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.
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.”
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.
Globalist Blueprint: Pashinyan Seeks to Silence Church as Armenia Becomes NATO Proxy – Analyst
By Svetlana Ekimenko – Sputnik – 26.06.2025
Western globalists installed Nikol Pashinyan as prime minister to wrench Armenia away from its historical alliance with Russia, says international affairs expert Iskandar Kfoury.
The arrest of Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan, a prelate of the Armenian Apostolic Church, is just the latest chapter in an effort to weaponize Armenia against its neighbors – especially Russia, Iskandar Kfoury told Sputnik.
The South Caucasus has always been a battleground for global powers, and now, under Pashinyan, American and NATO labs are conducting biological warfare research on Armenian soil, he said.
Furthermore, US military exercises have been welcomed on Armenia’s soil as part of a drastic geopolitical realignment.
The church – one of the last standing moral authorities in the country – is refusing to stay silent on this betrayal of Armenia’s national identity and sovereignty.
It was the church’s response that triggered the crackdown by Armenia’s authorities, Kfoury said.
NATO To Take ‘Quantum Leap’ in Military Spending, Pledging 5% of GDP Baseline
By Connor Freeman | The Libertarian Institute | June 24, 2025
Each member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is expected to ink a pledge to raise military spending to 5% of GDP over the next ten years. This is more than double the current 2% goal. Responding to President Donald Trump’s demands for greater spending, member states will agree to the new baseline in the Netherlands during an alliance summit this week. On Monday, the eve before the summit, this proposal was referred to as a “quantum leap” by Secretary General Mark Rutte.
Under the compromise deal, by 2035, each member state will commit a minimum of 3.5% of their GDP to “core military needs,” along with 1.5% to be earmarked for cybersecurity, infrastructure, and other security components.
“The defense investment plan that allies will agree [to] in The Hague introduces a new baseline, five percent of GDP to be invested in defense,” Rutte told reporters.Despite alliance concerns over Madrid’s refusal to commit to the 5% spending figure, which would necessitate a military yearly budget of nearly $90 billion, Rutte emphasized Spain will not be allowed to “opt-out.” He said, “NATO does not have as an alliance opt-outs, side deals, etcetera, because we all have to chip in.”
Moreover, Rutte insists the new spending will go toward producing thousands of tanks and a five fold increase in the production of air defenses. The NATO chief declared, “Our focus is ensuring that we have all we need to deter and defend against any threat.” Rutte added the summit will see strong support for Ukraine and noted the “most significant and direct threat facing this alliance remains the Russian Federation.”
The alliance has poured hundreds of billions of dollars into a proxy war with Russia in Ukraine that has seen hundreds of thousands of casualties with Ukraine losing roughly 20% of its territory.
With the US taking the lead, by 2021, defying Russia’s core security concerns and provoking conflict, Ukraine was being treated as a de facto NATO member. Rutte’s predecessor, Jens Stoltenberg, admitted that, under his leadership in the lead up to the war, the Washington-led bloc refused to take potential membership for Kiev off the table in negotiations even though Moscow had made clear that would prevent an invasion.
The policy has not changed. “Last year in Washington, NATO allies agreed that for Ukraine there is an irreversible path of Ukraine to enter NATO. And that is still true today, and it will still be true on Thursday after this summit,” Rutte told reporters.
However, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky reportedly will be “largely sidelined” at the summit’s main event. With Biden gone and Trump now in office, Rutte said Europe will work to cover the difference in US spending on the Ukraine war. He added that Europe and Canada have spent $40 billion on the war thus far this year. Washington is still providing Kiev with military and other aid, along with targeting intelligence.
Rutte’s comments also took aim at Tehran, the NATO chief said his “greatest fear” is Iran gaining a nuclear weapon that would give it a “stranglehold” over Israel. Iran is a signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and prior to Tel Aviv’s unprovoked war against the Islamic Republic, the consensus among US intelligence agencies was Tehran is not trying to build nuclear weapons. Israel – which is not a party to the NPT – has an undeclared nuclear arsenal estimated to contain as many as 300 warheads.
The US carried out an illegal act of war, bombing Iran’s internationally safeguarded nuclear energy facilities over the weekend. This is a blatant violation of the UN charter. Trump ordered the massive attack without congressional authorization as required per the US Constitution. When questioned about the legality of the strikes, Rutte proclaimed “I would not agree that [what the US did] is against international law.”
Trump is demanding a $1 trillion US military budget. While Rutte is currently focused on Moscow and fueling the Ukraine war, Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth recently boasted he is preparing the American military to defend the island of Taiwan, to “fight and win — decisively” a war with China.
NATO chief dodges question about why to fear a ‘Russian attack’
RT | June 24, 2025
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has failed to explain why the bloc believes Russia could attack within five years, but nevertheless used the claim during a press conference on Monday to reiterate calls for increased military spending.
In recent months, a number of Western officials have repeatedly claimed that Russia may attack an Eastern European member state in the near future, using the rhetoric as a foundation for drastically raising defense spending. Moscow has vehemently denied harboring any hostile intent, and called such accusations “nonsense.”
While speaking at a pre-summit press conference in The Hague, Rutte was asked to disclose what NATO’s assessment of a Russian attack within five years was based on. The secretary general, however, avoided giving any specific intelligence or threat assessment, citing only general fears and urging an increase in the bloc-wide defense spending target to 5% of GDP.
Rutte said there was “great worry in many circles of NATO” and referred to “senior military leaders” and “intelligence community people” who have spoken about the possibility that “3, 5, 7 years from now, Russia will be able to successfully attack us, if we do not start investing more today.”
He emphasized that “huge extra defense spending over the next three to five years” was required to ensure NATO’s future readiness. According to Rutte, yearly increases would be needed to strengthen the bloc through new personnel and military equipment.
Russia has consistently rejected the idea that Moscow plans to invade NATO countries, with President Vladimir Putin calling the accusations “nonsense” and “shameless lies” designed to extract resources from the population and divert it towards military spending.
Speaking to military academy graduates on Monday, Putin stated that the West “came up with this horror story themselves and repeats it year after year,” using it to provoke a new arms race and justify what he called “global militarization.”
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has also slammed NATO’s “unbridled militarization” and suggested that the bloc would need to create a “monster” to push through the proposed 5% GDP defense spending benchmark.
“Let’s call things by their proper names,” he said. “This is an alliance created for confrontation. This is an alliance that brings aggression and confrontation. This is not an instrument of peace and stability.”
Dissatisfaction with the old elites is growing in Europe
By Sonja van den Ende | Strategic Culture Foundation | June 24, 2025
Lately, it has become increasingly evident that European citizens are growing weary of their political elites and the entrenched system of rotating figureheads who perpetuate the same policies year after year. The political establishment exhibits a rigid adherence to outdated approaches, and their arrogance – manifest in a belief that they operate above democratic accountability – is glaringly apparent in their mainstream media channels, which are themselves staffed by the same elite journalists who have dominated the airwaves for decades.
Whether it is their reckless plans to fund military escalations through EU citizens’ taxes – such as the proposed five percent increase in NATO spending, justified by the unfounded fear of a Russian invasion – or the diversion of public funds to arm Israel, a state which commits genocide against the citizens of Gaza and which has now escalated to bombing nuclear facilities in Iran alongside its perpetual war partner, the United States, the disconnect between rulers and ruled has never been clearer.
Recently, widespread outrage erupted among citizens (and even some alternative politicians) over statements by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who declared that Israel and Ukraine were performing the Drecksarbeit (“dirty work”) for Germany and Europe. The remark was so brazen that even Germany’s state broadcaster, ZDF – part of the mainstream media apparatus – reacted with shock. Beyond confirming what many already suspected, this episode laid bare Germany’s geopolitical stance 80 years after the end of World War II.
“It would be good if this mullah regime came to an end,” Chancellor Merz asserted in an ARD interview, emphatically defending Israel’s military actions while insisting Iran must never acquire nuclear weapons. “Germany is also affected by the mullah regime.”
This rhetoric is emblematic of the German elite’s worldview. Merz is no outlier; his stance reflects the consensus within his party, the CDU – a so-called Altpartei with roots stretching back to the Nazi era. Many of its former members held high-ranking positions in the Third Reich, only to seamlessly reintegrate into postwar governance as if history had never happened. Merz’s own grandfather, the mayor of Brilon, was a card-carrying member of the NSDAP.
The Netherlands fares no better, currently mired in political chaos. Governments collapse with alarming frequency, yet power merely circulates among the same old parties, all aligned on fundamental policies – particularly in foreign affairs. Take the CDA, a party that dominated Dutch politics for decades. Its most famous figure, Joseph Luns, served as Foreign Minister across multiple cabinets from 1952 to 1971. Less known is his membership in the NSB – the Dutch Nazi party – in 1934. He was, like Mark Rutte, Secretary General of NATO, and incidentally the longest-serving Secretary General of NATO! But actually he was complicit in colonial crimes, including endorsing the 300-year exploitation of Indonesia, which only gained sovereignty in 1948.
Many Dutch citizens hoped for change when Geert Wilders’ far-right PVV ascended to power in 2024. Yet they were deceived once more: the PVV has proven to be little more than an extension of the neoliberal VVD, augmented by ultra-Zionist fanaticism and overt anti-Arab, anti-Islam vitriol. Historically, such a platform would have been labeled an apartheid party – akin to South Africa’s Dutch-derived Nasionale Party. The parallels are undeniable, though the targets have shifted: where Afrikaner nationalism oppressed Black South Africans, today’s Zionists, backed by Europe and the U.S., are exterminating Palestinians.
In their hatred of Islam, the PVV and its ilk fail to grasp that they are fueling the very refugee crises they claim to oppose. War breeds displacement, as Europe witnessed in 2015. Meanwhile, ostensibly left-wing parties like the Dutch PvdA-GL rely on Muslim migrants as a voting bloc, knowing they will never support the right. Thus, the cycle perpetuates itself – a self-reinforcing loop that must be broken.
The situation is equally dire elsewhere in Europe. In France, the ruling elite has resorted to banning opposition figures, even imprisoning them. Marine Le Pen, convicted of embezzling EU funds, received a four-year sentence (two suspended) and a five-year electoral ban. Though she avoids jail via ankle monitoring, the precedent is chillingly reminiscent of NSDAP tactics – a softer fascism, but fascism nonetheless.
Belgium mirrors this decay. After two years without a government, it banned the Flemish nationalist Vlaams Blok in 2004 for racism, only for the party to rebrand as Vlaams Belang. Now, its leader, Dries Van Langenhove, faces imprisonment. Meanwhile, the Baltics embrace open fascism: demolishing Soviet monuments, persecuting Russian speakers, and hosting marches glorifying locals who joined the Wehrmacht and SS.
These snapshots – from Western Europe to the Baltics – paint a disturbing portrait. The nations that founded NATO and the EU remain fascist at their core, cloaked in modernist rhetoric. What passes for left-wing politics in Europe today is, in reality, fascist leftism: a push for a genderless, LGBTQIA+-dominated society that paradoxically depends on Muslim immigration to marginalize the right. At its heart lies a new state atheism, with traditional Christianity supplanted by woke dogma and Russia cast as the arch-enemy precisely because it upholds the values Europe has abandoned.
The so-called right-wing and centrist parties, meanwhile, champion family and Judeo-Christian identity (never Islam), though many are merely Zionist proxies serving U.S.-Israeli interests. While they oppose the Ukraine war and advocate diplomacy with Russia, they misunderstand Moscow’s pluralism – its 25-million-strong Muslim community defies their binary worldview.
This is the vicious cycle dooming Europe: both political flanks, beholden to elites who rotate between corporate boardrooms and ministerial offices, are destroying the continent. Obsessed with maintaining a unipolar colonial order, they trail behind the U.S. into endless wars, oblivious that China, India, and Russia have already eclipsed them.
Europe, still occupied by U.S. bases, risks becoming another Ukraine – a vassal state. Its leaders, like Ursula von der Leyen, conflate democracy with fascism, having never fully reckoned with their Nazi past. But dissent is growing. Citizens are awakening to the totalitarian reality of an EU where they have no voice.
The time for change is overdue. Whether through a European Spring or a new Renaissance, the process has begun. Ironically, Russia’s Special Military Operation – however unintended – has accelerated this reckoning on both sides of the Atlantic.
Europe’s risky war on Russia’s ‘shadow fleet’
By Anatol Lieven | Responsible Statecraft | June 16, 2025
The European Union’s latest moves (as part of its 17th package of sanctions against Russia declared in May) to target much more intensively Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” of oil tankers and other vessels illustrate the danger that, as long as the Ukraine war continues, so will the risk of an incident that will draw NATO and the EU into a direct military clash with Russia.
The EU sanctions involve bans on access to the ports, national waters and maritime economic zones of EU states. Ships that enter these waters risk seizure and confiscation. It does not appear that Washington was consulted about this decision, despite the obvious risks to the U.S.
As part of this strategy, on May 15, an Estonian patrol boat attempted to stop and inspect a tanker in the Gulf of Finland. Russia sent up a fighter jet that flew over the Estonian vessel (allegedly briefly trespassing into Estonian waters), and the Estonians backed off — this time. In January, the German navy seized a Panamanian-flagged tanker, the Eventin, in the Baltic after its engines failed and it drifted into German territorial waters.
Sweden has now announced that starting on July 1 its navy will stop, inspect and potentially seize all suspect vessels transiting its exclusive economic zone, and is deploying the Swedish air force to back up this threat. Since the combined maritime economic zones of Sweden and the three Baltic states cover the whole of the central Baltic Sea, this amounts to a virtual threat to cut off all Russian trade exiting Russia via the Baltic — which would indeed be a very serious economic blow to Moscow.
It would also threaten to cut off Russia’s exclave of Kaliningrad, which is surrounded by Poland, from access to Russia by sea.
This is the kind of action that has traditionally led to war. The Swedish assumption seems to be that the Russian navy and air force in the Baltic are now so weak — and so surrounded by NATO territory — that there is nothing Moscow can do about this. However, it is very unlikely that the Swedes would take this step unless they also believe that in the event of a clash, Washington will come to Sweden’s defense — even though the EU and Swedish decisions were made without U.S. approval and are not strictly covered by NATO’s Article 5 commitment.
And despite all the hysterical language about Russia being “at war” with NATO countries, these moves by the EU and Sweden are also based on an assumption that Russia will not in fact lose its temper and react with military force. European policymakers might however want to think about a number of things: for example, what would the U.S. do if ships carrying U.S. cargo were intercepted by foreign warships? We know perfectly well that the U.S. would blow the warships concerned out of the water and declare that it had done so in defense of the sacred rule of free navigation — in which the EU also professes to believe.
EU leaders, and admirals, should also spend some time on Russian social media, and read the incessant attacks on the Putin administration by hardliners arguing precisely that Moscow has been far too soft and restrained in its response to Western provocations, and that this restraint has encouraged the West to escalate more and more. Such hardliners (especially within the security forces) are by far the greatest internal political threat that Putin faces.
It is important to note in this regard that moves to damage Russia’s “shadow fleet” have not been restricted to sanctions. In recent months there have been a string of attacks on such vessels in the Mediterranean with limpet mines and other explosive devices — developments that have been virtually ignored by Western media.
In December 2024, the Russian cargo ship Ursa Major sank off Libya after an explosion in which two crewmembers were killed. The Reuters headline reporting these attacks was rather characteristic: “Three tankers damaged by blasts in Mediterranean in the last month, causes unknown, sources say.” Unknown, really? Who do we think were the likely perpetrators? Laotian special forces? Martians? And what are European governments doing to investigate these causes?
If the Russians do sink a Swedish or Estonian warship, the Trump administration will face a terribly difficult decision on how to respond to a crisis that is not of its own choosing: intervene and risk a direct war with Russia, or stand aside and ensure a deep crisis with Europe. The U.S. administration would therefore be both wise and entirely within its rights to state publicly that it does not endorse and will not help to enforce this decision.
Washington also needs — finally — to pay attention to what the rest of the world thinks about all this. The overwhelming majority of senators who are proposing to impose 500% tariffs on any country that buys Russian energy have apparently not realized that one of the two biggest countries in this category is India — now universally regarded in Washington as a vital U.S. partner in Asia. And now America’s European allies are relying on U.S. support to seize ships providing that energy to India.
The U.S. administration would also be wise to warn European countries that if this strategy leads to maritime clashes with Russia, they will have to deal with the consequences themselves. Especially given the new risk of war with Iran, the last thing Washington needs now is a new flare-up of tension with Moscow necessitating major U.S. military deployments to Europe. And the last thing the world economy needs are moves likely to lead to a still greater surge in world energy prices.
European governments and establishments seem to have lost any ability to analyze the possible wider consequences of their actions. So — not for the first time — America will have to do their thinking for them.
Anatol Lieven is Director of the Eurasia Program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. He was formerly a professor at Georgetown University in Qatar and in the War Studies Department of King’s College London.
NATO’s credibility eroding amid organized crime corruption scandals and internal fractures
By Uriel Araujo | June 20, 2025
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), heralded as the bulwark of Western security, faces a credibility crisis that mirrors the decline of the West. Corruption scandals, internal divisions, and an insatiable appetite for expansion despite unmet commitments have eroded its legitimacy, with the Ukraine crisis as a stark backdrop. As a matter of fact, NATO’s troubles reflect a faltering Western order struggling to maintain global dominance.
Since last month, a sprawling investigation into the NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA) has revealed that officials sold confidential information to defense contractors, rigging multimillion-dollar arms contracts, including drones critical to Ukraine’s military efforts. The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) exposed a sophisticated network of insiders leaking sensitive data for personal gain, undermining NATO’s procurement integrity. Arrests in Belgium, the Netherlands, and Spain, with investigations in Luxembourg, Italy, and the United States, highlight the probe’s scope, which is expected to widen the more the EU agencies look at NATO’s contracts. This organized crime angle, involving illicit financial flows, remains underreported, which makes one wonder just how deep the rot goes.
The Ukraine crisis certainly amplifies these scandals’ impact. NATO’s support for Kyiv, including massive arms shipments, is tainted by corrupt practices that may have inflated costs or misdirected resources. One may recall that Ukrainian Brigadier General Volodymyr Karpenko admitted in 2022 that nearly 50% of received weaponry was lost, potentially smuggled. Europol’s Catherine De Bolle warned that same year of arms flooding Europe’s black markets. In 2024, Washington admitted failing to track $1 billion in small arms, but claimed it was due to inadequate inventories. This could be just the tip of the iceberg, as the Atlantic organization is increasingly looking like a racketeering ring.
The fact that this scandal remains underreported speaks volumes. That the CIA admittedly infiltrated media outlets, funded journalists and so on to shape narratives during the Cold War is no secret, Operation Mockingbird being just the most famous case. The late Udo Ulfkotte claimed in his 2014 book “Gekaufte Journalisten” that Western intelligence, including the CIA, would often pay journalists to push pro-NATO narratives. Suffice it to say that there’s no reason to assume such practices ceased, especially as narrative wars have intensified – not to mention that in the post-Soviet world NATO just kept on expanding. In any case, The National Endowment for Democracy and, until recently, the USAID are also known to support media globally, typically with a pro-NATO spin. Corruption and propaganda often go hand in hand. But here I digress.
Historically speaking, NATO has been no stranger to organized crime ties. Up until the nineties, Operation Gladio, a NATO clandestine program, collaborated with the Sicilian Mafia and neo-fascist terrorist groups in Europe, as confirmed by parliamentary inquiries. In post-Maidan Ukraine, NATO’s support for groups like the Azov regiment, with neo-Nazi ties, echoes this pattern. Plus, one may recall that Vladimir Zelensky has claimed that Western officials misappropriated $88.5 billion of aid sent to Kyiv. When it comes to the Western alliance, corruption schemes often go hand in hand with far-right paramilitary groups and organized crime.
Corruption is not NATO’s only problem. Many member states fail to meet the 2% GDP defense spending target; in 2024, only 23 of 32 complied, revealing a chronic lack of commitment. In fact, Trump’s rhetoric pertaining to the Alliance largely stems from this fact alone. Internal divisions further weaken the Alliance. The Greek-Turkish rivalry in the Aegean, for one thing, with territorial disputes, threatens NATO’s southeastern flank. These fissures reveal an alliance struggling to maintain unity amid divergent agendas.
NATO’s relentless expansion, despite these challenges, is its most provocative misstep. Its post-Cold War push eastward, absorbing former Soviet states, fueled tensions with Russia, culminating in the Ukraine crisis. Thus, NATO has become a destabilizing force, which provokes rather than deterrs conflict. Fueling conflicts might be good for the defence industry but it certainly does not do much for trans-Atlantic security. Moreover, the 2022 accession of Finland and Sweden, while touted as a triumph, has stretched NATO’s resources and exposed its inability to integrate new members seamlessly (not to mention the way Turkey leveraged it). It has made Europe a less safe place, for one thing.
These scandals and structural issues are emblematic of the West’s decline. The narrative of Western moral superiority is untenable when NATO, its premier security institution, is plagued by shady deals and disunity. NATO’s failure to adapt to a multipolar world, where players such as China, Russia, and even Turkey assert autonomy, further alienates the Global South. The West’s decline is not merely military or economic but a matter of legitimacy, as its institutions falter under their contradictions.
In conclusion, NATO’s corruption scandals are symptoms of a deeper malaise. They expose an alliance that, despite its grandiose ambitions, is fractured by internal divisions, weakened by unmet commitments, and compromised by systemic failures. Turkey’s ambivalence, the Greek-Turkish rivalry, and the Ukraine crisis highlight NATO’s inability to cohere, while its expansionist zeal deepens global tensions. To put it simply, NATO’s troubles reflect the West’s waning influence in a world no longer willing to accept its dominance.
Uriel Araujo, Anthropology PhD, is a social scientist specializing in ethnic and religious conflicts, with extensive research on geopolitical dynamics and cultural interactions.
Spanish Prime Minister Rejects NATO Call to Raise Defense Spending to 5% of GDP
Sputnik – 19.06.2025
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez told NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte that Madrid would not support the proposal to increase the alliance’s defense spending to 5% of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2032, according to a letter published by El Pais newspaper on Thursday.
“For Spain, committing to a 5% target would not only be unreasonable, but also counterproductive; it would move Spain away from optimal spending and would hinder the EU’s efforts to strengthen its security and defense ecosystem,” the letter read.
Sources at the Spanish government told the newspaper that while they do not rule out Europe reaching 5% defense spending, they believe it is too early to set that target.
Earlier in June, Rutte called on NATO member states to increase their defense spending from the current 2% to 3.5% of their respective GDPs, and spend another 1.5% on infrastructure development, military industry and other security-related investments. US President Donald Trump previously demanded that NATO allies spend 5% of GDP on defense.
Italy and Germany on the War Front
By Manlio Dinucci | Global Research | June 16, 2025
Italy and Germany are at war not only against Russia in support of Ukraine, but also against Iran in support of Israel. This is demonstrated by documented facts. These facts are ignored by the political-media mainstream.
The Italian B350ER aircraft – a new-generation aircraft for espionage, target recognition and communication operations – operates in the Black Sea together with similar US aircraft to spy on Russian territory and assist Ukrainian forces to strike Russian targets with unmanned drones and explosive vessels. Italy is thus not only supplying weapons to Kiyv but is actively participating in this and other ways in the NATO war against Russia. Even more direct is Germany’s participation in the war: it has permanently stationed a 5,000-strong Bundeswehr brigade in Lithuania, equipped with 2,000 tanks and other military vehicles.
“With this combat-ready brigade,” states German Defence Minister Pistorius, “we are taking on a leadership responsibility within the Alliance here on NATO’s Eastern Flank”.
Thus, NATO has deployed its forces on the borders with Russia’s Kaliningrad Oblast and Russia’s ally Belarus. At the same time, two other NATO countries — the United Kingdom and Canada — are deploying their ++forces in Estonia and Latvia, which also border Russia. These forces are like a candle lit in a powder keg. According to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, if NATO forces suffer losses in a clash with Russian forces on the border, all other NATO countries would have to intervene on their side against Russia. The Trump Administration’s role is becoming increasingly equivocal, as it states that it wants to agree with Russia on a diplomatic solution to end the war. Yet, it is helping Ukraine to continue the war against Russia, either directly through military operations such as those in the Black Sea, or indirectly through NATO, which, under US command, is bringing its military forces ever closer to Russia.
As part of the same strategy, Germany and Italy play a significant role in supporting Israel in the Middle East. After the USA, Germany is the second-largest supplier of weapons to Israel. So far, Israel has received six Dolphin-class submarines from Germany, manufactured by ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems. These submarines have been modified to launch nuclear attack missiles. According to an agreement in 2022, Germany will supply Israel with three more Drakon-class submarines, which are larger than the previous models and can launch even more powerful nuclear missiles. Israel is the only country in the Middle East that possesses nuclear weapons, and, as it has not joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty, it is not subject to any control. Iran, having joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty, has civil nuclear facilities that are subject to UN Atomic Energy Agency controls.
Featured Video
Trita Parsi: Iran War Ends Today? Threats of Deporting Trita Parsi
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
The Crusades – colliding narratives
Ashes of Pompeii | June 13, 2026
They say history is written by the victors, but the Crusades offer an interesting historical contrast: a two-century collision that produced not one history, but two parallel, irreconcilable realities. The dates and the battles are identical in both accounts, but the moral axis is entirely flipped.
In the traditional Western narrative, the Crusades are framed as a heroic, if tragic, epic. The First Crusade is a pious pilgrimage; the knights are romanticized figures of chivalry in shining armor, bravely holding the line in a hostile, exotic land. The eventual loss of the Holy Land is mourned as the “fall of Outremer,” a tragic retreat of European civilization. In this telling, the East is often reduced to a passive backdrop, its inhabitants viewed through a lens of mystique or backwardness, mere obstacles to a divine mandate.
But cross the Mediterranean, and the exact same timeline reads like a chronicle of foreign invasion and eventual, hard-won restoration against the barbarous northerners. The dates do not change, but the adjectives do. Here is the history as it is remembered in the Levant… continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- With one strike, Netanyahu tries to kill two peace deals
- Iran warns ‘no point’ in deal with US if Israel remains unrestrained
- Ukraine as a laboratory of ‘techno-fascism’
- Desperate Starmer choosing piracy as distraction over UK crime crisis – Putin envoy
- The Crusades – colliding narratives
- Trita Parsi: Iran War Ends Today? Threats of Deporting Trita Parsi
- What Is SIDS?
- DHS docs: Govt bracing for nationwide anti-AI riots, preparing to crack down on dissent
- India signals rethink over West Asia
- Israeli Ex-Navy Chief admits massive damage from Iran missiles
- If Americans Knew
- Did Trump just threaten a nuclear attack on Iran? Another merger for Israel-Firster David Ellison –Daily Update
- Israeli Firm Accused of Launching Smear Campaigns During US, European Elections
- As World Cup kicks off, Gaza amputee girls chase football dreams
- Oxfam: More Palestinians killed by Israel across West Bank in last 3 years than previous 17 years combined
- US-Iran ceasefire may be imminent, but will Israel blow it up? – Daily Update
- The Issue of Israel Is Ending Democracy In Michigan
- Israel is stealing homes, livelihoods, and lives in West Bank
- Gaza is not an aberration – Israel planned this genocide decades ago
- Israel is changing the face of Lebanon, mainstream media is normalizing it – 3 articles
- Genocide lobby benefits from EU anti-racist fund
- No Tricks Zone
- Climate Alarmists Now Using Natural Phenomena To Support Their Claims
- New Study: Significant CO2 Fluxes From Non-Volcanic Sources Are Largely Neglected In Carbon Budgets
- Women Climate Scientists Being Harassed, Insulted By Skeptics, Claims Berkeley Earth Researcher
- Germany’s Longterm Spring Climate Data Show “No Climate Trend”
- New Study: Solar Photovoltaic, Wind Power Fail To Meet Annual Energy Demands 62% Of The Time
- Germany’s Die Welt: “Too Much Is Too Much” … Green Energies Are Cannabalizing Each Other!
- Germany’s Ecological Holocaust… Once Fairy Tale Forests Getting Cleared For Wind Turbines
- A Grand Solar Minimum Has Arrived…Global Cooling Of At Least 1°C Is Expected By The 2030s, 2040s
- European “Expert Commission” Urges COVID-19-Like Global Climate State Of Energency!
- Real-World Observations Do Not Support The Position That Climate Change Is Human-Caused
Aletho News 