Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Putin drops truth bomb on Macron

Strategic Culture Foundation | July 4, 2025

NATO started the conflict in Ukraine, but Russia will end it on its terms, Russian President Vladimir Putin told his French counterpart this week in a wake-up call.

It’s always refreshing and necessary to bring reality into a conversation, assuming, of course, that the purpose of the dialogue is genuinely to resolve a problem.

France’s Emmanuel Macron requested the phone call with Putin this week. It was the first time the two leaders had spoken in nearly three years. The long absence was due to Moscow claiming that Macron breached diplomatic protocol after the last phone call in 2022 by leaking details to the media.

In any case, Putin showed magnanimity and a willingness to engage diplomatically by taking the call this week from Macron. The two leaders talked for over two hours.

Apart from Ukraine, another topic discussed was the outbreak of war between Israel and Iran, and the U.S. bombing of Iran’s nuclear sites. Macron agreed with Putin that Iran has the right to pursue civilian nuclear energy production, and both appealed for diplomacy to prevent escalation, according to the Kremlin’s statement on the phone conversation.

Critics might note, however, that France, Britain, Germany, and the other European states have played a double game with Iran, undermining Iran’s legitimate rights under the Non-Proliferation Treaty and giving political cover for the unlawful Israeli and US aggression against Tehran. Therefore, Macron’s concern for peace in the Middle East sounds hollow, if not hypocritical.

The Ukraine conflict was also discussed. But here, there was no pretense of diplomatic accord.

Macron urged Putin to “call a ceasefire as soon as possible” and to proceed with peace talks, said the Elysee Palace, as reported by French media.

For his part, Putin rebuffed the trite talk. He reminded Macron of some necessary reality.

According to the Kremlin’s statement: “When discussing the situation surrounding Ukraine, Vladimir Putin reiterated that the conflict was a direct consequence of the policies pursued by the Western countries, which had for years been ignoring Russia’s security interests, creating an anti-Russia staging ground in the country, and condoning violations of rights of Ukraine’s Russian-speaking citizens, and at present were pursuing a policy of prolonging hostilities by supplying the Kiev regime with a variety of modern weaponry. Speaking about the prospects of a peaceful settlement, the president of Russia has confirmed Moscow’s stance on possible agreements: they are to be comprehensive and long-term, provide for the elimination of the root causes of the Ukraine crisis, and be based on the new territorial realities.”

In other words, Russia will end the conflict that Macron and other NATO powers started illegally, and the ending of it will be on Russia’s terms.

Who does Macron think he is? Telling Russia to call a ceasefire as soon as possible? Earlier this year, in March, Macron gave a televised nationwide address declaring Russia to be an existential threat to Europe. He even made the madcap suggestion of France using its nuclear weapons to protect all of Europe. Such crazed talk by Macron is irresponsible and reprehensible.

Macron, along with Britain’s Starmer and Germany’s Merz, are prolonging the more-than-three-year war in Ukraine by pledging more military aid to the NeoNazi Kiev regime.

That regime owes its existence to an illegal coup d’état that the Americans and Europeans orchestrated in 2014. The ongoing conflict, which has slaughtered more than one million Ukrainian soldiers and burdened Europe with huge immigration costs, is the responsibility of Macron and other NATO states. They are the instigators, not Russia.

If Macron genuinely wants peace in Ukraine, there is a straightforward solution. Stop arming the NeoNazi regime and stop telling lies about “defending democracy in Ukraine” from alleged “Russian aggression.” Macron and his gang of NATO war criminals could end the bloodshed promptly if they dropped the evil charade.

U.S. President Donald Trump also had a phone call with Putin this week. That was on Thursday, two days after Macron’s.

As with the French leader, Putin told his American counterpart that Russia was insisting on achieving its aims in Ukraine: removing the root causes of the conflict and retaining all territories. Like Macron, Trump sounded impatient for a quick peace deal and later complained to the American media, “he had made no progress” with Putin in his phone call this week.

What Trump, Macron, and other Western leaders need to understand is that Russia wants a permanent peace based on its legitimate strategic security interests. This conflict is not a localized one between two parties. It is a proxy war between Russia and NATO, engendered by NATO. Pretending otherwise, as Macron is doing by conceitedly calling for a quick ceasefire, is a deception.

At least Trump seems to recognize that the supply of weapons to Ukraine has to stop if there is any chance of ending the conflict. This week, the Pentagon announced it was halting the flow of munitions. A big part of the reason is practical reality: the U.S. has depleted its arsenal after three years of weaponizing the Kiev regime.

The European leaders need to come to their senses too, and stop fueling the war machine that is the Kiev regime. It is a lost cause. Russia is winning the war and will eventually eradicate the regime and NATO’s threat to its national security. Europe does not have the capability or the resources. The grand deception projected by Macron and others, including EU top officials Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas, and NATO’s Mark Rutte, is destroying Europe.

Therein lies the fatal dilemma. What Putin said to Macron is the truth. If the conflict has any chance of being resolved peacefully, then the starting place is to recognize the historic causes of the conflict, not the delusional stuff that Macron is peddling.

But for Macron and all the NATO states to do that would be to admit their culpability for creating the biggest war in Europe since the Second World War. The political and legal repercussions would be explosive for Macron and the entire Western leadership. They are caught in the web of a Big Lie that they have spun.

July 5, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , , | Leave a comment

“NATO cannot disguise Ukraine’s plight”: FT reveals diminishing Ukrainian morale

By Ahmed Adel | July 3, 2025

Active missile strikes on targets of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in different cities undermine the morale of Ukrainians and sow a sense of hopelessness in the country, the Financial Times writes. Combined with Ukraine’s NATO membership hitting another roadblock, it seems that there is no chance of Ukrainian morale ever recovering.

“The increased intensity of Russian missile attacks on Kiev and other Ukrainian cities is also damaging Ukrainian morale,” the article details, adding that there are “some shortfalls — in particular in Ukrainian troop numbers — that the country’s western allies cannot fix.”

According to the London-based newspaper, without a clear outline of victory, there is a risk that Ukraine will fall into despair.

The author of the article also notes that following the meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and US President Donald Trump at the end of June, there was renewed hope for the supply of Patriot anti-aircraft systems, which are necessary due to the depletion of Ukraine’s air defense capabilities. However, Trump can easily change his mind or forget about it, the newspaper writes.

According to a cited official, Russia’s main goal is now to capture Odessa, as without the city, “Ukraine would lose access to its main port.”

“A group of former European leaders — including Carl Bildt of Sweden and Sanna Marin of Finland — visited Ukraine recently and picked up on the deteriorating mood. They wrote afterwards that ‘while Ukrainians will never stop resisting, without more military support, Ukraine can lose more territory. More cities might be captured’,” Financial Times wrote.

“Off the record, some western officials are even bleaker, warning of a risk of ‘catastrophic failure,’ if the Ukrainian military is stretched to breaking point — and does not receive a significant increase in military and financial aid from its western allies,” the newspaper added.

Responding to FT’s article, Andriy Kovalenko, head of the Center for Countering Disinformation at the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, delusionally claimed that Kiev was “planning the destruction” of the so-called “regime” of Russian President Vladimir Putin, but without elaborating on how this would be achieved.

“These publications about Putin planning to occupy something — that’s something. Putin actually wants to completely destroy Ukraine, but he can wish for anything he wants. There is no point in writing about his plans to occupy Odessa or anything else. He can plan all he wants, but he won’t succeed,” Kovalenko confidently said.

Nonetheless, despite Kovalenko’s bravado, the diminishing morale within Ukraine cannot be ignored and is now even being reported in Western pro-Ukraine media. What Kovalenko does not note is that Ukrainian morale is set to take another significant hit after Zelensky consistently promised NATO membership, something that is far from happening, if at all.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán warned that Ukraine’s entry into NATO would be akin to igniting a powder keg amid escalating tensions in Europe.

“Ukraine in NATO? That would mean war with Russia, and World War 3 the very next day. Meanwhile, the EU’s reckless rush to admit Ukraine would pull the frontlines into the heart of Europe. This isn’t diplomacy, it’s insanity – you don’t throw matches on a powder keg,” Orbán wrote on X.

According to Orbán, such an approach must not be allowed to turn Europe into a battlefield.

Orbán’s statement came after Hungary blocked the start of negotiations on Ukraine’s entry into the EU on June 26, with Budapest citing that 95% of Hungarians voted against Ukrainian accession in a recent survey, in which almost 2.3 million citizens participated.

Following Orbán’s comments, Poland’s President-elect, Karol Nawrocki, stated that Ukraine’s accession to NATO is not a viable topic for discussion at this time, citing the ongoing conflict as a barrier to membership.

“Today, there is no possibility for Ukraine to join NATO. It is at war. This would be the reason for all NATO countries to participate in the war. Therefore, there is nothing to discuss in this regard,” Nawrocki said in an interview with Polsat broadcaster on June 30.

In February 2019, Ukraine amended its Constitution to consolidate its strategic course towards EU and NATO membership. In May, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that ensuring Ukraine’s neutral, non-aligned, and nuclear-free status is one of Russia’s conditions for resolving the conflict in Ukraine.

Yet, despite Moscow’s demands being clear since 2022, Zelensky famously announced in February this year that he would be willing to “give up” his presidency and “trade it for NATO membership, if there are such conditions.” However, Ukrainian morale is not being boosted by his performative rhetoric. Only an end to the war, especially before the onset of another difficult winter, will achieve this, since Ukrainians, unlike Zelensky and his regime, have finally accepted the reality that they cannot defeat Russia.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

July 3, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Germany announces deployment of warships to Arctic

RT | July 2, 2025

Germany will send navy ships to patrol Arctic waters in response to Russia’s growing military presence in the region, Defense Minister Boris Pistorius announced on Monday. Russia has insisted that it is mirroring NATO moves in the far north to maintain balance.

Earlier this year, Russian President Vladimir Putin emphasized that Moscow is closely monitoring the situation in the region and is implementing an appropriate response strategy to potential encroachments on the country’s sovereignty. Russia’s Arctic coastline stretches over 24,000km.

“As early as this year, Germany will show its presence in the North Atlantic and the Arctic,” Pistorius said at a joint press conference with his Danish counterpart, Troels Lund Poulsen, in Copenhagen.

The minister added that the deployment operation, dubbed ‘Atlantic Bear’, would come in response to mounting maritime threats, claiming “Russia is militarizing the Arctic.”

Pistorius specified that one of Germany’s support ships would “go from Iceland to Greenland and then on to Canada” to take part in joint military drills with NATO allies, including Denmark, Norway, and Canada.

“In addition, we will deploy our maritime patrol aircraft, submarines, and frigates to demonstrate our commitment to that region,” he added.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said in April that members of the US-led military bloc are “working together” in the Arctic to “defend this part of NATO territory.”

The Kremlin has insisted that NATO’s continuing militarization of the region is unwarranted, and that Russia will mirror the moves taken by the bloc.

In March, Putin reiterated that Moscow is “concerned by the fact that NATO countries as a whole are more frequently designating the far north as a bridgehead for possible conflicts.”

“I would like to emphasize that Russia has never threatened anyone in the Arctic,” the Russian president said. He stressed, however, that Moscow would “reliably protect” its interests in the region by reinforcing its military contingent in response to Western actions.

July 2, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

Denmark subjects 18-year-old females to the draft starting July 1

RT | July 1, 2025

Women in Denmark are now subject to conscription, following a change to the relevant law made by the country’s parliament a few weeks ago.

The move comes as NATO, of which Denmark is a member, increases its military readiness, citing a perceived threat from Russia after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. At the bloc’s summit in The Hague last week, member states agreed to ramp up defense spending.

In May, the European Union approved a €150 billion ($171 billion) borrowing plan to support its own military buildup.

The Kremlin has consistently dismissed allegations of hostile intent toward Western nations as “nonsense” and fearmongering.

The newly adopted Danish legislation mandates “full equality between men and women in relation to military service.” It requires that “women who turn 18 on or after 1 July 2025 will have to… draw a [draft] lottery number and thus could be ordered to serve military service if there are not enough volunteers.” Female conscripts will serve under the same conditions as men.

The bill also extends the mandatory service period from four to eleven months, according to media reports.

Denmark’s armed forces rely on both volunteers and conscripts, who are called up when volunteer numbers fall short. Roughly 4,700 Danes completed military service in 2024, with women accounting for approximately 24% of that figure.

Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen unveiled plans to conscript women in March, framing the decision as part of a push for “full equality between the sexes.”

Latvia, another NATO member, is planning to conscript women by 2028. It reintroduced mandatory service in 2023 after scrapping it in 2006.

Norway and Sweden have already implemented gender-neutral conscription, in 2015 and 2018 respectively.

German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has also proposed reinstating the draft for men, which was abolished in 2011.

July 2, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Militarism, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

NATO Must Come to Agreement With Russia to Avoid New Arms Race – Orban

Sputnik – 30.06.2025

NATO will have to come to an agreement with Russia in order to avoid a new arms race, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said on Monday.

“Sooner or later, NATO… will have to negotiate with Russia on how much we will spend on military spending, because otherwise the sky will be the limit. So we need to avoid an arms race. We need to strengthen, but we must avoid an arms race. And it will not work out otherwise, except for us, the West, to come to an agreement with Russia,” Orban told the media.

There is a majority of states forming in NATO that believes that any conflict between the alliance and Russia will lead to a third world war and must be avoided, Orban added.

June 30, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

NATO’s defense spending surge may cause its collapse: Lavrov

Al Mayadeen | June 30, 2025

NATO’s surge in defense spending will only damage the alliance and push it toward collapse, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned, calling for greater pragmatism in its approach, as he addressed reporters following the Collective Security Treaty Organization’s Council of Foreign Ministers meeting.

“He can probably see – since he is such a wise sage – that the disastrous increase in spending of NATO countries will also lead to the collapse of this organization,” Lavrov said, responding to Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski’s claim that Russia’s military build-up would lead to its downfall.

“Meanwhile, Russia – as President [Vladimir Putin] said the other day in Minsk after the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council meeting – plans to reduce its military spending and be guided by common sense, rather than imaginary threats, as NATO member states do, including Sikorski,” Lavrov pointed out.

NATO approves defense spending hike to 5%

Following the NATO Summit held in The Hague on June 24-25, the alliance’s member states have agreed to increase defense spending to 5% of GDP, as outlined in the adopted communique, with plans to allocate at least 3.5% of GDP by 2035 based on NATO’s agreed definition of military spending.

An allocation of 1.5% of GDP will be dedicated to safeguarding critical infrastructure and networks, enhancing civil preparedness and resilience, fostering innovation, and bolstering the defense industrial base.

Eager to claim credit, Trump hailed the agreement by all 32 NATO member states to work toward spending five percent of GDP on defense, calling it “a great victory for everybody.”

During closed-door discussions, diplomats revealed that Trump stressed the importance of US leadership while pushing allies to direct their expanded defense budgets toward purchasing American-made weaponry.

With NATO leaders unanimously praising the agreement as “historic,” Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever observed that Europe’s “long break from history” had ended, emphasizing the continent’s urgent need to assume full responsibility for its defense amid escalating geopolitical tensions.

June 30, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | | Leave a comment

Norway’s War Profiteers Are Getting Rich Off Europe’s March To Militarism

By Svetlana Ekimenko – Sputnik – 28.06.2025

Norway’s military-industrial complex is cashing in big on Europe’s rearmament frenzy, while ordinary Norwegians face growing socioeconomic pressure, says Russian Ambassador to Oslo Nikolai Korchunov.

Norway raked in over $115 billion in windfall profits during 2022-2023 thanks to soaring gas prices fueled, ironically, by Europe’s decision to ditch reliable Russian energy.

Instead of investing those profits in public welfare, Norwegian leaders are fattening up defense contractors under the banner of “rearmament.”

With former NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg now pulling the strings as Norway’s finance minister, the government is prioritizing weapons over welfare and arming the Ukraine regime without a second thought.

All this, while NATO openly prepares for a head-on clash with Russia: Revamping its command, bloating budgets, and shifting from proxy war to potential direct confrontation.

June 28, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Cracks in the Alliance: Poland reconsidering Ukraine’s cause?

By Uriel Araujo | June 28, 2025

Poland has long been one of Ukraine’s staunchest allies in Europe, offering unwavering support since the beginning of the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian full-scale conflict in 2022. From hosting millions of refugees to providing military aid and championing Kyiv’s integration into Western institutions, Poland’s commitment seemed unshakable to many. Yet, recent developments signal a shift: Poles are growing weary of Ukraine, so to speak, and this “Ukrainian fatigue” threatens to reshape regional dynamics at a time when Kyiv is increasingly isolated.  Albeit a new development, this had been potentially there for a long time.

A recent survey by IBRiS reveals in fact a stark decline in Polish support for the cause of Ukraine’s ambitions. Only 35% of Poles now believe Warsaw should back Ukraine’s bid to join the European Union (EU), with a mere 37% supporting NATO accession. In contrast, 42% oppose Poland’s endorsement of Kyiv’s path to both institutions—a dramatic reversal from 2022, when 85% and 75% favored EU and NATO membership, respectively. Even more concerningly, from Kyiv’s perspective, 46% of Poles now advocate halting or reducing military aid, a significant departure from the early war fervor. These figures reflect a growing sentiment that Poland’s generosity has stretched thin, compounded by domestic pressures and latent historical grievances.

The roots of this shift are multifaceted. Economically, hosting over a million Ukrainian refugees has somewhat strained Poland’s resources. While many Poles initially welcomed their neighbors with open arms, reports of rising anti-Ukrainian sentiment suggest a fraying social fabric. Refugees have faced verbal abuse and discrimination, with some recounting calls to “go back to Ukraine”. This backlash is not merely economic but also deeply rooted in historical tensions.

The legacy of the Volhynia massacres, where the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA)—today celebrated in post-Maidan Ukraine as national heroes—committed atrocities against Poles, remains a festering wound, as I wrote last year. Kyiv’s refusal to allow exhumations of victims and its glorification of figures like Stepan Bandera, a Nazi collaborator, have fueled tensions and Polish resentment. These historical disputes, often downplayed in the West, are not mere academic debates but visceral issues pertaining to the politics of memory, and to identity; they shape public opinion and policy.

Poland’s domestic politics further complicate its foreign policy toward Ukraine. The return of Donald Tusk’s government has prioritized a pro-EU stance, but it faces challenges from a resurgent nationalist right that capitalizes on anti-Ukrainian sentiment also. This internal polarization threatens Tusk’s ability to maintain Poland’s role as a regional leader in supporting Kyiv.

The nationalist revival in Poland mirrors a broader regional trend involving Ukraine’s neighbors, where ethnopolitical frictions play an important role. For instance, Romania and Hungary have both raised concerns over Ukraine’s treatment of their minorities, while Greece has criticized the plight of its ethnic kin under ultranationalist elements in Ukraine (including those with neo-Nazi links). Kyiv’s post-2014 push for a unified national identity, often at the expense of minority rights, has alienated potential allies at a critical juncture. Far from being a mere “Russian talking point”, this is an issue that, to different degrees, hampers Ukraine’s bilateral relations with virtually all of its neighbors—including Slovakia. Writing in 2023,  GLOBSEC think-tank researcher Dmytro Tuzhanskyi  acknowledges that this “ethnic trap” was a challenge of EU accession talks. The “Ukrainian Question” in fact is a threat to the European bloc itself, as I’ve argued before.

The broader geopolitical context further complicates matters for Kyiv. As Western attention pivots to the Middle East, with conflicts in Gaza and beyond dominating headlines, Ukraine risks fading from the global spotlight. The West’s finite resources—both financial and political—are increasingly stretched, leaving Kyiv to compete for attention and aid. NATO’s expansion, once a “holy cow” topic, finally faces some skepticism in Poland and beyond, in the context of an increasingly divided and scandal-ridden NATO.

The alliance’s eastward push, framed as a bulwark against threats, has not delivered the promised stability. Instead, it has entangled member states in a prolonged conflict with no clear resolution, prompting questions about its strategic value. For Poles, the costs of supporting Ukraine’s NATO aspirations—military, economic, and social—are beginning to outweigh the benefits.

This cooling of Polish support is not an isolated phenomenon but is indeed part of a broader regional fatigue. Ukraine’s aggressive nationalist policies, while aimed at consolidating statehood, have sown discord with neighbors who perceive them as chauvinistic, as mentioned. These tensions, often overshadowed by the larger conflict, play a considerable role in regional dynamics, and Poland, despite its strategic partnership with Ukraine, is not immune to such pressures.

The implications of Poland’s shifting stance are profound. As one of Ukraine’s key advocates in the EU and NATO, a less enthusiastic Poland could weaken Kyiv’s bargaining power in Western capitals. The decline in public support for military aid and integration efforts signals a broader reassessment of Poland’s role in the conflict. If this trend continues, Ukraine may find itself increasingly isolated, caught between a distracted West and strained relations with its neighbors. With Trump attempting to shift the Ukrainian “burden” onto Europe, the EU and NATO (already grappling with internal divisions), may hesitate to keep supporting the cause of Kyiv. Warsaw’s “retreat”, if it comes to that, could really have a domino effect.

This is not to suggest that Poland will “abandon” Ukraine outright. Strategic considerations, including the supposed need for a buffer (and its continental ambitions), should likely keep Warsaw engaged. However, the era of unconditional support is clearly over. Poles are reevaluating their priorities, driven by economic burdens, historical grievances, and a nationalist resurgence that demands a reckoning with the past. For Ukraine, the lesson is clear enough: alienating allies through ultranationalist policies and historical revisionism comes at a steep cost. And Kyiv, by all indications cannot afford to lose allies. Poland’s fatigue is thus a warning—not just for Ukraine but for the broader project of NATO and EU expansion, which risks overreaching in a world of competing crises.

Uriel Araujo, Anthropology PhD, is a social scientist specializing in ethnic and religious conflicts, with extensive research on geopolitical dynamics and cultural interactions.

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

Kremlin responds to prospect of NATO nuclear-capable jets on Russian border

RT | June 27, 2025

Russia sees Estonia’s willingness to host nuclear-capable NATO aircraft as a direct threat to its security, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday.

Responding to recent remarks made by Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur welcoming such deployments, Peskov warned that the presence of F-35 fighter jets in the Baltic region would be considered a serious provocation. He criticized Tallinn’s stance as “absurd,” adding that relations with Moscow “can hardly get any worse.”

Pevkur told local media that F-35s, which are capable of being equipped with nuclear weapons, “have already been in Estonia and will soon return again in rotation,” and expressed the country’s readiness to accommodate allied forces using such aircraft.

The Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have hosted NATO fighter rotations since joining the military bloc in 2004. Their airspace is patrolled by allied aircraft due to limited domestic capabilities. NATO’s eastern expansion has long been a point of contention for Russia, which accuses the West of breaking post-Cold War assurances.

During this week’s NATO summit in The Hague, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer confirmed the planned purchase of at least 12 F-35A jets, thus restoring the UK’s airborne nuclear deterrent for the first time since the 1990s.

Although the US, UK, and France are the only official nuclear powers within NATO, American nuclear weapons remain stationed in several non-nuclear allied countries. Moscow claims that US-led training of NATO pilots for nuclear missions violates the spirit of non-proliferation agreements.

Citing the need to counter rising threats from NATO near its borders, Russia deployed tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus and held joint drills with Belarusian forces last year.

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

Washington’s unprecedented political war on Europe

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – June 27, 2025

A dramatic U.S. political broadside against Europe signals not just strained transatlantic ties, but a deeper ideological rupture — one that could push the EU toward redefining itself as a fully autonomous global actor.

Notwithstanding tensions surrounding US tariffs on the EU, the future and role of NATO, and the conflict in Ukraine, US-EU tensions are escalating to an outright political and ideological rivalry. Washington’s political attacks on European states and their policies mark a significant shift towards the end of transatlantic unity and an opportunity for the EU to rediscover itself.

Washington’s political attacks on Europe

On May 27th, 2025, the US State Department published an essay that could go down in history as Washington’s charge sheet on Europe, expressing the depth of contention and resentment colouring the Trump administration’s ties with the continent currently. However, once set along this path of confrontation, there may not be a return to normal, transatlantic ties in the foreseeable future. The essay begins with narrating the history and depth of US-Europe ties. Immediately afterward, however, it shockingly mentions what was unthinkable until a few years ago. The US State Department sees Europe as a ‘different world’, different from what the US itself (supposedly) represents. To quote the letter: “What endures [in Europe] instead is an aggressive campaign against Western civilization itself. Across Europe, governments have weaponized political institutions against their own citizens and against our shared heritage. Far from strengthening democratic principles, Europe has devolved into a hotbed of digital censorship, mass migration, restrictions on religious freedom, and numerous other assaults on democratic self-governance”.

Liberalism is Bad

It is not just European politics facing Washington’s assault; it is also the underlying liberal political order of Europe itself. The letter accuses Europe of restricting political space and criminalising dissenting political voices. The reason is the failure of liberalism, according to the letter. “Our concerns are not partisan but principled. The suppression of speech, facilitation of mass migration, targeting of religious expression, and undermining of electoral choice threatens the very foundation of the transatlantic partnership. A Europe that replaces its spiritual and cultural roots, that treats traditional values as dangerous relics, and that centralizes power in unaccountable institutions is a Europe less capable of standing firm against external threats and internal decay. To this end, achieving peace in Europe and around the world requires not a rejection of our shared cultural heritage, but a renewal of it”, adds the letter.

This, according to the letter, is not a good sign for the future of US-European ties. It mentions Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is said to have made clear that “Europe’s democratic backsliding not only impacts European citizens but increasingly affects American security and economic ties, along with the free speech rights of American citizens and companies”.

Beyond Mistrust

This letter reveals many things. Most importantly, it reveals the level of mistrust and gap that now divides the transatlantic world. It is no longer mere tactical disagreements over petty issues. This mistrust has at its roots in the political thinking of the Trump administration. Donald Trump understands the EU as a political arrangement created to “screw” the US. He and his political advisers are now trying to unscrew this arrangement to ‘free’ the US from the decades-old political bonds.

For Europeans, this is a major challenge. A report in the UK-based Financial Times said that Europe “is quickly becoming the latest front in a culture war Trump has unleashed against the bastions of liberalism. Most of his targets — elite universities, government agencies such as USAID, public broadcasters — have been domestic. But the Samson essay shows Maga’s ambitions go much further, and the movement is now prepared to deploy far beyond America’s borders”. According to this report, it is not the EU, which is the real threat to the US, but the US is the biggest threat to Europe itself.

How will Europe respond to this attack, which now has both political and cultural underpinnings? There is little denying that Europe needs to grapple with prospects of a potential ‘de-coupling’ from the US.  This de-coupling will create, at least in the immediate future, an urgent need for policy correction on several fronts. From negotiating the trade war with the US—which Europeans will understandably find hard to win—to shared security, the continent needs to change its direction fundamentally from seeking US compliance with the written and unwritten obligations of the transatlantic alliance to totally redefining—and changing—them.

This policy correction requires the EU to do a thorough reassessment of its ties not just with Washington but with Russia and China as well. It needs to reject notions—many of which were fanned out by the Biden administration most recently —of Russia being a security threat and/or Russian expansionism. Instead, it needs to realise that the Trump administration might be its best chance in the last seven decades or so since the end of the Second World War to come out of Washington’s shadow and become a truly autonomous player capable of both defining and defending its interests. In other words, instead of seeking to mend ties with the US to make them ‘normal’, it should further the ‘de-coupling’ and reinforce its continental interests as its own responsibility. There is arguably no alternative for Europe to survive this situation without losing its strength and standing internationally.

June 27, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

Sen. Mike Lee Introduces Bill to Remove US From NATO

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | June 26, 2025

Senator Mike Lee introduced a bill to remove the US from the North Atlantic Alliance, arguing that the collective defence pact is not within US national security interests.

The legislation titled the ‘Not A Trusted Organization Act’ or the ‘NATO Act’ argues NATO expansion led to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. “The dissolution of both the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union fundamentally altered the security environment in Europe and rendered NATO’s founding collective defense mission irrelevant,” the bill states. “Despite its waning relevance and prior assurances to the contrary, NATO began a profound eastward expansion in 1999, which, as of 2025, culminated in a land border with the Russian Federation that exceeds 1,500 miles and encircles the Baltic Sea.”

It adds, “The invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation in 2022 demonstrates the Russian Federation’s willingness to employ military action in response to perceived security threats.”

In 2007, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that Ukraine’s ascension into NATO would be a major national security risk for Moscow. Over the next decade and a half, the bloc would increasingly treat Kiev as a member, even if it would not grant Ukraine official membership in the alliance.

In 2021, the Kremlin sent a proposal to the White House that would have averted the war if NATO had agreed that Ukraine would not become a member. However, the Biden administration never seriously considered the offer, and NATO continued to express that the door to membership was open to Kiev.

In addition to starting a major war in Europe, Lee says membership in NATO is causing the US to pay for Europe’s defense. “Since the founding of NATO, the United States has shouldered the burden of what was characterized as a ‘collective’ security alliance, as the largest financial and hard power contributor,” the bill explains.

President Donald Trump is attempting to address the issue by mandating all alliance members to spend 5% of GDP on defense. However, Lee notes in the bill that nearly one-third of the bloc currently does not meet the current 2% minimum.

Lee argues that the current issues of the alliance create a situation where “Membership of the United States in NATO is inconsistent with the national security interests of the United States.”

June 27, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

A Worrisome Pledge to Substantially Increase US ‘Defense’ Spending

By Adam Dick | Peace and Prosperity Blog | June 26, 2025

Big news out of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) meeting this week is member governments agreeing to a declaration stating they each “commit to invest 5 percent of GDP annually on core defence requirements as well as defence-and security-related spending by 2035 to ensure our individual and collective obligations.”

“Defence” is used, largely outside America, as an alternative spelling of “defense.”

Most the focus in media coverage of this development is on the increased spending that will be required to meet this goal by nations other than the US that was the primary pusher of the move. But, it should also be noted that the US government will have to direct much more spending to “defense” to meet the goal as well.

A NATO chart of member governments’ spending levels as of 2024 puts the US at 3.4 percent of GDP (gross domestic product) on this type of spending. That means meeting the goal would require that such spending gobble up roughly half again as much of GDP within the next ten years.

In April, I wrote about how it would be disastrous if the US government achieved this increased spending goal that was then being promoted by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. You can read that post here.

June 26, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »