Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Le Pen’s verdict exposes Western Europe’s dangerous trend

The EU’s repression is backfiring spectacularly

By Vitaly Ryumshin | Gazeta.ru | April 4, 2025

What’s happening in Western Europe is increasingly raising uncomfortable questions. On March 31, a French court found Marine Le Pen guilty in the so-called “fictitious aides” case, sentencing her to four years in prison and banning her from running for office for five years. Remarkably, the ban took effect immediately, without even waiting for an appeal.

The court’s decision has proved highly controversial, and not only among Russians, who typically see Le Pen as part of Europe’s Moscow-friendly political forces. Even French political figures have expressed bewilderment. Given Le Pen’s position as the frontrunner in the 2027 presidential elections, her conviction has undeniably taken on political dimensions. Some French politicians have already called upon President Emmanuel Macron to pardon Le Pen in order to preserve the face of the country’s “democracy.” Prime Minister François Bayrou reportedly expressed alarm, admitting privately to aides, “France is the only country that does this.”

But Bayrou is mistaken in believing France stands alone. Suppressing opposition figures through tactics reminiscent of hybrid autocracies is becoming the latest trend in EU states. Recently, Romania spectacularly canceled the first round of its presidential election, later jailing Calin Georgescu, the leading candidate.

Germany seems likely to follow suit. The emerging coalition government between the CDU/CSU and SPD is drafting legislation that could bar anyone convicted of “incitement to hatred” from political activity. Though not openly stated, this measure unmistakably targets the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD).

The reason behind this crackdown lies deeper than any immediate legal disputes. Far-right parties across the bloc have increasingly challenged the European integration project itself. These political forces have openly called for slowing down or completely dismantling the EU in favor of returning to traditional nation-state structures. While some of these right-wing parties, including Le Pen’s National Rally and Germany’s AfD, have moved toward the political center in order to broaden their appeal, their reputation as “destroyers of Europe’s garden” remains entrenched.

Western European bureaucrats and established national elites are deeply unsettled by the growing popularity of these parties. Having benefited tremendously from the EU’s expansion and centralization for over three decades, they are unwilling to surrender their privileged positions without a fight. It’s as if they feel the ground shifting beneath their feet and will do anything necessary to preserve their status quo.

Yet here lies the paradox: the more the EU establishment struggles to remain in power through repressive measures, the quicker its authority and legitimacy erode. The bloc’s foundational identity rests on liberal democratic ideals, institutional sanctity, and the rule of law. When Brussels arbitrarily removes opposition candidates, it saws off the very branch upon which its entire elite sits.

The surge of Europe’s far right has not emerged in a vacuum. Its popularity directly stems from the existing EU leadership’s chronic inefficiency and inability to respond adequately to today’s challenges. Attempting to remove right-wing politicians from the playing field is not a solution. Discontented voters will inevitably find alternative ways to express their frustrations – likely even more fiercely once their grievances are compounded by deep mistrust of the political establishment.

Romania’s recent experience provides a vivid example. After the scandal involving the canceled election, Calin Georgescu’s popularity surged dramatically – from 23% to 40%. Once Georgescu was banned from running, voters swiftly pivoted to another far-right candidate, George-Nicolae Simion, who is now leading the race. This scenario seems almost comical, but could soon be replicated across France, Germany, and other EU states where authorities are excessively targeting opposition figures.

Western European leaders appear somewhat aware they’re playing a dangerous game. However, their conclusions and reactions to this crisis remain fundamentally flawed. EU bureaucrats try to unify the continent by exploiting citizens’ fears – fear of global instability, fear of military threats, fear of economic chaos. Their agendas emphasize support for Ukraine, joint military initiatives, and endless symbolic summits. Billions of euros are readily allocated to armament and defense.

Yet none of these actions address the real issues underlying the bloc’s deepening political divisions – economic stagnation, deteriorating living standards, mass immigration challenges, and declining trust in traditional governance structures. The EU’s refusal or inability to tackle these fundamental problems continues to fuel voter disillusionment.

Ultimately, the more the EU establishment clings desperately to power through authoritarian methods, the faster its cherished structures crumble. Until Western Europe’s leaders face reality and address genuine citizen concerns, this spiral of distrust and repression will only accelerate, making the EU’s future increasingly uncertain.

This article was first published by the online newspaper Gazeta.ru and was translated and edited by the RT team

April 6, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , | Leave a comment

Shameless: How an ‘EU aspirant’ silences opponents and threatens them with jail

Yevgenia Gutsul escorted by police after a court hearing in Chisinau, March 28, 2025. © Sputnik/Dmitrij Osmatesko
By Farhad Ibragimov | RT | April 3, 2025

On March 25, Evgenia Gutsul, the elected leader of Gagauzia, was detained at Chisinau International Airport while attempting to leave Moldova. A court later ordered her to remain in custody for 20 days.

Officially, the charges relate to alleged illegal campaign financing tied to the Sor Party and an organized criminal group. But while legal justifications were cited, the move immediately raised red flags about political motivations behind the arrest.

This incident sets a significant and troubling precedent: never before has an elected leader of an autonomous region in Moldova been taken into custody. Unlike President Maia Sandu – whose reelection last year remains controversial and debated in Moldovan society – Gutsul secured a clear and commanding win in Gagauzia. Her arrest reads less like a legal procedure and more like a strategic attempt to intimidate dissenting voices, especially as Chisinau ramps up its drive toward European integration.

Still, the confrontation wasn’t exactly unexpected. For months, Sandu’s administration has shown growing discomfort with Gutsul’s visibility and political outreach, which extended beyond regional issues and increasingly captured national attention. Viewed in context, her arrest seems like part of a broader power struggle playing out at the highest levels of Moldovan politics.

A leader under pressure – and defiant

Since her historic election in 2023 as the first female Bashkan (leader) of Gagauzia, Gutsul has been in near-constant conflict with Moldova’s central government. Her criticisms of Chisinau’s policies have been sharp and frequent. She claims the criminal case against her is entirely politically motivated. Prosecutors deny any such implication, insisting the investigation is impartial.

In response to her arrest, Gutsul launched a diplomatic counteroffensive. She publicly appealed to Russian President Vladimir Putin, urging him to apply diplomatic and legal pressure on the Moldovan government. Similar appeals followed to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan – citing a decades-old autonomy agreement signed with Turkey’s mediation – and to US President Donald Trump, whom she described as a global leader capable of preventing internal conflict in Moldova.

Her messages struck a chord in Moldova. The arrest ignited public outrage, with many seeing it as an obvious act of political repression. Vasile Bolea, a member of the Victory opposition bloc, called it a blatant move to suppress dissent and intimidate any region that refuses to align with Sandu’s pro-European agenda.

Gagauzia: the thorn in Chisinau’s side

This is not an isolated incident – it’s part of a longstanding power struggle between the Moldovan center and the autonomous region of Gagauzia. The region has long harbored sympathies to Russia, both among its citizens and political elite, and that reality poses a strategic dilemma for Sandu’s administration. Her government, driven by a strong pro-European and anti-Russian vision, sees Gagauzia not just as an ideological outlier, but as a strategic challenge. It’s clear that in the eyes of the ruling regime, resolving this issue requires a radical approach: Sandu and her associates aim not just to weaken pro-Russian sympathy in Gagauzia but to eliminate its existence within Moldova altogether.

Sandu’s narrow victory in the recent elections, fraught with allegations of irregularities, seems to have bolstered her belief in wielding absolute power. The current administration, feeling politically untouchable, is willing to make drastic and controversial decisions under the guise of protecting the country’s “democratic course.” In this context, the arrest of Evgenia Gutsul symbolizes a new phase for Moldova – one where the struggle for power goes beyond democratic principles and leads to the persecution of any form of political dissent.

The similarities to neighboring Romania are hard to ignore. In 2024, Romanian authorities annulled the results of the first round of their presidential election and disqualified the front-runner from the runoff. Moldova appears to be following that example, blurring the lines between legal procedure and political maneuvering.

Pre-election power moves and geopolitical games

Gutsul’s arrest comes at a critical political moment. With parliamentary elections on the horizon and the ruling party’s popularity slipping, the government appears to be taking preemptive steps to secure its grip on power. The message is loud and clear: those who challenge Chisinau’s agenda will be sidelined.

The situation also fits into a wider geopolitical context. Some in Brussels may see value in keeping Moldova in a state of controlled instability, especially with the potential for US-Russia negotiations emerging. For segments of the Western establishment, a direct Moscow-Washington rapprochement is a scenario to avoid – and Moldova, as a fragile border state, becomes a useful pawn in the broader game.

Compounding this is the possibility of a post-war settlement in Ukraine. Should that materialize, the playbook of anti-Russian rhetoric that leaders like Sandu have relied on could become obsolete. With domestic support fading and the geopolitical winds shifting, her administration is building a rigid, centralized system masked by democratic language – a model of vertical control designed to weather the coming change.

When the law becomes political

Moldova’s legal system hasn’t done much to counter the growing skepticism. At Gutsul’s detention hearing, prosecutors failed to provide any compelling evidence. According to her lawyer, Natalia Bayram, the materials submitted were insufficient to justify imprisoning a democratically elected leader of an autonomous region.

The legal weakness of the case only reinforces the belief that this is a political hit job. Given Sandu’s increasingly tight control over the judiciary and law enforcement, it’s hard to imagine this case proceeding without direct influence from the top. Every sign points to coordination at the highest level.

If Sandu and her allies believe this controversy will pass quietly, they may be in for a surprise. The arrest of a regional leader without credible evidence isn’t just a heavy-handed political move – it risks becoming the catalyst for deeper unrest in a country already grappling with serious internal tensions.

Farhad Ibragimov – lecturer at the Faculty of Economics at RUDN University, visiting lecturer at the Institute of Social Sciences of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

April 3, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , , | Leave a comment

Merz against Germans and Europeans

By Ricardo Nuno Costa – New Eastern Outlook – April 1, 2025

The last session of the Bundestag under the Scholz government paved the way for the extraordinary injection of 500 billion euros into the German economy, with the votes of the CDU/CSU, the SPD and the Greens. Behind this special fund, which involved an amendment to the Basic Law, is an attempt to revive the country’s economy, which has been stagnating since it declared economic war on its biggest energy supplier, Russia, in 2022. More worryingly, the easing of the debt brake that has now been approved does not set any future limits, which could lead Berlin into a debt spiral. For now, a week later, there is already talk of additional spending of at least 350 billion euros on this package. The decades-long brand image of German ‘fiscal discipline’, of the transparency of its economy and of Germany as the continent’s safeguard of monetary stability is thus falling apart.

The new chancellor, Friedrich Merz, who has always sold the image of being a ‘frugal’ and ‘rigorous’ politician and has vehemently opposed any change to the debt ceiling, is the mastermind and the one who will effectively direct the implementation of this fund over the next 12 years, thus being able, as head of government, to take out loans for public investments or direct payments from the federal budget. Calculated, the amount comes to a staggering 42 billion extra euros a year, almost a tenth more than the last federal budget. The money will flow into the German economy and generate opportunities, but at what cost?

Merz was for years the head of BlackRock Deutschland, the German branch of the world’s largest ‘shadow bank’, the asset manager BlackRock. In 2020, in order to run for the head of CDU/CSU), he formally stepped down from his position at the New York giant. Now, the opposition (and even members of the current grand coalition with the SPD) believe that the Chancellor wants to continue lobbying for the interests of his bosses on the other side of the Atlantic and combine Germany’s rearmament projects with an infrastructure programme from which BlackRock and the German arms giant Rheinmetall will make juicy profits at the expense of the public purse. MP and former parliamentary leader of the Social Democrats, Rolf Mützenich, accuses Merz of wanting to do business with foreign and security policy by keeping Germany under the thumb of the US military industrial complex. It was the best way he could find to ‘appease Donald Trump’, the SPD MP recently told Spiegel. So it’s clear that there’s no cut with the US, despite all the murmuring and outrage that Trump’s election has caused among a frustrated European elite, who blindly bet everything on Kamala Harris.

From austerity to debt

The Federal Republic, despite its reputation for austerity, is a champion of ‘special funds’. From the Marshall Plan to the country’s opaque and hurried reunification process, Berlin has always found ways to bypass legality or even the rules of the common market in order to keep its public accounts apparently healthy. The current special fund is by far the largest of the 29 previously approved. The Financial Markets Stabilisation Fund (200 billion in 2008), Covid (150 billion in 2020), the Armed Forces (100 billion in 2022) and the ‘energy crisis’ (200 billion in 2022) were the biggest. Through these extra budgets, Berlin has been hiding the true scale of its public debt and budget deficit for the last 20 years. Now things are clearer and many questions arise.

Germany is Europe’s largest economy, but it has been contracting for three years. The Berlin government actually has more liquidity than ever because it is taxing its citizens more than ever, but it needs to use these tricks to approve potentially unnecessary and exaggerated plans. In the current conditions of de-industrialisation, does Germany have the capacity to generate the physical wealth to get the economy growing again, or will the operation result in a setback that could aggravate the inflation already persistent since the special fund against Covid? Experts warn that the initiative will not have the capacity to generate economic competitiveness. Issuing debt for government programmes will do nothing to address this major shortcoming in the German economy.

Consequences for Europe

The approval of this fund further corroborates the idea that Europe as a whole – and not just the South, once vilely labelled the ‘PIGS’ – has, in fact, never left the crisis of 2007-08 and that its political classes (with Germany at the forefront) have insistently done the opposite of what they should have done.

How will France, Italy, Spain and the other Eurozone partners react to a move that could be considered ‘dumping’ between partners? Could this injection cause a new financial derivatives’ crisis?

Merz’s move had the immediate effect of boosting the European public debt market, causing the value of bonds to fall and their rates to rise. This dragged down Italian, Spanish, French and even Japanese bonds as a result. With the German state competing aggressively for new clients to finance its debt, it is forcing its European partners to follow suit. Discord is served. In other words, what Merz is doing is using his position as the Eurozone’s strong link by using the whole of Europe to pay for his businesses.

Does the new government in Berlin intend to finance its economy around sovereign bonds and a Frankfurt stock exchange with little more than a central European reach, and try to compete with the heavyweights of the global markets in New York, London, Tokyo, Shanghai and Hong Kong? Is this realistic?

Merz’s plan coincides with the European Commission’s Readiness 2030 programme to issue another 650 billion euros in debt outside the Budget Pact and another 150 billion to be disbursed in European guarantees. The biggest debt issue since the ‘bazooka’ against Covid, which is still being paid for in the form of inflation. The project calls for states to allocate at least 1.5% of their budgets to defence, in order to launch a continent-wide arms industry and supposedly create jobs in the sector. No one has asked the states (let alone their people) if they want to live in a war economy. No one has said how these 650 billion will be paid back, or what guarantees the ‘European guarantees’ give a State.

The expansive policies of German governments since 2008 have been controversial, even within their own borders. The Federal Court of Audit harshly criticised the new fund: ‘The financial management of the federal government has thus been largely externalised,’ it accused. It warned that the financial package ‘could result in billions of euros in interest costs’. This will have catastrophic economic and social consequences for future generations.

Merz is betting on public spending, but in reality this is a kind of untimely neoliberal Keynesianism, as it will be financed by the US speculative banks, to which the new chancellor has always been closely linked. The whole process seems less than transparent, just to say the least.

Problematic social situation

For big businesses, the arms industry, construction companies, the speculator class and the financial sector, the injection of such a huge amount of money will have the effect of energising the economy for a while and improving some ageing infrastructure. But for the small citizens (the overwhelming majority of the population), the consequences of the current announcement will be devastating. Merz has already announced a ‘radical reform’ of pensions and social welfare benefits.

A good example of the state of public accounts in Germany is yet to be seen. Recently, the scandal broke at the hands of hundreds of thousands of small business owners across the country, who saw their businesses almost bankrupted during the lockdown campaign of the Merkel 4 and Scholz governments. In an extremely deceitful manoeuvre, the banks mandated by the state administrations have now (four years later) demanded that they return up to thousands of euros in ‘aid’ per head, which the state authorities granted them in compensation for the forced paralysis of trade. This is a simple transfer of wealth from the country’s small productive sectors directly into the pockets of the financial-technocratic class (banks, lawyers and accountants), with the public administrations acting as bait.

Social discontent is also being felt in the numerous strikes in various sectors, particularly public transport and airports.

In a recent joint interview, the directors of two popular publications, one linked to the left and the other close to the AfD, agreed to create a united front and promised to join forces against the current state of affairs. There will be larger demonstrations than during Covid, ‘authorised or not’, with encampments in city centres, ‘for as long as it takes’. The images of popular revolt from 15 years ago in Madrid and Athens will be repeated, this time in Berlin.

Ricardo Nuno Costa ‒ geopolitical expert, writer, columnist, and editor-in-chief of geopol.pt

April 1, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , | Leave a comment

Orbán counters FT article telling the EU to ‘solve its Orbán problem’

Remix News | April 1, 2025

The Financial Times’ piece entitled “It’s time for the EU to solve its Orbán problem” has elicited a stern response from Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán.

The piece determines that the EU must support Ukraine’s fight against Russia and provide it with arms to do so. And to do this, it must also somehow get Hungary on board, despite the country repeatedly reiterating its pro-peace stance.

Author Mujtaba Rahman states, “The EU’s ability to do this is directly compromised by Orbán, who has been hugely emboldened by Trump’s return. The Hungarian prime minister keeps in lockstep with Trump and Putin in the hope of winning favours from both.”

Rahman then lists “levers” the bloc can pull to essentially force Hungary’s hand, primarily through the withholding of cash the country desperately needs due to what the author calls Hungary’s “stagnant economy.”

“EU funds are therefore critical if Orbán is to boost investor confidence in the country’s economy. The European Commission has leverage and should use it,” the piece reads. Rahman also suggests simply suspending Hungary’s voting rights.

The article ends by stating, “The EU is now facing a Darwinian moment. It will either adapt or die. To protect Ukraine and its Russian ‘frontline’ states, it must face down Orbán.”

In a response posted on X, Orbán wrote, “The Financial Times is right about one thing: Europe has arrived at a Darwinian moment. They want to change the EU from a peace project to a war project. This is not evolution, this is decay. We must resist, even if they want to punish us.”

April 1, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Germany to target ‘internal EU enemies’ – Politico

RT | April 1, 2025

The incoming German government plans to play a larger role in EU decision-making, including by punishing nations that dissent against the bloc’s foreign policy, Politico has reported. According to the outlet, a draft coalition agreement targets Hungary, which has defied EU decisions on issues such as the Ukraine conflict and sanctions against Russia.

Germany is set to have a new coalition government formed by the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), Christian Social Union (CSU), and the Social Democrats (SPD), likely led by Friedrich Merz of the CDU. The parties are currently finalizing agreements on key policy areas, including migration, climate, and EU relations. Merz is reportedly aiming to form the new government before Easter on April 20.

One of the documents reviewed by Politico outlines Berlin’s plans for a more assertive EU strategy. It proposes using the ‘Weimar Triangle’ – a trilateral alliance of Germany, France, and Poland, which currently holds the EU’s rotating presidency – to influence the bloc’s direction and strengthen Germany’s use of its voting rights.

The draft also states that Berlin plans to “defend” the EU against “internal and external enemies” by calling for punitive action against member states that allegedly violate principles such as the rule of law. Proposed penalties include withholding EU funds and suspending voting rights.

“We will take even more consistent action against violations,” the document states. “Existing protective instruments, from infringement proceedings and the withholding of EU funds to the suspension [of] membership rights such as voting rights in the Council of the EU, must be applied much more consistently than before.”

The coalition has also proposed the creation of a “comprehensive sanction instrument” to rein in perceived dissenters, including replacing the EU’s foreign policy unanimity requirement with majority voting to prevent countries from blocking decisions such as sanctions.

“The consensus principle in the European Council must not become a brake on decision-making,” the document states.

While Hungary is not mentioned by name, the draft agreement appears to be a clear reference to the country, which has long been at odds with EU policies, including over its approach to the Ukraine conflict and its sanctions policy towards Russia.

Budapest has argued that sanctions have been detrimental to the bloc’s economy, and has exercised its veto right on several motions to delay or dilute measures. Prime Minister Viktor Orban has repeatedly accused the EU of taking a “pro-war” stance and has pursued independent peace initiatives on the Ukraine conflict.

The EU has previously threatened to suspend Hungary’s voting rights. It withheld around €22 billion in funds earmarked for Budapest in 2022, citing rights and judicial concerns, but ultimately released about half of that amount last year.

April 1, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

The EU, the USSR, and the architecture of collective security in Eurasia

By Alexander Tuboltsev | Al Mayadeen | March 31, 2025

In July 1966, an important event took place in the Romanian city of Bucharest. The Warsaw Pact countries (USSR, GDR, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania) adopted a Declaration on Strengthening Peace and Security in Europe. This document, signed by the leaders of the listed countries, stipulated the following:

1. The Warsaw Pact participants officially declared that they have no territorial claims to any European state.

2. The signatories of the Declaration proposed the simultaneous dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and NATO in order to ease tensions.

3. The Declaration proposed the withdrawal of all foreign troops from European countries.

4. The Warsaw Pact countries proposed to develop mutually beneficial cooperation between all countries of the continent based on the principles of equality and non-interference in internal affairs.

And so, it was 1966. It had been less than five years since the Berlin crisis of 1961, when Soviet and American tanks faced each other in a standoff near the checkpoint (between West and East Berlin).

At the height of the Cold War, the Warsaw Pact countries proposed their own project for a collective, common, mutually beneficial security architecture in Europe.

10 years later, in November 1976, a new meeting of the Warsaw Pact Political Advisory Committee was held in Bucharest. As a result, a new Declaration was adopted. In my opinion, it can be called the prototype of the modern concept of a multipolar world. In the Declaration of 1976, the Warsaw Pact countries published the following program for the collective security system:

1. Ending the arms race.

2. Development of interstate relations with respect for the principles of sovereignty and mutual assistance.

3. Emphasis on the development of mutually beneficial trade and economic cooperation between different states.

4. Support the struggle against neocolonialism in Africa, Latin America, and Asia.

5. Support for the rights of the Palestinian people.

6. Restructuring of international economic relations based on the principles of justice and equality.

A few months later, in October 1976, the Soviet government sent a detailed Statement to the UN Secretary General on the topic of restructuring world economic relations. The Statement proposed to support the economic interests of Asian, Latin American, and African countries, to fight against neocolonial economic practices, and to limit the activities of global financial monopolies.

What do these historical facts tell us? In the 60s and 70s of the last century, the Warsaw Pact countries proposed to Europe to create a system of collective security and make a choice in favor of cooperation rather than confrontation. At the same time, they proposed to make world trade, economic ties, and political relations more pluralistic and more equal. These projects, outlined in the two Bucharest Declarations of 1966 and 1976, could once have significantly changed the geopolitical situation. But that didn’t happen, because there was one problem.

The military and political establishment of Western Europe and the United States had no intention of building a joint security architecture in Europe with the Warsaw Treaty Organization. The situation was quite the opposite: after 1991, NATO began its waves of expansion to the east. Since the Brussels summit in January 1994, an active process has begun to involve the countries of the former Warsaw Pact in NATO: in 1999 Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary joined the alliance. In the following years, the process of NATO expansion in Europe became continuous, spreading to the post-Soviet space (Baltic countries). The United States used this expansion as a tool to realize its hegemonic ambitions and to maintain the American unipolar dictatorship.

As the years passed, the EU countries continued to turn into a platform for NATO bases, which appeared closer to the borders of Russia. At the same time, the Russian Federation has always expressed its readiness for constructive dialogue, including on the architecture of collective security in Europe. Let’s recall 2008, when Russia took the initiative to create a Treaty on European security. In 2009, a draft of this agreement was presented, which mentioned, among other things, the following aspects:

1. Mutual cooperation between countries based on the principles of indivisible and equal security.

2. An agreement that the countries participating in the Treaty will not carry out actions affecting the security of other participants.

3. The openness of the Treaty for the accession of participants from all over the Eurasian and Euro-Atlantic area.

Western countries did not support this initiative. Moreover, they continued to expand the NATO military infrastructure in Europe, building new bases and accepting new countries into the alliance (Albania, Croatia).

The historical review I have given shows that for decades (since the 20th century), the EU countries have rejected all Soviet and Russian initiatives to create a European collective security architecture. The European Union did not want to enter into a dialogue on this topic and turned the idea of an equal security system into ruins.

Here is a typical example illustrated by Finland. Since 1948, when the Soviet-Finnish Friendship Treaty was signed, the USSR has been one of Helsinki’s most important economic partners. Finland actively bought oil from the Soviet Union at relatively low prices and then re-exported it to other European countries at a higher price. Due to its neutral position during the Cold War, Finland maintained political and economic relations with both the European Economic Community and the Warsaw Pact countries.

And what is happening now? In 2023, Finland joined NATO, becoming another springboard for the alliance’s military expansion. The country closed its border with Russia and began to massively reduce bilateral trade ties, which negatively affected the Finnish economy itself (especially the Finnish border settlements, many of which received most of their income through trade relations with the Russian Federation).

In the 2010s, many EU countries (Italy, Germany, and others that previously had active trade relations with Russia) began to break off bilateral contacts and impose sanctions, thereby undermining the very essence of the idea of free trade. What is the reason for this?

First, the EU countries have been actively using Russia’s resources for decades, buying oil and natural gas at favorable prices. But at the same time, Western European countries showed disrespect for Russia’s national interests and ignored its constructive proposals on the subject of collective security architecture. Instead of an equal dialogue, the EU showed arrogance.

Secondly, since the 90s, the EU has considered the former Warsaw Pact countries and the post-Soviet space as a market for its products and businesses. The EU imposed strict requirements and interfered in the economic processes in the states of Eastern and Central Europe, which began to join it. For example, in Latvia in 2006-2007, due to the agrarian reforms of the EU, the sugar industry of the republic was actually disbanded. This was unprofitable for the Latvian economy, but it was in line with the interests of the larger European sugar producers. Similar reductions in the sugar industry occurred at that time in Bulgaria, the former socialist country. And this is just one example of such EU interference in the economy of former Warsaw Pact members.

Also, the EU, within the framework of the “Eastern Partnership”, began its active economic expansion in the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) in the 2000s. The EU’s political and economic interference in the affairs of the CIS countries, along with NATO’s eastward expansion, posed a direct threat to Russia’s security. In turn, Russia has responded to this threat by strengthening its security and sovereignty, including in the economic sphere.

Thirdly, back in the 1990s, the EU countries became one of the main springboards of the Western hegemonic unipolar dictatorship led by the United States. The so-called “Western world” tried in every way to prevent the emergence of multipolarity, combining sanctions threats with neocolonial practices in the Global South. The number of international political contradictions grew every year, and the EU constantly refused equal dialogue.

Now, the year is 2025, and the EU has become a clone of NATO in its essence and actions. Like the North Atlantic Alliance, the EU is a vestige of the Cold War era. Instead of solving internal problems (for example, the inequality of economic development in Northern and Southern Europe, rising unemployment, and the European energy crisis), EU leaders are using aggressive Russophobic rhetoric, provoking new escalation stages, and imposing new sanctions packages. They are increasing military spending, sponsoring the militarization of Poland, Finland, and the Baltic States, and continuing their neo-colonialist expansion in Africa. Berlin, Brussels, Paris, and Warsaw are now the instigators of conflicts that are pushing the whole of Europe into the abyss in the name of globalism and destructive neoliberalism.

This tendency of the EU establishment to escalate once again confirms that the situation on the continent is tense to the limit. The idea of a collective security architecture is once again becoming relevant to prevent larger and more numerous conflicts. However, this can no longer be a concept of European collective security. Similar projects are a thing of the past. The world has changed, and in recent decades, the role of Asian countries has increased significantly. Countries such as China, India, Indonesia, and Vietnam are showing high rates of economic development, and their regional and international influence is growing. Therefore, in my opinion, the collective security architecture should be considered as a possible future project for the whole of Eurasia, built on the basis of equality and mutual respect. It is especially important to take into account the national interests of the countries of the Global South, which have suffered from Western European colonialism and interference for centuries.

To prevent further confrontation, it is necessary to eliminate the root causes that eventually led to the escalation. One of the main security problems in Europe is the expansion of NATO to the east and the concentration of NATO military bases near the borders of Russia and Belarus. Brussels, Paris, and Berlin should clearly understand that such actions (along with the bellicose rhetoric and policies of the current EU leadership) lead to an even more serious confrontation. Moscow and Minsk have repeatedly stressed that they will defend their territory and sovereignty in the event of a direct threat from the West.

It seems to me that, in the future, the most favorable option for reducing tensions in Europe and starting a dialogue on a new Eurasian collective security architecture could be the complete withdrawal of NATO troops from the EU countries bordering Russia (Finland, the Baltic states). If EU countries want to restore relations with Russia in the future, they should stop their hostile anti-Russian actions.

In the emerging multipolar world, there will be neither metropolises nor unipolar hegemonies. Europe is not the center of the world, but a political and geographical region like Africa, Asia, Oceania, and Latin America. Therefore, future global security can only be based on an equal and mutually respectful relationship between countries and continents, that is, between all poles of a multipolar world order. And there is no place in this system for such destructive practices as the neocolonial paradigm of thinking and Western arrogance towards other peoples.

March 31, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

French presidential hopeful Marine Le Pen sentenced to jail: Politicians react

RT | March 31, 2025

French and foreign politicians are reacting to the sentences handed down on Monday by a Paris court in a case against the National Rally party (RN) and several prominent figures, including Marine Le Pen, the party’s former leader who currently heads its parliamentary faction.

The RN and associated individuals were accused of embezzling EU funds allocated for the salaries of aides of European Parliament members and diverting them to the national coffers. Several defendants have been sentenced to prison terms of various lengths, while Le Pen was barred from seeking public office for five years.

  • 31 March 2025

    13:21 GMT

    French MEP Francois-Xavier Bellamy, who serves as vice president of the Republicans, has called the sentence “a very dark day for French democracy” and “major interference in our democratic life,” regardless of people’s opinions of the National Rally.

    ”The candidate whom the polls actually place in the lead in the presidential election has been barred from running by a court decision: this unprecedented event will leave deep scars,” he said on X.

    The French judicial system is “taking the risk of casting suspicion of arbitrariness” and needs to redeem itself in the eyes of the people by proving its impartiality, the politician added.

  • 13:12 GMT

    Le Pen’s lawyer, Rodolphe Bosselut, has announced his intention to appeal the verdict. He denounced the “provisional execution” ruling, which imposes an immediate political ban on his client and offers “no recourse” through the legal process.

  • 13:09 GMT

    Laurent Wauquiez, leader of The Republicans, a center-right parliamentary faction, has told BFM that “it is not healthy for an elected official in a democracy to be banned from running for office.”

    He characterized the verdict as “very harsh” and “not the path we should have taken.”

  • 13:03 GMT

    Geert Wilders, the leader of the Dutch right-wing Party for Freedom (PVV), has expressed “shock” at the verdict, describing it as incredibly tough.

    “I support and believe in her for the full 100% and I trust she will win the appeal and become President of France,” he said on X.

  • 12:59 GMT

    Left-wing party La France Insoumise has rejected the court’s verdict to ban Le Pen from running for office.

    The party “has never supported using the court to get rid of the National Rally,” a statement published by its national coordinator, Manuel Bompard, said. “We are fighting it at the ballot box and in the streets, through the popular mobilization of the French people, as we did during the 2024 legislative elections.”

  • 12:56 GMT

    Italian Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini has described the verdict as “a declaration of war by Brussels,” claiming that it is being celebrated by those who “fear the judgment of the voters.”

    In a post on X, he compared the outcome of the trial to the recent annulment of the presidential election in Romania, ordered by the Constitutional Court last December over claims of foreign interference. Calin Georgescu, an independent candidate who won the first round, has since been barred from participating in the new election.

  • 12:50 GMT

    Le Pen announced her appearance on TF1 TV later in the day.

  • 12:43 GMT

    Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has described the verdict as the “agony of liberal democracy” in the EU.

  • 12:35 GMT

    Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, a conservative politician whose views on the EU’s policies closely align with those of Le Pen, has expressed support for her on his social media. He posted the phrase “Je suis Marine!” (“I am Marine!” in French) on X and tagged her account.

    The expression has become prominent internationally since the January 2015 terrorist attack on the French satirical outlet Charlie Hebdo, when it was widely used to make a stance against jihadism and attempts to silence free speech.

  • 12:30 GMT

    RN President Jordan Bardella has denounced the verdict, describing it on X as unjust. “It is French democracy that is being executed,” he wrote.

March 31, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Progressive Hypocrite | , | Leave a comment

Judge rules Marine Le Pen ineligible to run for president in 2027 in latest blow to democracy in the EU

Remix News – March 31, 2025

A judge has ruled Marine Le Pen is ineligible to run for office, along with eight MEPs from her National Rally party, after they were found guilty of misappropriation of EU funds. The move is the latest attack on democracy in the EU, with judges increasingly deciding elections in Europe. Le Pen has also been sentenced to four years in prison, with two years suspended.

Notably, the news comes right as Le Pen leads the polling for French presidential elections in 2027, as Remix News reported earlier today.

The court estimated that the total losses amounted to €2.9 million, as a result of “paying by the European Parliament people who actually worked for the far-right party.” Le Pen was found to be responsible for €1.8 million in damages herself. The judgment also concerns 12 assistants. The prosecutor’s office initially alleged that €7 million had been used in this way.

Investigators accused Le Pen of managing the illegal use of European subsidies between 2004 and 2016, when she served as an MEP. They stated that instead of working in Strasbourg, assistants were to work for Le Pen’s National Rally party in a domestic capacity.

“It was found that all these people actually worked for the party, that their deputy did not commission them any tasks,” said the judge. Assistants then “passed from one deputy to another.”

“It was not about combining the work of assistants, but about combining the budgets of MPs,” said the judge.

Le Pen said before the trial that the matter is entirely political and that her opponents wished for her “political death.”

Other commentators have expressed surprise at not only the verdict but also the decision to exclude her from elections.

Pierre Lellouche, a lawyer and former Deputy of the French National Assembly, appeared on CNEWS to point out that the current prime minister, François Bayrou, faced the same charge and suffered no consequences.

“Then, last but not least, there is the case of (François) Bayrou, the current prime minister, who has been prosecuted for exactly the same thing, i.e., for abuses of party funding declared as parliamentary assistants in Europe, at the EU parliament. Bayrou emerged from this affair without being in the least concerned. In fact, the public prosecutor’s office has once again referred the matter to the courts, but even so, we’re dealing with a double standard here. It’s a bit surprising.”

He noted that the “separation of powers” is increasingly shifting towards judges, and noted that in many previous elections, these judges have tipped the scales in favor of certain candidates.

“We’re finding that more and more, everything is getting mixed up, everywhere. Look at Trump, who had seven judges behind him, and that didn’t stop him from winning. Finally, Strauss-Kahn was eliminated, Fillon was eliminated by a somewhat untimely and rapid indictment at the time of the presidential election, which allowed Mr. Macron to govern the country for seven years after all, which is no mean feat. Especially since, in the Fillon affair, the public prosecutor subsequently indicated that this was not entirely neutral and that the Élysée was particularly interested in this case. So you see, there is a separation of powers, but at the moment, power is shifting to the judges, and that can have a huge impact.”

Another attorney, Maxime Thiebaut, also brought up the case of Bayrou, saying:

“At the very least, you know, it comes as a surprise that Marine Le Pen has been found guilty. I would point out that Mr. (François) Bayrou was acquitted on a similar charge, because it was considered that he had not acted with intent. So I wasn’t in Mr. Bayrou’s file and I wasn’t in Ms. Le Pen’s file, but I note that there was also an expectation that Madame Le Pen would be guilty. We all know very well that when you’re the leader of a political party, you’re pretty far removed from the actual running of the party. Mr. Bayrou was recognized by Ms. Le Pen. Is it political or not? I don’t know and I won’t give my opinion on that.”

This is not the only such case either, with Romania banning the presidential frontrunner, Călin Georgescu, from running for president as well as arresting him.

March 31, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | Leave a comment

EU to reject Russia-US Black Sea deal – von der Leyen

RT | March 29, 2025

The EU will not lift its sanctions against Russia for as long as the Ukraine conflict continues, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has said.

During talks in Saudi Arabia on Monday, Russia and the US agreed to move towards reviving the Black Sea Grain Initiative, which, according to the Kremlin, should include the removal of Western restrictions against Russian Agricultural Bank and other financial institutions involved in the international sale of food and fertilizers.

In her interview with French broadcaster LCI on Friday, von der Leyen made it clear that Brussels will not support the idea of a maritime truce between Moscow and Kiev put forward by the administration of US President Donald Trump.

“The sanctions are very significant; they are painful; they have an impact on the Russian economy, and they represent a powerful lever,” she said when asked about the possibility of the EU fulfilling Russian demands to lift some of the curbs.

According to the head of the European Commission, the restrictions “will remain in effect until a just and lasting peace is established in Ukraine.”

However, she noted that “when the war is over, the sanctions might be removed.”

Von der Leyen also said that for the conflict to end, “security guarantees for Ukraine” are needed as well as “a solid defense industrial base and a deterrent force” in the EU.

The Black Sea Grain Initiative, originally brokered in July 2022 by the UN and Türkiye, envisioned the safe passage of Ukrainian agricultural products in exchange for the West lifting its restrictions on Russian grain and fertilizer exports.

Moscow withdrew from the deal a year later, citing the West’s failure to uphold its obligations. The Americans and Russians now see its revival as a step towards settling the Ukraine conflict altogether.

Earlier this week, President Vladimir Putin asserted that the Russian economy has become the fourth largest in the world in purchasing power parity terms after those of China, the US and India, despite a record 28,595 sanctions being placed on it by Washington, Brussels and their allies. According to the Russian government’s data, the country’s economy grew 4.1% in 2024, surpassing the official forecast of 3.9%.

Putin previously urged the Russian business circles against expecting the sanctions to be fully lifted, describing them as a mechanism of strategic systemic pressure on the country that the West intends to keep using.

March 29, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

EU ‘preparing for war’ – Hungarian FM

RT | March 29, 2025

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has accused Brussels bureaucrats of clinging to a “failed pro-war policy” in a desperate attempt to delay the moment when European taxpayers begin asking where the money spent on bankrolling Kiev has gone.

The European Union recently advised its 450 million inhabitants to stockpile essential supplies for at least 72 hours, with EU Commissioner for Crisis Management Hadja Lahbib warning on Wednesday that the Ukraine conflict threatens the bloc’s overall security.

Szijjarto said he initially thought the warning was some kind of joke or “trolling,” after Lahbib posted a bizarre video showing Europeans what to pack in a 72-hour survival kit.

“But why, in the 21st century, should EU citizens prepare a survival kit? There’s only one explanation: Brussels is preparing for war,“ Szijjarto wrote in a post on X on Friday. “At a time when there’s finally a real chance for a ceasefire and meaningful peace talks with [President Donald Trump’s] return to office, Brussels is going in the opposite direction, clinging to a failed pro-war policy.”

“Why? Because as long as the war continues, pro-war European politicians can avoid taking responsibility for three years of failure, and avoid answering an extremely uncomfortable question: where is the money that was sent to Ukraine?”

EU institutions in Brussels and individual member states have spent over €132 billion over the past three years supporting Kiev, and have pledged an additional €115 billion that has yet to be allocated, according to data from Germany’s Kiel Institute.

Since taking office, US President Donald Trump has pushed for a diplomatic resolution and sought to recoup what he estimates to be over $300 billion in US taxpayer money that his predecessor “gifted” to Kiev. Washington recently brokered a limited ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia, placing a moratorium on attacks on energy infrastructure. Kiev, however, has repeatedly breached the ceasefire terms, according to Moscow.

Despite the ongoing peace process, the EU has continued to push a hawkish agenda. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen recently unveiled an €800 billion plan to ramp up military spending through loans.

Meanwhile, France and the UK continue to advocate for the deployment of a military contingent to Ukraine. Speaking after a summit in Paris on Thursday, French President Emmanuel Macron announced that a so-called “coalition of the willing” will seek to deploy a “reassurance force” to Ukraine after a peace deal with Russia is reached.

The proposal to send troops has already been rejected by several EU members. The “coalition of the willing” – a phrase originally coined by the US in 2003 to describe countries backing the invasion of Iraq – now mostly refers to states that have pledged to continue supporting Kiev militarily, without necessarily committing to troop deployments.

March 29, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

Macron and Starmer’s coalition of the killing amid Europe’s insane war footing

Strategic Culture Foundation | March 28, 2025

If there were a prize for Orwellian-named conferences, then the one held this week in Paris would surely be a top contender.

Over the past month, there has been a slew of such gatherings in London, Brussels, and Paris. They have been conducted in a frenzy to thwart peace and prolong war – under the guise of “seeking security” against Russia.

Some 30 nations attended the latest Paris summit, convened by France’s Emmanuel Macron, and entitled “Building a Robust Peace for Ukraine and Europe”.

Europe is being gaslighted to view war as peace and accept that all economic resources must be dedicated to militarism. It is an insane war footing that is beyond any democratic or moral rationale.

European Union member states participated as well as NATO and non-EU nations Britain, Norway, and Canada. We should clarify that it was the elitist leaders of these countries who were present. Their lack of democratic mandate and authority is all too obvious to the people of Europe.

Some EU nations, such as Hungary and Slovakia, have protested commendably about the unwavering belligerence and obscene waste of public resources for fueling a proxy war in Ukraine.

Notably, too, the United States was not represented at the Paris summit. Coincidentally, this week, a leaked private group conversation between senior members of the Trump administration revealed their contempt for “loathsome” European leaders. One can understand why.

In the grandeur of Élysée Palace, Macron hailed the non-entity gathering as the “Coalition of the Willing”. With this self-appointed virtue, the French leader was referring to countries that are willing to deploy military forces to Ukraine or maintain the supply of weapons.

Macron has been assiduously supported in this military venture by Britain’s Prime Minister Kier Starmer.

The French and British leaders have intensified their efforts to directly insinuate Europe and NATO militarily in the three-year conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Their efforts are a result of American President Donald Trump engaging with Russian President Vladimir Putin to end the proxy war between the U.S.-led NATO alliance and Russia.

Trump’s diplomatic overtures with Moscow have sidelined the European states and have left them with an acute political problem of how to justify continuing military support for a failing Ukraine Project.

The French, British and other European Russophobes do not want the war to end. That’s because they are wedded to the false narrative about defending Ukraine from “Russian aggression”. They are also committed to strategically defeating Russia using Ukraine as a proxy.

In Orwellian fashion, the European and NATO warmongers cannot openly state their nefarious objective. That would be politically fatal. Hence, they are cynically dressing up their motives with virtuous-sounding schemes, such as deploying “peacekeeping troops” in the event of any ceasefire deal that the Americans and Russians might negotiate.

The relentless demonizing of Russia as a threat to Europe is amplified by a near-constant drumbeat of war. European citizens – 500 million of them – are being subjected to non-stop messaging about the “need” to militarize their societies to “defend” against “Russian expansionism”.

This week, the EU began urging citizens to stockpile emergency rations in their homes. Russia was not explicitly invoked as a threat, but it was palpably obvious that fear of war was being inculcated. While European states are slashing billions in social welfare, their elitist, Russophobic leaders are ramping up billions for militarism. Europe is on a war footing based on paranoia and the pathological fears of a ruling clique.

Macron and Starmer are also pushing the idea of integrating Ukraine into a first line of defense against alleged future Russian aggression toward Europe. In reality, this is about reconfiguring offense.

Their pretensions of “building a robust peace for Ukraine and Europe” are a reckless gambit to prolong the war. At its worst, the conflict could explode into an all-out world war.

It is cringe-making that failed European politicians who are mired in internal political and economic messes are seeking to aggrandize their images through high-stakes posturing against Russia.

Macron has said that his coalition of willing wants to have American backing for security. He added this week that if European troops in Ukraine come under fire from Russian forces, they will retaliate.

Moscow has already stated categorically that no European or NATO troops deployed to Ukraine are acceptable. They will be targeted as combatants.

That means that if Paris and London go ahead with their military venture in Ukraine, a wider war is almost inevitable.

It is alarming that Macron has lately said that European troops may be dispatched to Ukraine “with or without American support.”

Laughably, though, neither the French nor the British have the military power for a serious intervention. French forces have been serially kicked out of several African countries that were former colonies. Meanwhile, British military chiefs have warned Starmer that his deployment plans are ill-conceived and amount to “political theater”.

Even the much-vaunted summit in Paris this week showed open cracks between allies. Several European states have stated they are not willing to join any military intervention in Ukraine. Italy, Poland, and Greece have expressed deep concern about where Macron and Starmer’s logic is leading.

It seems that the extreme delusions of grandeur harbored by former imperialist powers are beginning to unnerve even supposed partners.

Hopefully, it is becoming transparent that Britain and France are gambling with world security to satisfy their own egos.

Two world wars in the last century stemmed from European intrigue and duplicity.

Has-been European powers are at it again with their Orwellian doublespeak about ensuring “lasting peace”.

The reality is Russia has won the proxy war that NATO instigated. Even the normally gung-ho Americans realize that.

NATO has been caught with blood on its hands as the culprit of an epic war crime against Russia, using Ukraine as a pawn. Trump seems to want to extricate the Americans from the debacle. He can try to offload the blame onto the previous Biden administration.

However, the European elitist leaders can’t do that. They are the same lackeys who promulgated the criminal proxy war. Their only perceived option is to keep it going… until the European public wakes up and takes retribution on their criminal leaders.

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

Iran urges EU to address Israel’s genocide, aggression instead of leveling ‘hypocritical’ claims

Press TV – March 27, 2025

Iran says the European Union should address the Israeli regime’s genocide and aggression against the countries in the region instead of leveling “hypocritical” claims against Tehran.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei made the remark on Thursday in reaction to the latest allegation by European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, who on Monday claimed Iran posed a threat to global stability and said Tehran must never be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon.

Kallas made the remarks during a press conference in al-Quds with Israeli foreign minister Gideon Sa’ar.

She also accused Iran of supporting Russia in the war with Ukraine.

Baghaei condemned the EU’s double standard policies and said, “If Kallas is truly concerned about stability and security in the region, she should address the [Israeli] regime’s genocide in Gaza and its repeated acts of aggression against Lebanon and Syria as well as the military occupation of these two countries’ territories.”

He added that such baseless statements, illogical remarks and hypocritical claims against Iran lack credibility.

Unlike her predecessors, who tried a bit to consider the principles of international law in expressing the EU’s positions, Kallas “speaks recklessly”, the Iranian spokesperson emphasized, warning that even if the EU foreign policy chief’s remarks are rooted in her lack of experience, they would further undermine Europe’s credibility in the eyes of any impartial observer.

Iran has repeatedly rejected accusations that it has supplied weapons to Russia for direct use in the war in Ukraine.

Meanwhile, Russia has repeatedly warned that a flow of Western weapons to Ukraine will only prolong the conflict.

Tehran has also stressed on numerous occasions that it is not seeking nuclear weapons and has put its civilian nuclear program under the surveillance of the International Atomic Energy Agency which has verified its compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), to which Tehran is a signatory.

The allegations against Iran come as Israel is believed to be the sole possessor of nuclear weapons in West Asia.

March 27, 2025 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »