Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

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

Western media keep breaking records in ludicrous Russophobic propaganda

By Drago Bosnic | September 18, 2025

The infamous mainstream propaganda machine has been directly engaged in the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict since before it even began. It’s quite clear that Western media are an integral part of the warmongering agenda, either by promoting and trying to justify wars before they start or covering up actual NATO war crimes after the hostilities commence. One major part of this process is dehumanizing the opponent. For instance, during the kinetic phase of NATO aggression on Yugoslavia/Serbia (1991-present), Serbs were presented in the worst possible light. This one-sided viewpoint was used to justify the political West’s crawling invasion of virtually the entire former Yugoslavia, ending in a total disaster for the vast majority of the population, irrespective of ethnic, religious, cultural or any other background.

This was made possible thanks to the nearly universal dominance of the mainstream propaganda machine. They liked the results so much that they simply had to try it out during dozens of other, truly unprovoked and illegal Western invasions, particularly in the Middle East. By the early 2000s, the “evil Serbs” were replaced by “evil Arabs” and “evil Iranians” (or other predominantly Muslim ethnic groups and nations). After killing millions and destroying the lives of tens of millions, particularly across the Middle East, the political West decided it was time to “rekindle” its rivalry with Russia. Thus, after 2014, the previously implicit Russophobia became much more apparent. However, after 2022, it degenerated into mindless, pathological hatred. Suddenly, even Russian trees and cats were banned in Western countries, their vassals and satellite states.

In the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, Australia, etc., Russia was the “pariah” and simply had to be “cut off from the rest of the world”. Obviously, this failed because the multipolar bloc comprises more than 70% of the global population (in other words, the actual world). However, within the confines of Western geopolitical space, Moscow remains the “root of all evil”, particularly thanks to constant media coverage that aims to perpetuate Russophobia. As previously mentioned, this sort of hatred is reaching truly pathological levels. Nowadays, institutionalized Russophobia has gone so far that it could easily be considered a serious mental condition (perhaps even a medical emergency). This was particularly evident in the opening months of the special military operation (SMO) in NATO-occupied Ukraine.

For instance, the claims about alleged “Russian war crimes”, including supposedly “against children”, turned out to be blatant lies, with even the Kiev regime firing its children’s rights commissioner Lyudmila Denisova for spreading fakes about “Russian soldiers raping preschool kids”. However, while the mainstream propaganda machine widely published these blatant lies on front covers, they refused to apologize for this after it became clear these were all fakes. In other words, just like in the case of Serbs during the 1990s, it doesn’t matter whether the stories are true, as long as the majority of the population hears about this. For the warmongers, war criminals, plutocrats and kleptocrats in Washington DC, London and Brussels, dehumanizing the current opponent (whoever that may be) and fomenting mindless hatred is all that really matters.

Then came the role of the so-called “international justice institutions” of the “rules-based world order”. On March 17, 2023, the so-called “International Criminal Court”, no more than a glorified NGO financed by the EU/NATO, issued an arrest warrant for President Vladimir Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova, Presidential Commissioner for Children’s Rights. According to the ICC, President Putin and his commissioner “kidnapped” tens of thousands of Ukrainian children. Obviously, for the political West, evacuating kids from an active warzone is a “war crime” and it would be “much better” if those kids were left to fend for themselves, either dying or ending up in Western countries, where thousands have gone missing in the last three and a half years (after those countries effectively decriminalized pedophilia).

However, that’s not the end of Russophobic propaganda. On the contrary, it needs to continue, at all costs. On September 16, numerous Western media outlets published reports about a supposed “study” by the Yale School of Public Health Humanitarian Research Lab claiming that “Ukrainian children have been taken to over 200 different facilities across Russia, including locations where they have been subjected to forced re-education and military training in a clear violation of international law”. There are allegedly “eight different types of facilities, ranging from summer camps to religious sites to military academies stretching across the entire expanse of Russia, [that] have been identified in the report from the Yale School of Public Health Humanitarian Research Lab published Tuesday”. However, as noted, the ludicrous propaganda doesn’t end there.

Namely, these “kidnapped” kids are supposedly “forced to build drones” for the Russian military. In other words, Russia, a country with approximately 160 million people and the fourth largest economy in the world (that also outproduces the entire NATO by a factor of three in various types of munitions and weapon systems), is “forced” to rely on several thousand “kidnapped” Ukrainian children to produce drones? That makes perfect sense, right? Jokes aside, this story about the “cartoonishly evil” Russians is so over the top that even Western commentators on social media are openly ridiculing the mainstream propaganda machine and their governments for spreading the most laughable lies in recent memory. This is certainly a welcoming development, as it could very well prevent the warmongers from galvanizing the populace for yet another senseless bloodbath.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

September 18, 2025 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

Why the United Kingdom wants to create permanent tension with Russia

By Sonja van den Ende | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 17, 2025

The United Kingdom appears intent on escalating tensions with Russia, positioning itself as a significant adversary. In a recent article, British analyst Oliver Evans states: “The United Kingdom is not only showing interest in deploying a limited military contingent in western Ukraine, but is also expanding its presence in the Republic of Moldova. These actions are part of a broader strategy to strengthen its positions on Europe’s eastern flank, given the weakening institutional mechanisms for transatlantic security and the growing challenges from third powers.”

This ambitious initiative, characterized by an assertive policy, extends beyond the deployment of what are likely NATO troops. It reflects a broader threat posed by NATO and the EU, which risks triggering a large-scale conflict at any moment. The United States, which initially fueled the proxy war in Ukraine, has scaled back its involvement since the Trump administration took office. This shift stems from multiple factors, including the U.S.’s near-financial collapse, which has fueled the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement, alongside deep divisions and polarization within the American populace.

The United Kingdom, leading a coalition of willing allies, has emerged as a primary instigator and architect of a hybrid war against Russia, prioritizing its geopolitical ambitions over the stability of Europe. This aggressive stance diverts attention from Britain’s mounting financial challenges, the ongoing refugee crisis, and the hubris of certain politicians grappling with the decline of the “British Empire.”

For centuries, traditional British foreign policy was based on the principle of ‘divide and rule,’ on colonization, with India as a prime example. Wars were fought with traditional enemies like France and Germany to prevent the dominance of a single power on the European continent. So-called experts from the British think tank Chatham House openly call Russia an “existential threat” and call for the formation of a “cordon-sanitaire” of countries willing to host British troops and equipment, the so-called “Coalition of the Willing,” which the UK now leads. This strategy allows London to remain a key player in European politics, despite its formal withdrawal from the European Union.

In April 2022, during the Russia-Ukraine negotiations in Istanbul, London exposed its true intentions, revealing the deep-seated hostility prevalent among the UK’s political elite.

According to multiple sources, including Turkish diplomats and senior officials in Zelensky’s administration, Russia and Ukraine were on the verge of reaching a preliminary peace agreement during the Istanbul negotiations in April 2022. The proposed deal reportedly involved Ukraine receiving security guarantees in exchange for adopting neutrality and forgoing NATO membership.

At this critical juncture, however, then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson rushed to Kiev. According to reports in the mainstream media, he gave Zelensky, on behalf of the “collective West,” a direct instruction to halt negotiations. Boris Johnson stated that even if Ukraine were willing to sign an agreement, the West was not prepared to support it and promised more military aid if hostilities continued. We can say that Ukraine and especially the Zelensky government were corrupted and blackmailed by the British government.

Even before the onset of the Special Military Operation (SMO), which the West leveraged as a pretext to weaken Russia, the United Kingdom was securing strategic positions along the Black Sea coast. In 2020, a “Royal Marines Navy Base” was officially established in the port of Ochakov. Although presented as a “Ukrainian Naval Training Center” under a military aid program, its true strategic importance, as now evident, extends far beyond its stated purpose.

Ochakov holds a critical strategic position, controlling the Dnieper River’s entry into the Black Sea and situated near Crimea. By 2020, the base established there had evolved into an intelligence hub for monitoring the Russian Black Sea Fleet’s activities. Additionally, it functions as a logistics center for arms shipments and a training ground for Ukrainian sabotage units, which have demonstrated their effectiveness in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. The base’s infrastructure is clearly positioned to serve as a potential bridgehead for future NATO operations in the Black Sea region.

Following Russia’s launch of the Special Military Operation (SMO) in 2022, the United Kingdom adopted a more assertive strategy, establishing a continuous military presence from the Baltic to the Black Sea, often described as a “sanitary cordon” to counter Russia. Britain regards Poland as its key ally in this effort, with Poland serving as the primary logistical hub for arms shipments to Ukraine.

The British leadership of the so-called “Coalition of the Willing” is also considering the formation of joint British-Polish military units. Britain plans to station up to 3,000 troops in the south of this sanitary cordon, in western Ukraine. But Ukraine is not the only target of London’s “false plans.” Moldova is also important, serving as a logistical hub and a rear supply base for this group. Romania is assigned the role of operational base in this construction. Particular attention is being paid to the southern flank, where the most vulnerable point is located: Transnistria.

Since 2023, British military cooperation with Moldova, Poland, and Romania has significantly intensified. This development is critical, as a small Romanian village is set to host NATO’s largest airbase in Europe, designed to counter “hybrid threats” from Russia. Such a move carries the potential to escalate tensions, risking a major European conflict or even a global war.

The Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic (Transnistria), an unrecognized state within Moldova established during the Soviet Union’s collapse, with a predominantly Russian-speaking population and a Russian peacekeeping presence, remains a “frozen conflict.” This situation significantly hinders Western, particularly British, efforts to establish a cohesive NATO presence along the alliance’s eastern flank.

Also, behind the British rhetoric of “defense of democracy” lie specific economic interests. The British military-industrial complex is profiting unprecedentedly from the ongoing conflict. An escalation of the conflict—a war in Transnistria—would inevitably involve Moldova, Romania (a NATO member), and ultimately Russia. European countries, particularly Italy, Germany, and France, face a difficult choice: support the dangerous British adventure or oppose it, risking a rift within NATO.

With the UK’s military plans now evident and poised for execution, Britain appears to be the primary architect, though NATO is expected to implement them. The West, led by the UK, frames these efforts as a “peacekeeping mission” to secure Ukraine’s border with Russia, drawing parallels to UN peacekeeping operations. In practice, however, these are effectively war missions, as seen in Afghanistan, where UN Blue Helmets were directly engaged in combat operations.

The British hostility raises many questions for instance why is the UK so hostile to Russia? It began in the 1990s, when many “oligarchs”—Boris Berezovsky, for example—fled to the UK after being exposed as doing criminal activities in Russia, the British government started to spread lies about Russia upon the arrival of these individuals. Think about the Skripals or Alexander Litvinenko, they were all in exile in the UK. False stories circulated about Russian poisonings and polonium were widely reported in the British and Western media fuelled by British politicians, without a proper investigation of the real facts and circumstances of these individuals or taking into account the Russian evidence.

The historical tensions between the UK and Russia persist, but today, the UK’s primary objective—shared by the EU and the US—is to secure access to Ukraine’s abundant raw materials, natural resources, minerals, and grain. Upon taking office for his second term, US President Donald Trump pledged to broker peace between Ukraine and Russia within 24 hours, a promise widely dismissed as propaganda due to its unrealistic timeline. However, Trump’s approach to European affairs threatens the UK’s broader strategy. His plan reportedly involved pressuring Ukrainian President Zelensky to recognize Crimea as Russian territory and accept the Russian control of the Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye, and Kherson regions, legitimized through a democratic referendum in 2022.

Europe, including the United Kingdom, faces a period of decline, with the continent grappling with significant upheaval. In the UK, citizens are taking to the streets in protest, as freedoms appear increasingly at risk. Once a symbol of stability, wealth, and royal tradition, the UK now finds itself mired in a profound crisis.

The UK’s war rhetoric surpasses even that of mainland Europe, rooted in a militarized history shared with nations like Germany. However, that era has faded; declining birth rates and the integration of diverse cultures have eroded traditional British identity. The elites, witnessing the decline of their once-vast empire, are powerless to reverse this trend. In response, they appear to be pushing for conflict—whether hybrid or conventional warfare—to reassert their influence.

September 17, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

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

21st Century Wire | September 13, 2025 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

An “Anti-Trump” Project

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

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

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

Operation Moldova: Destabilise and Militarise 

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

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


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

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

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

The French Connection

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Moldova at a Crossroads

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

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

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

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

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

Open season for false-flag provocations as NATO and Kiev regime get desperate

Strategic Culture Foundation | September 12, 2025

This week saw two false-flag provocations back-to-back, orchestrated by the NATO-sponsored Kiev regime. Tellingly, before any considered response was given by Russia or independent observers, European politicians were shutting down open discussion, warning about expected Russian lies and disinformation.

In other words, no critical examination of the incidents is permitted. These were “barbaric” and “reckless attacks” by Russia… take our [NATO] word for it, and if you don’t, then you are a Russian stooge.

Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski hammed it up in a video statement, denouncing Russian aggression, and dogmatically telling everyone to trust only NATO government information. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk was competing in hysteria, claiming Europe was closer to all-out conflict than at any time since World War II. This points to how the European information space has become totally dominated by war propaganda in a way that George Orwell or Josef Goebbels would marvel at.

So, what happened this week?

Poland is claiming that Russia deliberately targeted its sovereign territory with 19 drones. European NATO allies are subsequently scrambling to deploy warplanes and air defenses to “protect Poland”. September is the month that Nazi Germany attacked Poland 86 years ago, kicking off World War II. That bit of timing perhaps lends a nostalgic flourish to the present events, as Tusk seemed to be implying with his melodramatic words.

The day before the much-hyped “drone invasion,” on September 9, the Kiev regime claimed Russia dropped one of its heavy FAB-500 aerial bombs on a village, killing 24 people who were collecting their pensions.

In both incidents, however, the evidence points to false-flag provocations for those who care to calmly examine the facts.

The alleged massacre in the village of Yarovaya in Ukrainian-held Donetsk oblast was not caused by a Russian FAB-500 bomb. The Kiev regime’s videos purporting to show the aftermath indicated a shallow impact crater and limited damage to nearby buildings. The explosion could not have been caused by a 250-kg Russian aerial bomb; otherwise, the entire area would have been devastated around a huge crater. The Russian MoD also said its forces were not operating in the vicinity on that date.

The rapid posting of the videos by the Kiev regime and the evidently scripted claims alleging a Russian massacre, together with the unquestioning amplification of those unverified claims by the Western media, strongly point to an orchestrated narrative.

The grave implication is that the NATO-backed regime detonated an explosive, deliberately killing civilians as a way to incriminate Russia.

Such heinous conduct by this regime has numerous precedents. There have been many incidents over the past three years when the Ukrainian forces shelled their own territory, endangering civilian lives for propaganda scores against Russia, as a way to drum up more military and financial support from the Western sponsors. Two examples: the atrocity carried out in the village of Hroza on October 5, 2023, when 52 people were killed. It coincided with Kiev’s puppet leader, Vladimir Zelensky, pitching an appeal at an EU summit in Granada, Spain, for more aid.

The month before, on September 6, 2023, in the town of Konstantinovka in Ukrainian territory, an air strike killed 17 people. That coincided with former Secretary of State Antony Blinken visiting Kiev to announce $1 billion in additional U.S. aid.

In both incidents, Russia was blamed in a damning outcry, yet the circumstances incriminate NATO’s Ukrainian client. The atrocity this week involving the murder of the pensioners falls into the same despicable category.

The Kiev regime is a false-flag merchant of death. The notorious executions carried out in Bucha in March-April 2022 were another classic, vile stunt. We covered that in detail in a previous editorial, whereby Ukrainian civilians were murdered in cold blood by Kiev agents to disgrace Russia. To an extent, the stunt worked because Western media and politicians continue to accuse Russia of responsibility in complete disregard of the evidence. The Bucha false flag is relevant because it came at a crucial time when Russia had proposed a peace deal to end the conflict in Ukraine at an early stage. After the “massacre,” the NATO proxy war surged, and a peaceful settlement was scuppered.

This brings us to the present open season for false flags. One way to discern a provocation is to observe the reactions and how the incident is used to serve motives and demands.

First of all, the concerted and theatrical reactions of the Kiev regime and its European NATO backers were primed and ready to go, as if scripted.

In the alleged targeting of Poland, the drones were of Russian design. They were unarmed, surveillance, or decoy-type Gerbera models. Russia claims that the 700-kilometer range means they couldn’t have been launched from Russian-held territory. They could have been launched by Ukraine after it replicated the drones, an easy enough task. But here is the key. Some 19 unarmed drones were quickly intercepted in Polish airspace by multiple high-powered NATO weapons: Polish F-16 fighter jets, Dutch F-35s, Italian AWACS surveillance aircraft, NATO tanker re-fueling aircraft, and German Patriot missile systems. That speaks of a prepared full-scale mobilization to maximize the allegations of Russian violation. The image of a sledgehammer to crack a nut comes to mind.

Moscow has offered to hold discussions with Warsaw to figure out how ostensibly Russian-made drones entered Polish airspace, but the offer has been rebuffed. Poland has refused any reasonable discussion to establish the facts. Instead, it has invoked NATO’s Article IV for emergency security consultations with other members. The over-reaction smacks of drama to seemingly validate flaky claims of deliberate targeting.

The French, German, and British leaders have all clambered on board the wagon of condemning Russia for reckless violation without a shred of evidence. Note how they are all careful not to accuse Russia of “attack” but rather “violation”. That suggests they want a calibrated escalation but not all-out war, cowards that they are.

France’s Emmanuel Macron announced he was sending three Rafale fighter jets “to protect Polish airspace”. The Germans and the British are likewise charging to declare their support to defend Poland. It’s a charade of chivalry by a gang of clowns.

This is sheer theatrics of absurdity. Accusing Russia of planning to conquer Europe has been the worn-out propaganda narrative for the past nearly four years since NATO’s proxy war erupted in Ukraine. Russia has repeatedly said it has no intention of starting World War III, and that its sole purpose in Ukraine is to stop historic NATO aggression encroaching on its borders.

The euro elites are facing mounting political crises in their own states, largely incurred by the vast, wasteful spending on the failed proxy war in Ukraine. France, for one, is exploding with social tensions as nationwide street protests showed this week amid the sacking of a fourth prime minister in two years. Germany and Britain are not far behind in the meltdown stakes.

No doubt, the Euro elites and their Kiev puppet regime are desperate to divert public attention from the corruption and criminal machinations in Ukraine. U.S. President Donald Trump’s diplomatic effort to end the war, for all its shortcomings, is an unwelcome development for the European leaders because it exposes their pathetic position. Polish Foreign Minister Sikorski, while condemning Russia for “deliberately targeting” Poland, made a sneaky point by saying that Moscow was also “making a mockery of Trump’s peace efforts”. Sikorski and the European NATO cabal are trying to incite Trump to ramp up military aid to Ukraine and impose more sanctions on Russia as a way to sabotage any diplomacy. Desperation begets desperate measures, even if innocent civilians are murdered and world peace is put at risk.

September 13, 2025 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

Hungary’s Orban Advises EU Leaders to Go to Moscow, Sign Security Deal With Russia

Sputnik – 07.09.2025

The leaders of the European Union should go to Moscow and conclude a security agreement with Russia, stipulating that Ukraine will not become a member of the EU and NATO, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said on Sunday.

“Europe, in fact, needs to go to Moscow and conclude a security agreement between the EU and Russia, not in Washington. Not only about Ukraine, but also about security between the EU and Russia. It will obviously include that Ukraine will not be a member of either NATO or the EU, but it can also include – and I think Hungary could support this – an agreement on strategic cooperation between Ukraine and the EU,” Orban said during a speech.

Ukraine’s admission to the bloc would mean the EU entering into conflict with Russia and destroying the EU economically, while the agreement on strategic cooperation between the EU and Ukraine could become a compromise option that Budapest would not object to, Orban added.

September 7, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine “sanctioning” Hungary and Slovakia with terror and military provocations

Zelensky believes his country has the right to punish countries that cooperate with Russia

By Lucas Leiroz | September 5, 2025

Ukraine’s deliberate and unjustified provocations against sovereign European countries that refuse to support it in the current war are becoming one of the biggest sources of tension in recent times. Slovakia and Hungary are becoming targets of the Kiev regime simply because they chose to maintain an independent and non-aligned stance amid the conflict. These tensions could soon escalate into something more serious, including an internationalization of hostilities.

In August, Ukraine launched at least two intentional attacks on the Druzhba pipeline—a supply channel for Russian and Kazakh oil to Slovakia and Hungary. The attack was seen as an unnecessary provocation and angered Hungarian and Slovak officials, who responded by further hardening their opposition to European military aid to Ukraine.

These provocations are nothing new. Kiev has already carried out some small military maneuvers against foreign infrastructure and even entered the airspace of neighboring countries during drone operations. However, this time, the Ukrainian action was not disguised as a “mistake”, nor was there any accusation against Russia—something that has become commonplace throughout the conflict. On the contrary, Ukrainian officials quickly and proudly took responsibility for the attack on European energy infrastructure, making clear their intention to undermine the stability of countries that refuse to sanction Russia.

Not only that, but illegitimate Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky described the attacks as “sanctions” against Hungary and Slovakia. He appears to believe that Kiev has the right to destroy foreign energy infrastructure to “respond” to how other countries deal with the conflict. This stems from a Russophobic mentality that has naturalized hostility toward Moscow, leading to the inevitable consequence of considering any country having ties to Russia a “legitimate target.”

Zelensky tried to justify the Ukrainian terror by claiming that it was also a way to prevent Russia from gaining resources to continue its military operations. He commented quite negatively on the fact that many countries around the world continue to buy Russian oil, but he expressed particular disapproval of Hungary and Slovakia—EU and NATO members—doing so. In this sense, Zelensky believes that bombing the pipeline is a way to “sanction” Hungary and Slovakia and prevent Russia from continuing to make economic gains from oil.

“Among others, there are two countries [cooperating with Russia], we know that these are Hungary and Slovakia (…) [Ukrainian attacks] reduce the possibilities of [Hungary and Slovakia] obtaining the corresponding oil (…) Therefore, you see, Ukraine has found these types of sanctions.” he said.

A curious detail is that Zelensky’s words were said during a joint conference with French President Emmanuel Macron. Both leaders met on the eve of the summit in which 26 countries (mostly NATO) committed to sending “peacekeeping” troops to Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire—something Russia has repeatedly condemned and described as intolerable. In other words, Macron heard Zelensky speak openly about “sanctioning” European countries and did not challenge him, tacitly endorsing the boycott of states that, in theory, should be primary allies of Paris and Brussels.

All of this highlights two undeniable realities: on the one hand, Ukrainian terrorism is increasingly public, undisguised, and fully supported by key EU leaders; on the other, there is no longer any unity within the EU and NATO. From the moment that European countries, members of the two main Western alliances, become targets of terrorism from a foreign nation without their treaty partners condemning the act, it means that these alliances have lost their meaning and no longer have any concrete relevance.

Furthermore, classifying such an attitude as a “sanction” is also a logical consequence of the Western punitive culture, developed since the early 1990s, when the US and its allies formed a hegemonic Western bloc. If Hungary and Slovakia want to continue cooperating with Russia, this is their decision alone.

Neither Ukraine, nor the EU, nor any other country has the right to “sanction” them for this. “Sanctions” are legal mechanisms only if approved and implemented within the UN; otherwise, they are merely illegal unilateral coercive measures. Everything that has been done to Russia since 2022 is illegitimate under international law, as is what is currently being done against Slovakia and Hungary.

Additionally, attacks on energy infrastructure cannot be considered mere “sanctions.” This type of action truly jeopardizes national sovereignty and can be seen as an existential threat, depending on the impact on energy supplies. Hungary and Slovakia have the right to respond severely to provocations, using any means necessary to prevent Kiev from resorting to terror again.

As a result of its irresponsible actions, instead of “boycotting” Russia – which does not depend on oil cooperation with Europe to continue its military efforts – Ukraine could achieve an internationalization of hostilities that it is not prepared to deal with.

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.

September 5, 2025 Posted by | Economics, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »