Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

US Report Reveals Push to Weaponize AI for Censorship

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | December 19, 2024

For a while now, emerging AI has been treated by the Biden-Harris administration, but also the EU, the UK, Canada, the UN, etc., as a scourge that powers dangerous forms of “disinformation” – and should be dealt with accordingly.

According to those governments/entities, the only “positive use” for AI as far as social media and online discourse go, would be to power more effective censorship (“moderation”).

A new report from the US House Judiciary Committee and its Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government puts the emphasis on the push to use this technology for censorship as the explanation for the often disproportionate alarm over its role in “disinformation.”

We obtained a copy of the report for you here.

The interim report’s name spells out its authors’ views on this quite clearly: the document is called, “Censorship’s Next Frontier: The Federal Government’s Attempt to Control Artificial Intelligence to Suppress Free Speech.”

The report’s main premise is well-known – that AI is now being funded, developed, and used by the government and third parties to add speed and scale to their censorship, and that the outgoing administration has been putting pressure on AI developers to build censorship into their models.

What’s new are the proposed steps to remedy this situation and make sure that future federal governments are not using AI for censorship. To this end, the Committee wants to see new legislation passed in Congress, AI development that respects the First Amendment and is open, decentralized, and “pro-freedom.”

The report recommends legislation along four principles, focused on preserving American’s right to free speech. The first is that the government cannot be involved when decisions are made in private algorithms or datasets regarding “misinformation” or “bias.”

The government should also be prohibited from funding censorship-related research or collaboration with foreign entities on AI regulation that leads to censorship.

Lastly, “Avoid needless AI regulation that gives the government coercive leverage,” the document recommends.

The Committee notes the current state of affairs where the Biden-Harris administration made a number of direct moves to regulate the space to its political satisfaction via executive orders, but also by pushing its policy through by giving out grants via the National Science Foundation, once again, aimed at building AI tools that “combat misinformation.”

But – “If allowed to develop in a free and open manner, AI could dramatically expand Americans’ capacity to create knowledge and express themselves,” the report states.

December 19, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Brussels further damages European industry by approving 15th sanctions package on Russia

By Ahmed Adel | December 17, 2024

The Council of the European Union announced the approval of the 15th round of sanctions against Russia on December 16. Clearly, by imposing a new package of sanctions, the EU is willing to continue destroying its own industries by persisting on a policy of economic warfare despite the boomerang effects.

“This package of sanctions is part of our response to weaken Russia’s war machine and those who are enabling this war, also including Chinese companies. It shows the unity of EU member states in our continued support to Ukraine,” said Kaja Kallas, the EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

“Our immediate priority is to put Ukraine in the strongest possible position. We will stand by the Ukrainian people on all fronts: humanitarian, economic, political, diplomatic and military. There can be no doubt that Ukraine will win,” she added.

The new package includes, in particular, a list of personal sanctions against 54 individuals and 30 organizations that, according to the Council’s announcement, are “responsible for actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine.”

The restrictions are intended to “address the circumvention of EU sanctions through targeting” Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” and weaken the country’s military industry.

Specifically, 52 third-country vessels were sanctioned, which the bloc claims are involved in oil imports from Russia, the delivery of war material to this country, and/or “the transport of stolen Ukrainian grain.”

The new economic restrictions also target Russian defence companies, chemical plants, and civilian airlines. For the first time, sanctions are fully applied to several Chinese entities for cooperating with Russia.

Since the start of the special military operation in Ukraine on 24 February 2024, the EU has adopted numerous restrictive measures against Russia. According to the Castellum.AI database, more than 19,500 individual and sectoral sanctions have been triggered against Russia since the start of the military operation.

However, despite Russia becoming the most sanctioned country in the world, Russian President Vladimir Putin said at the 22nd Congress of the United Russia Party that the Russian economy continues to develop despite the unprecedented Western sanctions.

“Russia is developing, the economy is growing and this is amid sanctions, literally unprecedented in world history, against the background of gross interference and pressure on the part of the governing elites of some countries,” the president said on December 14, adding that foreign blackmail and attempts to stop Moscow will come to nothing.

“Russia is confident, it is conscious of its righteousness and its strength, and this is why all objectives set for the short and long term will certainly be met,” Putin said.

The Russian president’s comments followed the EU’s announcement on December 11 that member states had agreed to the 15th EU sanctions package against Russia. Now, even as European companies more openly express their interest in returning to the Russian market, the EU acts against the interests of citizens and the business community alike as prices escalate and the cost of living gets out of hand.

Moscow has repeatedly stated that the country will stand up to the pressure of sanctions that the West began imposing on Russia several years ago and continues to intensify because they lack the courage to admit the failure of such punitive measures.

Rising costs, driven partly by a rejection of Russian energy, are causing Europe to lose its global competitive advantage. Although Europe has maintained energy supply security, prices on the European market are now much higher than before. Some analysts predict a further rise in energy prices and the danger this poses to the European industry.

It is worth remembering that current gas prices in the European Union are almost five times higher than those in the United States. As a September report on European competitiveness points out, EU companies continue to face electricity prices between two and three times higher than the US.

A separate study by the German Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Deutsche Industrie und Handelskammer or DIHK) finds that high energy costs and a lack of reliable supplies are holding back industrial production, while “the risk of deindustrialization,” according to Siegfried Russwurm, chief executive of the industrial conglomerate Thyssenkrupp, “continues to increase.”

The energy crisis and the resulting economic recession in Europe are partly due to the EU’s refusal to accept cheap and reliable energy supplies from Russia. With these economically suicidal measures, Brussels wanted to force Moscow into capitulation. However, Russia has reoriented its export flows, particularly towards Asia.

Meanwhile, European buyers have been forced to purchase energy sources from alternative suppliers at higher prices, which obviously affected the competitiveness of European producers and hit the continent’s major economies. In effect, the anti-Russia sanctions have boomeranged, but Europe continues to insist on this economically suicidal policy.

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

December 17, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Trump is a nightmare for the EU in more ways than one

With its submissiveness to the US and contempt for its president-elect, the bloc’s set itself up for a perfect storm of punishment

By Tarik Cyril Amar | RT | December 14, 2024

For a man his age, incoming US president Donald Trump has a knack for cultivating a bad-boy image. Refreshingly direct to the point of rude honesty, or dishonesty, as the case may be, he has no time for polite circumlocution. His threats are harsh, his demands unvarnished, including toward Washington’s so-called allies in Europe, which really are, at best, clients, and, more realistically, just vassals. In that spirit of candid, no-frills domination, Trump already has a long record of threatening NATO, which he sees – plausibly – as a scam in which European members fleece the US to free-ride on its insane (but that’s a different story…) military spending.

Or, in the genteel English still cultivated at The Economist, “through NATO, America is the guarantor of the continent’s security.” Yeah, right, by firing missiles at Russia… The problem with Trump is that he is uncouth enough to know the real relationship is much more like Don Corleone “protecting” your funeral parlor. And he behaves accordingly: Even during his first term in the White House between 2017 and 2021, he started scaring other NATO members into higher military spending, while never allowing them to feel safe about his commitment. Art of the tough deal: Keep ‘em guessing, keep ‘em on their toes. And it worked, too: the European spongers began to pay more. So, there will be more of that, rest assured. If, that is, there will be a NATO to speak of.

Even less noticed is the fact that the new old US president – and thus capo dei capi of the West – is not much kindlier disposed toward the EU. And yet there it is: Trump’s frank, open, and long-standing dislike for that strange bureaucratic behemoth that is about as democratic as the former Soviet Union, less efficient than the Habsburg Empire, and so full of its global “norm-setting” mission that even American “indispensability” looks oddly old-fashioned by comparison.

As early as the beginning of 2017, when the great American bruiser gate-crashed the White House for the first time, The Economist warned its European readers to “be afraid” of Trump, a man harboring “indifference” and “contempt” for the EU. Really? How unheard of! The raunchy-tycoon-turned-peremptory-president, the British establishment Pravda of neoliberalism and Russophobia explained, would seek to shatter the EU by playing “bilateralism.” That, of course, is Euro-babble for respecting individual countries’ governments by taking their sovereignty more seriously than power-grabbing delusions of grandeur in Brussels. And – oh, horror! – he might even try to talk Russia. (Spoiler: back then he did not – big mistake.)

That, however, was 2017. Now, things have moved on. Even before Trump won his second presidential election by crushing his Democratic opponents, The Economist admitted that “’Trump-proving’ Europe” is a notion doomed to fail, which means EU leaders may well become “geopolitical roadkill.” How so, you may wonder?

Well, first of all there is Russia. Regarding Moscow, Trump seems ready to talk, and in a substantial manner we have not seen since the end of the Cold War: He has publicly signaled that he does not believe in trying to coerce Moscow by further escalation; his freshly appointed advisers Mike Waltz and Keith Kellogg, though known for ambiguous signals in the past, will fall into line, as they should as public servants. And if not, they’ll be fired, Trump-style, fast and without remorse.

To say the least, Trump no longer feels as restrained by Washington’s deep-state, deep-freeze Cold War re-enactors as during his first term. Sure, it’s the US: there is always the possibility someone might try to murder him, again. But if he stays among the living, which is likely, then it’s payback time: Talking to Russia now is one delicious way in which he will dish out well-deserved retribution for both the media-lawfare circus of Russia Rage (aka ‘Russiagate’) in which his opponents weaponized slander and disinformation against him. And, more importantly, Russia has been winning the war in Ukraine, not only against Kiev but also, in effect, against the West. In sum, Trump has less reason to be afraid of his own backstabbers at home, and Washington has more reason to be much more careful about Russia.

Moscow, meanwhile, has made it clear repeatedly that any new agreements would have to be mutually beneficial. The time of Gorbachevian naivete will never return. Yet, at the same time, Russia does seem open to – serious – talks: The Russian leadership does not merely carefully watch Trump, as you would expect. It also sends back calibrated pings that signal cautious appreciation of his overtures, as recently over his criticism of firing Western missiles at Russia.

Hence, nightmare number one for the EU: Trump is serious about ending US support for the failed project of inflicting a geopolitical demotion on Russia via a proxy war in Ukraine. That will leave not only the regime of Ukraine’s past-use-by-date leader Vladimir Zelensky high and dry but remaining fanatics in the EU as well. In the best-case scenario, the US will leave the European vassals with the cost of the postwar, whatever shape that may take. Trump has already said as much. In the worst-case scenario, EU elites could try going it alone. That is, worst-case for them, in every (un)imaginable way: economically, politically, and yes, militarily, too.

And behind Trump’s willingness to make good on his election promise to end the American cluster-fiasco in and over Ukraine, lurks the possibility of a much larger turn toward – wait for it! – diplomacy in the US-Russia relationship. Perhaps it is early days to mention that other long-forgotten D-word – and it would also take two to tango, of course – but a phase of détente cannot be excluded. If it were to take place, America’s European vassals would come to regret burning their bridges with Moscow to please Washington.

Then, nightmare number two, there is the economy. The US-EU relationship is the single largest trade connection in the world, worth about $11 trillion per year. That, you may think, constitutes a lot of common interest and thus reasons for treating each other if not gently then, at least, cautiously. Nope, that’s not how this works, because the relationship is lopsided, and Trump is furious about it. For him, the EU’s trade surplus with the US is yet another way in which shifty Europeans have been milking America. His weapon of choice to retaliate and rectify the situation are, of course, tariffs, the higher the better. Even before his re-election, Goldman Sachs warned that his rule could cost the EU as a whole a full percent of GDP. And yes, that’s a lot, especially for a continent already largely economically depressed, demographically declining, and with badly squeezed public finances.

What can EU leaders, those sadly submissive vassals about to be abused even worse than usual by their hegemon, do now? Frankly, not much. It’s already too late: They have made themselves dependent as never before on whoever happens to win the strange event Americans call “elections” and gets to mess with the world from the White House. And that is not at all Trump’s fault, by the way. (No, and not “the Russians!” either…).

Take, for instance, the EU’s wannabe despot Ursula von der Leyen. Building her own power grab – like Stalin, as it happens – on a mix of executive apparat overreach, crony networking, and ideological bigotry, she has made one serious mistake that may cost her dearly: She has cozied up so shamelessly to the outgoing Biden administration that, serious rumor has it, Trump cannot stand her. So, alternatives are in demand: Maybe he likes Italy’s Giorgia Meloni better? Or originally the Netherlands, now NATO’s Mark Rutte, who is constantly praised for his alleged “Trump-handling” skills?

But here is the problem with that, frankly, silly approach: Trump is not an idiot. Attempts to “handle” him are insultingly obvious and, if he tolerates them temporarily, then it’s only to handle his would-be handlers back. And then the irony is, of course, that the only EU leaders Trump respects, such as Viktor Orban of Hungary, are outcasts among their own: Good luck recruiting them now to make up for how much he disrespects all the others. Maybe they’ll even help, a little, Ursula, Olaf, and Emmanuel. But it’ll cost you, because they will – rightly – set their own conditions and gain great leverage.

What about Danegeld perhaps? Danegeld, you must know, was what the hapless inhabitants of the British Isles paid the seaborne Viking marauders in the Dark Ages. The system was simple: pay up or be plundered and slaughtered. You think that sounds a little primitive for today’s sophisticated Europeans? Never underestimate how low they will stoop. Ursula von der Leyen has already suggested that one way to mollify Trump might be to just buy even more perversely expensive LNG from the US. Christine Lagarde, head of the European Central Bank, has gone even further, pleading for a whole ‘Buy American’ program, including – surprise, surprise! – arms to assuage Trump’s ire.

Desperate? You bet. Humiliating? Obviously. Yet what’s worse, it’s not going to work. Here’s why: Even if Trump condescends to accepting such tributes from his European subjects, he will never lose sight of the one thing that really interests him (apart from his own money, power, and fame): American advantage. Whatever the Europeans will offer and however low they will kowtow, in the end, any deal will be good only for one side, the US. That’s ironic, because Russia, for one, and possibly China as well can expect the minimum of respect that makes mutual benefit at least possible. That’s because they have stood up to American bullying. For the Europeans, though, it’s a Catch 22 now. One way or the other, they will pay even more dearly than before for their historic failure after the Cold War: When they should obviously have emancipated themselves from the US, they sold out worse than ever. And without need. To paraphrase a past master of politics: It’s worse than a crime, it’s self-abuse.

Tarik Cyril Amar is a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory.

December 14, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Economics, Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

EU has failed to cut energy ties with Russia – commissioner

RT | December 12, 2024

The EU has failed to overcome its dependence on Russian energy, and needs a new plan to wean itself off Moscow’s supplies, the bloc’s new energy chief told Politico on Thursday.

In his first interview since taking the post, Dan Jorgensen highlighted the growth in Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) purchases.

The share of Russian LNG on the EU market reached 20% this year, according to the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators, despite Brussels’ pledge to stop consuming Russian fuel by 2027.

“It’s obvious to everybody that something new needs to happen because… now it’s beginning to go in the wrong direction,” the EU Energy commissioner said, while pledging to present “a tangible roadmap that will include efficient tools and means for us to solve the remaining part of the problem.”

The new measures will target “gas primarily, but also oil and nuclear” and will be formulated by mid-March, Jorgensen said, noting that five EU countries still rely on Russia for nuclear fuel.

The EU declared its intention to end its dependence on Russian energy supplies following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Supplies of higher-cost US fuel have replaced much of the cheap pipeline gas that was previously delivered by Russia.

However, efforts have stalled in recent months, and the EU continues to buy billions of euros’ worth of Russian gas each month. In 2024, the bloc is expected to import 10% more LNG from Russia than in 2023, according to energy analytics firm Kpler.

Politico noted, however, that any plan to sever energy ties with Russia in the next few years would be strongly opposed by EU members that are still heavily reliant the imports, particularly Hungary and Slovakia, whose leaders Viktor Orban and Robert Fico have resisted energy sanctions on Russia.

Jorgensen’s proposal is also likely to come just weeks after a long-term contract for Russian gas transit via Ukraine is set to expire, on December 31. The EU still receives around 5% of its gas from Russia via Ukraine’s gas transit network, according to the latest data.

Last month, Bloomberg warned of an imminent energy crisis in Western and Central Europe due to the latest US sanctions against Russia’s Gazprombank, the primary bank for energy-related transactions. The outlet said that rapidly depleting gas reserves and potential supply cuts from Russia threaten to exacerbate an already difficult situation.

December 12, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

Seizure of Frozen Russian Assets: Is EU Setting a Legal Trap for Euroclear?

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 11.12.2024

Valerie Urbain, CEO of Euroclear which holds $200 billion in frozen Russian Central Bank assets, told Bloomberg that if the European Union (EU) decides to confiscate the money, the financial services company should be exempt from any liabilities.

What are Euroclear’s concerns?

Urbain suggests Russia’s frozen money may be seized if incoming US President Donald Trump cuts off aid to Ukraine.

Confiscating the Russian assets poses severe risks to the euro currency and the broader stability of Europe’s finances, she warns.

Euroclear could also face legal challenges from Moscow to any moves to confiscate its foreign-held funds, a senior EU official told Reuters in March. Moscow could seize the €33 billion ($34.6 billion) of Euroclear money held in Russia and take legal action to sequester Euroclear assets in Hong Kong and Dubai, the official cautioned.

Sputnik pundit and French economist Jacques Sapir warned in October 2023 that the confiscation of Russia’s frozen assets would be theft – leading to legal action.

Urbain’s predecessor Lieve Mostrey warned the EU in February against seizing the frozen Russian money, adding that “the risk is a bit lower” if the EU appropriates the interest owed on the frozen sovereign assets.

But in October the European Commission moved to consider allowing Euroclear to take the frozen Russian assets, despite the risks. Euroclear complains that it faces “a significant number of legal proceedings ongoing, almost exclusively in Russian courts”.

December 11, 2024 Posted by | Economics | , | Leave a comment

Slovak MP Slams EU Leadership’s ‘Idiotic’ Russian Gas Sanctions

Sputnik – December 11, 2024

Reducing energy dependence on Russia became one of the European Union’s top priorities after the West unleashed its sanctions campaign against Moscow in 2022. The move has backfired on the continent, leaving Europe facing a crippling energy crisis, while Russia retained its position as the world’s largest gas exporter in 2023.

If the EU wants to drive its economy off a cliff, its self-destructive goal of halting Russian gas flows will get that result, Andrej Danko, deputy speaker of the National Council of the Slovak Republic, told Sputnik.

Ending imports of Russian gas will be a huge problem, he warned, adding that “whoever claims that this is not true is a fool.”

“Therefore, we need to talk about this problem, and a solution is needed,” Danko underscored.

The Slovak politician is set to visit Moscow in January to discuss prospects for Russian gas supplies in 2025.

He weighed in on EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s crusade of totally banning both Russian piped gas and LNG, specifically, recent remarks about wanting to discuss with US President-elect Donald Trump an increase in purchases of liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the United States to replace Russian supplies.

The Slovak lawmaker admitted he was puzzled by her proposal.

“How much would US gas imports cost? What was the purpose then of Nord Stream 1, Nord Stream 2? What do they want to achieve? This will be a problem for Germany, where Ursula is from originally… If she wants to live in America later, then I get it. But if Ursula is going to live in the European Union, it’s impossible to understand her… It’s inconceivable for a person of her rank to say something like that,” Danko said.

Gas prices exceeded $500 per thousand cubic meters in Europe in November, with European gas futures reaching around €46 ($48.6) per MWh as Russia suspended fuel deliveries to Austria’s OMV. Furthermore, Ukraine is about to stop the transit of Russia’s gas through its territory by the end of the year, which could affect several European nations, including Austria and Slovakia.

Unless the EU changes its self-harming policy course, it won’t exist in 10 years’ time, Danko speculated. EU sanctions on Russian energy have generated a terrible situation, according to him, and people like Ursula von der Leyen are only driving the bloc’s economy into the ground.

He also voiced hope for dialogue between Moscow and Washington under incoming President Donald Trump. As for Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky, he “does nothing for his people, he only creates problems,” Danko noted, likening the expired Kiev regime leader to a chattering “con artist.”

The EU’s energy problems are also linked to the Green Deal, Danko said, which “some jokers had come up with,” and foolhardy talk about scrapping nuclear energy.

He claimed the biggest problems were created by shutting down nuclear power plants under Germany’s then-Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Codified in a 2002 law, the nuclear phase-out in Germany was finalized after the 2011 Fukushima disaster in Japan. The country’s last trio of operating nuclear power plants, Emsland, Neckarwestheim 2, and Isar 2, were finally shuttered on April 15, 2023.

Berlin’s move to join the West’s energy sanctions against Russia and give up Moscow’s reliable and abundant energy supplies, along with the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage and the “green agenda” aimed at replacing fossil fuels and phasing out nuclear energy, have all contributed to Germany’s dismal economic data and looming deindustrialization.

Assessing the litany of mistakes made by the European Union, Danko speculated that if the continent hopes to achieve progress in energy and the economy, a fresh influx of “parties of the people” is needed to breathe new life into the EU.

December 11, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

Russian gas was ‘win-win’ – Merkel

RT | December 10, 2024

Buying natural gas from Russia was a good deal, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said, rejecting suggestions that it may have been a strategic mistake.

Merkel, who served as chancellor from 2005 to 2021, was in Paris this week to promote her memoir. She gave an exclusive interview to state TV channel France 2, in which she was asked about Germany’s energy relationship with Russia.

“The gas trade with Russia has a deep-rooted tradition. It began during the Cold War and continued throughout my time in office. I do not think it was a mistake, because we obtained Russian gas at a favorable price,” Merkel said in the interview, which aired on Monday evening.

“It was a win-win situation,” the former chancellor added.

Following the escalation of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Germany had to source gas elsewhere because “prices exploded,” Merkel said, noting that this would have happened much earlier had Berlin stopped doing business with Moscow during her term.

“I believe it is reasonable to procure the most affordable gas,” she told France 2.

Earlier on her press tour, Merkel also defended the decision to build Nord Stream 2, noting that she had “no support from the business community to stop the gas trade with Russia” at the time. The project was launched in 2015 and the first pipes were laid in 2018.

While the government of Merkel’s successor, Olaf Scholz, has accused Moscow of “shutting off” gas to Germany, his coalition partner Robert Habeck had moved to end the energy trade long before the Ukraine conflict and EU sanctions on Russia provided the pretext. The Green Party leader presented giving up gas for “renewables” as an environmentally responsible policy choice.

Berlin thus refused to certify the newly finished Nord Stream 2 pipeline in January 2022. Nord Stream 1 was destroyed by a series of underwater explosions in September 2022. Investigations by Germany, Sweden, and Denmark have not pointed to a culprit yet, though German media reports have blamed a “rogue” group of Ukrainians.

One of the lines of Nord Stream 2 survived the bombing unharmed and could still deliver gas to Germany should Berlin change its policy and certify the pipeline.

The loss of Russian gas and reliance on the far more expensive US alternative has since pushed energy prices in Germany beyond what a lot of industrial enterprises could afford, triggering a wave of shutdowns and bankruptcies.

In a December 2022 interview, Merkel revealed that Germany and France considered the Minsk Agreements – a framework to peacefully resolve the dispute between Kiev and the two Donbass republics – as a play for time until the West could arm Ukraine for a confrontation with Russia. Former French President Francois Hollande has confirmed her claim.

December 10, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | Leave a comment

Russia’s Demands in Peace Negotiations

Dmitri Polyanskiy, Alexander Mercouris & Glenn Diesen on the Duran
Glenn Diesen | December 7, 2024

We had a conversation with Dmitri Polyanskiy, the First Deputy Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations. Polyanskiy shared the Russian perspective on recent escalations with NATO and the requirements for a peaceful settlement.

As Ukrainian frontlines are collapsing, the US can either escalate or start negotiations. The decision by the Biden administration to attack Russia with long-range ATACMS crossed Russia’s red lines, and the response was the Oreshnik missile. The Oreshnik missile was intended as a warning shot by not attaching a warhead. Russia demands an end to NATO expansion, territorial concessions, and restoring minority rights in Ukraine.

View video at Odysee

December 9, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia, Video | , , , | Leave a comment

Georgia prevented Maidan-style coup – PM

RT | December 9, 2024

Georgia has prevented an attempted overthrow of the government orchestrated by foreign powers, Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze has said. He compared the scenario allegedly prepared for the nation with the situation in Ukraine in 2014.

Speaking on Monday, Kobakhidze referred to the US-backed Maidan coup in Kiev a decade ago, which ousted Ukraine’s democratically elected president, Viktor Yanukovich, and precipitated the current conflict between Moscow and Kiev.

“It took the [Georgian] Ministry of Internal Affairs exactly five days to neutralize the resource of violence of the radical opposition,” Kobakhidze said at a cabinet meeting, thanking the head of the ministry, Vakhtang Gomelauri, and police officers.

He added that the ministry had acted in accordance with standards “higher than the American and European ones.”

“This is how the attempt of Maidan in our country was stopped in exactly five days,” Kobakhidze concluded.

The Georgian capital, Tbilisi, has been rocked by anti-government and pro-EU rallies since late November, when Kobakhidze announced that the country would halt negotiations on potential accession to the bloc until 2028, citing “blackmail and manipulation” from EU officials. Brussels has since imposed personal sanctions against members of the Georgian government.

Protestors have repeatedly clashed with law enforcement, shot fireworks, and thrown Molotov cocktails at riot police, who have deployed tear gas and water cannons in an effort to disperse the demonstrators.

December 9, 2024 Posted by | Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Romania makes dangerous step to prevent victory of anti-war presidential candidate

By Lucas Leiroz – December 9, 2024

Western narratives about “democracy” and “electoral transparency” seem to be mere rhetoric – conveniently used against enemies and ignored when Western countries violate such “rules”. Recently, Romania illegally and unjustifiably annulled the results of its presidential elections just to prevent an anti-EU candidate from winning. This case clearly shows how European countries are willing to take any kind of action to prevent political changes that favor multipolarity.

The Romanian Constitutional Court illegally interfered in the country’s electoral process by annulling the results of the first round of the presidential elections. Thus, independent candidate Calin Georgescu, who surprisingly won the race against his EU-backed opponents, was harmed for maintaining a critical stance of opposition against Romania’s alignment with the West.

Georgescu is accused of receiving Russian support in his electoral campaign. He is a well-known critic of NATO and the EU, and is absolutely against Romania’s involvement in the conflict with Russia. He promises to reverse the Romanian government’s aid measures to Ukraine, and maintains a strong position against the EU-sponsored “woke” cultural agenda. As a religious nationalist, he also wants to establish peaceful ties with Russia to pacify relations between the countries with Orthodox Christian majorities, which has made him particularly popular among the Romanian people, who remain largely Christian despite Western cultural pressure.

For this reason, Georgescu is called “pro-Russian” and his opponents invent unsubstantiated narratives against him, claiming that Moscow finances his political projects and his electoral campaign. Russian authorities have already spoken out on the case, denying any connection, but that was not enough to stop Romanian judges from nullifying his first-round election victory, labeling him a “foreign agent.”

Georgescu won nearly 23% of the vote in the first round. He was scheduled to face leftist-liberal candidate Elena Lasconi, who won 19% of the vote, in a runoff election. Instead of respecting the will of the people, the Constitutional Court, which is certainly controlled by pro-NATO and pro-EU judges, simply nullified the electoral process and set a new election day for a later date.

The right-wing candidate reacted to the decision by saying that the judges made a coup d’etat. According to him, democracy and the rule of law have been suspended in Romania, and there is no longer any respect for the country’s legal order. Georgescu described the Romanian judicial system as corrupt, strongly condemning the unfair accusations made against him.

“Essentially, this is a formalized coup d’etat. The rule of law is in an induced coma, and justice subordinated to political orders has practically lost its essence. It is no longer justice, it obeys the orders (…) The corrupt system in Romania showed its true face by making a pact with the devil,” he said.

In fact, no evidence has been provided to justify the claim that Georgescu is supported by Russia. If such support existed, it would certainly be easy to provide personal data to prove it, but nothing has been done, which indicates that the allegations are completely baseless. This shows that for the Romanian electoral legal system, a fair lawsuit is not important, and any maneuver to prevent a dissident candidate from coming to power is valid.

Even if Georgescu did receive support from Moscow, this should not be a problem, since it is common for candidates to be supported by foreign countries – as in Romania itself, where Georgescu’s opponents are largely supported by the EU. In a truly democratic system, all candidates should be free to make their own choices regarding international and diplomatic alliances. However, it seems that Romania is not really a democracy.

To prevent the rise of an anti-NATO political wave, the Atlantic alliance is encouraging the rise of authoritarian regimes in Europe. NATO knows that the war against Russia is unpopular and that ordinary citizens want support for Ukraine to end. Therefore, only dictatorships can sustain the alliance’s war efforts – which is why, for example, Macron recently banned the French parliament and now Romania has annulled its presidential elections.

It is important to emphasize that Romania is an important logistical hub for supporting Ukraine, in addition to exerting direct influence over Moldova, a NATO proxy country with an ethnic Romanian majority. Losing a presence in Romania would be negative for NATO and the EU, which explains their desperation to prevent Georgescu’s victory.

It remains to be seen how long Western countries will continue to be able to violate the will of their own people without suffering serious consequences and deep crises of legitimacy.

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

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

December 9, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

Kiev reveals terms of $20 billion US loan

RT | December 9, 2024

The Ukrainian government has approved the terms of a conditional agreement with the US Federal Financing Bank (FFB) for a 40-year loan of $20 billion which will be backed by profits from frozen Russian state assets.

It’s part of a broader $50 billion G7 loan deal, which includes a separate $20 billion EU commitment, and $10 billion to be split by G7 members Britain, Japan and Canada.

The money will be transferred to the Facilitation of Resources to Invest in Strengthening Ukraine Financial Intermediary Fund, established by the World Bank on October 10, “for the sake of the state,” a resolution issued by Ukraine’s Cabinet of Ministers on Friday stated.

The transfer will be based on a Certificate Purchase Agreement between Ukraine, the FFB, and the US Agency for International Development (USAID), along with a loan guarantee and repayment agreement between Ukraine and USAID.

Under the deal, Ukraine’s Finance Ministry will issue a certificate of indebtedness to the FFB, guaranteed by USAID, the government resolution said.

The loan, which has an annual interest rate of 1.3% plus the current average rate for one-year US Treasury bills, will be repaid using interest earned from immobilized Russian sovereign assets.

The US and its allies froze an estimated $300 billion in assets belonging to the Russian central bank following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. In June, G7 members pledged a $50 billion loan for Kiev, with the frozen Russian assets to be used as collateral, to help Kiev buy weapons and rebuild damaged infrastructure. The agreement was finalized in October.

Moscow has repeatedly denounced the asset freeze as “theft” and argued that tapping into these funds would be illegal and set a dangerous precedent. The Russian Finance Ministry has warned that it will initiate retaliatory measures mirroring the West’s actions against resources of Western investors held in the country.

The latest move is part of the current US administration’s last-minute strategy to bolster Kiev’s war effort, which includes a new $725 million military aid package to Kiev and another round of sanctions against Russia. It comes as uncertainty grows over Washington’s commitments under the upcoming presidency of Donald Trump, particularly after US House Speaker Mike Johnson dismissed President Joe Biden’s request to include $24 billion in additional aid to Ukraine in a government funding bill last week.

December 9, 2024 Posted by | Corruption | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Spiralling European Political Crisis: France’s Prime Minister Falls And President Under Pressure to Resign

By Ricardo Martins – New Eastern Outlook – December 7, 2024

The motion of no confidence, voted through on 4 December 2024, has succeeded—a first in France since 1962. All eyes are now on French President Emmanuel Macron, who faces mounting pressure to resign, but has assured that he will not resign.

The French political crisis is evolving into a dramatic and complex challenge, with significant implications for domestic governance, European stability, and global diplomacy. The public largely blames President Macron for the chaos.

In his national TV address on the evening of 5 December, Macron sought to shift the blame onto the “far-right” and “far-left,” accusing them of uniting to create turmoil ahead of the next presidential election—or to force an early one. He firmly rejected the idea of broad “cohabitation” as a solution or of bringing forward the presidential election foreseen for 2027.

Here’s my analysis connecting the key developments and their potential consequences.

A Crisis Born of Discord

Michel Barnier’s short-lived government collapsed in an extraordinary parliamentary alliance between far-right (RN – Marine Le Pen’s National Rally) and the left (New Popular Union, including LFI – France Unbowed led by Jean-Luc Mélenchon, considered an extreme-left movement). Their common grievance? A rejection of Barnier’s austere budget proposal, which sought to rein in France’s growing deficit, as well as their initial rejection of Barnier’s nomination as Prime Minister by President Macron, who disregarded the election results that were won by the left.

However, Le Pen was the primary architect behind the government’s downfall.

While intended to address fiscal concerns, the proposal ignited a populist backlash, culminating in a vote of no confidence. This marked the first successful ousting of a French prime minister by parliamentary motion since 1962, underscoring the depth of political fragmentation in the Fifth Republic.

Ripples Across Europe

France’s turmoil arrives at a precarious moment for the European Union. As the bloc’s major army and second-largest economy, its instability reverberates across the continent, weakening political cohesion within the EU and exposing vulnerabilities in the Eurozone. The EU was not used to face a political crisis in such dimensions within its core nations.

Compounding the issue, Germany is preoccupied with its own economic and electoral uncertainties, and Donald Trump’s imminent return to the U.S. presidency introduces a wildcard into global geopolitics.

The crisis in France underscores broader European challenges, from the rise of populism to mounting fiscal pressures, threatening the EU’s ability to maintain a united front in trade negotiations, foreign policy, and economic governance.

The EU has long relied on the leadership of the Franco-German duo. Now, both nations are mired in deep crises—Germany facing a political and economic crossroads, and France grappling with political and fiscal turmoil.

To make matters worse, there is no leader on the horizon like Charles de Gaulle, Willy Brandt, François Mitterrand, Helmut Kohl, or Angela Merkel—figures we were accustomed to relying on in the past to steer their nations out of such crises.

Macron Under Fire

Having Michel Barnier delivered his resignation, President Emmanuel Macron is under intense pressure to act decisively. Barnier now holds the dubious distinction of being the shortest-serving Prime Minister of the Fifth Republic. Naming a new prime minister quickly is not just a domestic imperative, but also a global one. The reopening of Notre Dame Cathedral this weekend, attended by Trump and other dignitaries, has heightened scrutiny on Macron’s leadership.

While Macron could reappoint Barnier as a caretaker to buy time, doing so risks appearing tone-deaf to growing calls for systemic change. Meanwhile, opposition factions and public sentiment increasingly question Macron’s ability to lead, raising the spectre of a presidential resignation. Macron’s televised address has done little to alter the narrative surrounding his survival—or the prospect of his potential downfall.

The Challenge of Finding a New Prime Minister

Forming a new government in France is proving to be a complex and overwhelming task. The New Popular Front (NFP) Alliance, a coalition of Greens, Socialists, Communists, and the radical left faction, France Unbowed, is the largest group at the French National Assembly.

However, the NFP lacks a sufficient majority to govern outright, forcing them to rely on support from President Macron’s MPs to pass legislation.

A potential candidate for prime minister from the NFP, Lucie Castets, was previously rejected by Macron this summer with fears that she would cancel his neoliberal reforms, such as the pension reform. The president’s decision stemmed from an apparent inability to secure stable majorities, despite the theoretical possibility of combining the NFP’s votes with Macron’s MPs to push through key laws. The new stalemate highlights the deep fractures within French politics and raises questions about whether any coalition can provide the stability needed to navigate the current crisis.

The immediate question is whether Macron can restore a semblance of stability by swiftly appointing a credible prime minister. Failure to do so could embolden opposition forces and deepen calls for his resignation. Beyond France, the crisis tests the EU’s resilience in managing its internal divisions while confronting external pressures, from a menacing Donald Trump to the rising assertiveness of the Global South.

Opportunistic Moves in Brussels

Amid France’s crisis, Brussels may seize the moment to push forward controversial EU initiatives. Chief among them is the Mercosur trade deal, a landmark agreement with Latin American countries that France has staunchly opposed. With French political attention consumed by domestic turmoil, the European Commission might view this as a rare opportunity to sidestep resistance and secure the deal’s approval, sparking further controversy within an already fragile EU.

The coming days will be pivotal in determining whether France and the EU can weather this storm—or whether it will escalate into a broader crisis of governance.

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

December 7, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »