NATO wages hybrid war on Russia as Europe prepares for wider conflict
By Ahmed Adel | August 24, 2026
The war in Ukraine has long ceased to be a bilateral conflict between Moscow and Kiev. What began as a military operation has evolved into a sustained hybrid NATO campaign against Russia, with Ukraine receiving military assistance and intelligence sharing, European states rearming, and the anti-Russia sanctions regime continually expanding. The cumulative effect is an attempt to degrade Russia’s strategic capacity while avoiding the formal declaration of direct war.
According to Bild, military planning documents are circulating within NATO. The documents, developed by United States Army Major Andrew Pingray, lay out that the objectives in a war with Russia would be to halt an offensive and significantly weaken the Russian military’s potential. The German newspaper reports that NATO has developed a multi-phase concept for a potential large-scale conflict with Russia, often referred to as the NATO Land Warfighting Concept.
“NATO is preparing with a new concept of land warfare for a possible Russian attack in the Baltic region,” the publication says.
Bild reported that in the opening phase, combat aircraft, long-range missiles, and unmanned systems would play a central role. Along the frontiers of the Baltic states with Russia and Belarus, planners envision autonomous zones where the permanent stationing of Alliance ground forces would be minimized. From these zones, strikes could be directed against targets on Russian territory, including airfields, industrial facilities, bridges, and rail nodes. Later phases involve more restrictions on logistics and deploying unmanned systems deeper into Russian territory.
The circulating documents also state that NATO’s top priority should be suppressing the missile threat. To this end, the Alliance plans to use aircraft, missiles, and drones to destroy Russian missile systems. One of the plan’s key areas of focus is the Kaliningrad exclave of Russia, where Russian missile and air defense systems are deployed.
According to Bild, the NATO plan also includes the possibility of cooperation with Russians opposed to President Vladimir Putin. Separately, the creation of an “air bridge” for the delivery of drones and robotic systems to Russian territory, which could be used against military targets, is being considered.
Although it is unclear whether this document is a fully authorized operational plan or one of many contingency studies, its existence and partial disclosure indicate that European military planners are seriously exploring scenarios for direct conflict with Russia.
The political context for these preparations has shifted markedly. Under the previous administration, American involvement in the Ukrainian theater was more overt and expansive. The current Trump administration’s position reflects greater reluctance to commit combat forces or to underwrite indefinite European escalation.
American intelligence support, satellite reconnaissance, and the continued sale of advanced weapon systems to Ukraine have not stopped, but the heavier financial and manpower burden is being shifted to NATO’s European members. European Union countries have responded by expanding their procurement programs, particularly in air and missile defense, artillery munitions, and longer-range strike capabilities. These purchases are presented as investments that strengthen collective defense and revitalize domestic industry, thereby providing political cover for rising defense budgets amid Europe’s economic woes.
Germany has moved from limited, non-lethal aid and uniforms to a more assertive military posture, especially after the change of leadership in Berlin. The current German government has accelerated spending commitments and public rhetoric that frames Russia as an enduring threat to the EU. British and French strategic preferences continue to shape the overall direction, with the two traditional powerhouses of Western Europe encouraging Germany to assume greater responsibility as a continental military power while seeking to limit their own direct exposure.
The Black Sea, particularly the ports of Odessa and Nikolaev and the Danube delta, has taken on heightened strategic importance. Disruption of these ports affects the flow of Western military supplies into Ukraine. Russian strikes on port infrastructure are therefore attempts to sever supply lines that have been reoriented from commercial grain exports to military cargo. The substitution of Western weapons shipments for agricultural traffic along the Danube highlights the militarization of civilian infrastructure.
At the same time, a formal ceasefire that leaves the underlying security architecture unresolved would, from the Russian perspective, create new vulnerabilities rather than lasting stability, especially if Ukraine remains integrated into Western military, intelligence, and political structures and does not revert to neutrality. This is particularly important because European states are already expanding industrial capacity, stockpiling munitions, and refining doctrines for high-intensity conflict.
The ongoing hybrid campaign—integrating support, economic measures, information warfare, and societal militarization—allows the West to exert constant pressure without direct attribution to combat. If this hybrid strategy continues without a political solution that addresses Russia’s core security concerns, NATO’s planning is likely to become increasingly aggressive. Europe’s accelerated rearmament and the emerging detailed plans within NATO dispel any resistance to the idea that the conflict has now expanded beyond Ukraine’s borders.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
Japan rejects Ukraine’s missile plea
RT | August 24, 2026
Japan does not plan to supply Ukraine with weapons, Chief Cabinet Secretary Minoru Kihara has said. At a press briefing on Monday, he told reporters that Tokyo “is not considering any deliveries” of defensive or offensive weapons “at this time.”
Kihara was responding to Ukrainian Prime Minister Sergey Koretsky, who asked Japan on Sunday for anti-ballistic missiles, in an interview with Kyodo News.
“I would like to kindly ask one and only thing… anti-ballistic missiles,” he was cited as saying. “It’s the most important thing we need… I very much hope and count on your country.”
Koretsky took office in July and was reportedly close to disgraced businessman Timur Mindich, a close associate of Vladimir Zelensky who fled to Israel amid a corruption scandal.
“At this time, the government does not consider transferring weapons under the Self-Defense Forces Law to Ukraine,” Kihara said, referring to an overhaul in April of Japan’s defense-export policy that lifted restrictions limiting transfers to non-lethal categories and opened the door to lethal weapons exports.
He noted that Tokyo has already provided Kiev with non-lethal equipment and pledged around $20 billion in recovery, reconstruction, and humanitarian aid, signaling that it intends to keep its assistance within these bounds.
Japan’s stance on the Ukraine conflict has been marked by contradiction. Tokyo has publicly sided with Kiev, condemning Russia’s military operation and taking part in the Western sanctions. However, it has stopped short of supplying lethal weapons to Ukraine, and unlike some Western nations, has retained stakes in key Russian energy projects, citing their importance to domestic energy security.
Over the past few months, Ukraine has increasingly sought new military hardware from its Western backers to counter severe battlefield shortages amid the steady advance of Russian forces. Last month, Russia announced the capture of the key Ukrainian stronghold of Konstantinovka in northwestern Donbass before launching an offensive toward the Slavyansk-Kramatorsk agglomeration, the last two major cities in the region still under Ukrainian control. Over the past week, Russia has liberated six settlements in Donbass.
Kiev has intensified long-range drone attacks deep inside Russia, increasingly striking energy and civilian infrastructure and prompting Moscow to denounce the raids as terrorist attacks against civilians. Last month, Russian Ambassador-at-Large Rodion Miroshnik told RT that Ukraine is trying to mask its battlefield setbacks by attacking Russian civilians and presenting the strikes as “some kind of achievement.”
Russia has long accused Western weapons suppliers of enabling Ukraine’s deep-strike campaign. A Sunday Times report last week claimed that Ukraine has used British-made drones for long-range attacks inside Russia over the past six months. Moscow maintains that this aid makes Kiev’s foreign backers direct participants in the hostilities and only serves to prolong the conflict. Earlier this month, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned that Russia will adopt “much harsher methods to destroy everything that enables the West to fuel Kiev’s war machine.”
The ‘coalition of the willing’, a group of Western states pushing for continued aid to Ukraine which includes the UK, France, and Germany, will convene in Kiev on Monday to discuss future weapons deliveries. Kiev is expected to seek additional interceptor missiles. The UK is set to announce that it will provide Ukraine with classified technical information needed to assemble long-range cruise missiles domestically.
Senior Iranian MP warns France over ‘constant betrayals’ after Tehran expels diplomats
Press TV – August 19, 2026
Senior Iranian lawmaker Ebrahim Azizi has condemned France’s “constant betrayals” against the Islamic Republic, warning that Paris’s continued anti-Iranian measures will only further complicate its ties with Tehran.
“The Iranian people will never forget France’s constant betrayals over issues such as contaminated blood, INSTEX and snapback,” Azizi, chairman of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, wrote on X on Wednesday.
“Continuing this course and anti-Iranian actions will only make conditions more difficult for it,” he added.
Azizi’s reference to the INSTEX (Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges) and snapback comes against the backdrop of longstanding disagreements between Iran and the E3 — France, Germany and the UK- over Tehran’s peaceful nuclear program.
The three countries shut down the INSTEX mechanism in 2023. Established in 2019, the INSTEX was designed to facilitate trade between European companies and Iran, bypassing the US sanctions.
The E3 also moved to trigger the UN Security Council’s “snapback” mechanism under the 2015 Iran nuclear deal last year, despite Tehran’s commitment to diplomacy and transparency regarding its nuclear program.
Azizi’s remarks came after Iran’s Foreign Ministry declared two French diplomats working at the French Embassy in Tehran persona non grata over activities that violated international law and the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.
In a statement on Tuesday, the ministry said the two French officials had engaged in activities contrary to international law, particularly provisions of the Vienna Convention.
The ministry said that, despite several weeks having passed since the misconduct was uncovered, France had taken no steps to address the diplomats’ actions or provide assurances against similar incidents, prompting Tehran to bar the two from entering the country.
The move follows a diplomatic dispute between Tehran and Paris that escalated in July, when the diplomats were briefly detained in Tehran after Iranian forces discovered them at a secret meeting site while carrying out a judicial order to arrest two suspects in a major case involving foreign infiltration and interference.
Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence said the two diplomats had “extensive records of violations and conduct contrary to domestic laws and diplomatic obligations.”
Azizi also referred to the issue of HIV-contaminated blood products supplied by France in the 1980s, another longstanding grievance in Tehran’s relations with Paris.
In 1985, French pharmaceutical company Institut Mérieux supplied blood-clotting products contaminated with HIV to several countries, including Iran. The products were administered to hemophilia and thalassemia patients, many of whom contracted the virus and later died.
Iran recorded its first HIV infections among patients who had received the contaminated French blood products.
Putin warns West over ship seizures
RT | August 12, 2026
Russia could seize ships carrying Western cargo in retaliation for similar actions against Russian maritime trade, President Vladimir Putin has warned.
There have been several incidents in recent months in which Western militaries have seized vessels that their governments accused of being part of a so-called Russian ‘shadow fleet’. Putin warned on Wednesday during a meeting with Pacific Fleet commanders that Moscow could take retaliatory measures wherever it deemed necessary.
“Some nations are violating the Law of the Sea by trying to restrict the movement of our civilian traders. They recently came up with the idea of seizing our ships and selling off our plundered property. This is certainly nothing short of piracy and robbery,” Putin said.
“If such a policy is implemented in practice, we will be forced to take mirror responses. And not necessarily in the waters where our ships are being raided. We’ll do it wherever and anywhere we see fit,” he added.
Pacific Fleet Commander Adm. Viktor Liina reported in response that the Russian military has detailed information about Western commercial traffic.
“From April 24 to August 6 of 2026, 1,001 ships passed through the Russian exclusive economic zone, including 379 with flags of unfriendly nations,” he said. “That includes 273 general cargo ships and 71 tanks, including 26 under the British flag and nine under the French flag.”
The UK and France have carried out several interdictions of supposed Russian ‘shadow fleet’ vessels. In June, The Telegraph reported that British authorities were considering selling around 100,000 tons of Russian crude seized from a sanctioned tanker and using the proceeds to benefit Ukraine.
The term ‘shadow fleet’ is used by Western governments to describe vessels they accuse of helping Russia circumvent sanctions, particularly the price cap imposed on Russian oil. Moscow rejects the designation, saying it has no basis in international law and violates Russia’s right to conduct maritime trade.
Western governments have targeted hundreds of vessels with unilateral sanctions and have increasingly resorted to physically intercepting and detaining some of them.
Kiev has also broadened its use of the “shadow fleet” label, applying it to various Russian commercial vessels targeted in Ukrainian drone strikes, including tankers and cargo ships.
Notable ‘shadow fleet’ detentions
At least a dozen vessels have been detained by Western nations since last year as part of their campaign targeting Russian trade. The list of incidents includes:
- In March 2025, Germany seized the tanker Eventin carrying some 100,000 tons of crude. German courts later blocked the government’s attempts to sell the Panama-flagged ship.
- In April 2025, Estonia detained oil tanker the Kiwala, claiming it had no valid flag. Weeks later the ship was released.
- An oil tanker going by the names the Pushpa, Kiwala, Boracay, and others was targeted by France in September 2025, but resumed its voyage towards the Suez Canal the next month. Western media claimed it was linked to the mass hysteria over “mystery drone sightings” in Europe.
- In March 2026, French-backed Belgian forces boarded the oil tanker Ethera. It reportedly remains impounded under a €10 million ($11.6 million) bail.
- Sweden seized the cargo ship Caffa in March 2026 for allegedly carrying “stolen Ukrainian grain.” Earlier this month the country’s top court agreed to the government’s request to transfer the ship to Ukraine.
- British forces for the first time directly seized a ‘shadow fleet’ ship in June, 2026, when they targeted the oil tanker Smyrtos. Previously, the UK only provided assistance to France for such operations. The ship’s Indian master, Ajay Pant, remains in British custody pending a criminal trial for violating the UK’s anti-Russian measures.
Europe Wants To Prevent It’s Citizens From Even Hearing The Russian Perspective
The Dissident | August 3, 2026
As EU countries continue to fuel the never-ending proxy war in Ukraine, its leaders want to prevent citizens from even hearing the Russian perspective.
In the most recent move, the Emmanuel Macron government in France is trying to ban the Russian-French journalist Xenia Fedorova from the country, simply for giving an alternate perspective on the Ukraine war in TV interviews.
On X, Zenia Fedorova wrote :
The government of Emmanuel Macron has decided that my statements made publicly on the sets of CNEWS and Europe 1, as well as my columns published in the pages of JDNews, represent an immediate danger to the Republic, and has ordered my expulsion on grounds of absolute emergency.
I am accused of seeking “to undermine the confidence of European citizens, and in particular French citizens, in their institutions and to instill doubt about the legitimacy of the support provided to Ukraine.”
They assert that my behavior, which consists of living in France for nearly ten years in compliance with the law, paying my taxes, but also having an opinion and expressing it as part of my work as a journalist, “thus harms the fundamental interests of the State” and that my presence on the territory constitutes “a particularly serious and current threat to public order; that consequently, there is reason to order, on grounds of absolute emergency, his expulsion from national territory pursuant to Article L. 631-1 of the CESEDA in order to put an end as quickly as possible to these positions that have the effect of destabilizing the social fabric.”
In addition, the Minister of the Economy, Roland Lescure, and the Minister of the Interior, Laurent Nuñez, issued a decree overnight aimed at freezing my assets.
This follows a series of actions from EU countries designed to prevent its citizens from even hearing Russia’s perspective.
Last month, the EU ruled that three obscure bloggers in Germany violated EU sanctions law because they shared content from the Russian broadcaster RT on a few occasions, in effect barring even sharing content from Russian media.
The EU has even placed sanctions on commentators who have no connection to Russia, and do not endorse Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, most notably the retired colonel in the Swiss army, Jacques Baud, simply because he was critical of official EU policy in the Ukraine proxy war.
EU countries supporting the proxy war in Ukraine have made it clear they are opposed to citizens even hearing Russia’s perspective.
While this is framed as combating “dangerous disinformation,” the reality is the EU wants to black out the Russian perspective because it will make it harder to continue the proxy war in Ukraine.
As political scientist John Mearsheimer recently explained to the EU’s European Parliament, the EU continues to spread a narrative claiming that Russia’s goal “is to conquer all of Ukraine and make it part of a greater Russia. Once that goal is achieved, Russia will move to create an empire in Eastern Europe, much like the Soviet Union did after World War II. In this story, Putin is a mortal threat to the West and must be dealt with forcefully. In short, Putin is an imperialist with a master plan that fits neatly into a rich Russian tradition”.
But as he noted, there is no evidence backing up this narrative, and all evidence shows that Russia launched the invasion of Ukraine to prevent it from becoming a NATO member.
“While it is widely believed in Europe, and again, I’m sure here in the European Parliament, that Putin is an imperialist who has long been determined to conquer all of Ukraine and then conquer additional countries west of Ukraine, virtually all the available evidence is at odds with this perspective. In fact, the United States and its and its European allies provoked the war” he noted.
One can still oppose the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but the reality is, the war was launched after decades of U.S. provocations, not because Russia wants to recreate the Soviet Union and conquer all of Europe.
Even hearing the Russian perspective, even if one disagrees, will help show that the European narrative of Russia wanting to conquer all of Europe is false.
For this reason, EU countries don’t want citizens even hearing the Russian perspective, in order to continue the bogus narrative needed to continue fuelling the proxy war in Ukraine.
France planning third attack on former colony – African leader
RT | July 27, 2026
French intelligence services are preparing a third attack on Niger’s main airport after two assaults on the facility this year, the West African nation’s transitional leader, General Abdourahamane Tchiani, has said.
Tchiani made the allegation in an interview on state-owned RTN on Saturday to mark the third anniversary of the transitional authorities taking power following the ouster of French-aligned President Mohamed Bazoum. France condemned the July 2023 coup, refused to recognize the new authorities, and demanded Bazoum’s reinstatement.
“The June 18 attack was not the last because we are already tracking [them], since the objective has not been achieved. French intelligence is currently working to attempt a third attack,” Tchiani said.
Gunmen launched an assault on Diori Hamani International Airport in Niger’s capital Niamey on June 18, killing 13 people, including 11 security personnel and two civilians, according to the Sahel state’s Defense Ministry. At least 22 assailants were neutralized and about 20 suspects arrested. Al-Qaeda-linked Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM) claimed responsibility for the attack.
The airport, which also hosts a military airbase and the headquarters of the joint Niger-Burkina Faso-Mali force, was previously attacked in January. Islamic State claimed responsibility for that assault, during which officials said 20 militants were killed and 11 arrested. Gen. Tchiani accused France, Benin, and Ivory Coast (Cote d’Ivoire) of sponsoring the violence. Paris and the two neighboring countries have denied the allegations.
On Saturday, the Nigerien leader accused French intelligence of assembling, training, and equipping militants from JNIM who were behind last month’s offensive. He said the operation was intended to simultaneously target the airport, the presidential palace, and an officer-training center in Tondibia, on the outskirts of Niamey.
Tchiani linked the attack to the withdrawal of at least 4,000 foreign troops from the Niamey airbase. He claimed France sought to portray their presence as essential to Niger’s security and their departure as a cause of permanent instability.
Niger and its neighbors Mali and Burkina Faso have battled jihadist violence for more than a decade. The three former French colonies formed the Alliance of Sahel States (AES) in 2023 to jointly combat the insurgency after severing defense ties with Paris over alleged French aggression and its failure to contain the militants.
The AES leaders have jointly condemned what they described as a “cowardly and perfidious aggression” supported by “foreign state sponsors” against their countries.
French Donbass Charity Founder’s Show Trial Designed to ‘Neutralize’ Dissent to Hostility to Russia

Sputnik – 15.07.2026
The criminal case against SOS Donbass organizer Anna Novikova is part of France and EU’s broader policy of “intimidating dissenters and neutralizing them to suppress domestic opposition to the official hostility to Russia,” independent French geopolitical analyst Come Carpentier de Gourdon told Sputnik.
“In fact any support of Russia, even by quoting or circulating news reports, opinions or comments from Russian (state) media is considered in France as connivence with the enemy and therefore potentially treasonous,” with Russia deemed “de facto an enemy country,” the observer pointed out.
But the prosecution may face problems, because the law “is far from clear” regarding humanitarian aid, “and any trial can become very controversial as the accused may object the French Government’s position: Ukraine is not an ally of France or a NATO member, France has not declared war on Russia.”
“Therefore objections can be raised to the claim that assistance to the Donbass and denunciation of Ukrainian actions there is tantamount to supporting Russia’s military campaign.”
Nevertheless, “other EU countries” should be “expected to adopt similar measures or laws,” the analyst fears.
Case Flunks Even EU’s Own Fake Rule of Law Standards
Novikova’s case does not even “adhere to the three Orwellian slogans of the EU – democracy, rule of law and respect for human rights,” political analyst Dr. Greg Simons told Sputnik.
The “purely political” crackdown “is a continuation of the larger attempt to shut out any alternative views,” and was preceded by things like bans on Russian foreign-facing media, sanctions and economic warfare against critics. It will inevitably expand over time, Simons expects.
“The Ukraine issue is going to become much more sensitive and toxic politically to Europe for supporting this cause,” and Novikova’s “lawfare” imprisonment and trial are a “test case” for tightening control over the narrative on Ukraine.
It’s also an “an act of pure intimidation so that people will stop breaking the narrative” amid the growing desperation and political vulnerability of the French government, Simons suggests, pointing to President Macron’s growing vulnerability and questions on his political future, and similar trends regarding the anti-Russia ideology of Euro-Atlanticism in general.
The end of anonymity in a state-verified internet
As governments tie online speech to real-world identities under the banner of child safety, the implications extend much farther
By Onur Ozersin | The Cradle | July 8, 2026
The internet, long framed as a space of relative freedom, is entering a period of structural change driven by governments acting in parallel.
A quieter process is underway across multiple jurisdictions. Authorities are introducing identity verification requirements tied to access and participation. These measures are presented as safeguards for minors, and a number have already been written into law.
From Canberra to Washington, London to Ankara and Abu Dhabi, governments are moving to dismantle the era of anonymous internet access, embedding age restrictions and verification protocols into law and platform design in what amounts to one of the most significant shifts the digital world has seen since its inception.
A coordinated turn
The emerging model links user profiles to verified identities, going beyond routine regulation and altering how expression functions online.
As every digital post becomes indelibly linked to a real-world identity and added to a permanent database, the concept of online privacy is fundamentally inverted. Anonymity is no longer viewed as a civil right, but rather as an illicit activity.
Momentum accelerated in the UK in 2025, where more than 12,000 individuals faced detention and penalties linked to online activity.
A similar trend is unfolding in the US, where states such as Florida, Utah, and California have pushed forward with localized identity mandates. Progress on a federal equivalent, the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), remains under congressional debate.
The EU has moved along a parallel track through the Digital Services Act (DSA). Presented as a regulatory framework, it has taken on an enforcement function in practice. Denmark, Greece, Italy, and Spain have been selected as early testing grounds for verification systems.
By 2026, the focus had begun to widen. The debate moved from child protection toward the regulation of political expression. In Germany, Chancellor Friedrich Merz stated in early May, “I want to see the real names of everyone who expresses an opinion against us online. They should not hide behind anonymous accounts.”
Turkiye introduced comparable measures in late April. Parliament approved identity checks and a social media ban for children under 15. Following publication on 1 May, platforms were given nine months to comply.
Justice Minister Akin Gurlek described the internet as “digital chaos” and said the law would apply to platforms with more than one million users. Penalties for non-compliance include aggressive enforcement actions, such as financial sanctions, bandwidth throttling, and total network blocking.
The UAE adopted its own framework in June 2026 through Cabinet Decision No. 106. It set an official age threshold for social media use in the Arab world. Platforms are required to integrate with UAE Pass or deploy biometric verification systems. A 12-month transition period has been granted, with enforcement measures including fines and possible service suspension beginning July 2027.
While neighboring Gulf states have not yet codified specific age restrictions or identity verification mandates, parallel legislative frameworks are highly anticipated. This is particularly true for countries boasting advanced digitalization infrastructures, such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Regulators are also cracking down on the primary tool used to bypass these digital borders: VPN services. European Commission Vice President Henna Virkkunen warned that identity verification measures must not be circumvented via VPNs, aligned with existing plans in France and the UK to restrict private network routing.
This crackdown marks a dramatic ideological reversal. Where European leaders previously criticized China’s rigorous internet restrictions under the banner of free speech, they are now deploying the very same enforcement mechanisms within their own borders.
Verification as a condition of access
Several proposals would require users to confirm their identity within fixed timeframes, in some cases as short as 72 hours. Failure to comply could result in account suspension and deletion of associated data.
The choice is reduced to two options. Users either attach their digital history to their legal identity or lose access to accumulated networks and content.
This requirement effectively weaponizes your entire digital past. A political argument you had years ago, an obscure question asked on an old forum, or a reckless comment made in the heat of youth will now follow you forever, indelibly stamped onto your official legal identity.
Initially restricted to government agencies, this searchable database could eventually be accessed by insurance corporations and future employers. Cross-border data sharing will likely become standard practice during international travel applications.
A possible scenario illustrates the trajectory. A visa application could include a request for a digital profile from a country of origin. Automated systems would assess that data before any human review.
The EU has already imposed sanctions on journalists covering certain geopolitical issues, including those expressing pro-Palestine views or positions aligned with Russian policy.
The scope of regulation is not limited to public content. The EU has continued to pursue its “Chat Control” initiative, which aims to enable scanning of private communications. After a temporary exemption expired in April 2026, the Council moved on 2 July to restore monitoring provisions through 2028.
This issue has prompted intense resistance from privacy advocates and a coalition of over 500 cryptographers, who warn that requiring platforms to pre-scan message content inherently compromises end-to-end encryption, effectively transforming private messaging spaces into permanently monitored state domains.
Speech under observation
Officials maintain that these measures apply to social media. The infrastructure being built has broader potential applications.
It is only a matter of time before fingerprint, retina, and facial scans become mandatory for every single action you take online.
Once that threshold is crossed, background screening will extend far beyond traditional criminal records; instead, an individual’s digital profile will become the primary determinant of their professional career. This shift seamlessly enables AI algorithms to scan every digital trace left online, pre-emptively labeling users as “risky” or “prone to crime.”
This framework inevitably chills public discourse; criticizing state policy, exposing corruption, or merely asking a question will be permanently appended to a citizen’s digital dossier. Consequently, state authorities will no longer need to actively suppress free speech.
When the penalty for dissent risks the destruction of an individual’s lifelong professional achievements, self-censorship manifests organically.
A comparable pattern is visible offline. More than 300 international students involved in pro-Palestine protests at US universities faced visa revocations and deportation last year. If visible protest carries such outcomes, the implications of permanent digital traceability are likely to be more far-reaching.
Speaking to The Cradle, journalist and technology policy expert Fusun Nebil frames the issue in broader terms:
“Perhaps the most critical point in this debate is that the internet is no longer merely a means of communication; it has also become people’s digital memory and identity. It is not enough for governments to cite seemingly legitimate justifications such as child safety, combating disinformation, and fighting cybercrime. We must seriously discuss how a digital order that completely eliminates anonymity will exert pressure on freedom of expression, political pluralism, and the culture of social criticism in the long term.”
From open forum to managed space
The internet has long functioned as a space where citizens learn and shape ideas through open discussion, progressing from early forum sites to modern social networks. However, under a system where every word becomes an official record, the survival of satire, humor, and intellectual exchange is thrown into question.
In a framework where a joke cracked at age 22 can be held up as evidence against an individual at age 40, the internet will cease to be an environment for exploration and instead transform into a vast courtroom where any spoken word can be leveraged as an indictment.
Today, traditional media such as newspapers and television channels are frequently controlled or influenced by powerful interest groups in many countries. As a result, social media platforms have become the primary spaces where citizens can freely exchange ideas.
However, introducing mandatory identity verification will almost certainly restrict the diversity of opinions in these remaining open environments.
In June 2026, the UK government launched a consultation on regulating content distribution on platforms such as YouTube and TikTok. The proposals include requirements for algorithms to prioritize material from designated public service broadcasters and approved outlets.
This introduces a tiered structure within platforms. Certain sources receive visibility by design.
Exit routes and unintended outcomes
Mandating online identity verification could not only alter the nature of social media platforms, but also spark a mass exodus to the dark web. Ironically, the primary victims of this shift will be the very children these laws are intended to protect.
When governments force tech giants like Meta, X, and TikTok to implement identity checks, ordinary citizens who value privacy and young people in particular may turn to the dark web. Although mainstream platforms face frequent criticism, their moderation teams and AI systems actively remove the vast majority of harmful content.
In contrast, dark web networks lack any oversight or community guidelines. When a teenager uses the Tor network to bypass restrictions, they would not just be chatting with friends; they would enter an unmonitored environment where exploitation risks are exponentially higher than on monitored platforms.
Data concentration and exposure
The accumulation of identity data introduces another layer of risk. Large databases of biometric and personal information present attractive targets for cyberattacks.
In April 2026, concerns surfaced around the EU Age Verification App shortly after its code was made public. Security researchers identified weaknesses in its structure.
Independent specialists, including cybersecurity consultant Paul Moore and French cryptographer Olivier Blazy, immediately identified critical architectural and design vulnerabilities within the framework.
Addressing EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen directly on X, Moore issued a stark warning: “Seriously @vonderleyen – this product will be the catalyst for an enormous breach at some point. It’s just a matter of time.”
Telegram founder Pavel Durov also joined the debate, claiming that these security vulnerabilities are a direct result of the system’s fundamental design rather than a simple error: “The EU age verification app was hackable by design – it trusted the device (that’s instant game over).”
A monitored horizon
Although identity verification on the internet may seem like a step taken to protect children, whether it leads to a safe harbor or a dangerous cliff depends on how it is implemented. If the solution is based solely on enacting bans and collecting ID numbers, free communication will inevitably be pushed toward dark web networks where oversight is almost impossible.
The path to protecting children is not to lock digital doors and hand the keys over to the government. Rather, it lies in ensuring that the open internet continues to provide a space where citizens can freely express ideas without the pressure of self-censorship, while making it safe through moderation, education, and transparency.
Otherwise, by the 2030s, we may find ourselves facing not a generation protected from the harmful effects of the internet, but a generation that has grown up in the lawlessness of the dark web.
And if political Cancel Culture fails?
What will Europe become if the populist sweep occurs across Europe?
Ashes of Pompeii | July 8, 2026
A couple of days ago I wrote about political Cancel Culture in Europe, how the establishment is using lawfare to try to sideline populist movements, usually right wing, across the continent. And from their perspective, it is not hard to understand why. Without cancelling these opposition groups, there seems little doubt that almost all of the establishment parties will be swept away and in a very short time, the political landscape of Europe will look radically different.
The sheer scale of this potential electoral shift means that the traditional mechanisms of political control will simply cease to function. Germany would see the AfD as either the by far largest party or actually forming the government. The UK would see Farage and Reform achieving a near absolute majority, fundamentally altering the British political system. France would face elections where the runoff is between Le Pen and Mélenchon, with both being complete outsiders loathed by the establishment for entirely opposite reasons. Spain would probably see a coalition between the right and the far right. Unlike other European countries, the Spanish right is not entirely uncomfortable with the far right, as many will have had family members who were entirely in synch with the National Catholic fascism of the past. Italy presents a fascinating case. Meloni came in as a far right outsider but adapted to become more centrist. It seems not unlikely that she will go back to her roots if all of her European peers more closely resemble where she came from than where she is now.
This sweeping transformation forces us to ask profound questions about the future of the continent. What does this mean for the EU project itself? Can a union built on ever closer integration survive when its largest members are led by sovereignists? What happens to Ursula von der Leyen personally and politically in such a scenario? Will she be forced out by a hostile council, or will she attempt to pivot her own agenda to survive? How will the European Commission function without its traditional center left/center right driving force? Will the entire bureaucratic apparatus in Brussels, itself built on this centrist tradition, face a complete dismantling?
We must also consider foreign policy and defense. What happens to the practically unified European support for Ukraine when the political winds shift so dramatically across the continent? How does this impact the cohesion and future of NATO? What becomes of the traditional EU north and south relations, or the dynamic with eastern Europe? How exactly do Hungary and Slovakia fit into this new paradigm? Do they transition from isolated outliers to the new ideological center of gravity? Will the Baltic states find themselves isolated in their hardline defense postures?
Furthermore, we must examine other continental relationships. What happens to relations with Russia and European energy security? Is Russia even interested in returning to basing much of its trade on Europe – once burnt, twice shy?
And of course, America. Many of these leaders are very pro-American, have good relations with Trump and are ideologically aligned. But how well will European sovereignty movements mesh with MAGA and America First? One thing is to be ideologically aligned, another very different thing is economic and military negotiations, and national interests.
On the domestic front, the cultural battles will undoubtedly intensify. How far would these outsiders go in dismantling wokist policies such as LGBT mandates and aggressive climate change legislation? Will they simply pause these initiatives or completely reverse decades of legislation? What happens to immigration rules and the millions of migrants already on the continent? Will mass deportations become a realistic policy goal?
It will not be surprising to see a certain amount of taming of the firebrands, just as we witnessed with Meloni before she fully embraced her current centrist posture. Governing requires compromise, and the responsibilities of state often moderate radical rhetoric. But if all of them are outsiders simultaneously, taming becomes much more difficult. There is no moderate center left to anchor them. Who would in this case do the taming?
When the core nations of Europe are all led by anti-establishment figures, the gravitational pull toward traditional compromise simply vanishes. The firebrands would have absolutely no reason to yield ground to a center that no longer holds power. Voters will demand immediate and radical changes, and leaders will have no institutional excuses to delay. The resulting political environment will be entirely uncharted territory for modern Europe.
![]()
The old consensus is dead. And either the traditional forces use authoritarian and lawfare means to maintain control, or a new, highly unpredictable era of nationalist governance is about to begin across the continent.
Of course the irony, and hypocrisy, of the political establishment’s use of authoritarianism to push back what they consider (or at least want us to consider) the “barbarian authoritarianists” will not be lost on all.
French MEP Rima Hassan says terrorism trial aims to silence her pro-Palestine advocacy

Press TV – July 7, 2026
Ahead of her trial on charges of “apology for terrorism,” French Member of the European Parliament Rima Hassan says French authorities have subjected her to sweeping surveillance measures and political pressure in an effort to silence her criticism of Israel’s genocide in Gaza.
Hassan, a vocal pro-Palestinian lawmaker, appeared in court on Tuesday over the French offense of “apology for terrorism,” a legal provision that criminalises certain forms of expression deemed to support or glorify acts of terrorism.
“This is a political case,” Hassan said in an interview ahead of her court date. “It’s a way of putting the Palestinian cause on trial.”
Hassan added that the prosecution is part of a broader campaign targeting her for speaking out in support of Palestine.
The European Parliament member said she has faced intense judicial and political pressure in recent months.
She described disproportionate investigative measures, including the lifting of her parliamentary immunity, retroactive surveillance, and the dissemination of false information following her detention in April.
On April 2, Hassan was taken into police custody after posting on X a quote by Kozo Okamoto, a former member of the now-defunct Japanese Red Army.
The quote read: “As long as there is oppression, resistance will not only be a right, but a duty.”
Hassan said that while in police custody in April, she was subjected to particularly intrusive questioning about her identity, origins and religion, despite those issues having “no connection whatsoever to the alleged facts.”
“This way of proceeding is part of a political climate in which Palestinians, or people perceived as such, are too often regarded as suspects before they are regarded as citizens,” she said.
“This reflex, fuelled by Islamophobia and anti-Palestinian racism, constructs the dangerous figure of the ‘enemy within’,” she added.
In a press release issued ahead of the trial, Hassan’s team said the quote she shared on X was “referring to a principle that lies at the heart of international law: the right of peoples to resist colonization and the occupation of their territory by a foreign army.”
According to the statement, Hassan later deleted the post to avoid any possible misunderstanding.
The post was reported to the prosecutor’s office by far-right National Rally MP Matthias Renault, the French interior minister, the European Jewish Organisation (OJE), and the League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism (Licra).
The prosecution was initiated by the public prosecutor’s office, which operates under the authority of the executive branch.
Hassan said the “judicial harassment” she has faced demonstrates “how far some are willing to go to silence voices that denounce the suffering of the Palestinian people.”
The trial marks the latest legal challenge brought against Hassan over her criticism of Israel’s occupation and its genocide in Gaza. Over the past two years, 16 legal proceedings have been initiated against her, 13 of which have already been dismissed without further action.
