Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

From NATO’s flank to Eurasia’s core: Türkiye’s break with the West begins

By Farhad Ibragimov | RT | October 10, 2025

For decades, Turkish nationalism marched under the NATO flag. But now, one of Türkiye’s most influential right-wing leaders is calling for a turn East – toward Russia and China. His proposal may mark the country’s clearest ideological break with Atlanticism since joining the Alliance.

In September, Türkiye’s political landscape was shaken by a statement that many experts called sensational and potentially transformative. Devlet Bahceli, leader of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and a long-time ally of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan within the People’s Alliance, proposed the establishment of a strategic trilateral alliance involving Türkiye, Russia, and China to counter the “US-Israel evil coalition.”

Bahceli emphasized that such an alliance is “the most suitable option, considering reason, diplomacy, the spirit of politics, geographical conditions, and the strategic environment of the new century.” The proposal extends far beyond the usual nationalist agenda, positioning Türkiye as a player capable of initiating new formats of international cooperation.

To grasp the importance of this statement, we must note the historical context. Turkish pan-Turkism has traditionally been oriented toward the West, and nationalists were seen as staunch defenders of the pro-Atlantic course. In this light, Bahçeli’s call for an alliance with Moscow and Beijing marks a symbolic break from that tradition, reflecting growing distrust toward NATO and the US within Türkiye’s political landscape.

Bahceli’s comments are not random. Over the past few years, he has steadily ramped up his criticism of the West, advocating for Türkiye’s sovereign development “beyond blocs and alliances.” But this is the first time he has explicitly named Russia and China as preferred partners.

Reactions inside Türkiye were mixed. Right-wing circles called Bahceli’s words “revolutionary,” while leftists saw them as confirmation of a broader anti-Western consensus. Internationally, the statement underscored Ankara’s growing distance from Western power centers and its gradual rhetorical shift toward the East and Greater Eurasia.

Shortly afterward, Erdogan made a cautious comment, saying he was “not fully familiar” with Bahceli’s initiative but adding, “Whatever is good, let it happen.” The ambiguity is typical for Erdogan, who avoids publicly rejecting the ideas of key allies while keeping his political options open.

On one hand, the president is wary of provoking open conflict with Western partners, given Türkiye’s economic vulnerabilities. On the other, his comments suggest that Bahçeli’s initiative could serve as leverage – a way to pressure the US and EU by signaling that Ankara might strengthen ties with Moscow and Beijing.

A day later, Bahceli clarified his position, saying, “We know what we are doing. Türkiye should not be the implementer of regional and global projects put forward by others, but rather must be the leading actor of its own unique projects.”

In other words, Bahçeli not only intensified his anti-Western rhetoric but also asserted Türkiye’s claim to be an independent power center in the emerging multipolar world order. His stance reflects the desire of part of Türkiye’s leadership to move from being a peripheral NATO ally to a pioneer of alternative alliances in Eurasia.

From NATO loyalism to Eurasian realism

For decades, Türkiye was one of NATO’s most loyal allies. Since the Cold War, the Turkish elite believed that integration into Euro-Atlantic structures was the only viable strategy. A world order based on American leadership seemed stable and predictable.

Erdogan shared similar views when he first became prime minister in 2002. But as global competition intensified, disagreements with Washington deepened, and multipolar trends gained momentum, he realized that the unipolar system could not last. Türkiye, he concluded, must adapt – and play a role in shaping the new order.

Seen in this light, Bahceli’s proposal is more than nationalist fervor. It reflects an understanding among parts of Türkiye’s leadership that the country’s future lies in greater strategic autonomy and in building ties with alternative centers of power. His words echo those within Erdoğan’s circle who believe Türkiye can assert itself only through closer engagement with Russia and China.

This shift reveals how Türkiye’s elites have moved from trusting the stability of a Western-centric system to recognizing its limits – and searching for new frameworks in which Ankara can act as a key player rather than a subordinate.

Redefining Türkiye’s place in the world

Bahceli’s remarks highlight deep shifts within Turkish nationalist circles and Ankara’s growing readiness to reconsider its global role. He argues that neither China nor Russia is Türkiye’s enemy, despite efforts by Western ideologues to claim otherwise. Instead, he sees the West as the true obstacle – determined to prevent Türkiye from becoming an independent power center and confining it to a role of “watchdog” in the Middle East.

In his latest statement, Bahceli stressed the need for a new strategy:

“We believe that Türkiye, located at the center of Eurasia, which is the strategic focus of the 21st century, should pursue multidimensional and long-term policies aimed at strengthening regional peace and stability and developing cooperation opportunities, especially with countries in the Black Sea and Caspian Basin, including Russia, China, and Iran. Considering the changing and complex structure of international relations, producing permanent and comprehensive solutions to global issues such as terrorism, illegal migration, and climate change is a responsibility that no country can achieve alone.”

Essentially, Bahceli is saying that Türkiye must transcend old constraints and stop being a tool in the hands of external forces. His stance embodies a new paradigm: only through an independent, multilateral, and Eurasian policy can Türkiye become a true architect of regional stability and a major player in the future global order.

The end of oscillation

Türkiye has long oscillated between Atlantic alignment and independent ambition. These cycles rarely evolved into a lasting doctrine. But the current geopolitical environment is forcing Ankara to make a choice.

Economic dependency, regional instability, and Israel’s aggressive behavior – including attacks on Iran and Qatar – have created a sense of urgency. In Ankara, some now fear that Türkiye itself could become a target.

Globally, the old unipolar order is losing balance, and an alliance with Russia and China may offer Türkiye not guarantees, but strategic advantages – especially in securing its autonomy and status as an independent power center.

At the UN General Assembly, US President Donald Trump urged Erdogan to stop buying Russian oil and even floated bringing Türkiye into the anti-Russia sanctions regime. For Ankara, that would mean economic damage and deeper dependence on the West – a risk the leadership is no longer willing to accept.

Bahceli’s initiative, and Erdogan’s carefully measured reaction, mark a pivotal moment. Türkiye is beginning to institutionalize its search for an alternative political philosophy – one grounded in multipolarity, strategic pragmatism, and a redefined vision of its place in the 21st century.

Farhad Ibragimov – lecturer at the Faculty of Economics at RUDN University, visiting lecturer at the Institute of Social Sciences of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

October 11, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

EU candidate being primed for conflict with Russia – opposition figure

RT | October 10, 2025

Moldova’s new military doctrine is “a manifesto rejecting peace, neutrality, and the future of our nation” and priming it for a conflict with Russia, opposition politician and former lawmaker Marina Tauber has said.

“Just a week after the election, Russia has officially been labeled a threat. The next phase is to draw our nation into a war,” Tauber stated in an interview with Russia’s TASS news agency published on Thursday.

She further argued that Moldova’s fragile economy cannot sustain militarization. “While our elderly must choose between bread and medicine, our government buys armor and conducts drills with NATO. That is the real price of the so-called ‘European choice,’” she said.

Tauber accused President Maia Sandu’s government of abandoning Moldova’s constitutional neutrality in pursuit of EU membership.

Moldova’s newly adopted military doctrine, unveiled on Wednesday, commits the country to boosting defense spending and aligning its forces with NATO standards over the next decade. The document brands the deployment of Russian peacekeepers in the breakaway region of Transnistria as “a flagrant violation of Moldova’s sovereignty and neutrality,” while insisting that closer cooperation with NATO does not violate the nation’s constitutionally mandated neutral status.

Tauber was forced to flee Moldova days before the parliamentary election in late September, as she was facing a criminal conviction on charges of financial misconduct that she insists were politically motivated.

Critics of Sandu, a Romanian citizen and outspoken advocate of EU integration, have accused her of using anti-Russian rhetoric to consolidate power. Several opposition candidates were barred from the ballot ahead of the vote – a move that the targeted politicians denounced as an abuse of power – allowing Sandu’s Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS) to secure a majority.

Moscow has criticized Moldova’s foreign policy shift, accusing Sandu’s administration of acting against national interests in favor of Western geopolitical goals. Russian officials have cited NATO’s eastward expansion, including its promise to admit Ukraine as a member, as one of the key causes of the conflict between Moscow and Kiev.

October 10, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Militarism, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Why are so many eager for war with Russia? /Lt Col Daniel Davis & Glenn Diesen

Glenn Diesen | October 8, 2025

The discussion centers on Russia’s next moves in the Ukraine war and the West’s potential responses. Russia views NATO’s continual expansion and Western escalation as provocations it must eventually answer. Putin’s recent speech referencing “Novorossiya” (a broader region beyond Donbas) signals that Moscow’s ambitions may soon expand to include all historically Russian-speaking and industrial parts of southern and eastern Ukraine—essentially the Black Sea coast from Kharkiv to Odesa. The analysis suggests Russia’s likely to pursue this expansion after Ukraine’s army becomes too depleted to resist. Western promises of future NATO membership for Kyiv only make Russia more determined to seize strategic territory permanently.

October 9, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia, Video | , , , , | Leave a comment

The Mystery of Trump, Ukraine, and Russia

By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | September 18, 2025

Hardly anyone in the mainstream press addresses the mystery of how Trump went from what was supposedly a secret agent of the Russians to an ardent opponent of Russia in the Ukraine-Russia war. My hunch is that the commentators in the mainstream press are so excited that Trump has turned pro-Ukraine that they don’t care that they were, not so long ago, accusing him of being a secret agent of Russia.

After all, who can forget the daily refrain during Trump’s first term in office. “Robert Mueller is going to save us!” We had to be subjected to that refrain from both Democrats and the mainstream press for more than a year. The notion was that Trump was, as president of the United States, secretly serving the interests of Russia. Democrats and most of the mainstream press were convinced that Robert Mueller, a lawyer who had been appointed as special counsel to investigate the matter, was going to save us all by concluding that Trump was, in fact, serving as a secret agent of Russia, which would then result in Trump’s removal from office through impeachment.

As we all know, Robert Mueller did not save us because there was nothing to save us from. The entire matter was one great big ridiculous conspiracy theory on the part of the mainstream press and Democrats. After a year of extensive investigation by a huge and very expensive staff of lawyers, Robert Mueller ended up concluding that the allegation was bogus.

Nonetheless, most everyone thought that Trump would do everything possible to establish friendly and peaceful relations with Russia. Such a policy, of course, wouldn’t make him a secret agent of Russia, any more than President Kennedy’s efforts in that direction made him a secret agent of Russia.

Yet in his first term in office, Trump ended up taking a fairly adversarial stand toward Russia. It was reasonable to conclude, however, that one reason he did that was an effort to bend over backwards to show that the secret-agent accusations were entirely bogus.

This time around as president, however, there was nothing that Trump had to prove. During his 2024 campaign, he made it clear that he intended to bring an end to the Ukraine-Russia war as soon as he took office. Of course, the easiest and fastest way to have done that was to immediately cut off all U.S. foreign aid to Ukraine. For a while, it appeared that that was precisely what Trump was going to do. When Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky visited Trump and Vice President Vance in the White House, both of them berated, insulted, humiliated, and dressed down Zelensky in public. Zelensky ended up leaving that meeting with his tail between his legs. Trump even stated that it was Ukraine that had started the war. The message seemed clear — U.S. aid to Ukraine was going to terminate, which would, of course, have been the logical course of action given Trump’s conviction that it was Ukraine that started the war.

However, sometime afterward, Trump did an about-face and began berating Russia and Russian president Vladimir Putin for not doing enough to end the war. He began threatening Putin with more economic sanctions. He made it clear that the U.S. government would continue supporting Ukraine, especially with weaponry. He has also taken an increasingly aggressive position toward Russia and Putin.

The mainstream press treats all this as perfectly normal. I myself find it extremely mysterious. How does a guy who is accused of being a Russian agent go all the way to becoming a Russian adversary? For me, that’s quite a switch.

The following is my opinion as to what has happened to bring about this very radical turnaround. As longtime readers of my blog know, I have long maintained that it is the national-security branch of the federal government — i.e., the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA — that is in charge of the federal government, especially in foreign affairs, and that the other three branches simply operate in support of the national-security branch.

It was the national-security branch that used NATO to successfully provoke Russia into attacking Ukraine. It did that by having NATO, an old relic from the Cold War racket, move eastward toward Russia’s borders knowing full well that Russia would object and ultimately invade Ukraine, after which they could condemn Russia for its “aggression.” The objective was to use a war with Russia to “degrade” Russia, give Russia its own “Afghanistan,” and bring about regime change within Russia. The U.S. would supply the weaponry and cash to Ukraine to accomplish this. It would only be Ukrainian soldiers, not American soldiers, who would be dying and so the American people wouldn’t care about what the national-security branch had done to bring about the war.

What the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA failed to confront was the distinct possibility that Russia would end up winning the war, which would necessarily mean a defeat of the United States. After the deadly 20-year U.S. fiasco war in Afghanistan and the installation of a pro-Iranian regime in the U.S. war of aggression against Iraq, the last thing the national-security branch wants is the humiliation of another military defeat, especially at the hands of Russia — its adversary in its old Cold War racket.

So, it’s my opinion that the national-security establishment has put the squeeze on Trump and made him see how important it is to “national security” that Russia not be permitted to win this war. It is my opinion that Trump has caved in to such pressure, just like Congress and the federal courts have long deferred to the national-security branch. That, to me, is a logical explanation for Trump’s about-face on Russia and also why he no longer heavily emphasizes the need to “drain the swamp” and bring an end to the “deep state.”

October 9, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

NATO eyeing ‘forceful’ response to Russia – FT

RT | October 9, 2025

NATO is considering easing restrictions on pilots to allow them to fire at unauthorized Russian aircraft, and drastically increasing its military footprint on the country’s border, the Financial Times reported on Thursday, citing sources. This comes amid Western claims that Russia violated EU airspace, which Moscow has denied.

Last month, Estonia and Poland claimed that Russian aircraft illegally entered their airspace. Western media has also speculated that Russia may be behind drone incidents in other EU nations, which at times disrupted air traffic. Moscow has said the West has not provided any evidence for the claims.

Several NATO members are now debating “a more forceful response” to Russia, according to the Financial Times.

The reported proposals include arming surveillance drones that currently gather intelligence on Russian military movements and lowering the threshold for fighter pilots on NATO’s eastern border to take down perceived threats. Other options under discussion involve conducting military exercises directly along the Russian border, the report said.

Two NATO officials told the FT that one urgent task is to simplify the rules of engagement, which now differ among member states. Some nations require pilots to visually identify targets before firing, while others permit engagement based on radar data or the perceived direction and speed of an approaching aircraft.

FT sources noted that the talks, initiated by states bordering Russia and backed by France and the UK, later developed into a bloc-wide discussion – which, however, is said to be in the early stages. Some governments reportedly advocate for strong deterrence policies, though others urge restraint to avoid direct confrontation.

The article comes on the heels of last week’s EU summit on creating a ‘drone wall’ to deter alleged Russian incursions, with Politico reporting that the meeting “descended into a familiar stalemate.”

Russia has accused NATO of escalating tensions near its borders through expanded military deployments and exercises. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has also stated that NATO is “de facto at war” with Russia due to the bloc’s support for Ukraine.

October 9, 2025 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Pro-EU Czech PM concedes election defeat

RT | October 4, 2025

The right-wing party of agricultural tycoon Andrej Babis, branded the ‘Czech Trump’ by local media, has come out ahead in the Czech general election with 97% of the vote counted, according to official results.

The ANO movement is now set to replace the current center-right cabinet led by Prime Minister Petr Fiala. He has already congratulated Babis, conceding defeat and stating the outcome of the vote must be respected.

Speaking to reporters after his victory became evident, Babis once again rejected longstanding accusations of being anti-EU and insisted he merely wants to “save” the bloc.

“We want to save Europe… and we are clearly pro-European and pro-NATO,” Babis told Reuters.

ANO will seek a one-party cabinet but will have to enter talks with two minor parties to secure an outright majority, Babis said. One of the parties is believed to be the far-right SPD, which has long been considered a potential coalition partner.

“We went into the election with the aim of ending the government of Petr Fiala and support even for a minority cabinet of ANO is important for us and it would meet the target we had for this election,” SPD deputy chairman Radim Fiala said in a televised speech. In contrast to ANO, his party maintains an explicit anti-EU and anti-NATO stance.

Another potential coalition partner is the Motorists, who strongly oppose the EU’s environmental policies. They and the SPD received nearly 7% and 8% of the vote respectively, and joining forces with ANO would be sufficient to secure a majority.

During his campaign, Babis repeatedly criticized the EU’s handling of immigration and the Green Deal, as well as opposing EU membership for Ukraine. He also pledged to drastically cut aid for Kiev, promising more domestic spending instead. Babis signaled he would end the so-called ‘Czech initiative’ project, dedicated to supplying ammunition to Ukraine, calling the scheme overpriced.

October 4, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

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

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »