary worldview.

This is the vicious cycle dooming Europe: both political flanks, beholden to elites who rotate between corporate boardrooms and ministerial offices, are destroying the continent. Obsessed with maintaining a unipolar colonial order, they trail behind the U.S. into endless wars, oblivious that China, India, and Russia have already eclipsed them.

Europe, still occupied by U.S. bases, risks becoming another Ukraine – a vassal state. Its leaders, like Ursula von der Leyen, conflate democracy with fascism, having never fully reckoned with their Nazi past. But dissent is growing. Citizens are awakening to the totalitarian reality of an EU where they have no voice.

The time for change is overdue. Whether through a European Spring or a new Renaissance, the process has begun. Ironically, Russia’s Special Military Operation – however unintended – has accelerated this reckoning on both sides of the Atlantic.

June 24, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Islamophobia, Militarism, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

EU member states block new Russia sanctions

RT | June 23, 2025

Hungary and Slovakia have blocked the European Union’s 18th sanctions package against Moscow, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has announced. The bloc’s proposal to cut Russian energy imports would deal a major blow to his country’s energy security, he explained.

Budapest has opposed EU sanctions on Russian energy since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, saying the imports are vital to its national interests. The country has a long-term contract with Russia’s Gazprom and receives the bulk of its oil and gas from Russia. Slovakia has also voiced similar concerns.

Speaking at a press conference following a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels on Monday, Szijjarto said that “we, together with Slovakia, prevented the adoption of the [18th] sanctions package today,” which would mostly have focused on Russia’s energy sector.

The diplomat clarified that Budapest and Bratislava vetoed the sanctions package because in separate trade legislation, Brussels has proposed phasing out all remaining Russian gas flows to the EU by the end of 2027. The minister argued that this would severely undermine Budapest’s energy security and lead to a sharp spike in energy costs for Hungarians.

”We are not willing to have the Hungarian people pay the price for supporting Ukraine,” Szijjarto insisted.

The EU-wide phasing-out plan that Szijjarto referred to was announced by EU Energy Commissioner Dan Jorgensen last Tuesday, with the backing of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

The proposal, which is currently opposed by Hungary, Austria and Slovakia, and reportedly by Italy, is expected to be introduced as trade legislation, which under EU rules does not require unanimity among bloc members to become law, but merely the support of at least 15 of the EU’s 27 member states.

Commenting on the plan, Russian presidential envoy Kirill Dmitriev, said that “EU Commission bureaucrats seem obsessed – with making the EU as uncompetitive as possible on the global stage.”

While pipeline flows have dropped sharply since 2022, EU imports of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) have soared. Russia supplied 17.5% of the bloc’s LNG in 2024, trailing only the US at 45.3%, according to industry data. France, Spain, and Belgium accounted for 85% of the EU’s LNG imports from the sanctioned country, according to the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA).

Russia maintains that it is still a reliable energy supplier, while denouncing Western sanctions and trade restrictions targeting its exports as illegal under international law.

June 24, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

Europe’s risky war on Russia’s ‘shadow fleet’

By Anatol Lieven | Responsible Statecraft | June 16, 2025

The European Union’s latest moves (as part of its 17th package of sanctions against Russia declared in May) to target much more intensively Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” of oil tankers and other vessels illustrate the danger that, as long as the Ukraine war continues, so will the risk of an incident that will draw NATO and the EU into a direct military clash with Russia.

The EU sanctions involve bans on access to the ports, national waters and maritime economic zones of EU states. Ships that enter these waters risk seizure and confiscation. It does not appear that Washington was consulted about this decision, despite the obvious risks to the U.S.

As part of this strategy, on May 15, an Estonian patrol boat attempted to stop and inspect a tanker in the Gulf of Finland. Russia sent up a fighter jet that flew over the Estonian vessel (allegedly briefly trespassing into Estonian waters), and the Estonians backed off — this time. In January, the German navy seized a Panamanian-flagged tanker, the Eventin, in the Baltic after its engines failed and it drifted into German territorial waters.

Sweden has now announced that starting on July 1 its navy will stop, inspect and potentially seize all suspect vessels transiting its exclusive economic zone, and is deploying the Swedish air force to back up this threat. Since the combined maritime economic zones of Sweden and the three Baltic states cover the whole of the central Baltic Sea, this amounts to a virtual threat to cut off all Russian trade exiting Russia via the Baltic — which would indeed be a very serious economic blow to Moscow.

It would also threaten to cut off Russia’s exclave of Kaliningrad, which is surrounded by Poland, from access to Russia by sea.

This is the kind of action that has traditionally led to war. The Swedish assumption seems to be that the Russian navy and air force in the Baltic are now so weak — and so surrounded by NATO territory — that there is nothing Moscow can do about this. However, it is very unlikely that the Swedes would take this step unless they also believe that in the event of a clash, Washington will come to Sweden’s defense — even though the EU and Swedish decisions were made without U.S. approval and are not strictly covered by NATO’s Article 5 commitment.

And despite all the hysterical language about Russia being “at war” with NATO countries, these moves by the EU and Sweden are also based on an assumption that Russia will not in fact lose its temper and react with military force. European policymakers might however want to think about a number of things: for example, what would the U.S. do if ships carrying U.S. cargo were intercepted by foreign warships? We know perfectly well that the U.S. would blow the warships concerned out of the water and declare that it had done so in defense of the sacred rule of free navigation — in which the EU also professes to believe.

EU leaders, and admirals, should also spend some time on Russian social media, and read the incessant attacks on the Putin administration by hardliners arguing precisely that Moscow has been far too soft and restrained in its response to Western provocations, and that this restraint has encouraged the West to escalate more and more. Such hardliners (especially within the security forces) are by far the greatest internal political threat that Putin faces.

It is important to note in this regard that moves to damage Russia’s “shadow fleet” have not been restricted to sanctions. In recent months there have been a string of attacks on such vessels in the Mediterranean with limpet mines and other explosive devices — developments that have been virtually ignored by Western media.

In December 2024, the Russian cargo ship Ursa Major sank off Libya after an explosion in which two crewmembers were killed. The Reuters headline reporting these attacks was rather characteristic: “Three tankers damaged by blasts in Mediterranean in the last month, causes unknown, sources say.” Unknown, really? Who do we think were the likely perpetrators? Laotian special forces? Martians? And what are European governments doing to investigate these causes?

If the Russians do sink a Swedish or Estonian warship, the Trump administration will face a terribly difficult decision on how to respond to a crisis that is not of its own choosing: intervene and risk a direct war with Russia, or stand aside and ensure a deep crisis with Europe. The U.S. administration would therefore be both wise and entirely within its rights to state publicly that it does not endorse and will not help to enforce this decision.

Washington also needs — finally — to pay attention to what the rest of the world thinks about all this. The overwhelming majority of senators who are proposing to impose 500% tariffs on any country that buys Russian energy have apparently not realized that one of the two biggest countries in this category is India — now universally regarded in Washington as a vital U.S. partner in Asia. And now America’s European allies are relying on U.S. support to seize ships providing that energy to India.

The U.S. administration would also be wise to warn European countries that if this strategy leads to maritime clashes with Russia, they will have to deal with the consequences themselves. Especially given the new risk of war with Iran, the last thing Washington needs now is a new flare-up of tension with Moscow necessitating major U.S. military deployments to Europe. And the last thing the world economy needs are moves likely to lead to a still greater surge in world energy prices.

European governments and establishments seem to have lost any ability to analyze the possible wider consequences of their actions. So — not for the first time — America will have to do their thinking for them.

Anatol Lieven is Director of the Eurasia Program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. He was formerly a professor at Georgetown University in Qatar and in the War Studies Department of King’s College London.

June 21, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Video | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Estonia worsening anti-Russian measures

By Lucas Leiroz | June 20, 2025

The Baltic countries continue to escalate their anti-Russian measures, taking all sorts of irresponsible actions to harm Russian citizens both inside and outside their borders. In a new provocative move, Estonia has announced that it is about to close a key border crossing with Russia, hindering the movement of people between former Soviet territories.

Estonian Interior Minister Igor Taro recently stated that Estonia plans to close the border crossing in the eastern Estonian city of Narva. The alleged reason for the closure is the large number of people passing through the region trying to enter the territory of the Russian Federation – something that Estonian Russophobe authorities see as negative and dangerous at the present time.

Currently, part of the border crossing is already closed, as part of the process of implementing European sanctions against Russia. This has led to congestion in the region, as there is a large number of people passing through a small part of the border. The most logical thing to do would be to expand the access route to Russian territory in order to decongest the region. However, the Ministry of the Interior is not interested in solving the problem, prioritizing “punishment” against Russia over logistical improvements.

Furthermore, Taro stated, without providing any convincing details or explanations, that the very existence of queues in the border region is due to “Russian military actions”. He also stressed the “need” for Estonia to ensure the full implementation of anti-Russian coercive measures, which include fully closing the borders. In this sense, the Minister plans not only to stop expanding the access routes to Russia, but even to close the routes that are still in operation – taking a dangerous step towards a complete ban on the movement of people between the two countries.

“Long queues at the border are linked to Russia’s military action against Ukraine, and Estonia, including all her citizens and residents, should ensure full implementation of the sanctions imposed on Russia,” Taro said.

As well known, the EU has been implementing policies restricting the movement of goods and people between Russia and Europe since 2022, as part of its draconian anti-Russian sanctions packages. Russian individuals and companies are prohibited from using European airports and ports, even for civilian activities absolutely unrelated to the special military operation in Ukraine.

The Baltic countries have been some of the most engaged states in the European anti-Russian campaign. Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia have advanced measures to ban the Russian language and culture, as well as to erase the Soviet past and revise their history – absolving the Nazis and condemning the heroic role of the USSR in World War II. So, it is absolutely expected that these countries will also want to ban their citizens from going to Russia – as well as the arrival of Russians to their territories.

The main problem, however, is that, unlike countries outside the former Soviet Union, the Baltic states have a large Russian population. In Estonia, almost a fifth of the population are ethnic Russians. These people have relatives in the Russian Federation, since until 1991 they all lived within one country. Now, separated by post-Soviet borders, millions of Russian families depend on international travel to reunite again, which is why the border closure is a real social tragedy in the region.

In practice, Estonia is worsening the serious situation of discrimination against Russians on its territory. Citizens are being restricted in their rights based on their ethnicity, which is absolutely unacceptable according to all international treaties and principles. Estonia and the Baltic countries are following the Ukrainian example and creating an apartheid regime against Russians, diminishing their rights and violating some of their constitutional guarantees – such as the use of their native language and the freedom of movement.

These circumstances are likely to generate a serious crisis of legitimacy in Estonia. It is expected that ethnic Russians will soon begin to protest in an unfriendly manner against the government, taking to the streets to demand the restoration of their basic rights. Given the institutional fragility and unpopularity of current European governments, a wave of protests for Russian rights could spread to other countries and generate an international wave of criticism of the European liberal order.

Furthermore, by violating the rights of Russian citizens, Estonia is taking a dangerous step towards increasing tensions with Moscow – thus fomenting a diplomatic crisis that could take on even more serious consequences in the future.

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.

June 20, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

How the EU Manufactures Misinformation with Norman Lewis

corbettreport | June 18, 2025

WATCH ON: ARCHIVE / BITCHUTE ODYSEE / RUMBLE SUBSTACK or DOWNLOAD THE MP4

Dr Norman Lewis is a writer, speaker and consultant on innovation and technology and a visiting research fellow for MCC Brussels. Today he joins us to discuss his new report, “Manufacturing Misinformation: The EU-funded propaganda war against free speech,” detailing how the European Commission is attempting to regulate the boundaries of legitimate public debate in Europe through a covert campaign of linguistic control and censorship.


SHOW NOTES:

Manufacturing Misinformation: The EU-funded propaganda war against free speech

The Digital Services Act

European Democracy Shield

EU AI Act: first regulation on artificial intelligence

Digital Services Act Transparency Database

June 19, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Video | , | Leave a comment