Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Recognise a state and prevent it from existing?

By José Goulão | Strategic Culture Foundation | October 2, 2025

And suddenly, the overwhelming majority of countries in the so-called Collective West decided to recognise the State of Palestine. Among them were some of the most loyal allies of the Zionist regime and accomplices to its atrocities, such as France, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and even, despite its negligible specific weight, the government of the Portuguese Republic. We know that consistency is not the strong point of the Montenegro clique: recognition was declared just a few weeks after the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Paulo Rangel, went to bless the crimes of the Israeli regime, precisely at one of the most intense stages of human and physical devastation in the Gaza Strip.

Any reader will naturally wonder what has now led so many important countries, the guardians of “our civilisation”, to adopt a stance that they could, and should, have taken years ago. Was it the blatant and dramatic exposure of the decades-old genocide of the Palestinian people, which is ravaging the Gaza Strip and which the hypocrisy of fine words and the most beautiful intentions can no longer hide? Perhaps a little, although we should not attach too much importance to this response because shame is not something that abounds in Western governments.

Another reason, this one with a much more important political and strategic significance, is the certainty of all those making the declarations that their decision, apart from being couched in plenty of half-truths, has no practical effect on the real recognition of Palestinian rights and on the murderous conduct of the State of Israel. On the same days that the declarations of recognition were made, the Zionist Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, assured with complete conviction that there would never be a Palestinian state. This was a challenge to the attitudes of Western countries, which they received with the most devout silence.

And now?

The most relevant situation, and also the one that raises the most doubts about the genuineness of Western governments’ intentions regarding the restoration of the rights of the Palestinian people, is based on a simple question: What now?

Yes, what could these declarations of recognition of the State of Palestine change in the current situation, controlled by the fascist impulses of the Israeli government and the US administration, this time under Trump’s baton – as it could be, with the same effects, under Biden’s orders?

At first glance, they will change nothing. Colonial and expansionist arbitrariness continues unabated in East Jerusalem and from north to south in the West Bank, while the human and physical levelling of Gaza continues unhindered, except for the guerrilla pockets of Hamas.

Western governments have recognised an abstract state with no effective powers over what should be its territory, disappearing every day in the face of the genocidal advances of hordes of settlers imported from all over the planet. Are Western governments doing anything concrete to force Israel to stop colonisation? Are they stopping sending weapons to Israel? Are they considering imposing sanctions capable of suffocating a state run by a criminal clique that is incapable of living on its own?

So far, there is no indication that any of the Western powers are willing to take these steps, which are essential if any qualitative changes in the balance of power throughout Palestine are to lead to negotiations capable of defining the paths for establishing and applying international law in the region. This would imply that, at least in this case, Western leaders would have to put aside their bureaucratic adherence to the ‘rules-based international order’ defined in Washington. The truth is that no government seems willing to take this risk, which, in practice and under these conditions, reveals that recognising or not recognising the State of Palestine will amount to the same thing, that is, more of the same.

Recognise, yes, but…

Western governments have been careful (which opens the door to backtracking) not to recognise the State of Palestine unconditionally, thus continuing to put the strict application of the principles established by international law on hold. Endowed with authority and power granted by five centuries of colonial violence, which allowed them to invent an entity such as the State of Israel, Western governments have attached a series of conditions to the decision. Taken literally, these translate into recognition without recognition because they effectively limit the Palestinian people’s decision-making powers on matters that concern them and on which only they have the right to deliberate.

In a manoeuvre that transfigures much of what is positive about recognition, Western governments are attempting to breathe new life into Mahmoud Abbas’s moribund Palestinian Authority, confined to Ramallah, by giving it powers that it will be unable to exercise. They also demand its absolute surrender to Israel – a demand that is unnecessary in the situation that has been dragging on throughout this century – and they attribute sole responsibility for terrorism in Palestine to Hamas, while ignoring Israeli terror – disguised as ‘security’ and ‘right to exist’. As always, this double standard vitiates the very declarations of recognition from the outset.

The condition that demonstrates how hypocritical and, for now, useless the declarations of recognition are, however, relates to the demand for the disarmament not only of Hamas but of all structures of the Palestinian Resistance. Such demands leave the entire Palestinian people even more helpless and at the mercy of the criminal free will of the Zionist regime, which can thus pursue its genocidal goal, free from any hindrance, while remaining exempt from accountability before international bodies. In the practical consequences of the measures imposed by Western governments in exchange for the recognition of the State of Palestine, the Zionist state would find the best of all worlds and the full realisation of all its objectives.

The shadow of collaborationism

The most recent developments in the recognition process help to dispel some uncertainties about the interests that lie behind the decision, which are not favourable to the Palestinian people.

It was clear from the outset that the recognition of Palestinian independence by Western governments was not, it bears repeating, unconditional. Most of the speeches on the subject clearly overvalued the Palestinian Authority, which is inactive in practice and, more seriously, entirely conditioned by Israel’s demands. The “shared” management of much of the West Bank between the Ramallah government and the Zionist occupation forces means, in fact, that the former has been placed at the service of the latter’s interests. This is often confirmed by the actions of the Palestinian police forces in repressive actions against the Palestinian population itself.

This situation suits Western governments because it means that the ‘autonomous’ authorities are willing to collaborate in ways that run counter to the legitimate interests of the Palestinian people, which have never been recognised by Western states.

At the same time, the West attributes sole representation of the Palestinians to the decrepit Palestinian Authority and its leader Mahmoud Abbas, who is in fact perpetuated in power despite being completely hamstrung by Israel and the United States. It should be remembered, as it is a fact, that his accession to the presidency was achieved through a soft coup organised in 1994 by the United States, Israel and Western powers, as a result of which the historic leader of the Resistance, Yasser Arafat, was removed from the main positions of power (to which he had been elected) and assassinated a few months later.

It should also be remembered that Mahmoud Abbas, very recently described as ‘pragmatic’ by a pro-Israeli publication such as the weekly newspaper Expresso, was received at the White House, from where Arafat had been banned, shortly after taking office as president of the so-called ‘Autonomy’ in 1994.

These circumstances help to better understand the Western constraints that accompanied the recognition of independence. And they lead to the elementary conclusion that there will be no representative entity that reflects the will of the Palestinian people without the holding of free, open and democratic general elections under the control of international bodies supervised by the UN. This process cannot involve the intervention of Israel and the United States of America, which is by definition biased and self-serving.

Another demand common to Western governments is that the Resistance (wrongly and maliciously equated with Hamas) should ‘renounce’ terrorism, that is, armed struggle, while, it should be repeated, sparing Israeli terrorism. This ‘renunciation’ must be accompanied by the disarmament of the Resistance, which means the total surrender of the Palestinian people to the discretionary and genocidal power of Israel. From this perspective, the recognition of Palestine becomes a poisoned gift.

Abbas’ recent speech to the UN General Assembly, delivered via the internet because, this time, the Trump administration illegally refused to grant the Palestinian president a visa to travel to New York, confirmed the existence of dangerous collaboration with Israeli and Western colonial interests.

Mahmoud Abbas, as Palestinian president, promised that ‘Hamas will never be the government’. But how can the most prominent Palestinian leader, whose party was defeated in the last general elections held in the occupied territories, promise that the most voted political force (according to the last poll, held more than 15 years ago) will not be able to govern the state? By manipulating the election results? By adopting a single-party regime or a personal dictatorship? By preventing a party with significant popular support, Hamas or any other, from being a legitimate and necessary part of a majority government? Let us remember that Abbas and his Western and Arab allies prevented Hamas from governing after it won an absolute majority in free elections; and that, despite multiple negotiations and supposed draft agreements, they always sabotaged the creation of ‘national unity governments’ that would have brought Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem under the same ‘autonomous government’. ‘One of our strategic objectives is to maintain the separation between Gaza and the West Bank,’ Netanyahu confessed to his Likud party’s parliamentary group.

None of these paths implied in the content of the recognition statements correspond to the ‘democratic values’ proclaimed by the Western world, which seems willing to impose, through its latest decision, an authoritarian and undemocratic ‘solution’ centred on Abbas.

In his speech, the Palestinian president stated that he does not want Palestine to be ‘an armed state’. What does this idea mean, which is incompatible with the existence of a full state as established in international law? Would the defence and security of Palestine be handed over to Israel? Would the Palestinian people no longer have anyone to defend them, whether it be the armed resistance or the state apparatus?

In his time, shortly before being assassinated by Zionism in 1995, Israeli Prime Minister Isaac Rabin admitted that the maximum status he would grant to a Palestinian entity at the end of the ‘peace process’ would be ‘less than a state’. Have Mahmoud Abbas and the Western leaders who manipulate him revived this idea? Will Palestine ‘less than a state’ be the future state of Palestine as understood?  There will be no better way, then, already considered as the ‘final solution’ to the problem, for the continuation of genocide and the creation of Greater Israel – throughout Palestine, as a first step.

The fundamental question, however, remains: what will come after the recognition of independence, given that Israel occupies almost the entire territory where this state would be created? What will Western countries do to give substance to their decision? It should be remembered that international law requires the creation of an ‘independent and viable’ Palestinian state. In prosaic terms, a state like any other. However, this is not what is being planned, with the collaboration of the incompetent Palestinian Authority. Israel’s dizzying policy of creating settlements is gradually eating away at the territory that is essential for the creation of a viable state. Taking a clear-headed view, the Portuguese head of state admitted that one day there will be no territory left to establish a state. This is a reality that I began denouncing many years ago, because it is obvious and Israel makes no secret of it. Despite recognising these circumstances, the Western world is doing nothing concrete to stop the colonisation and make the state it claims to recognise viable.

Once again, the West’s main objective has been to create propaganda and delaying tactics and, with them, to try to neutralise the increasingly strong, active and genuine solidarity of Western peoples with the Palestinian people. This solidarity cannot be allowed to wane; it must be strengthened, because if we rely on the promises and decisions of our governments, the Palestinian people will continue to be the biggest victims. And we cannot allow that to happen.

October 3, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , , | Leave a comment

France claims to have detained ‘Russian shadow fleet’ tanker

French soldiers onboard the Boracay oil tanker off Saint-Nazaire, France’s Atlantic coast. © AP Photo / Mathieu Pattier
RT | October 2, 2025

France has said it has detained an oil tanker and two crew members linked to an alleged Russian ‘shadow fleet’ supposedly used to evade Western sanctions on oil and gas exports.

French authorities said the tanker, the Boracay, which has been sanctioned by the EU, was sailing under a Benin flag and is currently under investigation for “serious irregularities.” French naval forces reportedly boarded the vessel last week, and it has since remained anchored near Saint-Nazaire on France’s west coast.

The two crew members, who introduced themselves as the captain and first mate, have been taken into custody, according to the prosecutor of the western port city of Brest, Stephane Kellenberger.

Media reports suggest investigators also suspect the vessel could have been linked to unidentified drones that were observed near Danish airports and military sites last month, prompting restrictions on civilian UAV flights.

French President Emmanuel Macron has claimed the Boracay crew are suspected of committing “various serious offences” which justified their detention. He did not confirm any link between the tanker and airspace violations in Denmark.

Moscow has said it has no information about the vessel being referred to by the French authorities or the allegations against it.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted, however, that Western European nations have been engaging in a “very large number of provocative actions” in various waters, which he said are “absolutely not conducive to ensuring freedom of commercial navigation.” He added that these actions sometimes force Russia’s armed forces to take “enforcement measures.”

Russia has consistently rejected Western sanctions as illegal and warned that attempts to restrict its vessels’ freedom of navigation would draw a response.

Moscow has also dismissed Western claims about Russian drone activity in Western Europe as unsubstantiated and politically motivated. Russian officials have warned that Ukraine could attempt to stage a false flag operation using drones in an attempt to draw NATO into a direct confrontation with Moscow.

October 2, 2025 Posted by | Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Iran’s FM addresses UN Security Council on failed Russia-China draft resolution

Global Times | September 27, 2025

The UN Security Council has voted down an effort by China and Russia to extend sanctions relief to Iran for six months under the nuclear deal – formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on Friday, local time. The draft failed to be passed as the number of votes in favor did not reach nine.

In his speech, Iran’s Foreign Minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, began by thanking China, Russia, Pakistan, and Algeria for supporting the resolution, which he described as a genuine effort to “keep the door of diplomacy open and avoid confrontation.” He also welcomed the decision of Guyana and South Korea not to oppose the draft, calling it a stand “on the right side of history,” according to WANA News, an Iranian news agency.

The Iranian foreign minister argued, “Today’s situation is the direct consequence of the US withdrawal from the JCPOA and the E3 (France, United Kingdom and Germany) failure to take any effective action to uphold the commitments.”

“The US has betrayed diplomacy, but it is the E3 which have buried it,” he stressed. Araghchi also said, “The E3 and the US acted in bad faith, claiming to support diplomacy while in effect blocking it.”

“Regrettably, E3 chose to follow Washington’s whims rather than exercising their independent sovereign discretion,” he said, adding “the US persistent negation of all initiatives to keep the window for diplomacy open proved once again that negotiations with the United States lead to nowhere other than dead end,” the foreign minister added.

Geng Shuang, China’s deputy permanent representative to the United Nations spoke after the vote. He reminded the Council that “history has shown that resorting to force or applying maximum pressure is not the correct approach to resolve the Iranian nuclear issue,” according to the UN report.

Geng continued, “Against the backdrop of ongoing conflict in Gaza and the instability in the Middle East, a breakdown in the Iranian nuclear issue could trigger new regional security crisis, which runs counter to common interest of the international community.”

The Chinese diplomat urged the US to “demonstrate political will by responding positively to Iran’s proposal to resume talks and committing unequivocally to refrain from further military strikes against Iran.”

September 27, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

US, allies veto draft resolution on delaying ‘snapback’ of Iran sanctions

Press TV – September 26, 2025

The United States and its allies veto a draft resolution aimed at delaying “snapback” of the UN Security Council’s sanctions against Iran that were lifted in 2015 in line with a nuclear deal between the Islamic Republic and world countries.

On Friday, the US, the UK, France, Denmark, Greece, Panama, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, and Somalia vetoed the draft measure seeking to delay imposition of the coercive economic measures for six months.

China, Russia, Algeria, and Pakistan voted in favor of the measure that had been submitted by Beijing and Moscow. South Korea and Guyana abstained.

According to the UN, “The so-called ‘snapback’ mechanism [now] remains in force, which will see sanctions rei-imposed on Tehran this weekend, following the termination of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).”

JCPOA refers to the official name of the nuclear deal that upon conclusion was endorsed by the Security Council in the form of its Resolution 2231.

The agreement lifted the sanctions, which had been imposed on Iran by the Security Council and the US, the UK, France, and Germany over unfounded allegations concerning Tehran’s peaceful nuclear energy program.

The bans had been enforced against the nation, despite the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)’s having historically failed to find any proof of “diversion” of the nuclear program.

The US left the JCPOA in an illegal and unilateral move in 2018 and then re-imposed those of its sanctions that the deal had removed.

In 2020, Washington went further by trying unilaterally to trigger the “snapback.”

After the American withdrawal, the UK, France, and Germany too resorted to non-commitment vis-à-vis the Islamic Republic by stopping their trade with Tehran.

The Friday vote came after the trio launched their own bid to activate the “snapback” on August 28.

The allies have been rehashing their accusations concerning Iran’s nuclear energy activities in order to try to justify their bid to reenact the sanctions, ignoring absence of any proof provided by the IAEA that has subjected the Islamic Republic to the agency’s most intrusive inspections in history.

They have also constantly refused to accept their numerous instances of non-commitment to the JCPOA.

Iran, however, began observing an entire year of “strategic patience” following the US’s withdrawal – the first serious violation of the nuclear agreement – before retaliating incrementally in line with its legal right that has been enshrined in the deal itself.

In the meantime, the Islamic Republic has both voiced its preparedness to partake in dialog besides actually engaging in negotiation aimed at resolving the situation brought about by the Western allies’ intransigence.

Tehran refused to categorically rule out talks with the European troika even after illegal and unprovoked attacks by the Israeli regime and the United States against key Iranian nuclear facilities in June, which made it impossible for the IAEA to continue its inspections as before.

The Islamic Republic’s latest goodwill gesture came on September 9, when it signed a framework agreement with the IAEA aimed at resuming cooperation with the agency, which had been suspended following the attacks.

The Friday vote came, although, Iranian officials, including President Masoud Pezeshkian, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, and security chief Ali Larijani, had strongly warned the US and its allies against triggering the “snapback.”

Araghchi had cautioned that such vote would lead to termination of the agreement with the IAEA, while Pezeshkian had noted that talks would be “meaningless” if the mechanism were to be enacted.

Meeting with anti-war activists in New York on Thursday, the president had called the prospect of re-imposition of the sanctions unwelcome, but added that the coercive measures did not signal “the end of the road.”

“Iran will never submit to them,” he had said, referring to the bans, and added that the Islamic Republic “will find the means of exiting any [unwelcome] situation.”

China voices ‘deep regret,’ discourages renewed aggression

Reacting to the vote, China’s Deputy UN Ambassador Geng Shuang similarly expressed “deep regret” for the failure to adopt the draft resolution, identifying dialogue and negotiation as two of “the only viable options” out of the situation caused by the Western measures.

He urged the US “to demonstrate political will” and “commit unequivocally to refraining from further military strikes against Iran.”

Geng further called on the European trio to engage in good faith in diplomatic efforts and abandon their approach of pushing for sanctions and coercive pressure against Iran.

Russia slams US, allies for lack of ‘courage, wisdom’

The remarks were echoed by Geng’s Russian counterpart Dmitry Polyanskiy, who said, “We regret the fact that a number of Security Council colleagues were unable to summon the courage or the wisdom to support our draft.”

“We had hoped that European colleagues and the US would think twice, and they would opt for the path of diplomacy and dialogue instead of their clumsy blackmail,” he said.

Such approach, the diplomat added, “merely results in escalation of the situation in the region.”

Speaking before the vote, Polyanskiy had also told the chamber that Iran had done all it could to accommodate Europeans, but that Western powers had refused to compromise.

September 27, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Marine Le Pen pressures Macron as calls for French election grow

Al Mayadeen | September 25, 2025

Marine Le Pen is intensifying her offensive against French President Emmanuel Macron, seeking to exploit his political vulnerability as his fifth prime minister in two years, Sebastien Lecornu, struggles to form a stable government.

The National Rally leader is pushing for a snap French election, aiming to increase pressure on Macron and his allies. By framing the president and his centrist camp as the source of France’s political dysfunction, Le Pen is attempting to present her party as the only credible alternative.

“The people on the ground are fed up with them,” National Rally Vice President Louis Aliot told Bloomberg, confirming that the far-right party will not back Lecornu’s government.

Lecornu’s immediate challenge is passing a budget in the National Assembly. He has been reaching out to moderate-left lawmakers to secure votes, but their demands are unlikely to align with Macron’s agenda.

The difficulty is compounded by recent political upheaval. Francois Bayrou’s government collapsed after lawmakers across the spectrum blocked a €44 billion package of tax increases and spending cuts. Now, Lecornu faces a similar risk of defeat.

National rally pushes for snap French election

Le Pen has shifted her strategy, adopting a harder line against Macron after months of balancing disruption and restraint. Her party helped bring down Bayrou’s administration and is now demanding concessions from Lecornu that he is unlikely to make.

By doing so, the National Rally hopes to fracture Macron’s centrist bloc or portray its rivals as complicit in France’s political paralysis. Le Pen has made clear she could support ousting Lecornu if his budget proposals fail.

Public frustration appears to be on Le Pen’s side. A recent poll found that 61% of respondents favor dissolving parliament. The National Rally, already the largest party in the National Assembly, believes a snap vote could bring it closer to a majority.

In last summer’s snap election, the party finished first in more than half of constituencies but was blocked from power after centrist and leftist parties united in the second round. Party officials argue momentum is now shifting in their favor.

Legal challenges add personal stakes for Le Pen

For Le Pen, the stakes are both political and personal. She is appealing a conviction tied to the misuse of European Parliament funds that currently bars her from running for office for five years. She has described the ruling as politically motivated.

A decision on her appeal is expected before summer 2026. Some National Rally figures have floated the idea of passing an amnesty law to clear her path to the 2027 presidential race if the party secures a parliamentary majority.

Le Pen has derided Lecornu’s appointment as the “final cartridge of Macronism” and hinted at further escalation if the deadlock continues. She has even suggested broader constitutional options, including a referendum or the resignation of the president.

“If dissolution is not sufficient, there is the potential resignation of the president of the republic, and the possibility of holding a referendum,” she told Europe 1 radio last week.

By linking Macron’s presidency to political paralysis, Marine Le Pen is betting that her National Rally can transform mounting voter frustration into a decisive advantage in France’s shifting political landscape.

September 25, 2025 Posted by | Economics | | Leave a comment

Mohammad Marandi: Iran KILLS IAEA Deal — Cairo Agreement Wiped Out After SnapBack!

Dialogue Works | September 21, 2025

September 22, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Video | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Iranian parliament pushes for ‘nuclear option’ as deterrence to western threat

The Cradle | September 22, 2025

Over 70 members of Iran’s parliament on 22 September called for a reassessment of the country’s defense doctrine, pressing authorities to consider nuclear weapons as a deterrent.

In a letter addressed to the Supreme National Security Council and the heads of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, the lawmakers demanded that the issue be raised urgently.

“We respectfully request that, since the decisions of that council acquire validity with the endorsement of the Leader of the Revolution, this matter be raised without delay and the expert findings communicated to the parliament,” the statement read.

The MPs argued that while the development and use of nuclear arms contradicts the 2010 ‘fatwa’ of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei banning them, circumstances have changed.

They wrote that “developing and maintaining such weapons as a deterrent is another matter,” stressing that “in Shia jurisprudence, a change in circumstances and conditions can alter the ruling.”

“Moreover, safeguarding Islam – which today is bound to the preservation of the Islamic Republic – is among the paramount obligations.”

The push was led by Hassan-Ali Akhlaghi Amiri, a representative from the holy city of Mashhad, according to Hamshahri Online.

Lawmakers noted that the nuclear doctrine was shaped at a time when the international community was still able to restrain Israeli aggression.

They pointed to the large-scale assault launched by Israel in June, backed by the US, which included direct strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities, among them Fordow.

Iran has long stated its nuclear program is peaceful, rejecting western claims it seeks weapons capability. Tehran continues to cite Khamenei’s fatwa as proof of its intentions.

At the same time, the Supreme National Security Council announced the suspension of cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) after the UN Security Council imposed sanctions.

State media quoted the body as saying the move was a response to the “ill-considered steps of three European countries.”

Lawmakers warned that pressure tactics by the E3 countries will draw a “harsher and more decisive” response than before.

September 22, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Brussels bureaucrats are running around like panicked chickens – Orban

RT | September 21, 2025

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has slammed Brussels, accusing the EU leadership of mismanaging key areas such as the economy, immigration, and security.

In a critical speech at Digital Civic Circles, a network of digital groups promoting conservative values in Hungary, he claimed the bloc was on the brink of collapse due to the failures of its current leaders.

The prime minister painted a stark picture of “mountains of debt, crowds of migrants, street violence, the increasingly dark shadow of war, mass layoffs, skyrocketing utility costs, impoverished households, and Brussels bureaucrats running around like panicked chickens,” on Saturday while describing the EU’s troubles.

According to Orban, the EU has fallen short of establishing itself as a credible global power. Instead of rising to meet these challenges, the bloc has become a symbol of weakness, indecision, and internal chaos, he said.

He criticized what he called the “tragic” trade deal with the US signed by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, adding that the EU’s green policies are “killing European industry.” Energy prices, Orban noted, are “three to four times higher” than in the US, while countries like France are edging toward unsustainable debt levels.

“Europe, as we knew and loved it, is over,” Orban warned. “If we deny this, we lose time. If we say it out loud, we gain time.”

The politician contrasted Budapest’s own approach with that of Brussels, pointing to stricter migration controls, a family policy tied to employment, and a tax system that, he said, supports jobseekers.

Orban’s criticism, while sharply worded, taps into broader concerns which have been echoed by economists and analysts. Experts from the International Monetary Fund and other institutions have warned that the EU risks long-term stagnation.

The IMF projects euro-area growth at just 0.8% in 2025 and 1.2% in 2026, while public debt remains near 90% of GDP and deficits continue to exceed 3%, well above pre-pandemic levels.

September 21, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | Leave a comment

SNSC says Iran will suspend cooperation with IAEA after re-imposition of sanctions

Press TV – September 20, 2025

Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) says Tehran will suspend its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) after the United Nations Security Council voted not to permanently lift sanctions on Tehran.

In a statement on Saturday, Iran’s top security body condemned the “ill-considered” moves by Britain, France, and Germany —known as the E3— regarding the Islamic Republic’s peaceful nuclear program.

On Friday, the 15-member Security Council failed to adopt a resolution that would have prevented the reimposition of UN sanctions on Iran after the E3 triggered the “snapback” mechanism, accusing Tehran of failing to comply with the 2015 deal, formally called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Iran rejected the illegitimate move by the European troika, pointing out that the United States had already pulled out of the deal and accusing the European trio of siding with illegal sanctions instead of honoring their own commitments.

In a Saturday session, chaired by President Masoud Pezeshkian, the SNSC addressed the latest situation in the region and the Israeli regime’s adventurism, the statement said.

“Despite [Iranian] Foreign Ministry’s cooperation with the Agency and the proposals presented to settle the [nuclear] issue, the actions of European countries have effectively suspended the path of cooperation with the Agency,” the SNSC emphasized.

According to the statement, Iran’s top security body tasked the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with continuing its consultations within the framework of the SNSC decisions to safeguard the national interests.

It added that Iran’s foreign policy under the current circumstances will be based on cooperation to establish peace and stability in the region.

Earlier on Saturday, Pezeshkian said Tehran can overcome any re-imposition of sanctions and will never surrender to excessive demands.

“We should believe that we can overcome obstacles and that the ill-wishers of this territory cannot block our way,” the president added.

The SNSC was formally put in charge of overseeing cooperation with the IAEA in July, following a series of illegal and unprovoked Israeli and US attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities.

The shift came after Iran’s Parliament passed legislation on July 2, requiring that all IAEA inspection requests be reviewed and approved by the SNSC.

September 20, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

UN Security Council votes to reimpose nuclear sanctions on Iran

Al Mayadeen | September 19, 2025

The United Nations Security Council voted on Friday to reimpose nuclear sanctions on Iran, citing its alleged violations of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

The move, driven by Britain, France, and Germany, has sparked sharp criticism from Russia, China, and Iran, highlighting deepening divisions within the international community over the future of Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.

The three European signatories to the JCPOA called for the activation of the snapback mechanism, falsely claiming that Iran had breached commitments made under the 2015 deal, which was designed to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons capabilities.

The European powers alleged that Iran’s advancements in uranium enrichment and reduced cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) constitute material violations of the agreement.

Iran, Russia, and China push back

In response, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that Tehran had presented a “fair and balanced” proposal to European nations aimed at preventing the reimposition of sanctions.

Russia’s UN Ambassador, Vasily Nebenzia, rejected the European-led move, saying, “There are no grounds for reinstating UN sanctions on Iran.” He emphasized that the E3’s push for snapback sanctions has no legal authority and affirmed that Moscow would not recognize it.

Russia also called on Security Council members to support a joint Russian-Chinese draft resolution on Iran, offering an alternative diplomatic track to avoid escalation.

China’s envoy emphasized that pressure on Iran must stop and urged Tehran to reaffirm the peaceful nature of its nuclear program, noting Iran’s declared willingness to cooperate.

Iran maintains that its nuclear program remains peaceful and has accused Western powers of double standards and bad faith. Chinese Ambassador to the UN echoed this stance, stating, “It was the United States that withdrew from the agreement, attacked Iran militarily, and disrupted negotiations.”

China’s envoy also called on the European trio to immediately withdraw their notifications to reinstate sanctions, stressing that “pressure is not the solution.”

Snapback could nullify Cairo agreement 

Al Mayadeen’s sources warned on Thursday that activating the snapback sanctions mechanism would nullify the Cairo Agreement and end cooperation between the IAEA and Tehran.

This would prevent international inspectors from accessing sensitive facilities, escalating the standoff even further.

According to the sources, the diplomatic window with Iran remains open, but indicators point to the potential activation of the snapback sanctions mechanism. They argued this is largely because Washington is steering the European Troika in the talks.

The sources warned that Washington is expected to call on Tehran to resume negotiations after activating the snapback mechanism, aiming to impose its conditions from what it perceives as a position of strength. They described this approach as a serious miscalculation of Iran’s stance and the way Tehran would respond.

September 19, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Grossi, again? Iran’s new IAEA deal reeks of JCPOA 2.0

By Fereshteh Sadeghi | The Cradle | September 15, 2025

Three months after the Israeli occupation state’s aerial assault on Iran, the Iranian government reached a new deal with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The agreement, and the fact that IAEA chief Rafael Grossi and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi offered conflicting interpretations of it, has outraged Iranian political circles and the public, many of whom view Grossi as a facilitator of Israeli aggression. Araghchi is now accused of concealing details of the agreement and repeating the mistakes of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear deal.

Iran signs surprise deal with IAEA after Israeli strikes

During a brief visit to Egypt on 12 September, Araghchi shook hands with Grossi as they announced a deal on the resumption of UN inspections of Iran’s nuclear program. The agreement was significant as Tehran had halted its cooperation with the IAEA in the wake of the Israeli aggression in June, and a parliamentary vote had suspended international inspections. The vote had been ratified after the cessation of the 12-day war between Iran and the occupation state in late June, amid accusations that the IAEA was sharing intelligence on their nuclear facilities and scientists with Israel and the US. Iranian officials claimed two IAEA inspectors smuggled classified documents on the Fordow nuclear site to Vienna. Iran revoked their licenses, but the agency took no punitive action. Fordow was later bombed by US B-52 bombers. Grossi’s 12 June report to the IAEA Board of Governors, which accused Iran of failing to meet its safeguards obligations, is widely seen as having paved the way for the 12-day Israel–Iran war that started one day after on 13 June. The agency’s refusal to condemn Tel Aviv’s attacks deepened Iranian distrust.

E3 pushes for sanctions as Iran tries to avoid snapback

As Iran withdrew from indirect nuclear talks with the US and halted cooperation with the IAEA, Germany, France, and Britain (the E3) announced their intention to reinstate UN sanctions. Those sanctions had been suspended under the 2015 JCPOA. The E3 said it would trigger the snapback mechanism before its expiry in mid-October, claiming that Iran had failed to uphold its commitments.

Seeking to avoid further sanctions, Iran agreed to engage the E3 in talks in late August. In exchange for Iranian cooperation with the IAEA, clarification on 440 kilograms of highly enriched uranium stockpiled before the Israeli attack, and a return to US negotiations, the Europeans offered to extend the snapback deadline by six months. Iran rejected the offer. The E3 then launched the snapback process but gave Iran a 30-day deadline to comply with the UN atomic watchdog’s demands. A week later, IAEA inspectors were scheduled to visit Iran to supervise fuel replacement at the Bushehr nuclear power plant. Araghchi reassured lawmakers that the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) had authorized the inspectors’ visit and insisted all cooperation would comply with the law banning extensive IAEA engagement. A source close to the Iranian Foreign Ministry tells The Cradle that inspectors had also planned to visit other facilities, including the Tehran Research Reactor, but those plans were quietly scrapped under parliamentary pressure. Then, without warning, the Araghchi–Grossi agreement in Cairo was revealed, shocking Iranian society. The deal guarantees renewed Iranian cooperation with the IAEA.

Parliament sidelined, backlash intensifies

One day before Araghchi’s Cairo trip on 9 September, parliamentarian Hussein-Ali Haji-Deligani warned that a new IAEA deal was imminent – one that violated Iranian law and did not protect national rights. He warned Araghchi against signing or risking impeachment. Once news of the agreement broke, reports surfaced that the Iranian legislature, the Majlis, would close for three weeks for lawmakers to visit their constituencies. Critics alleged this was a calculated move to shield the Cairo agreement from scrutiny.

While the Foreign Ministry and the SNSC remained silent, Grossi publicly elaborated:

“The technical document would include access to all facilities and installations in Iran and contemplates the required reporting on all the attacked facilities including the nuclear material present at those and that will open the way for respective inspections and access.”

That statement drew sharp rebuke. Tehran MP Amir-Hussein Sabeti said, “This passive and weak settlement to renew cooperation with the IAEA contradicts national interests, paves the way for new [Israeli] strikes, and clearly violates the law.”

In a televised debate, Araghchi attempted to allay the criticism, claiming the deal was approved by the SNSC. He dismissed Grossi’s remarks as “his own interpretation of the text”, adding, “from now on, the IAEA should request access to each nuclear site and the SNSC will review the requests case by case.”

The Iranian top diplomat stressed that “as long as Iran has not implemented environmental and safety measures at the attacked facilities, the IAEA will not be granted permission to visit them.” He insisted the agreement had nothing to do with the E3’s ultimatum; nevertheless, he contradicted himself by stating, “This settlement will be declared null and void if the Snapback mechanism goes into effect.”

Araghchi faces mounting calls for impeachment

Araghchi’s inconsistent justifications failed to quell the backlash. His repeated references to the SNSC did little to calm MPs. And in Iranian politics, it is an unprecedented event. Tehran’s Hamid Rasaei posted on X, “Ambiguities remain despite Araghchi’s explanations. Therefore, the Foreign Ministry must publish the text of the agreement.” He added sarcastically, “We usually kept deals secret for fear of the enemies. But since the other party is Grossi –  the Israeli spy – there’s no reason to hide this deal from the public.” His colleague, Kamran Ghazanfari, went further to threaten Araghchi, “either deny Grossi’s remarks and share the signed document with lawmakers, or get prepared for your impeachment. We are not treating our national interests flippantly.”

Keyhan newspaper openly called the Cairo deal “invalid” because it does not meet the requirements of the Iranian law. Rajanews compared the Cairo document with Lausanne’s nuclear deal, adding, “Back in 2015, the government of Hassan Rouhani and then FM [Mohammad Javad] Zarif refused to publish the relevant fact sheet. Only later, Iranians found out the fact sheet had imposed unprecedented restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program.”

As public scrutiny intensified, the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee summoned Araghchi for a closed-door session. He described the three-hour meeting as “very good and constructive” but revealed no details. According to reports, “Araghchi provided the committee with the text of the memorandum” and “it was decided that cooperation with the IAEA remain only in the framework of the law and its implementation depends on non-happening of the Snapback.” That reassurance did little to assuage critics. Rasaei summed up the mood with a blunt X post, “The three-hour session finished. It’s the JCPOA all over again.”

On 14 September, the SNSC issued a statement indicating that its Nuclear Committee had ratified the Cairo agreement, adding “the committee is backed by the SNSC whose decisions are confirmed by Iran’s leader [Ali Khamenei].” Yet, the statement also stressed that should any hostile action be taken against the Islamic Republic and its nuclear facilities, including the reinstatement of the terminated resolutions of the UN Security Council, the implementation of the arrangements would be suspended. So far, 90 lawmakers have asked Majlis Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf to convene a session on the Cairo memorandum. Ghalibaf has yet to comply.

In a country still reeling from the JCPOA’s consequences, lawmakers are increasingly determined to block another unilateral, opaque agreement made without parliamentary oversight.

September 16, 2025 Posted by | Deception | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Destabilising Moldova: Europe and Zelensky’s Plan to Thwart Trump-Putin Peace Efforts With Provocations in Transnistria

21st Century Wire | September 13, 2025 

New reports indicate a major operation is underway, spearheaded by European leaders, in conjunction with Ukraine and Moldovan governments—to expand the war in Ukraine by fomenting hostilities in the Russian-allied region of Transnistria.

Are NATO and Ukraine planning to open a new front in the country of Moldova and the breakaway region of Transnistria? Since its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, Moldova has walked a delicate line in maintaining its neutrality, while trying to balance aligning more closely with the West—and still maintaining its historic relationship with Russia. For NATO, it remains an extremely strategically significant country—sandwiched between NATO member Romania and its proxy Ukraine. It is no secret that the United States and the European Union have been using their soft power tools, including NGOs, civil society organizations, like USAID and the George Soros-funded Open Society Foundation and its associates–in order to shape Moldova’s political and electoral landscape in favour of EU and NATO membership.

This brings us to a recent report by Ukrainian journalist Diana Panchenko, who left Ukraine in 2022 after being critical of President Volodymyr Zelensky, his handling of the war, and the massive corruption connected to his government, detailed in her book, The Inevitable: The Shocking Truth behind the War in Ukraine.

This week, Panchenko published an appeal to US President Donald Trump, with compelling information about preparations for military provocations in Moldova—which are designed to trigger an attack by the Ukrainian army on Transnistria. According to Panchenko, the provocation is being organised by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, in concert with the main European leaders, French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

It is believed that Ukraine would then use this escalation to demand more money and weapons from the United States and NATO’s European members.

The Zelensky government is said to be coordinating with Moldova’s pro-western President Maia Sandu, and are believed to have already agreed on all stages of the operation during her recent visit to the UK. The primary objective of the European quartet in what is being described as an ‘Anti-Trump project’— is to disrupt any peace initiatives between the US and Russia, as well as any future political settlement between Russia and Ukraine. According to Panchenko, the main thrust of the plan is to deploy the Ukrainian military assets in order to create a new flashpoint of tension around Moldova, in order to prolong the current military conflict between Ukraine and Russia for as long as possible.

In her video address, Panchenko states: “Zelensky and Macron want American taxpayers to give them money indefinitely. Zelensky plans to attack Transnistria. Russian peacekeepers are stationed there. Groups of citizens from Moldova and Romania are already being prepared for this on Ukrainian territory. They are being helped by citizens of Ukraine and Germany. This information was passed on to me by people from Zelensky’s team. They understand that this will lead to even more war. They don’t want that! They are afraid!”

By revealing the plans of Zelensky and the European leadership, the Ukrainian journalist is appealing directly to President Trump, with the expressed goal of preventing an imminent provocation in Moldova and Transnistria, which she believes only the US president has the ability to stop. “I am appealing to Trump, Vance, Rubio. Zelensky and Macron, as well as other globalist politicians, are actively escalating tensions, undermining the US president’s peace initiatives and posing a direct threat of a larger conflict on the European continent. All for the sake of retaining power and profiting from bloodshed!” said Panchenko.

An “Anti-Trump” Project

According to the Ukrainian journalist, this coordinated effort between the Europeans and Zelensky is being framed as an ‘anti-Trump project’, with plans for the provocation being devised by representatives of European politicians, intelligence agencies and militaries immediately after Donald Trump secured a victory in the 2024 US presidential election.

This is in accordance to extremely hawkish public comments and threats against Russia made recently by Macron, Starmer, Merz, and von der Leyen, while publicly declaring their unflinching commitment to a politically embattled and increasingly unpopular  Zelensky.

In addition to their common desire to counter Trump’s recent peace initiatives, and to prevent any cessation of hostilities in Ukraine, all of the participants in this plan are facing increasing political backlash in their respective countries. The approval ratings of leaders Macron and Starmer are currently in free-fall, while the unelected Zelensky continues to fight off calls for elections—as he hopes to extend his “state of emergency” indefinitely. Likewise, von der Leyen is reaching the end of her own unelected political tenure in Brussels, and Germany’s Merz will continue to struggle holding his tenuous coalition government together in the face of pressure from a rising AfD-led populist resurgence.

Operation Moldova: Destabilise and Militarise 

The plan developed in early 2025 hopes to draw Moldova into the Ukraine conflict by applying military pressure on Transnistria, officially known as the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic (PMR), a landlocked breakaway state established in 1990, but which is still internationally recognised as part of Moldova—and which hosts a significant contingent of peace-keeping forces from the Russian Federation.

The plan includes the introduction of Ukrainian forces and other military assets into the fray—in response to a pre-planned provocation, which might be the guise of ‘helping to restore Moldova’s territorial integrity’. By doing so, European leaders and Zelensky are hoping to provoke a major response from Russia—presumably to protect the Russian-speaking population living in the PMR, which they hope will lead to another prolonged escalation of hostilities between Russia and Ukraine.


Moldovan President Maia Sandu in London, meeting with King Charles III on a state visit the UK, July 24-25, 2025.

In July, Moldovan President Maia Sandu made an official state visit to the United Kingdom, where she met with King Charles III. Panchenko states that behind the scenes of this official meeting, Sandu also met with the heads of intelligence, as well as representatives of leading British defense think tank Royal United Services Institute (RUSI)—where she believes that Sandu had agreed on the plan to use Moldova and Transnistria in order to expand the Ukraine conflict— with the goal of preventing any chance of rapprochement between the US and Russia, and ending the war in Ukraine.

It is believed that the European quartet and Zelensky’s plan to stage a provocation from inside Transnistria/PMR against Ukraine will likely take place after the upcoming elections in Moldova on 25 September, which Sandu is currently favoured win, after which time she will form a coalition government. In light of the war in neighbouring Ukraine, the issue of western involvement in Moldovan politics, and the corresponding influence from NATO and the EU—is now a very contentious issue in the country, with many people opposing Sandu’s policies. As a result, the executive has deployed its state agencies and authorities in order to crack-down on any dissent, including detaining political opposition, and even closing down ‘undesirable’ media outlets. Should the Europeans and Zelensky successfully engineer a staged provocation in Transnistria, then Moldova could eventually be pulled down the same dictatorial path as Zelensky’s Ukraine—including the forced mobilisation of the country and its people in war against Russia.

The French Connection

Recent reports suggest that French intelligence services had already tried, and failed, in launching a similar operation using their Romanian counterparts in order to foment tension by meddling in the recent Romanian elections, including the personal involvement of the head of French foreign intelligence (DGSE), Nicolas Lerner, who is believed to have led interference operations in the recent presidential elections in Romania.

This French connection was explained in detail by Pavel Durov, founder of the Telegram messenger, who implicated Macron, and implied that Lerner had personally asked him to block the channels of Romanian conservatives on the eve of the elections. Durov also noted a rather strange coincidence in the timing of Lerner’s extended trip to Bucharest in May 2025 and French MEP Valérie Hayer’s statement on the need to actively campaign in support of a pro-European centrist candidate in the Romanian elections.

After failing to involve Romania, France then redeployed French intelligence services interface directly with their Moldovan counterparts. Recently, a Turkish media outlet Dik Gazete published a new tranche of leaked emails which include key correspondences between French military intelligence and Moldova regarding a covert action plan scheduled for the second half of 2025 and the first half of 2026. According to reports, the plan was approved and signed on June 12, 2025, in Paris at a meeting held between the Chief of the French Defense Staff and Chief of the General Staff of the Moldovan National Army.

According to the leaked documents, in order implement the covert action part of their plan involving France’s participation in the escalation of tensions in the PMR, French intelligence began identifying members of the French Legion who were of Moldovan and Transnistrian descent, with the aim of using them for covert operations, including sending them to the PMR to carry out staged provocations.

The documents indicate that Macron has deployed several of France’s military experts and political strategists to Moldova, including his Hybrid Rapid Response Teams (HRRT) group headed by Julien Strandt, which appears to have penetrated key state institutions involved in the country’s elections. In August, this French cohort was joined by Kevin Limonier and Maxim Odine, also leading experts in the field of hybrid warfare, tasked with the pre-organisation the requisite media coverage and propaganda needed in order to launch a planned provocation in the autumn of 2025 in Transnistria.

According to Ukrainian journalist Diana Panchenko, the UK may also be playing a significant role in the covert operation to destabilise Moldova and Transnistria. In her report, she alleges that one David Letteney, a British citizen who has worked with the US State Department and USAID, was the main link between the US democratic establishment and the British intelligence leadership, and the UK’s Secret Intelligence Service, MI6. Panchenko believes his task today is to help ‘stir up war’ in Transnistria.

In addition to the planned European military and intelligence operations currently underway, Ukraine has tasked its Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine (GUR), with long-range planning in preparation for an upcoming provocation the PMR—presumably with the full backing of its western intelligence partners. Kirill Budanov, head of the Main Intelligence Directorate, issued this statement which clearly indicates that operations are indeed underway:

“I support Moldova’s desire to rid itself of occupying forces on its territory. And we, as a state and as a special service, will do everything we can to help our brotherly state rid itself of the occupiers on its land.”

It is believed that Ukraine is already forming a special strike force from among Moldovans serving in their Foreign Legions, currently under the command Ukrainian military unit A3449. Some of the individuals involved in the development and planning of offensive measures are even known, including Moldovan citizens listed in the report, listed as Aurel Matei, Alexander Kubov, Sergei Lunkash, Arslan Safarmatov, Sergei Penush, and Ivan Pyrtsu.

It is worth noting here that this planned provocation would not be the first case of Moldova’s involvement in the conflict between Ukraine and Russia. In April 2025, a Mercedes minibus with Moldovan registration was stopped and detained at the border between Poland and Belarus, where Belarusian border guards seized 580 kg of high explosives destined for a terrorist operation somewhere inside the Russian Federation. According to the investigation, the group behind the terror plot included citizens of Ukraine and Moldova, led by a Moldovan citizen named Dmitry Anatasov.

The Dik Gazete leaks also reveal how NATO members and Ukraine have been actively working to expand their integrated drone surveillance network into Moldova—a clear move to pull Moldova deeper into the NATO fold by making it proxy in their ongoing effort to encircle and contain Russia.

Moldova at a Crossroads

Similar to Ukraine and Georgia, Moldova’s pro-Western factions have been pushed for closer ties with NATO and the EU, while pro-Russian factions (aligned with the breakaway region of Transnistria) have resisted these moves. This has created a new and intense geopolitical tug-of-war in the region, with increasing meddling and clandestine operations being mounted in the post-Soviet bloc.

Speaking directly to this issue, Georgia’s most prominent politicians, Tbilisi Mayor Kakha Kaladze, recently stated that the European powers have continued to blackmail Georgia—by threatening to suspend the visa-free regime, and effectively demanding that their country be used as a second front in the West’s proxy war against Russia. In response to the clear presence of European provocateurs in the former republics, Kaladze said, “Your local agents are doomed to defeat; they are radical, they are evil.”

Moldova is now facing this very same dilemma. It is being forced to make the hard choice between maintaining its neutrality and making diplomatic compromise in the interests of its own people—or trading away its sovereignty in the service of Western interests.

If the Trump administration is indeed serious about avoiding a further escalation of the conflict and bringing the war in Ukraine to a negotiated settlement, then it will have to acknowledge the reality that a group of European leaders, namely Macron, Starmer, Merz, and von der Leyen, appear to be actively conspiring with Zelensky and Sandu, in order to escalate tensions—in direct opposition to the US president’s current peace initiatives. Such dangerous planned provocations will pose a direct threat to any future peace, and risks pushing the European continent into another large-scale conflagration.

September 14, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »