Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Mark Rutte wants to triple military aid to Zelensky, with Western taxpayers footing the bill

RT | May 14, 2026

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte wants NATO members to cough up 0.25% of their GDP for Ukraine. This figure seems minuscule, but how much hard-earned taxpayer money does it add up to?

Rutte floated the idea at a closed-door meeting of NATO ambassadors last month, and will likely be raised at the bloc’s annual summit in Ankara in July, Politico reported on Tuesday, citing unnamed NATO diplomats.

How much money does Rutte want to give Ukraine?

The combined GDP of NATO’s 32 member states adds up to $57.2 trillion, according to the bloc’s figures from 2025. Assuming that the US backs Rutte’s proposal, Ukraine stands to receive a windfall of $143 billion, or more than three times the amount of military aid it received from its Western donors last year.

To put Rutte’s demand in perspective, $143 billion is:

  • Roughly equal to Russia’s entire yearly defense budget (around $145 billion)
  • $16 billion more than Germany’s 2026 defense budget ($127 billion)
  • Larger than the combined economies of Latvia and Lithuania ($130 billion)
  • Four times what the US spent on developing the atomic bomb ($35.5 billion, adjusted for inflation)
  • Almost six times what the US has spent on the war with Iran to date ($25 billion)
  • Enough to buy more Patriot missile batteries than currently exist (around 200)

This princely sum is separate to the 5% of GDP that NATO requires its members to spend on their own militaries, and separate to the unrepayable, debt-financed loan of €90 billion ($105 billion) that the EU has already started to funnel to Kiev.

Whose idea was this?

Unsurprisingly, the idea was first suggested by Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky. “Ukraine is part of Europe’s security, and we want 0.25% of the GDP of a particular partner country to be allocated to our defense industry and domestic production,” he told reporters last June.

Is every NATO member on board?

Rutte’s aim is to balance military aid to Ukraine among member states, as to date, Nordic countries like Denmark and Baltic countries have been making outsized contributions compared to some of the bloc’s larger economies. Denmark, for example, has given 3.25% of its entire GDP to Kiev since 2022, while Germany has given 0.55%. On the lower end of the scale, Hungary has given the smallest share of any NATO country at 0.04%.

France and the UK are reportedly unhappy with the proposal, even though both nations already exceed the 0.25% target. London and Paris both refused to comment when contacted by Politico. Furthermore, some unnamed EU countries reportedly want their contributions to the aforementioned €90 billion EU loan counted towards Rutte’s target.

Where will the money go?

Western military aid to Ukraine is typically spent on purchasing weapons from abroad, paying military salaries, and the research, development, and manufacture of arms within Ukraine. Zelensky insists that the money will go to Ukraine’s defense industry and domestic production – a sector that is a hotbed of corruption and graft.

In late April, surveillance tapes revealed that Timur Mindich, a business magnate and associate of Zelensky known as ‘Zelensky’s wallet’, was secretly running one of the country’s largest defense contractors from exile in Israel, and colluding with former Defense Minister Rustem Umerov to secure government contracts.

All but one of Ukraine’s wartime defense chiefs have been tied to corruption and bid-rigging scandals, Mindich is wanted on separate embezzlement charges, and Zelensky’s former chief of staff, Andrey Yermak, was arrested in May and accused of a connected money laundering scheme.

It will likely be up to individual donor countries to stipulate how their 0.25% is spent. However, RT has already covered some of the endemic rot within the Ukrainian defense sector, and the picture so far suggests that whatever the Western taxpayer sends to Kiev, there is no telling how much will be skimmed off the top along the way.

May 14, 2026 Posted by | Corruption, Militarism | , , | Comments Off on Mark Rutte wants to triple military aid to Zelensky, with Western taxpayers footing the bill

NATO member’s government collapses after Ukrainian drone incident

RT | May 14, 2026

Latvian Prime Minister Evika Silina has announced her resignation amid a government crisis caused by an incident involving Ukrainian kamikaze drones hitting an oil depot near the Russian border.

Silina announced the decision at a press briefing on Thursday. Just hours earlier, Interior Minister Rihards Kozlovskis, a member of Silina’s liberal-conservative Unity party, stated that the prime minister has no intention of leaving office. Meanwhile, the opposition was planning a procedural maneuver to circumvent the five-day pause required under Latvian law before a request for a no-confidence vote is granted.

The crisis in the Baltic state was triggered by an incident last week in which two Ukrainian long-range kamikaze drones hit an empty oil depot near the town of Rezekne, around 40 km from the Russian border. No casualties were reported on the ground.

Defense Minister Andris Spruds, who has supported Ukraine’s attacks against Russia and called the incident regrettable but understandable, resigned over the weekend. The Progressives party member said he did not want the military to be dragged into political squabbling.

MP Andris Suvajevs, who leads the Progressives parliamentary faction, stated earlier in the day that the ruling coalition was certain to collapse if a no-confidence motion is put to a vote. The prime minister was expected to take part in a session of parliament, but instead invited the media to her office to announce her resignation. She blamed “political jealousy and narrow party interests” for the crisis.

Moscow has accused NATO nations of tacitly allowing Ukraine to use their airspace to conduct strikes on targets in northwestern Russia, particularly oil export terminals in Leningrad Region. Officials in several countries where incidents involving Ukrainian drones were reported since mid-March have expressed concerns with Kiev’s military planning.

Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo said he told Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky that Helsinki regards Ukrainian aircraft entering its airspace as unacceptable. Estonian Defense Minster Hanno Pevkur said the Ukrainians should “keep their drones away from our territory [and] control their activities better.”

May 14, 2026 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Comments Off on NATO member’s government collapses after Ukrainian drone incident

Prof John Mearsheimer TRUMP WILL BE FORCED TO CUT A DEAL w/IRAN

Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – May 13, 2026

May 13, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Video, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Prof John Mearsheimer TRUMP WILL BE FORCED TO CUT A DEAL w/IRAN

Russia Not Ruling Out West’s Preparing Another ‘Bloody Hoax’ in Ukraine – Diplomat

Sputnik – 13.05.2026

MOSCOW – Russia does not rule out that the West is preparing another “bloody hoax” in Ukraine similar to the one arranged in the city of Bucha in 2022, Yulia Zhdanova, the head of the Russian delegation at the Vienna talks on military security and arms control, said on Wednesday.

NATO representatives have held three meetings with directors, screenwriters and producers working in the cinema industry in Brussels, Los Angeles and Paris, and planned a next meeting with members of the Writers’ Guild of Great Britain, Zhdanova said.

“The letter received by those invited to these events mentions ‘three projects’ that are already in development. Perhaps NATO countries are once again preparing for another bloody hoax? For instance, like the one staged in Bucha in April 2022,” Zhdanova said at the 1136th meeting of the OSCE Forum for Security Cooperation.

The Russian Defense Ministry said in April 2022 that the footage of Bucha published by Kiev was a provocation. The ministry said that not a single local resident was subject to violence during the time that the town was under Russian control.

All Russian troops withdrew from Bucha by March 30, 2022, leaving the northward roads to and from the town open to traffic, while Ukrainian troops shelled the southern outskirts with large-caliber artillery, tanks and multiple launch rocket systems.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that Russia rejected any accusations of involvement in the alleged deaths in Bucha and warned world leaders against jumping to conclusions without first considering Moscow’s arguments.

May 13, 2026 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism | , , | Comments Off on Russia Not Ruling Out West’s Preparing Another ‘Bloody Hoax’ in Ukraine – Diplomat

The Battle for Zaporizhzhia – Part 34 of the Anglo-American War on Russia

Tales of the American Empire | May 7, 2026

Springtime in Ukraine melted snow turning farmland and dirt roads into deep slush that vehicles could not cross. The ground has dried and Russian forces quicken their advance and will reach the big Dnieper River this summer. The most likely crossing point is the city of Zaporizhzhia with a population of 700,000.

It is unclear if Ukraine will fight to defend Zaporizhzhia or fall back behind the Dnieper River. If Ukraine evacuates this city, its big buildings could provide a great fortress. But Ukraine has nowhere for its 700,000 people to live and not enough transport to move them anyway. In addition, as Russian forces soon approach, their drones will patrol Zaporizhzhia bridges and attack any transport, effectively blockading the city. Ukrainian forces could become trapped on the east side of the river.

It will be interesting to see if NATO can destroy all the Dnieper bridges despite opposition from many Ukrainians, who may disrupt plans with police and military units. The Russians want them to support major forces once they cross the river. The Ukrainians know these bridges are vital national assets and not easily replaced. If all bridges are destroyed, this can delay the Russian advance for months.

_________________________________

“Military Summary” channel; YouTube; daily war updates;    / @militarysummary  

Related Tales:

“The Anglo-American War on Russia”;    • The Anglo-American War on Russia  

May 11, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Video | , , , | Comments Off on The Battle for Zaporizhzhia – Part 34 of the Anglo-American War on Russia

French presidential hopeful pushes to end Russia sanctions

RT | May 11, 2026

French presidential hopeful Florian Philippot has called for lifting sanctions against Russia and restoring Russian energy imports. In an interview with RT, the politician claimed that Brussels-driven EU policies run counter to France’s national interests.

A former vice president of the National Front (now National Rally) and ex-member of the European Parliament, Philippot announced on Saturday that he will run in the 2027 election. He leads the sovereigntist movement ‘Les Patriotes’ and is a longtime critic of the EU, the euro, and NATO. He advocates restoring French sovereignty, reducing dependence on supranational institutions, and ending French military and financial aid to Ukraine.

“I want, and it is in my program, for France to regain its independence by leaving all the supranational globalist structures: the EU, the euro, NATO,” Florian Philippot told RT France on Sunday. “And I want a policy of dialogue and friendship with Russia, and not, as today, one of mistrust, war, and insults. All of this is absurd for our national interests.”

The politician said Paris should “take back control” by withdrawing from free trade agreements such as Mercosur, which he said “condemn French farmers to death.” He added that sanctions on Russia imposed by Brussels should be ended in order to restore the flow of Russian gas and oil.

Philippot also called for France to regain control over immigration and migration flows while pursuing a broader reindustrialization strategy. He said the country’s industrial base had been weakened under the euro and advocated restoring a national currency better suited to the French economy.

In addition, the politician pledged to expand the use of referendums, including citizen-initiated votes, as part of strengthening popular sovereignty. He also called for reducing France’s dependence on the EU, which he said is largely shaped in Berlin and Washington rather than in Paris. Philippot stressed that leaving the EU would allow France to lower energy and electricity costs.

France is heading toward a highly fragmented presidential race, with around 30 people already expressing interest in being on the 2027 ballot. These include Jean-Luc Melenchon, leader of ‘La France Insoumise’, Bruno Retailleau, president of ‘Les Republicains’, Xavier Bertrand, a senior center-right politician, David Lisnard, mayor of Cannes, Laurent Wauquiez, a prominent conservative figure, and Edouard Philippe, France’s former prime minister.

May 11, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , | Comments Off on French presidential hopeful pushes to end Russia sanctions

Prediction: NATO’s Collapse & Nuclear War

By Prof. Glenn Diesen | May 8, 2026

NATO was always destined to be a temporary military alliance, united by a common enemy and threat during the Cold War. Once that threat disappeared with the end of the Cold War and thereafter the collapse of the Soviet Union, the main question asked in the 1990s was: What would be NATO’s new reason to exist? The answer to this question was to pursue unipolarity / collective hegemony in the post-Cold War era through NATO expansionism and military interventionism (“out of area or out of business”).

Russia was implicitly given the ultimatum: be a compliant civilizational student or a counter-civilizational force. Russia could accept NATO’s hegemonic role as a “force for good,” or it could resist, and then NATO would return to its former role of confronting Russia. The NATO-backed regime change in Ukraine—aimed at transforming the country from a Russian partner into a frontline state aligned against Russia— triggered the war in 2014. NATO thus began reverting to its former role of confronting Russia, yet it happened as the hegemonic era had come to an end.

Now that the former collective hegemony has been balanced and a multipolar world has emerged, NATO has yet again lost its purpose and will disintegrate. European leaders want to restore NATO’s original purpose: containing Russia. This will fail because it is based on the fraudulent narrative that Russia wants to restore the Soviet Union, rather than balancing NATO expansionism and military interventionism.

The US will, however, not return to the original purpose of NATO as the distribution of power has shifted, and will therefore not play along with the fake narratives of Europeans leaders. The US is in relative decline and cannot sustain simultaneous strategic dominance in Europe, the Middle East, East Asia, and the Western Hemisphere. The US cannot be everywhere in a multipolar world, and it will pivot to the Western Hemisphere and East Asia. A US presence in Europe consumes too many resources and pushes Russia toward China, its main rival. However, the US is happy to outsource the conflict with Russia to the Europeans. Europe remains obedient, and Russia is weakened.

If Europe had rational leaders, they would have adjusted to the new international distribution of power by shutting this war down, making peace with Russia, establishing a common pan-European security architecture (35 years too late) that also saves Ukraine by removing it from the front lines of a re-divided Europe, and diversifying their economic ties to avoid excessive dependence on any one foreign power. However, Europe does not have rational leaders, and even arguing that weapons are not the path to peace or arguing in favour of diplomacy is smeared and censored as “pro-Russian” treason. Europe’s political class remains committed to Russophobic narratives and policies that intensify confrontation and prolong the conflict.

The trajectory now appears increasingly clear: NATO will continue to disintegrate, and the Europeans will compensate by further escalating the war against Russia. This will happen at a time when Russia is desperate to restore its deterrence by retaliating against Europe (most predictably against Germany), while the US commitment and protection of Europe are waning. The predictable consequence is that European leaders will eventually provoke a powerful response from Russia, which will rapidly escalate to what will hopefully only be a limited nuclear strike.

May 8, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , , | Comments Off on Prediction: NATO’s Collapse & Nuclear War

Russia warns of escalating NATO military activity in Baltic region

Al Mayadeen | May 4, 2026

Russia has accused NATO of significantly expanding its military operations in the Baltic Sea, particularly near the Kaliningrad region, warning that the alliance’s growing presence poses risks to regional stability and international navigation.

Artem Bulatov, special envoy at the Russian Foreign Ministry, stated that NATO is intensifying efforts to enhance its combat capabilities and infrastructure in areas adjacent to Kaliningrad, pointing to a sustained military buildup under various operational frameworks.

According to Bulatov, NATO launched its Baltic Sentry mission in January 2025 under the stated aim of protecting critical infrastructure in the Baltic Sea, while continuing extensive air patrols and expanding the scope of its exercises.

Member states engaging in ‘provocative’ actions

He added that the scale and frequency of NATO drills have increased, alongside provocative actions by member states targeting vessels involved in transporting goods to and from Russia.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko warned that these activities are creating “serious threats” to international shipping routes and economic operations in the region, suggesting that NATO’s mission is effectively aimed at controlling key logistical corridors.

Grushko further argued that the alliance’s operations are designed to restrict the movement of goods linked to Russia, raising concerns in Moscow over the militarization of maritime routes in the Baltic.

Russia warns of Western shift on nuclear weapons role

Russia has expressed concern over a shifting Western approach to the role of nuclear weapons, senior diplomat Andrey Belousov said last week.

Speaking in an interview with RIA Novosti, Belousov said Moscow is increasingly alarmed by developments within what he called the “collective West,” particularly ahead of the upcoming review of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

The Eleventh Review Conference of the NPT is scheduled to take place in New York City from April 27 to May 22.

“Currently, a number of issues in the context of the NPT are causing us serious concern. First and foremost, this concerns a trend that could soon take on an avalanche-like nature: the widespread declaration by a number of states — primarily from the ‘collective West’ camp — of a new view on the role and place of nuclear weapons,” Belousov said.

May 4, 2026 Posted by | Militarism | , | Comments Off on Russia warns of escalating NATO military activity in Baltic region

NATO courts screenwriters to embed alliance messaging in film, TV

Al-Mayadeen | May 3, 2026

NATO has been quietly holding closed-door meetings with film and television writers, directors, and producers across Europe and the United States, in what critics are denouncing as a coordinated effort to embed the military alliance’s messaging into mainstream entertainment.

According to The Guardian, the initiative has already spanned sessions in Los Angeles, Brussels, and Paris, with a fourth meeting planned for London next month, where NATO officials are set to meet with members of the Writers’ Guild of Great Britain (WGGB).

The meetings, held under Chatham House rules, meaning participants may use information discussed but are not permitted to identify other attendees, focus on what organizers describe as the “evolving security situation in Europe and beyond.”

A WGGB email reviewed by The Guardian indicated that three separate projects are already in development that were “inspired, at least in part,” by those conversations.

James Appathurai, a former NATO spokesperson now serving as the alliance’s deputy assistant secretary general for hybrid, cyber and new technology, is expected to attend the London session alongside other officials.

In language that alarmed many recipients, the invitation suggested that “even if something so simple,” as NATO’s core message of cooperation and collective security, “finds its way into a future story, that will be enough.”

‘Clearly propaganda’

NATO’s outreach has drawn sharp criticism from within the creative community. Irish screenwriter Alan O’Gorman, whose film Christy won best film at the 2026 Irish Film and Television Awards, called the initiative “outrageous” and “clearly propaganda,” telling The Guardian that many writers come from countries that have “suffered under wars that NATO has joined and propagated.”

O’Gorman said those invited were “pretty offended that art would be used in a way that was supporting war,” and framed the meetings as part of a broader effort to cultivate pro-NATO sentiment in light of fearmongering across European media about weakened defenses.

Screenwriter and producer Faisal A. Qureshi, who applied to attend one session before a scheduling conflict prevented him, raised more structural concerns. He warned that the “risk for any creative who dips into this unattributable world of intelligence or military briefings is that they can get seduced into thinking they now have some secret knowledge,” one that normalizes moral compromise in the name of the greater good.

Qureshi questioned whether writers given such privileged access would genuinely “challenge or interrogate” the information fed to them, or simply absorb it.

A pattern of cultural lobbying

The London meeting is not an isolated effort. In 2024, eight prominent Hollywood screenwriters, including a writer and executive producer on Friends and a producer on High Potential, were flown to NATO headquarters in Brussels, where they met then-Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. The trip was organized by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The initiative also mirrors recommendations from the Centre for European Reform, which earlier this year called on governments to directly engage cultural figures, including screenwriters and producers, to build public support for rising defense budgets and “better tell the story” of why military investment is necessary.

NATO, for its part, framed the sessions as demand-driven, saying the meetings “follow from interest expressed by members of the industry to know more about what NATO is about and how it works.”

May 3, 2026 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , | Comments Off on NATO courts screenwriters to embed alliance messaging in film, TV

Iran consolidates Strait of Hormuz control in post-war power shift, leaving US in dark

Press TV | April 30, 2026

The geopolitical landscape of the Persian Gulf has undergone a seismic shift following the 40-day US-Israeli war of aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Iran emerged from the imposed war not merely intact but strategically ascendant, holding a decisive upper hand over the world’s most critical energy chokepoint.

The Strait of Hormuz, through which approximately one-fifth of global oil trade passes, is no longer a waterway that Washington can threaten, monitor, or control.

It is now firmly under Iranian management, backed by legal codification, military capability, and an unshakable political resolve, as asserted by Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Mojtaba Khamenei in his Persian Gulf Day statement on Thursday.

The Leader unveiled a comprehensive strategic vision, which seeks to transform Iran’s relationship with the world’s most critical energy chokepoint from defensive vigilance to active and legally codified management.

This is not a tactical victory or a fleeting advantage. It is a fundamental reordering of power in the region, one that leaves the United States guessing about Iran’s next move while every available path before it leads toward a deepening crisis.

The failed cycle: Trump’s return to discredited pressure tactics

The opening gambit of America’s renewed pressure campaign is itself an admission of strategic bankruptcy. Trump’s insistence on escalating economic pressure through the imposition of maritime piracy and naval blockade represents a return to a cycle that has been tested repeatedly – and has failed repeatedly.

The formula is familiar: apply economic strangulation, incite public discontent in Iran, force Tehran to the negotiating table, and extract strategic concessions in exchange for absolutely nothing from the American side.

This cycle has been attempted before. The critical difference this time is that in previous iterations, the military option still carried some credibility. Washington could imply, however vaguely, that if pressure failed, force remained on the table.

That credibility has now been expended. The 40-day war imposed on Iran consumed the military option, and the failure of that aggression has left it hollowed out. It may not have vanished entirely, but it no longer carries the weight or deterrent value it once did.

A second difference is the remarkable resilience of the Iranian people. America’s entire pressure strategy has been built on the assumption that economic hardship would eventually trigger widespread unrest – that the Iranian people would turn against their leadership, creating the conditions for “regime change” or capitulation.

Yet Iranians have demonstrated extraordinary patience, solidarity with the leadership, and unwavering support for the armed forces. This has made America’s investment in fomenting discontent far more difficult than in previous comparable cycles.

A third and perhaps most decisive difference is that America now faces an Iran with relatively full hands. The management and sovereignty imposed by Iran over the Strait of Hormuz have fundamentally altered the balance of leverage.

Iran is no longer merely a sanctioned nation absorbing blows. It has become a sanctioning country capable of imposing costs, controlling access, and reshaping the rules of engagement at the regional and global level.

America’s new priority: Breaking the strait, not Iran

For the United States, the strategic calculus has shifted in revealing ways. The primary objective is no longer dismantling Iran’s nuclear program or forcing a change in its foreign policy. It is far more urgent and immediate: reopening the Strait of Hormuz.

The closure or effective Iranian management of this strategic waterway has dealt a fundamental blow to American prestige and credibility around the world, including among its allies, a wound that Washington cannot afford to leave untreated.

Indeed, breaking the deadlock in the strait may well have taken precedence over – and gained urgency compared to – the question of Iran’s nuclear rights. This inversion of priorities speaks volumes.

America would rather secure passage for its allies’ tankers than resolve the nuclear file. It would rather salvage its wounded so-called “superpower” image than extract concessions on uranium enrichment.

But Iran’s position is unwavering. The decisive, clear, and emphatic declaration of its irreversible decision regarding sovereignty and control over the Strait of Hormuz carries consequences that extend far beyond economics.

There is the economic dimension, certainly – the ability to toll vessels, generate revenue, and pressure adversaries. But there is also the humiliation of American superpower status and the toppling of its global dominance. Every day that Iran exercises effective control over the strait is a day that American credibility erodes further.

Furthermore, the consolidation of Iranian sovereignty over the strait dismantles America’s decades-old strategic roadmap concerning the deployment and geography of its forces in the region.

The United States had built its Persian Gulf presence around the assumption of freedom of navigation – that its navy could come and go as it pleased, that its bases were inviolable, that its dominance was uncontested. That assumption is now dead.

The veto stronger than the Security Council

The vital role of the Strait of Hormuz in the global economy and development cannot be overstated – and it extends far beyond the mere passage of oil through this waterway.

Global supply chains, energy security, and the economic stability of major powers all depend on uninterrupted transit through this narrow chokepoint.

By applying its own rules for the world’s use of the strait, Iran has placed in its hands an extraordinarily powerful tool – perhaps even stronger than the UN Security Council veto.

In practice, this serves as a preamble to the realization of Iran’s strategic objectives in the region and the world. As the Leader of the Islamic Revolution stated in his Persian Gulf Day message, this great achievement will change the order of the region and the world.

The gains from Iran’s implementation of management over the strait are not limited to collecting tolls from passing vessels. While tolls bring considerable material benefits to Iran – revenue that can be reinvested in development – these financial gains are negligible compared to the broader strategic achievements.

The true prize is structural power. The ability to say yes or no. The capacity to reward allies and punish adversaries. The authority to shape the rules by which the global economy accesses one of its most vital arteries.

A new image of Iran: A major power

The consolidation of Iranian sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz – alongside the imposition of defeat upon the enemy in its objectives during the recent imposed wars – has led to the delineation and unveiling of a new image of Iran to the region and the world.

These days, much confirmation of this can be heard in the comments and analyses from the world’s leading think tanks, experts, politicians, and reputable media outlets worldwide.

For America’s former and current allies, following this great Iranian achievement, the US will no longer carry the halo of a “superpower” or the capacity for bullying and coercion as before. Many current equations and orders – including NATO – will now be subject to change and revision to America’s detriment.

The decisive and crushing defeat of American dominance in the region and the world is far more severe, costly, and far-reaching than a military or political defeat resulting from the third imposed war.

This is not hyperbole. It is a recognition of structural reality. When a superpower attempts to subdue a regional power and fails – when it expends its military option, exhausts its economic leverage, and still cannot achieve its objectives – the message to every other player is clear. The unipolar moment is over. A new order is emerging, and Iran is one of its main architects and protagonists.

The enemy’s new weapon: Distortion and deception

Recognizing that conventional military and economic tools have failed, the enemy has turned to its most dangerous weapon – one more significant than naval blockades or even the resumption of war. That weapon is distortion, deception, and trickery.

The enemy seeks to use its agents inside Iran and its media mouthpieces to influence Iranian minds, causing the value of the Strait of Hormuz to collapse in public opinion under the weight of economic and military pressure.

Signs of this dangerous and insidious influence can be observed these days in certain opinions and media outlets. This mysterious current – in what is certainly a coordinated movement – is pushing for concessions and the use of the Strait of Hormuz card to end American pressures, alongside nuclear capabilities.

These statements align precisely with the enemy’s desire to strip our country of these instruments of power. The logic is perverse but predictable: if the Iranian people can be convinced that the strait is not worth the cost, that the pressure is unbearable, that compromise is preferable to resistance – then the enemy will have achieved through psychological warfare what it could not achieve through military aggression.

This is why vigilance is essential. The battlefield has shifted from the waters of the Persian Gulf to the minds of the Iranian people. And on this battlefield, the stakes are just as high.

Iran’s inevitable response

Iran’s response to the continued naval blockade, maritime piracy and banditry by the United States in international waters – as well as the harassment of vessels associated with Iran – is inevitable. As has been emphasized twice so far in the statements of the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, the top military command center, Iran cannot remain indifferent or silent in the face of this lawlessness and maritime piracy.

The American campaign of maritime banditry – the interception of Iranian oil shipments, the seizure of vessels, the intimidation of crews – is itself an act of war. Iran has every right under international law to respond proportionally – and it will respond.

But the form of that response is what keeps Washington guessing. Will Iran escalate gradually or dramatically? Will it target American vessels directly or focus on allied shipping? Will it employ legal mechanisms, economic instruments, or military demonstrations?

The range of options available to Iran is vast, and the deliberate unpredictability of Iranian decision-making leaves the United States in a perpetual state of uncertainty.

This is the new strategic landscape, one in which Iran holds the upper hand, determines the management of the Strait of Hormuz, and keeps Washington guessing about every move.

April 30, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on Iran consolidates Strait of Hormuz control in post-war power shift, leaving US in dark

Ukraine Seeks to Provoke a Nuclear Conflict: Zakharova

teleSUR | April 29, 2026

On Wednesday, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova denounced that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is sabotaging any and all peace initiatives and is now creating conditions for a potential nuclear conflict.

“The diplomat drew attention to Zelensky’s earlier remarks that Ukraine should be given both NATO membership and nuclear weapons as security guarantees,” TASS reported.

“In fact, he continues to provoke a nuclear conflict with such statements. Moreover, Western Europe risks becoming the first victim of this very nuclear blackmail,” Zakharova stated.

“Zelensky clearly does not want peace. He seeks to prolong the fighting indefinitely and is ready to risk a dangerous escalation of the conflict,” she added.

Putin Accuses Ukraine of Resorting to Terrorist Tactics

On Tuesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin denounced that Ukraine is resorting to terrorist actions against the civilian population and infrastructure because it is unable to stop the advance of Russian forces. During a meeting on ensuring security in the upcoming elections, he stressed that the risks of terrorist attacks on Russia are growing.

“The Kiev regime, unable to stop Russia from advancing along the line of engagement, has resorted to overt terrorist methods with the help of its patrons. Ukraine is losing territories day after day and is staking on terror because of its inability to change the situation,” Putin stated, adding that Zelensky hopes that acts of terrorism against Russia will change the situation.

Putin also denounced that the Kiev regime will try to meddle in the 2026 Russian parliamentary elections. More specifically, Ukraine will try to prevent elections from being held in Donbass and Novorossiya.

April 29, 2026 Posted by | War Crimes | , , | Comments Off on Ukraine Seeks to Provoke a Nuclear Conflict: Zakharova

Putting Nukes in Finland Won’t Make Country Safer, Finnish Politician Cautions

Sputnik – 27.04.2026

Stationing nuclear weapons in Finland will not make the country safer, Armando Mema, a member of the Freedom Alliance party, told Sputnik on Monday in response to the government’s plans to allow the import and storage of such weapons on Finnish soil.

“Changing the law and allowing the import of NATO countries’ nuclear weapons will not make Finland safer,” Mema said.

The politician added that NATO, which had promised “not to expand an inch to the east,” is now beefing up its military presence in Finland and wants to place nuclear weapons there.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has described Finland’s plans to allow the import of nuclear weapons into the country as a “concentrated confrontation.”

On April 23, the Finnish government submitted to parliament a proposal to amend the Nuclear Energy Act and the Criminal Code, which would lift the current ban on the import, manufacture, storage and use of nuclear weapons within the country.

April 27, 2026 Posted by | Militarism | , | Comments Off on Putting Nukes in Finland Won’t Make Country Safer, Finnish Politician Cautions

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »