Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Ukraine’s Patriots can’t tackle Russian missiles – FT

RT | October 2, 2025

The Russian military has modified its missiles to better evade Ukrainian air defenses, including US-made Patriot systems – often seen as a key linchpin of Kiev’s shield – the Financial Times reported on Thursday, citing officials in Kiev and the West.

According to officials interviewed by the FT, Russian missiles can now follow a normal arc before veering into a steep terminal dive or executing maneuvers that “confuse and avoid” Patriot interceptors. The outlet cited recent strikes against Ukrainian drone facilities as a strong indication that Russia has likely upgraded the Iskander-M mobile system and the air-launched Kinzhal.

One former Ukrainian official called the added maneuverability “a game changer for Russia,” the newspaper reported, adding that deliveries of US-supplied Patriot interceptors, essentially the only weapon in Ukraine’s arsenal capable of tackling Moscow’s ballistic missiles, are not coming as quickly as planned.

The paper also noted that data released by the Ukrainian Air Force shows that the rate of interception of Russian ballistic missiles improved over the summer, reaching 37% in August, but then fell to just 6% in September.

Ukraine shares data on Patriot battlefield performance with the Pentagon and weapons producers, according to the FT. Officials told the outlet that while efforts are being made to improve the Patriots’ performance, they often lag behind Moscow’s evolving tactics.

Ukraine’s Air Force flagged similar concerns in May. Spokesman Yury Ignat said that the ballistic trajectories of the Iskander-M missiles “have been improved and modernized” while the projectiles could fire off radar decoys. He also complained that Ukraine’s domestically designed air defenses are unable to shoot down most of the Russian missiles, while those produced in the West are used to cover key infrastructure and other high-priority targets.

Moscow has repeatedly said its strikes only target military-related infrastructure, defense industry, and troop deployment bases and are never aimed at civilians.

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

US to Provide Ukraine With Intelligence for Strikes Deep Into Russia – Reports

Sputnik – 02.10.2025

US President Donald Trump has allowed intelligence agencies and the Pentagon to provide Ukraine with intelligence for strikes deep into Russia against energy infrastructure facilities, The Wall Street Journal newspaper reported, citing US officials.

Washington is also asking NATO countries to provide similar support, the report said on Wednesday.

In addition, the United States is considering supplying Ukraine with Tomahawk and Barracuda missiles, as well as other missiles with a range of about 500 miles (804 kilometers), the report added.

Russia has said that arms supplies to Ukraine hinder the conflict settlement, directly involving NATO countries in it. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that any cargo containing weapons for Ukraine would be a legitimate target for Russia.

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

Nuclear-Armed Sweden: Blueprint or Bluff?

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 29.09.2025

Fresh from abandoning centuries of neutrality, Swedish politicians are now openly discussing nuclear weapons. What’s really behind this dramatic shift? Mikael Valtersson, former Swedish Armed Forces officer, breaks it down for Sputnik.

Why Nukes are on Sweden’s Agenda

It’s driven by a “fear of a Russian threat” which is “a consequence of Sweden’s and its European allies’ provocative policies against Russia,” Valtersson explains.

“We will see more of the fear-mongering from Europe in the coming years.”

Sweden wasn’t neutral in the Cold War:

  • Airfields readied for NATO jets
  • Military intelligence was shared between Sweden and NATO
  • Even during tensions over the Vietnam War, military cooperation with NATO never stopped

Though sided with NATO, Sweden doubted its nuclear shield. Therefore, in the 1950s–60s Sweden ran its own nuclear weapon program.

“When the politicians stopped the fission weapons program the Swedish Defense forces continued with fusion weapons instead until the politicians banned all nuclear weapons development when they realized this.”

Nuclear Plan is Not Viable

But an independent Swedish nuclear program isn’t viable. Why?

  • It would come at enormous economic costs
  • Already very large amounts of money are spent on rearmament and supporting Ukraine
  • Swedes don’t want to spend even more on nukes

Europe might start a common nuclear weapons program, but Sweden will not do it on its own, according to the pundit.

“Europe’s military-industrial complex is using the ‘Russian threat’ to strengthen its very reduced size after the Cold War.”

September 29, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

US considering Tomahawks for Kiev – Vance

RT | September 28, 2025

Washington is considering making long-range Tomahawk missiles available for Kiev, Vice President J.D. Vance has told Fox News. The White House is “looking at” the issue, he said on Sunday.

Earlier, several Western news media outlets, including the Wall Street Journal and The Telegraph, reported that Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky specifically requested the missiles from the US during a meeting with Trump on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York earlier this week.

According to the WSJ, Trump did not oppose the idea and was also open to lifting restrictions on Kiev’s use of US-made weapons in strikes deep into the Russian territory but made no specific commitments during the meeting. The president was previously against giving Tomahawks to Ukraine, according to Axios.

“We’re certainly looking at it,” Vance said when asked if Washington considers selling the missiles to other NATO members so that they could be handed over to Kiev. When further pressed on the issue of a potential escalation that could follow such a step, Vance said that Trump would ultimately determine Washington’s course of action.

The US president’s special envoy, Keith Kellogg, who also talked to Fox News on Sunday, said that “the decision has not been made” yet while confirming that Zelensky did ask Trump for Tomahawks. The missiles have a range of up to 2,500 kilometers and can be equipped with nuclear warheads.

Moscow has previously repeatedly warned that Western arms supplies to Kiev would not change the situation on the frontline and only risk further escalation, potentially leading to a direct conflict between Russia and NATO.

In November 2024, President Vladimir Putin warned that “the regional conflict in Ukraine provoked by the West has assumed elements of a global nature,” and warned of a backlash if tensions escalate further.

His words came after Kiev launched several strikes using US-made ATACMS and HIMARS systems, as well as British-made Storm Shadow missiles, deep inside Russian territory after receiving a green light from its Western backers. The Kremlin then also warned that “reckless decisions” of Western nations supplying Ukraine with long-range missiles cannot be left unanswered.

September 28, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Kallas insists US shouldn’t offload Ukraine on EU

RT | September 26, 2025

Brussels is not solely responsible for helping Ukraine end its conflict with Russia, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas told Politico on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York on Thursday.

The comments follow US President Donald Trump’s recent apparent change of stance on Ukraine, after he suggested that Kiev, “with the support of the European Union,” was “in a position to fight and win.” Some observers saw the remark as Trump stepping back from the conflict after failing to make good on his pledge to end it quickly.

“He was the one who promised to stop the killing,” Kallas said. “So it can’t be on us.”

After taking office in January, Trump engaged in brokering peace negotiations while suspending military aid to Kiev and refraining from imposing sanctions on Russia.

He has insisted that the EU countries take greater responsibility for their own security, urging European NATO members to increase military spending to 5% of their gross domestic product (GDP).

Brussels’ top diplomat insisted that there is no NATO without the US, adding that America is one of the military bloc’s key members and any discussion of NATO’s role must reflect Washington’s responsibilities.

The EU has faced challenges in financing long-term support for Ukraine, limited by constraints in its budgetary mechanisms and resistance from some members.

Kallas, a long-time Russia hawk, put forward an ambitious plan in March to mobilize new military aid for Ukraine worth €40 billion via EU member states. Several countries, including France, Italy, Spain, and Portugal, resisted the proposal, wary of the formidable commitments.

After weeks of negotiations, the package was scaled back to €5 billion for ammunition, underscoring both the limits of EU unity and the challenges Kallas faces in translating her hawkish stance into collective action.

Russia has repeatedly accused the EU of undermining the peace efforts around Ukraine and militarizing in preparation for any conflict with Moscow.

Moscow’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Thursday that the EU and NATO have declared “an actual war” on Russia, accusing the West of orchestrating the Ukraine conflict.

September 26, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Moldovan opposition warns of election fraud

RT | September 25, 2025

Moldova’s pro-Western authorities will attempt to falsify the results of this weekend’s parliamentary election, including by ballot stuffing abroad, an opposition leader has claimed.

Irina Vlah of the Patriotic Electoral Bloc (BEP) urged citizens to participate in Sunday’s vote and claimed that fraud is the only way the governing Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS) can secure victory.

“They will try to appropriate all the unused ballots. They are preparing ballot-stuffing abroad under the cover of the ‘diaspora,’” she told supporters on Thursday.

Recent polls show PAS, the pro-Western party led by President Maia Sandu, trailing narrowly behind BEP. According to various media reports, Sandu secured re-election in 2024 thanks largely to ballots cast abroad, a fact that fuels opposition suspicions ahead of Sunday’s vote.

The Russian Foreign Ministry has accused the Moldovan authorities of a selective approach toward overseas voters. In a statement on Thursday, it noted that while 280 polling stations will be open in the US and Western Europe, with mail-in voting also permitted, only two stations will operate in Russia for its large Moldovan community, allowing just 10,000 people to cast ballots.

The ministry also dismissed what it described as the “spread of unfounded claims about Moscow’s interference” in Moldova’s internal affairs, pointing instead to the EU leaders openly supporting the country’s current leadership. In August, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, and Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk traveled to Chisinau for Independence Day celebrations, as a show of support for the country’s EU path.

Sandu has accused Russia of waging a “hybrid war” and spending “hundreds of millions of euros” to sway Moldovan voters. Earlier this week, Moldovan police arrested 74 people on suspicion of plotting unrest, alleging a network of activists was working to amplify Russian influence.

Moscow has denied any involvement and warned on Tuesday that NATO members had already deployed troops in western Ukraine to prepare for an intervention in Moldova after the vote.

September 26, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

Shooting down Russian plane would mean war – ambassador

RT | September 25, 2025

Any NATO member state that shoots down a Russian warplane would trigger a “war” with Russia, Moscow’s envoy to Paris, Aleksey Meshkov, has warned.

Last Friday, Estonia claimed that Russian military aircraft had briefly violated its airspace, due to which Tallinn requested urgent consultations with fellow NATO members. Earlier this month, Poland alleged that multiple Russian decoy drones entered its territory.

Moscow has denied both sets of allegations.

Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte did not rule out shooting down Russian warplanes should they violate the bloc’s airspace, emphasizing, however, that such decisions are made strictly on a case-by-case basis.

When asked how Russia would react if one of its warplanes was shot down by NATO, Meshkov told France’s RTL radio station on Thursday “that would mean war.”

According to the Russian diplomat, “quite a lot of [NATO military] planes accidentally or not accidentally violate our airspace. And no one shoots them down.”

He also insisted that NATO member states have failed to produce “material” evidence to back up their accusations.

On Wednesday, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov similarly dismissed claims over the supposed incursion by Russian warplanes into Estonian airspace as “hysteria” that is “absolutely baseless and unfounded.”

Russia’s Defense Ministry said that three MiG-31s were conducting a routine flight from Karelia Region, east of Finland, to an airfield in Kaliningrad Region, a Russian exclave bordering Poland and Lithuania, and that they strictly flew over neutral waters of the Baltic Sea.

Addressing an emergency UN Security Council on Monday, Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski vowed that his country would destroy any Russian aircraft or missile that crossed into its airspace.

Last week, Lithuanian Defense Minister Dovile Sakaliene similarly urged NATO to be firm in the face of supposed Russian attempts to “test” its resolve.

September 25, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Propaganda, Cognitive Warfare, and Europe’s Path to Self-Destruction

By Ricardo Martins – New Eastern Outlook – September 24, 2025

Media narratives, a superiority complex, and psychological battles are shaping Europe’s future. Europe’s self-image as a “garden” blinds it to global realities, while irrational narratives about war risk accelerating its own decline.

Jowett and O’Donnell (2012), scholars in the field of political communication and propaganda studies, define propaganda as “the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behaviour to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist.”
Propaganda has always been a weapon of war, but in today’s Europe, and especially Germany, it has reached new levels of sophistication. What once targeted foreign adversaries is now increasingly directed at domestic populations.

Supported by mainstream media, NATO strategies, and elite consensus, propaganda in Europe has become less about informing citizens and more about shaping their cognitive environment.

The German scholar Dr. Jonas Tögel calls this phenomenon “cognitive warfare,” a deliberate attempt to mold the thoughts, emotions, and even instincts of entire populations.

In this article, I intend to examine the current status of propaganda in Germany and Europe, its aims and self-destructive trajectory, NATO’s role in weaponizing cognition, and the cultural mindset that enables Europeans to view themselves as a “garden” surrounded by the “jungle.”

Drawing on the voices of Dr. Tögel, interviewer and scholar Pascal Lottaz from the Institute for Neutrality Studies at Kyoto University, and the German philosopher Hans-Georg Moeller, I explore where this propaganda is leading Europe and whether there is room for optimism.

The Present State of Propaganda in Germany and Europe

Dr. Jonas Tögel’s analysis shows that German media today is more propagandistic than at any point since the Cold War. In his study of Tagesschau, Germany’s most-watched evening news program, he found systematic framing: starting with seemingly neutral reporting, then subtly guiding viewers toward one-sided conclusions. Russian war crimes are emphasized, Ukrainian war crimes are ignored, and Russia’s demands are depicted as irrational, while Ukraine’s are legitimate.

This is not accidental. Tögel highlights that Germany spends over €100 million annually on “public relations,” a euphemism for state-funded propaganda. Intelligence services monitor narratives circulating in the media and deploy rapid countermeasures when alternative views gain traction.

NATO itself has established “centers of excellence” dedicated to narrative warfare, while European laws, such as the Digital Services Act, create the legal infrastructure for controlling online dissent, according to the scholar.

In short, propaganda in Germany today is not just biased news; it is a coordinated, professional, and well-funded campaign that blurs the line between information and psychological operations.

NATO’s Cognitive Warfare: Turning Inward

Traditionally, propaganda was aimed at foreign enemies. Today, NATO openly describes “cognitive warfare” as a new battlefield domain, alongside land, sea, air, space, and cyberspace. The sixth domain is the human mind itself.

According to Tögel, NATO’s resilience strategy requires “resilient citizens,” defined not as people capable of independent thought, but as individuals who “think and feel the right things.” In practice, this means shaping public opinion to ensure alignment with NATO objectives, while dismissing dissent as “Russian disinformation.”

The hypocrisy is striking: Western leaders claim to defend democracy and open discourse by censoring dissenting voices. As Tögel notes, this inversion—“defending freedom through censorship”—is not hidden in shadowy rooms but discussed openly at NATO conferences. Citizens are told cognitive warfare is a defense against foreign manipulation, yet in reality, their own minds are the battlefield.

Censorship in the West is becoming more overt. The Trump administration’s Pentagon policy now requires journalists to obtain authorisation before reporting some or even unclassified information, or risk losing access. “Information must be approved for public release by an appropriate authorizing official before it is released, even if it is unclassified,” according to a Pentagon memo.

Why Do Europeans Believe Their Own Propaganda?

One of the striking questions raised is why Europeans so readily trust their own propaganda, while viewing manipulation as something that happens only “elsewhere.” This is a question I have posed many times, but I never receive an answer, only offended looks.

According to Tögel, part of the answer lies in professionalization: German TV debates and news are carefully staged to create credibility. By starting with neutral reporting (the “foot-in-the-door” technique), audiences are more likely to accept biased conclusions later.

Another factor is sociological. Journalists often operate as freelancers or contractors, meaning their livelihood depends on fitting the expectations of editors. This creates a “natural mechanism,” as Lottaz puts it, where conformity is rewarded and dissent punished. Over time, propaganda becomes less about direct orders and more about systemic self-censorship.

The consequences are dangerous: public fear of Russia is deliberately cultivated, not to encourage peace negotiations, but to sustain support for weapons deliveries and military escalation. Statistically, higher levels of fear correlate with greater public acceptance of war and loss of their welfare.

German Innocent Arrogance and European Superiority

Hans-Georg Moeller of the University of Macau offers another dimension: the cultural mindset that underpins Europe’s propaganda. He describes Germany’s attitude as “innocent arrogance,” the assumption that German superiority, once based on nationalism, now manifests through the European Union.

Germany projects moral superiority onto Europe, framing the EU as a “garden” surrounded by a chaotic “jungle,” as put forward by Josep Borrell. This worldview assumes Europeans are enlightened guardians of civilization, while the rest of the world lags behind.

Moeller recalls the German politician who complained to Namibia’s president that there were more Chinese than Germans in the country, a remark rooted in colonial nostalgia and superiority, forgetting that Namibians have not forgotten the genocide that colonial Germany committed there.

This European arrogance blinds policymakers to global realities. While Europe clings to moral rhetoric, countries like China are overtaking it in modernization and development. Believing their welfare state is eternal, Europeans underestimate their vulnerability. As Moeller warns, this superiority complex leaves Europe “caught off guard,” unprepared for a shifting global order.

Propaganda as Self-Destruction

Both Tögel and Moeller converge on a disturbing conclusion: propaganda is not strengthening Europe but accelerating its decline because it impedes its leaders and citizens from seeing reality.

By framing the Ukraine war as a “battle for democracy” without realistic goals, European leaders are gambling with their own destruction. Unlike the U.S. or Russia, any escalation would devastate Europe directly.

Moreover, propaganda fosters irrationality. While Russia and China (and the U.S. in certain measure) act according to geopolitical logic, Europe clings to emotional narratives that contradict themselves: Russia is both weak and about to conquer Berlin; Ukraine is both winning and desperately dependent on aid to survive. These contradictions are sustained only through constant manipulation.

The welfare state, once Europe’s crown jewel, faces strain from ballooning military spending. Germany alone spends around €200 billion annually on defense, diverting resources from schools, healthcare, infrastructure, and pensions. If propaganda continues to suppress dissent, citizens may realize too late that their security and prosperity were sacrificed on the altar of illusions, according to the scholars.

Reasons for Optimism?

Despite this grim picture, Tögel offers a cautious hope: awareness is growing through independent media, alternative research channels, and citizen activism are exposing the mechanics of propaganda. He insists that if the public demands peace, political elites must eventually follow.

The optimism lies not in NATO or European elites, but in ordinary citizens reclaiming their capacity for reason. The antidote to propaganda is pluralism: exposure to multiple perspectives, critical debate, and genuine democracy where decisions about war and peace rest with the people, not with insulated elites.

Conclusion

Propaganda built through one-sided news and debates in Germany and Europe today is unprecedented in scale, sophistication, and self-destructive potential. It sustains irrational policies, suppresses dissent, and blinds Europeans to global geopolitical realities. NATO’s cognitive warfare, far from defending democracy, undermines it by targeting the minds of its own citizens with the excuse to protect them.

Hans-Georg Moeller’s critique of German arrogance reveals the deeper cultural logic: Europe’s superiority complex sustains the illusion that it is the “garden” of civilization, even when it is being overtaken by others.

Where is this leading? Unless Europeans wake up, the result may be a decline in economic, political, academic, and even civilizational terms. But if awareness spreads, if citizens reclaim their role as decision-makers, propaganda could yet collapse under the weight of its contradictions or still revive the democratic spirit that propaganda was meant to silence. The other possibility is to continue down the path of self-destruction.

September 24, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Kiev’s backers living in ‘parallel reality’ – Moscow

RT | September 24, 2025

Ukraine’s European backers are living in “a parallel reality” by believing that Kiev is performing well on the battlefield, Russia’s deputy ambassador to the UN, Dmitry Polyansky, has said. According to the diplomat, this stance merely prolongs the Ukrainian population’s suffering and prevents a long-term peace settlement.

Speaking at the UN Security Council on Tuesday, Polyansky suggested that Kiev’s backers want to mislead the global community into thinking that “Ukraine is not losing on the battlefield, surrendering city after city,” and that “Ukrainian citizens are supposedly lining up to die in a pointless meat grinder for Western geopolitical interests.”

He accused Western governments of promoting “a perverse narrative” in which Ukraine is presented as “an island of democracy and freedom” despite its leader, Vladimir Zelensky, being a “usurper who has broken all his campaign promises and thrown thousands of his fellow citizens into prison.”

Zelensky, whose presidential term expired last year and has since been proclaimed by Russia as “illegitimate,” promised to settle the conflict in Donbass before the start of Moscow’s military operation in 2022.

Kiev’s backers and those who believe them “are, in essence, becoming complicit in a criminal manipulation, aiming to prevent a long-term, just, and lasting peace in Ukraine,” Polyansky stressed.

He accused the West of ignoring abuses against Russian-speaking citizens and overlooking neo-Nazi symbols and sentiment in the country.

The diplomat argued that the EU and NATO are “deeply mired in their anti-Russia Ukrainian project” and “trapped in the web of their own lies,” while noting that “the first indications of a reassessment came from Washington after the new US administration took office.”

“Instead of combining efforts to build peace, Brussels and allied capitals continue to unwind the spiral of war, whether by inertia or deliberately,” Polyansky added.

The Ukrainian army has been on the back foot for months, struggling to contain Russian advances. Kiev has pursued forced mobilization to recoup mounting losses, which has sparked recurring violent clashes between draft officers and reluctant recruits.

September 24, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

As elections approach in Moldova: What do the allegations of an attack on Transnistria mean?

By Erkin Oncan | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 23, 2025

Elections in Moldova are just around the corner. Scheduled for September 28, 2025, they are set to become a stage for a serious “political showdown” among the country’s leading political forces.

The results will be determined by the fierce competition between pro-Western actors advocating for Moldova’s “integration with Europe” and forces leaning toward Russia. The outcome will affect not only Chişinău’s domestic politics but also the regional balance of security.

Moldovan politics is sharply divided. On one side stands President Maia Sandu’s pro-Western Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS). On the other are two major pro-Russian alliances: the Victory Bloc, composed of right-wing/nationalist forces, and the Moldova For Alliance, representing leftist/socialist currents rooted in the country’s socialist past.

Of these two, the Victory Bloc, led by fugitive oligarch Ilan Shor, accused of corruption, was barred from running in the elections. This has considerably strengthened the hand of the pro-Russian leftist alliance. While Sandu’s defeat is within the realm of possibility, pro-Russian factions believe she will once again resort to various irregularities and abuses, “just as in previous elections.”

Moldova’s political divide also mirrors its geographic and social makeup. While there are significant pro-Russian constituencies even in the west of the country, the division becomes sharper toward the east, closer to Russia.

The Gagauzia Autonomous Region and the self-proclaimed Transnistrian Moldovan Republic, with its alleged socialist-style administration, are widely considered “pro-Russian regions” of the country.

The Chişinău government jailed Gagauzia leader and Victory Bloc member Evghenia Guţul on charges of so-called corruption and unexplained financial resources. In recent weeks, however, the region most highlighted in accusations of “abuses and violations” under Sandu’s administration has been Transnistria.

Located along Moldova’s eastern border, squeezed between the pro-Western Moldovan government and Ukraine, Transnistria has a history closely resembling that of Ukraine’s Donbas region.

A regional flashpoint

Transnistria is not only politically but also militarily strategic. Russian military personnel are stationed in the region, and the Soviet-era ammunition depots at Kolbasna elevate its importance far beyond Moldova’s usual political disputes.

According to pro-Russian politicians in Moldova, the Central Election Commission continues to discriminate against voters from Transnistria. The first controversy erupted over the ballot papers.

Official data shows that of the 2.772 million ballot papers printed for the upcoming elections, only 23,500 were allocated to Moldovan citizens residing in Transnistria. This means the vast majority of them will not be able to vote.

Additionally, “repair works” announced by the Chişinău government just before the elections are being interpreted as attempts at electoral interference. PAS representatives told the Joint Control Commission (JCC) that seven bridges would be under repair simultaneously in September and October. Crucially, these bridges connect Transnistria with the rest of Moldova, and six of them are located in the “Security Zone.”

Why are the bridges important?

The “security zone” in Transnistria was established under the Yeltsin–Snegur Ceasefire Agreement of July 21, 1992, following the Transnistria War.

Stretching 225 kilometers along the de facto border between Moldova and Transnistria, it serves as a buffer zone monitored by the JCC, headquartered in Bender.

Deployed there are about 400 Russian soldiers, nearly 500 Transnistrian troops, and over 350 Moldovan soldiers. Observers from Ukraine and the OSCE also take part in the monitoring.

Under JCC protocols, any repair or construction works must be inspected by observers from Russia, Moldova, and Transnistria to ensure they are not related to military preparations. Yet, a few days ago, sudden inspections were launched without allowing any JCC members entry.

These “repairs” could effectively lock down the elections. With the bridges closed and only 12 polling stations in the region, out of 300,000 Moldovan citizens in Transnistria, only around 50,000 will be able to cast a ballot.

Under normal conditions, at least part of the remaining 250,000 could still participate. But the closures will make it impossible, leading many Transnistrians to see the works as a deliberate effort to suppress their vote.

A similar situation occurred in the last presidential elections, when police under Sandu’s orders shut down two major bridges and even stopped or turned back voters crossing from Transnistria.

Adding to the tensions, two polling stations were “suddenly” declared “mined.”

All of this is viewed as part of Sandu’s broader effort to block pro-Russian political forces. Considering that Moldovan citizens in Russia (about 500,000 people) will also be unable to vote, the tally suggests around 750,000 pro-Russian voters may be disenfranchised.

A frozen conflict with military stakes

Beyond politics and ballots, Transnistria remains a “frozen conflict” zone with military dimensions. The area is strategically critical for both Russia and NATO.

For Russia, if its “Black Sea closure” strategy in Ukraine were ever completed, connecting with Transnistria—home to Russian passport holders and massive Soviet weapons stockpiles—would be a key step.

For NATO, Transnistria is equally vital: situated on Ukraine’s border and near the Black Sea, it represents both an obstacle and an opportunity for the alliance’s eastern expansion.

In this climate, reports of growing numbers of foreign military experts in Moldova, cited by both Russian and Ukrainian sources, merit close attention. Military insiders also allege that intense, closed-door talks are underway between Kiev and Chişinău, and that Sandu’s visit to the UK may have included discussions on Transnistria.

According to a report by Ukrayinski Novini, British officials welcomed Moldova’s decision to provide logistics infrastructure for an international peacekeeping mission that could later be deployed to Ukraine. Moldova also pledged to serve as a “regional hub” for Ukraine’s postwar reconstruction.

“Ukraine operation in spring 2026”

Some claims go further: British officials allegedly secured Sandu’s approval for a Ukrainian Armed Forces “special operation” in Transnistria in spring 2026.

British military experts are said to be preparing certain Ukrainian units for such an assault after Moldova’s parliamentary elections.

While these remain unconfirmed, the very idea underscores Transnistria’s potential to disrupt NATO’s eastward strategy.

Although Odessa has long been seen as a Russian target, the reality suggests a different scenario: if Western forces settle in Odessa, Transnistria will inevitably come into the spotlight.

In light of these geopolitical calculations, Sandu’s possible re-election is expected to mark the beginning of an effort to dismantle the administrations in both Gagauzia and Transnistria. Pro-Russian politicians insist that Sandu’s domestic maneuvers must be understood in this geostrategic context.

The logic behind Transnistrian plans also recalls the Odessa Summit of June 11, 2025, when Romanian President Nikuşor Dan, Maia Sandu, and Volodymyr Zelensky held a special meeting said to focus on Black Sea strategies.

Since Sandu’s rise to power, Moldova has signed bilateral agreements with several NATO members, including France, the UK, Romania, and Poland. Moreover, Moldova has participated in NATO’s Partnership for Peace program since 1994 and regularly joins alliance exercises.

How was Transnistria formed?

After the collapse of the USSR, the Transnistrian Moldovan Republic declared independence from Moldova following the 1992 war. Situated between Moldova and Ukraine, it remains internationally unrecognized except by a few breakaway states such as South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and the now-defunct Nagorno-Karabakh.

Its crisis roots stretch back to the 1917 Russian Revolution. While Moldova eventually became part of Romania, Transnistria remained within Soviet territory. After World War II, Moldova was re-incorporated into the USSR, and Transnistria became an autonomous region within the Moldavian SSR.

In the late Soviet period, Transnistria’s industrial strength—providing 40% of the republic’s GDP and 90% of its electricity—set it apart from agrarian Moldova. Its population was also distinct: predominantly Russian and Ukrainian, rather than Romanian-speaking Moldovans.

When Moldova declared independence in 1990 and pushed nationalist measures such as making Moldovan the sole state language and adopting the Latin alphabet, Transnistria’s people felt threatened. They organized under the United Council of Work Collectives (UCLC), eventually proclaiming independence on September 2, 1990, under Igor Smirnov.

The Moldovan government saw this as a rebellion, and clashes escalated into war. Both sides raided Soviet arms depots, and the conflict culminated in the Battle of Bender in 1992, leaving about 1,000 dead, including 400 civilians. The July 21, 1992 ceasefire froze the conflict and created the current “security zone.”

Unlike Donbas, however, Transnistria has managed to maintain its autonomy while preserving ties with Moldova, thanks in part to the decline of nationalism and the resurgence of leftist politics in the wider country.

Is Transnistria socialist?

Although Soviet symbols and flags remain in use, the region cannot be described as truly socialist. It is heavily reliant on Russia both militarily and economically. Its governance style blends Russian backing with Soviet nostalgia.

Meanwhile, Chişinău receives active support from NATO-member Romania, which holds influence in Moldova’s political and judicial institutions and harbors ambitions of eventual unification.

In short, Transnistria is bound to feature ever more prominently in Moldova’s multi-layered politics. Once seen by European tourists as little more than a “Soviet nostalgia stop,” it now represents a geopolitical hotspot where frozen conflicts threaten to thaw under mounting political and military pressures.

September 23, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , | Leave a comment

EU preparing to ‘occupy’ Moldova – Moscow

RT | September 23, 2025

European countries are preparing for a military intervention in Moldova, according to Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR). The agency warned that “eurocrats” in Brussels intend to ensure that Chisinau continues to pursue anti-Russian policies, and will go as far as to “occupy” Moldova after upcoming parliamentary elections.

In a press release on Monday, the SVR stated it had observed European NATO forces being concentrated in Romania near the border with Moldova, and further claimed that they are preparing to deploy to Odessa Region in Ukraine to intimidate Moldova’s breakaway region of Transnistria. It added that military servicemen from France and the UK have already arrived in Odessa.

According to the SVR, forces from European countries intend to intervene following the upcoming parliamentary elections, where Brussels and Chisinau will allegedly falsify the results in the hope of driving Moldovan citizens to the streets to defend their rights. After that, at the request of Moldovan President Maia Sandu, European forces will enter the country and compel Moldovans to “accept dictatorship under the guise of European democracy,” the service said.

The SVR similarly warned in July that NATO was molding Moldova into a military “battering ram” against Russia.

Former Moldovan President Igor Dodon also recently claimed that the EU intends to use Moldova as “cannon fodder” in a possible future conflict with Russia.

September 23, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Harald Kujat: Former Head of the German Army Exposes Lies of the Ukraine War

Glenn Diesen | September 19, 2025

General Harald Kujat is a former head of the German Armed Forces (Bundeswehr) and the former Chairman of NATO’s Military Committee. Having held the top military position in both Germany and NATO, General Kujat offers his expertise on how the West and Russia ended up fighting a proxy war in Ukraine. General Kujat discusses the failure to reach a common understanding after the Cold War, the toppling of President Yanukovych in Ukraine, the sabotage of the Minsk agreement and the Istanbul peace negotiations, and the West’s lies about an “unprovoked” and “full-scale invasion” of Ukraine. When Boris Johnson came to Ukraine to sabotage the peace negotiations in 2022, one of Zelensky’s close associates summed up the essence of Johnson’s visit: “Johnson brought two simple messages to Kyiv. The first is that Putin is a war criminal; he should be pressured, not negotiated with. And the second is that even if Ukraine is ready to sign some agreements on guarantees with Putin, they are not. We can sign [an agreement] with you [Ukraine], but not with him. Anyway, he will screw everyone over”.

September 19, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment