US proposes leaving former Ukrainian territories under Russian control – Bloomberg
RT | April 18, 2025
The US has presented its allies with the details of its peace plan to bring the conflict between Russia and Ukraine to an end, Bloomberg reported on Friday, citing European officials familiar with the matter.
The contours of the plan were outlined during a meeting in Paris on Thursday. The proposal reportedly includes easing sanctions on Russia, as well as terminating Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO. The roadmap would effectively freeze the war, with the formerly Ukrainian territories held by Russia remaining under Moscow’s control, the sources suggested.
One of the officials told Bloomberg that the proposal still had to be discussed with Kiev, adding that the plan would not actually amount to a definitive settlement of the conflict. Moreover, Kiev’s European backers would not recognize the territories as Russian, the source suggested.
The Paris meetings involved senior officials from several countries. The US delegation was led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and White House special envoy Steve Witkoff. They met with French President Emmanuel Macron and also held discussions with top officials and negotiators from France, Germany, the UK, and Ukraine.
Earlier on Friday, Rubio signaled Washington was ready to “move on” if a way to end the hostilities between Moscow and Kiev could not be found shortly.
“We need to figure out here now, within a matter of days, whether this is doable in the short term. Because if it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on,” Rubio told reporters before departing from France.
Moscow has signaled a full ceasefire with Ukraine was highly unlikely, citing Kiev’s violations of previous deals. Speaking to reporters at the UN headquarters on Thursday, Russian envoy Vassily Nebenzia said there are “big issues with the comprehensive ceasefire,” recalling the fate of the now-defunct Minsk agreements, which were “misused and abused to prepare Ukraine for the confrontation.”
The diplomat also cited repeated Ukrainian violations of a US-brokered 30-day moratorium on energy infrastructure strikes, implemented on March 18.
“How close we are to the ceasefire is a big question to me personally, because, as I said, we had an attempt at a limited ceasefire on energy infrastructure, which was not observed by the Ukrainian side. So, in these circumstances, to speak about a ceasefire is simply unrealistic at this stage,” Nebenzia said.
Germany: Far-left extremist on trial for attempted murder wins state-sponsored €30,000 art prize

By Thomas Brooke | Remix News | April 15, 2025
Hanna Schiller, a German art student charged with attempted murder and membership of the notorious far-left “Hammer Gang,” has been awarded the 27th Federal Prize for Art Students — a prestigious state-sponsored honor carrying €30,000 in prize money and additional production support.
Schiller has been in pre-trial detention since May 2024 and has been formally charged for her role in violent assaults carried out by the Antifa-affiliated gang, including in Budapest, where the gang severely beat nine people they suspected of being right-wing back in 2023.
The indictment states Schiller and others pinned one of the victims down during the attack while others beat him unconscious with a baton, which prosecutors say could have resulted in death.
Despite these charges, Schiller was nominated by the Academy of Fine Arts Nuremberg, where she remains a registered student. The nomination came months after her arrest and appears to have been made in full knowledge of the legal proceedings.
The prize is ultimately awarded by the Federal Ministry of Education and the German Students’ Union after assessing nominations from respective institutions.
As reported by Tichys Einblick, the prize jury praised Schiller’s work for its “precise political images” and its focus on “structural violence and power,” referencing pieces made from women’s hair as examples of her exploration of contemporary sociopolitical issues. The official announcement made no mention of the charges or her imprisonment.
Academy officials have defended the nomination, citing a commitment to the principle of presumption of innocence. “The AdBK Nuremberg treats her like any other student until the verdict is announced,” the school said in a written response to inquiries.
The academy does, however, state in its mission statement that it is “for openness, tolerance and against any kind of extremism and violence.”
Still, critics say the award signals an unacceptable tolerance for violent extremism, pointing to Schiller’s alleged crimes, which include premeditated assaults using hammers and pepper spray. The gang’s targets were reportedly individuals believed to be right-wing, whom they ambushed and beat without warning. Prosecutors say Schiller was directly involved in restraining and attacking several victims during the assaults, one of whom received over 15 blows to the head.
Other members of the gang have already been convicted. Lina Engel was sentenced to five years and three months in prison by a Dresden court back in June 2023, while three of her associates received lesser sentences. Another member was sentenced to three years in a Hungarian prison the following January.
After years on the run, Johann Guntermann, the 31-year-old suspected head of the extremist group, was arrested by German police after being apprehended near Leipzig in November last year.
In addition to the €30,000 prize money, Schiller also received a scholarship of €18,000 to fund an art exhibition scheduled to open in November at the exhibition planned from November 2025 at the Bundeskunsthalle in Bonn.
Commenting on the news, Alternative for Germany (AfD) co-leader Alice Weidel claimed Schiller’s violent activism may have actually been a key reason for her receiving the award.
“Left-wing extremist Hanna S., allegedly part of the ‘Hammer Gang,’ receives a state-sponsored art prize worth 30,000 euros, possibly not despite, but precisely because of, her ‘activism.” No taxpayer money for violent left-wing extremism!” Weidel wrote on X.
With the trial ongoing in Munich, the Ministry of Education and the Nuremberg Academy have yet to revise their position or address the appropriateness of awarding a national prize to an individual currently facing charges for attempted murder and violent extremism.
It is unclear whether the prize and subsequent funds will be revoked pending a conviction.
AfD leader slams latest German military aid to Kiev as ‘catastrophic’
Al Mayadeen | April 11, 2025
Germany’s plan to ramp up military support for Ukraine has drawn sharp criticism from Alice Weidel, co-leader of the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party. Speaking on Friday, Weidel condemned Defense Minister Boris Pistorius’ announcement of further arms deliveries, warning that the move fuels conflict rather than advancing peace.
According to a report by RedaktionsNetzwerk Deutschland (RND), Pistorius revealed that Berlin will allocate an additional 8 billion euros ($9 billion) in military assistance to Ukraine by 2029. This comes on top of roughly 7 billion euros worth of equipment pledged for delivery in 2025. Germany has already committed nearly €44 billion in aid to Ukraine since the war began in 2022, including military, financial, and humanitarian support, making it one of Kiev’s largest backers in Europe.
Responding to the announcement on social media platform X, Weidel said: “Pistorius announces new arms deliveries to Ukraine. This makes it clear: the small coalition continues the catastrophic course of escalation carried out by the ‘traffic light’ coalition. This is explosive. We must support the US efforts to achieve a ceasefire.”
Weidel and the AfD have long opposed German military aid to Ukraine, arguing that continued arms shipments escalate tensions and jeopardize German national interests. She has also criticized sanctions on Russia, warning they disproportionately harm Germany’s economy. In her public statements, Weidel has urged Berlin to adopt a neutral foreign policy stance and support diplomatic initiatives, particularly those backed by US President Donald Trump.
Russian officials have frequently argued that Western weapon supplies prolong the war and position NATO countries as active participants in the conflict. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reiterated that any shipment containing arms intended for Ukraine is considered a valid military target under Russian policy.
Here’s why the AfD is destined for the German government
By Tarik Cyril Amar | RT | April 12, 2025
Germany has an undeserved reputation for dour rationality and lacking an appreciation of the absurd. In reality, however, Germany is a – for want of nicer terms – very counterintuitive country.
If you are running a regime in Kiev (at least according to the official story) and blow up Germany’s vital energy infrastructure, Germans will say thank you and throw money and arms at you, while also helping you blame someone else (the Russians, of course: Germany has never been an imaginative country).
If you are in Washington and certainly had a hand in blowing up that infrastructure, and then go on to fleece the Germans by selling LNG at a high cost and promoting their deindustrialization by filching their companies, good Germans get very, very angry – at China.
If you happen to be the single most popular and perfectly legal political party in Germany, get ready to never be allowed to actually participate in governing. Because Germany is also a country in which that single most popular party – the Alternative for Germany (Alternative für Deutschland, commonly known simply as AfD) – is locked out of building governing coalitions. By definition.
That system is called a “firewall” – against that nasty most popular party that makes life so difficult for all those other, no longer popular parties. It has absolutely no basis in the constitution or in law.
Come to think of it, as the “firewall” systematically and deliberately treats the votes of AfD voters as somehow less effective than those of others, it may well be the “firewall” itself that is unconstitutional, at least in spirit if not even by the letter of the law. So much for Germany, the country that allegedly loves order and rules.
In reality, the “firewall” amounts to a dirty political cartel and a form of disenfranchisement: The traditional parties, feeling threatened by the insurgent AfD have simply decided that they do not care what the voters say and won’t have anything to do with it. Since German governments are virtually always based on coalitions, which means that the AfD and its voters are treated as inferior. That this means that, as of now, in particular voters in the former East Germany are subject to this kind of discrimination, adding a West-East aspect to it that sits very badly with talk about German unity.
To get one thing out of the way: For now, it is only one poll that shows the AfD in the lead; other polls still have it in (barely) second place after the mainstream conservatives of the CDU/CSU bloc (which, in reality, functions as one party) of soon-to-be chancellor Friedrich Merz. But these differences are irrelevant. What matters is that the AfD’s rising trend is unbroken. That is definitely a blow to Merz, even before he has officially assumed office, as international observers are noting. Especially in view of the fact that Merz’s own poll numbers are cratering at the same time.
Yet there is a broader point, too: The whole “firewall” strategy is malfunctioning extremely badly. Sensible observers have long predicted it, and now it is becoming ever more obvious: Freezing the AfD out only serves to make it stronger.
One thing that does not make Berlin’s ruling parties, the CDU and SPD, any more popular is that they have concluded their negotiations on how to divvy up the spoils of ministries and other goodies. Indeed, it is extremely embarrassing for the new governing coalition of conservatives and Social-Democrats (SPD) that the most recent AfD milestone breakthrough is happening now. It is a coincidence from hell: there they are, the traditional parties, seemingly safe behind their “firewall” and all ready to go, and the voters – uncouth as they can be – show them just how unpopular they are.
Germans expect little from them, even now: A fresh poll shows that two thirds do not believe that things will change under the new coalition of tired old parties.
Note that most Germans have been deeply unhappy with the status quo, as we also know from recent polls: In February, Ipsos found that the general mood was “as bad as never before.” Only 17 percent of citizens – less than a fifth – believed their country was “on a good trajectory.” The other 83 percent were not indifferent or neutral but felt Germany was on the “wrong” trajectory. Even for a nation with something of a culture of angst and doom, those are atrocious figures.
Hence, expecting no change now amounts to deep pessimism: Germans have felt for a while already that they are in dire trouble; and a preponderant majority thinks that that is where they will be stuck under new old management as well.
A senior AfD leader, Alexander Gauland, is already more than confident: “It’s a natural law that we’ll be ahead of the CDU at the next elections,” he recently declared. That may be jinxing it. The AfD is, after all, much less unlike other parties than the latter like to pretend: The AfD as well may end up squandering its current good luck with infighting, for instance, over how to react to US President Donald Trump’s tariff attacks, which will severely harm Germany.
Yet there is no doubt that the traditional parties are doing their utmost to repel not only voters but even their own members. In particular Merz’s CDU is in barely contained rebellion: its members and voters are fuming at having voted conservative and yet being saddled with a massive deficit spending program. The pretext that all of this is needed because of – drum roll – Big Bad Russia is not dampening down the anger.
One local CDU organization has already rebelled openly. In the state of Sachsen-Anhalt, formerly part of East Germany, CDU members from the Harz district have gone public with an official resolution making two points and one demand: There is “massive” unrest among the CDU’s base of ordinary party members, and in Germany’s “East,” that is, what used to be the former German Democratic Republic, the CDU has decisively lost the last federal elections. The demand is to tear down the so-called “firewall” against the AfD and start collaborating with it systematically. It is symptomatic that this very local rebellion is making news all over the country.
“What a scandal! Opening the gates to the far right!” many will scream. Yet they have it all upside down: Disregarding the fact that, in reality, the CDU/CSU conservatives and the AfD mostly see eye-to-eye ideologically, one day, in the not so far away future, the AfD may well enter and perhaps even dominate a German government. The irony is that when that happens, those who have upheld the, frankly, moronic “firewall” will have only themselves to blame. Because the real question is not if the AfD will enter government in Berlin but how and, in particular, how strong. The longer the “firewall” is kept up, the more likely the AfD will not just participate but dominate.
Tarik Cyril Amar, a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory
Max Blumenthal: Banning Protests Against Israel
Glenn Diesen | April 9, 2025
The editor-in-chief of The Grayzone, Max Blumenthal is an award-winning journalist and the author of several books, including best-selling Republican Gomorrah, Goliath, The Fifty One Day War, and The Management of Savagery. He has produced print articles for an array of publications, many video reports, and several documentaries, including Killing Gaza.
Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen: Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/
Le Pen’s verdict exposes Western Europe’s dangerous trend
The EU’s repression is backfiring spectacularly

By Vitaly Ryumshin | Gazeta.ru | April 4, 2025
What’s happening in Western Europe is increasingly raising uncomfortable questions. On March 31, a French court found Marine Le Pen guilty in the so-called “fictitious aides” case, sentencing her to four years in prison and banning her from running for office for five years. Remarkably, the ban took effect immediately, without even waiting for an appeal.
The court’s decision has proved highly controversial, and not only among Russians, who typically see Le Pen as part of Europe’s Moscow-friendly political forces. Even French political figures have expressed bewilderment. Given Le Pen’s position as the frontrunner in the 2027 presidential elections, her conviction has undeniably taken on political dimensions. Some French politicians have already called upon President Emmanuel Macron to pardon Le Pen in order to preserve the face of the country’s “democracy.” Prime Minister François Bayrou reportedly expressed alarm, admitting privately to aides, “France is the only country that does this.”
But Bayrou is mistaken in believing France stands alone. Suppressing opposition figures through tactics reminiscent of hybrid autocracies is becoming the latest trend in EU states. Recently, Romania spectacularly canceled the first round of its presidential election, later jailing Calin Georgescu, the leading candidate.
Germany seems likely to follow suit. The emerging coalition government between the CDU/CSU and SPD is drafting legislation that could bar anyone convicted of “incitement to hatred” from political activity. Though not openly stated, this measure unmistakably targets the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD).
The reason behind this crackdown lies deeper than any immediate legal disputes. Far-right parties across the bloc have increasingly challenged the European integration project itself. These political forces have openly called for slowing down or completely dismantling the EU in favor of returning to traditional nation-state structures. While some of these right-wing parties, including Le Pen’s National Rally and Germany’s AfD, have moved toward the political center in order to broaden their appeal, their reputation as “destroyers of Europe’s garden” remains entrenched.
Western European bureaucrats and established national elites are deeply unsettled by the growing popularity of these parties. Having benefited tremendously from the EU’s expansion and centralization for over three decades, they are unwilling to surrender their privileged positions without a fight. It’s as if they feel the ground shifting beneath their feet and will do anything necessary to preserve their status quo.
Yet here lies the paradox: the more the EU establishment struggles to remain in power through repressive measures, the quicker its authority and legitimacy erode. The bloc’s foundational identity rests on liberal democratic ideals, institutional sanctity, and the rule of law. When Brussels arbitrarily removes opposition candidates, it saws off the very branch upon which its entire elite sits.
The surge of Europe’s far right has not emerged in a vacuum. Its popularity directly stems from the existing EU leadership’s chronic inefficiency and inability to respond adequately to today’s challenges. Attempting to remove right-wing politicians from the playing field is not a solution. Discontented voters will inevitably find alternative ways to express their frustrations – likely even more fiercely once their grievances are compounded by deep mistrust of the political establishment.
Romania’s recent experience provides a vivid example. After the scandal involving the canceled election, Calin Georgescu’s popularity surged dramatically – from 23% to 40%. Once Georgescu was banned from running, voters swiftly pivoted to another far-right candidate, George-Nicolae Simion, who is now leading the race. This scenario seems almost comical, but could soon be replicated across France, Germany, and other EU states where authorities are excessively targeting opposition figures.
Western European leaders appear somewhat aware they’re playing a dangerous game. However, their conclusions and reactions to this crisis remain fundamentally flawed. EU bureaucrats try to unify the continent by exploiting citizens’ fears – fear of global instability, fear of military threats, fear of economic chaos. Their agendas emphasize support for Ukraine, joint military initiatives, and endless symbolic summits. Billions of euros are readily allocated to armament and defense.
Yet none of these actions address the real issues underlying the bloc’s deepening political divisions – economic stagnation, deteriorating living standards, mass immigration challenges, and declining trust in traditional governance structures. The EU’s refusal or inability to tackle these fundamental problems continues to fuel voter disillusionment.
Ultimately, the more the EU establishment clings desperately to power through authoritarian methods, the faster its cherished structures crumble. Until Western Europe’s leaders face reality and address genuine citizen concerns, this spiral of distrust and repression will only accelerate, making the EU’s future increasingly uncertain.
This article was first published by the online newspaper Gazeta.ru and was translated and edited by the RT team
AfD in historic first pulls dead even with CDU/CSU in latest INSA poll

eugyppius – April 5, 2025
It has finally happened: Alternative für Deutschland are no longer the second-strongest party in Germany; for the first time ever, they have pulled dead-even with CDU/CSU in a representative poll. Both claim 24% support in the latest INSA survey, conducted for BILD between 31 March and 4 April. It is the strongest poll result the AfD have ever received.
The results are partly symbolic and well within the margin of error (2.9 percentage points), but the trend is clear, and nobody seriously doubts that in the coming weeks AfD will assume the lead and become the strongest-polling party across the Federal Republic.
The running average of all major polls – which lags a week or two but yields the clearest view possible of the trend – looks like this:

The Union parties have been experiencing a slow but steady collapse in support as their voters abandon them in ever greater numbers for their hated blue rival. The erosion began after Friedrich Merz struck a deal with the disgraced Social Democrats (SPD) to overhaul the debt brake with the outgoing Bundestag, contrary to one of his primary campaign promises. Everything we’ve heard about the disastrous coalition negotiations with the SPD in the weeks since have confirmed the image of a careless, inexperienced yet ambitious CDU chancellor candidate, desperate to ascend to the highest political office, whatever the cost. Back in 2018, Merz pledged he would cut support for the AfD in half and drive his party back to 40% supporter or higher. He has achieved very nearly the opposite, plunging his future government to the depths of unpopularity before it is even formed and ceding first place to precisely the people he promised to cut down to size. It is a farce beyond anything I could’ve imagined.
There is no plan or strategy here; Merz has no idea what he is even doing. He and CDU/CSU leadership did have a brief flash of insight back in January, when they reached across the firewall to vote with the AfD on legislation to restrict migration. Back then at least, they knew they had to show the left parties they had other options, or they would be destroyed in coalition negotiations with any potential “democratic” partner. Leftist activists took to the streets and Merz rapidly retreated, returning to his standard denunciations of the AfD and pledging never to vote with them again. In return for a measure of mercy from Antifa, Merz voluntarily led his party into a trap, ceding all possible leverage over a radicalised SPD, who will force the Union parties to swallow one poison pill after the other. It is a win-win for them. They get what they want and they get to grind the CDU and the CSU to dust at the same time.
The election might be over, but make no mistake – these poll results matter. First, collapsing support deprives the CDU of options in the present. They can’t walk away from the negotiating table and seek new elections, because they know they’d come out of them vastly worse. Their terrible numbers further strengthen the negotiating position of the SPD, who will force the CDU to accept still more damaging compromises, driving CDU support even lower. Then we must remember that federal elections are not the only game in town. The rank-and-file of the CDU have to contend in an array of district elections in the coming months, and five state elections are approaching in 2026, including two in East Germany (Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Sachsen-Anhalt) that may well end in the collapse of the firewall at the state level. Dissatisfaction with Merz inside the CDU is widespread and growing.
All of this will make it more tempting for the Union parties to support banning AfD. It is hard to discern exactly how this would happen. The CDU could join the left parties of the Bundestag in applying for a ban. The’ve said they might do this if and when the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) upgrades their assessment of the AfD to “confirmed right-wing extreme.” Alternatively, Merz’s government could apply for a ban directly with the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe. What happens depends a lot on the strength of the evidence that the BfV have assembled against the AfD; if (as I suspect) this evidence is weak, they’ll want to avoid this measure because of the risk. Any failure would merely confirm the legitimacy of the AfD as a democratic party.
If the CDU can’t remove the AfD from the board – and probably even if they can – their future looks very dismal. If present numbers hold, the only conceivable government in 2029 would be the dreaded Kenya coalition, consisting of CDU/CSU, SPD and Greens all together. The compromises and failures the Union would be forced to swallow in that scenario would be even worse than the compromises and failures they’re swallowing now. Their punishment would be accordingly harsher. The CDU established the firewall as a defensive mechanism, to discourage their own voters from defecting to the AfD. Now the firewall has become a great cudgel against the Union, and a major source of the AfD’s strength.
Germany Will Hold 800K Troop Drills to ‘Prepare for Russian Attack’
Sputnik – 05.04.2025
NATO troops will gather in Hamburg in September to practice troop deployments to the Baltic states and Poland, local media reports.
Germany’s army, the Bundeswehr, will hold massive military exercises in September involving NATO soldiers to practice a scenario of an allegedly possible “Russian attack,” with up to 800,000 servicemen to take part in them, the Bild newspaper reported.
The drills will be held in Hamburg for three days and will be dubbed Red Storm Bravo, the scenario is a Russian attack on the West, the publication says.
According to the publication, the exercises will be aimed at practicing the operational transfer of NATO troops to the Baltic countries and Poland, in which Hamburg, which has a “strategically important port,” will play a key role.
German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius previously stated that Germany should prepare for a possible war with Russia by 2029.
Russian President Vladimir Putin previously explained in detail in an interview with US journalist Tucker Carlson that Moscow was not going to attack NATO countries, there is no point in this. The Russian leader noted that Western politicians regularly intimidated their people with an imaginary Russian threat in order to distract attention from domestic problems, but “smart people understand perfectly well that this is a fake.”
Recently, the West has increasingly voiced ideas about a direct armed conflict between the alliance and Russia. The Kremlin, however, noted that Russia did not pose a threat, did not threaten anyone, but would not ignore actions that are potentially dangerous to its interests. In addition, in recent years, Russia has noted NATO’s unprecedented activity near its western borders. The alliance is expanding its initiatives and calls this “containment of Russian aggression.” Moscow has repeatedly expressed concern about the buildup of the Alliance’s forces in Europe. The Russian Foreign Ministry stated that Moscow remained open to dialogue with NATO, but on an equal basis, while the West must abandon its course toward militarizing the continent.
Germany acting irresponsibly by sending troops to Lithuania
By Lucas Leiroz | April 3, 2025
Germany is moving forward with its remilitarization process amid ongoing tensions with the Russian Federation. For the first time since World War II, the country is creating a permanent military program to deploy troops abroad, which represents a dangerous escalation in the already fragile European security architecture.
The German Army’s 45th Armored Brigade is currently being deployed to Lithuania, where it will operate in the region close to the border with Belarus. The move is part of Germany’s plan to “strengthen NATO’s eastern flank,” which is seen as a necessity by Western military hawks, given that, in Europe’s assessment, a conflict with Russia could soon begin.
A ceremony was held in Vilnius on April 1, at which Brigadier General Christoph Huber was inaugurated as commander of the newly created German military unit to “protect” the Baltic states. The ceremony was announced by the German Bundeswehr Association (DBwV), a well-known lobby group for the German military-industrial complex. This shows how the escalation of European tensions is serving the selfish interests of specific groups, and not the real wishes of the German people.
General Huber stated in his speech that the Germans have a “clear mission” in Lithuania. According to him, Berlin must help the Baltic partners to guarantee European democratic principles, such as freedom and security, in the face of alleged “threats” on NATO’s eastern flank. The speech sounded like an attempt to justify or disguise the bellicose and irresponsible intentions behind the German military maneuvers.
“We have a clear mission. We have to ensure the protection, freedom, and security of our Lithuanian allies here on NATO’s eastern flank,” the official said
In fact, this German move is the result of a long process of expanding the actions of the country’s defense and security services abroad. Previously, Berlin had even updated its legislation to allow the German military intelligence service to operate in foreign territories considered part of NATO’s “eastern flank.” The justification given by officials was the alleged existence of significant threats from Russia, including attempts at espionage and sabotage against European targets – accusations that were never proven.
“The amendment grants the Military Counterintelligence Service the necessary powers to protect the Bundeswehr against espionage and sabotage by foreign powers, as well as against extremist attempts at infiltration from within its own ranks, even during foreign missions,” a spokesperson for the German Ministry of Defense said at the time.
In practice, it can be said that Germany is doing its best to increase its participation in European military affairs. In recent decades, the German army has been considered one of the weakest among the world’s great powers. Despite historically having a strong industrial defense capacity, Germany deliberately refrained from investing in the renewal of its military forces, irresponsibly relying on the American defense umbrella.
This situation has changed since 2022. Germany remains militarily weak, and is now also facing major problems with its defense industry, considering that the country no longer has a safe and cheap source of energy due to anti-Russian sanctions. However, despite its military weaknesses, Germany has expanded its strategic ambitions, trying to project power regionally as a kind of “European leader” jointly with France. Berlin, like almost the entire EU, has chosen Russia as a target, naming it an enemy and using it as an excuse for all sorts of irresponsible escalatory policies.
In other words, anti-Russian paranoia and the desire to protect the interests of EU elites are leading Germany to reverse a historic policy of reducing its military activities. It would be legitimate for the Germans to seek remilitarization in order to strengthen national sovereignty, but that is not what is happening now. Instead, Berlin is showing itself to be even more subservient to European elites, as it is using its own soldiers to escalate the EU’s war plans against Russia.
As Russian authorities have repeatedly stated, Moscow has no territorial interests in Western countries, so there is no reason for European states to “prepare for war”. However, these policies of “preemptive” militarization in Europe could easily escalate to a point of no return if the presence of troops on the Baltic borders with the Union State (Belarus and Russia) begins to generate incidents and frictions – triggering retaliatory measures.
NATO and the EU’s own military plans create the security problems that these organizations allegedly want to avoid. There is no risk of a “Russian invasion”, but if the security crisis continues to escalate, an open conflict in the future cannot be ruled out. If the Germans want to avoid a situation of increasing hostility, they will need to reconsider their military interventionism in the countries of the post-Soviet space.
Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.
You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.
Germany: Does Chaos await the CDU party? Unrest growing as AfD closes in on first place
In democracy, it is always best to simply ban the party that might end up beating you
Remix News | April 2, 2025
With coalition negotiations ongoing, the Christian Democrats (CDU) are beginning to experience inner turmoil over the current polling weakness of the party. Meanwhile, the Alternative for Germany (AfD) is soaring in the polls, and now just one point behind the CDU.
Dennis Radtke, head of the CDU’s workers’ wing, told Handelsblatt newspaper, that the polling weakness is now a major concern.
“We must confidently explain why we do what we do,” Radtke demanded, including why weapons investments are needed to “prevent our children from having to learn Russian.”
“The current development is, to say the least, highly problematic and dangerous,” Radtke said. He is calling for an “honest analysis” of the election results.
The party must “not give the impression that the CDU has won an absolute majority and that we are selling our souls unnecessarily.”
However, the influential Welt newspaper is predicting even more dire consequences for the CDU. The influential deputy editor fo the paper, Ulf Poschardt, slams the CDU’s “firewall” against the AfD, pointing out that it is only strengthening the AfD.
Dear friends of the firewall, dear Antifa, congratulations on erecting the great firewall and its effective violence. You’ve done it. The AfD is now only slightly behind the CDU/CSU – and you don’t have to be a great prophet to suspect that this is only an interim result.
The CDU/CSU has made itself dependent on the culturally dominant left-green zeitgeist, and now the once conservatives and conservatives are being presented with the bill. The firewall agitators in the editorial offices, from the far left to the left to the center-left – which is most journalists – should also be rather grateful. The destruction of the CDU/CSU is in full swing. What the opportunist Angela Merkel failed to achieve, Friedrich “We’re halving the AfD” Merz is now managing to do.
He goes on to appeal to the conservative wing of the CDU, imploring them not to join a coalition with the SPD.
“And the conservatives in the CDU/CSU, the only relevant Antifa after Franz Josef Strauss, must ask themselves whether they want to allow the destruction of their party in a senseless coalition with an irresponsible SPD. Or not. It’s no longer just about the self-destruction of the CDU/CSU. The destruction of the country is getting closer. A little closer every day.”
The federal chairwoman of the Small and Medium-Sized Business Union, Gitta Connemann (CDU), also raised the alarm.
“The dire predictions even before the coalition negotiations have been concluded aren’t helping anyone, least of all the country,” also told Handelsblatt.
The new Forsa poll has the AfD at 24 percent, just a point behind the CDU, which is at 25 percent. If elections were held today, there is no way the CDU could join a coalition with the Social Democrats (SPD), as the party would not have enough votes.
Friedrich Merz, who is thought to be the next chancellor, made a radical break with his campaign promise to not remove the debt brake. Almost immediately after the election, he said he would take out hundreds of billions of debt and change the constitution to do it, which he successfully passed using the previous Bundestag formation before a new parliament could take power.
It is thought that the Office of the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), the powerful domestic spy agency, has a report that will classify the AfD as “confirmed right-wing extremist.” At that point, the new Bundestag is expected to vote on a ban on the AfD, including the Greens, SPD, Left Party, and the CDU.
Merz himself has said he will recommend his MPs vote for a ban if the BfV delivers the report with such a designation. The BfV, a highly partisan agency, was led by a CDU member, Thomas Haldenwang, up until recently. Currently, a new president has not yet been appointed.
If a ban is voted through, the issue will go to the Constitutional Court.
In the end, Germany may end up banning the most popular party in the country.
Germany’s CDU-SPD Coalition Eyes Stricter Online Speech Controls
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | March 31, 2025
Germany may soon tighten its grip on digital speech even further, as internal documents obtained by BILD from the ongoing coalition talks between the center-right CDU (led by Friedrich Merz) and the center-left SPD (headed by Chancellor Olaf Scholz) point to an unsettling agenda: expanding the state’s authority to police so-called “disinformation.”
Behind closed doors, the prospective coalition appears to be crafting policies that would significantly broaden state influence over what can and cannot be said online — particularly on social media platforms. These proposals, originating from the coalition’s “Culture and Media” working group, show a clear intent to escalate pressure on platforms like X and intensify efforts to suppress content labeled as “fake news.”
The push is rooted in the belief, echoed in the coalition’s exploratory paper, that “disinformation and fake news” pose a danger to democracy. But the negotiating paper goes even further, declaring: “The deliberate dissemination of false factual allegations is not covered by freedom of expression.” This phrase, quoted by BILD, lays the groundwork for potentially sweeping restrictions on speech, raising serious alarms among legal experts and free speech advocates.
The document argues that a supposedly independent media regulatory body must be empowered to crack down on so-called “information manipulation,” as well as “hatred and incitement” — all under the vague condition that it adheres to “clear legal requirements.” But when the government or its proxies begin defining what qualifies as misinformation, the door swings wide open for politically motivated censorship.
Many will see this as a dangerous step toward criminalizing dissent. Legal scholar Volker Boehme-Neßler of the University of Oldenburg told BILD, “Lies are only prohibited if they are punishable, for example in the case of incitement to hatred. Otherwise, you can lie.” He also stressed that the boundary between fact and opinion is often blurry and contested: “It is not a simple question of what is a statement of fact and what is an expression of opinion. In most cases, courts interpret freedom of expression very broadly.”
The move mirrors broader concerns raised internationally. US Vice President JD Vance previously slammed Germany’s trajectory on both mass migration and censorship, warning that Berlin’s crackdown on dissent risks becoming self-destructive.
With political speech increasingly vulnerable to arbitrary classification as misinformation, critics worry that these new policies represent not a defense of democracy, but an erosion of one of its most fundamental pillars: the right to free and open debate.
