The UK Joins the Pirates
By Craig Murray | June 15, 2026
I was genuinely surprised by the Starmer regime’s refusal to state that the Israeli boarding of the Global Sumud flotilla on the High Seas was illegal. I did not realise it was because the UK was planning to undertake similar illegal seizure itself.
The Gaza Flotilla seizure was illegal: while for obvious reasons freedom of navigation had been the undisputed basis of UK maritime policy for centuries. The UK is a set of islands whose population is dependent on food imports to stay alive. Freedom of navigation is a core strategic interest of the UK. The relevant provisions of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea were very heavily UK driven, including on passage through straits.
Abandoning the primacy of freedom of navigation is absolutely a radical policy departure for the UK, driven like so many other changes to traditional British legal positions by the Starmer regime’s extreme support for Israel.
It is not generally understood how profound a change this is. Even the Tory government of David Cameron, with William Hague as Foreign Secretary, had opposed the Israeli naval blockade of Gaza and particularly Israeli seizure of vessels on the High Seas. William Hague stated in 2010 to the House of Commons of the boarding of the Mavi Marmara:
We are seriously concerned about the seizure of British nationals in international waters,
This is a long term British legal position now directly repudiated by Starmer, Lammy and Cooper.
I had not realised that not only was the UK now supporting the campaigns of illegal blockade and seizure of vessels being openly pursued by Israel and by Trump, but Starmer was actually intending to abandon freedom of navigation and join the Trump/Netanyahu doctrine.
That is what the UK has now done by its seizure of the Smyrtos as it had passed through the Straits of Dover en route to Sikka in India.
The Dover Strait is a strait. The clue is in the name. The UK has absolutely no right to close it to Russian shipping. This is in Article 39 of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea:

Transit of international straits “shall not be impeded” is pretty plain. This is the applicable legal regime for both the Strait of Dover and the Strait of Hormuz. Obviously in time of war different considerations apply, and commercial shipping of belligerent states – and to and from belligerent states – becomes a legitimate target. Iran is fully justified in also treating states permitting attacks launched from their territory as belligerent states.
If hostilities end this Article 39 regime that should apply again in the Strait of Hormuz.
It is worth a footnote to say that Iran had, until the recent illegal aggression by Israel and the United States, always strictly observed the international law on straits even though Iran did not sign the Convention and actually had entered a formal reservation on passage through straits. Even during the war, Iran had attempted, in extremely difficult circumstances, to establish a system for passage of genuinely neutral vessels.
It is astonishing that at this moment, when navigation of the Strait of Hormuz is arguably the single most live question in all of international politics, the UK has decided to abandon the principle of free transit through straits.
It takes hypocrisy to an entire new level, it truly beggars belief, that the day after closing the Dover Strait to Russian shipping, Starmer issued a joint statement with Germany, France and Italy insisting on “Freedom of Navigation” in the strait of Hormuz.
Even if you don’t care about international law and believe that Trumpian realpolitik is better, to act against freedom of navigation now would seem an unwise decision. The UK is now copying actions like the United States naval blockades of Cuba and Venezuela, and the Israeli genocidal blockade of Gaza. These are gross violations of the Law of the Sea.
UK Government minister Lisa Nandy was on television news last night as the government pumped out militaristic propaganda. The Royal Navy’s action in boarding and capturing an entirely unarmed and peaceful merchant vessel was portrayed as an act of Nelsonian brilliance. Nandy justified the seizure on the grounds that Russia’s oil sales pay for its war with Ukraine, and that the UK was enforcing sanctions against Russia.
Neither provides an atom of legal justification for seizing the vessel. The UK is not at war with Russia. Ukraine is, and the Ukrainian navy would have been entitled to seize the vessel. For reasons of cheap popularity and to increase the massive amounts of public money swirling around the corruption honeypot of military spending, UK ministers seem determined to move us to the brink of war with Russia. But we are still not at war, and the UK accordingly has no right to seize peaceful and innocent Russian bound, owned or flagged commercial vessels.
The UK is legally entitled to put whatever sanctions it wishes on Russia. But it can only enforce those within its legitimate jurisdiction. A foreign vessel, even when engaged in innocent passage or transit passage through a UK strait or other territorial waters, is not under UK jurisdiction. The Smyrtos was in fact in international waters south of the UK when seized.
In fact this attempt to enforce western sanctions in areas where western powers have no jurisdiction is a classical example of the current aggressive resurgence of imperialism, where the “rules based order”, meaning rules imposed by the imperialists, replaces international law.
Nandy also stated that the Smyrtos was a member of the “Russian shadow fleet”. This is a term that the Starmer regime and their client mainstream and corporate media have relied upon repeatedly to demonise the Russian owned or directed merchant fleet.
Russia sells oil to countries like India and China perfectly lawfully. That this oil is carried in ships bearing flags other than Russian is perfectly normal.
Nil or close to nil of those ships carrying hydrocarbons to and from the UK are UK registered and flagged.
It has been a sad truth of international shipping for many decades that commercial vessels bear flags of convenience, and that jurisdictions compete to offer the very lowest standards of crew salary and welfare regulations, officer and crew training, vehicle condition and maritime safety and inspection regimes.
Most of the registries of well-known international flag of convenience states such as Panama, Liberia and the Marshall Islands, do not really exist in the sense of being government departments of those countries, as they should be. They are private companies with almost no real world footprint, which pay a fee to the government to operate the registry, and collect the fees from the shipowners registering. The register is just names in a laptop – and very often that laptop is in London.
UK colonies often have substantial such fake registries. The UK is a strong opponent of the International Transport Workers Federation, which has struggled against this system to improve mariners’ rights.
The system evolved for wealthy shipowners to avoid all maritime safety, environmental and welfare regulation, and the UK and other western countries which pander to the needs of the ultra wealthy have always been complicit. The incredible hypocrisy of western states pointing fingers at Russia for running “Flags of convenience” is breathtaking.
The West has spent decades building and profiting from the global flags of convenience system. Russia is simply using the same system that Western companies created and still dominate.
Incidentally the MOD’s own propaganda footage, shown by all UK mainstream media yesterday, proves that the Smyrtos is a modern, clean, well-equipped and comfortable vessel and all the propaganda about ancient rustbucket is completely untrue.
I have finally managed to pin down the alleged legal basis of the seizure of the Smyrtos, and it is that the vessel was stateless and thus subject to boarding under Article 110 of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea.

The UK is claiming that the Smyrtos fell foul of Article 110.1 (d) that it was “without nationality”.
We will inspect that claim more closely in a moment. But, assuming it for a moment to be true, note that you only have a right to visit and inspect on the High Seas a ship that is without nationality. Article 110 absolutely does not confer any right to seize a ship on the High Seas not found on inspection to be in unlawful activity. The UK has seized the Smyrtos, brought it into UK territorial waters and then claimed it is under UK jurisdiction.
Nowhere is that allowed in the Convention.
Now let us look at the claim that the Smyrtos is without nationality. This is an astonishing story which the media will not tell you.
When the Smyrtos set sail from Russia it was flying the Cameroonian flag, and on the Cameroonian register. That is not in doubt.
While the ship was on its voyage, on 10 June Cameroon withdrew its registration. It did so because the EU and UK threatened to halt development aid to Cameroon unless they removed Russian vessels from their shipping register.
So the UK blackmailed Cameroon into deregistering the ship. Then, before the ship could reach a friendly port, the UK boarded it because it had been deregistered.
Now doubtless there are chortling people in the UK security and military industries self-congratulating themselves over how clever they are. But while this may be a clever ruse de guerre, it is hardly a ruse de paix. It is not going to survive scrutiny by an international court. An unexpected change of registration, forced upon the owners, is very difficult to complete instantly, but doubtless one was in train and perhaps finished. The UK actions are patently – and deliberately – unreasonable.
Politicians seek to drum up cheap popularity by stupid jingoism. Starmer has won a cheap headline. The world inches closer to the next world war. The UK loses yet more legitimacy in the eyes of the wider world.
Meantime Trump claims as a great victory a possible return of the Strait of Hormuz to the open status it enjoyed before he started an illegal war in the interests of Israel.
Freedom of navigation was a principle worth defending. It has been abandoned in favour of a return to the rule of the seas by those with the strongest navies. Fortunately Putin is neither as war hungry nor as politically desperate as Starmer. However Russia will now be obliged to send at least a frigate to keep the Strait of Dover open. The drums of war beat ever closer.
Craig Murray is a former Head of Maritime Section of the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office. He is a former Alternate Head of the UK Delegation at the UN Preparatory Commission for the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Desperate Starmer choosing piracy as distraction over UK crime crisis – Putin envoy

RT | June 14, 2026
Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev has accused UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer of using the seizure of a supposed Russian-linked vessel to distract from domestic problems.
In a post on X on Sunday, Starmer announced that UK forces intercepted a tanker involved in ‘shadow fleet’ operations, which allegedly help Russia bypass Western sanctions on oil exports.
The Smyrtos was reportedly transiting the English Channel before it was boarded by UK marines. The UK Defense Ministry said it will be held and monitored off the south coast while its operations are investigated.
Starmer boasted that he personally directed the interception, calling it a “successful operation” that delivered “yet another blow to Russia.” He later posted footage purportedly showing armed marines boarding the vessel.
Dmitriev suggested that the operation was not about security or enforcing sanctions, but to manufacture a confrontation and distract the public from immigration problems and crime.
“Desperate Starmer, instead of intercepting HIS immigrants who rape, mutilate and behead British people, attempts to DISTRACT the UK with an escalation,” he wrote on X.
The UK faces tensions over immigration following a number of attacks and high-profile murder and rape cases involving migrants in recent years. This week, a 17-year-old girl was stabbed in the neck in northwest England by a 30-year-old man of Pakistani heritage. The most persistent issue remains migrants crossing the English Channel in small boats from France, with successive governments repeatedly promising and failing to reduce the arrivals.
Ukraine’s Western backers have long accused Russia of using a ‘shadow fleet’ to maintain oil exports, which they seek to restrict in order to weaken Russia amid the conflict with Ukraine. Russia has denied that it operates a shadow fleet and has condemned the seizure of vessels on the high seas.
The UK has been among the loudest advocates of tougher action against ships carrying Russian oil, while previously avoiding direct involvement. In March, however, London claimed that a legal review cleared UK troops to board the vessels. The Russian Embassy in London called it a “deeply hostile step,” accusing the UK of preparing “acts of piracy.”
Russia has long considered Britain a key force behind the Ukraine conflict, accusing it of directly assisting Ukrainian long-range strikes on Russian territory with UK-supplied weapons. Moscow has also accused Western governments of demonizing Russia to justify increased defense spending and to distract the public’s attention from domestic problems.
US publishes docs on ‘dangerous’ Ukrainian biolabs

RT | June 12, 2026
US Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard has released new evidence that US-funded biological laboratories in Ukraine were researching dangerous pathogens. Washington previously denied any role in running these labs.
Published on Friday, the declassified documents reveal that the US “built and supported” 40 biolabs in Ukraine, which worked with “especially dangerous pathogens” including anthrax, avian flu, Ebola, plague, and tuberculosis. At least 12 of these laboratories were carrying out human research.
Some of the laboratories were engaged in so-called ‘gain of function’ research, a controversial practice whereby animal viruses are modified to increase their virulence and transmissibility to study their effects on humans.
The partially-redacted documents state that the US paid for the construction and equipping of at least four laboratories, at a total cost of more than $9 million. They also reveal that these laboratories carried out research on behalf of and in collaboration with the US Department of Food and Agriculture, the US Army, the World Health Organization, the UN, and multiple US universities. Metabiota, a biotech company part-owned by Hunter Biden’s investment firm, is also listed as a partner.
What did Russia say about the biolabs?
As Russian troops entered Ukraine in February 2022, the Russian Defense Ministry claimed that Vladimir Zelensky’s government in Kiev ordered the “emergency destruction” of pathogens at multiple US-funded laboratories in Ukraine. The ministry accused Kiev of ordering the destruction in an attempt to hide its role in an American biological weapons program.
Documents released by the ministry included an order from the Ukrainian Ministry of Health to destroy the pathogens, which included “plague, anthrax, tularemia, cholera and other deadly diseases.”
After reviewing thousands of pages of documents seized from labs in Donetsk, Lugansk and Kherson, Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov of the Russian Radiological, Chemical, and Biological Defense Forces concluded in 2023 that “the US, under the guise of ensuring global biosecurity, conducted dual-use research, including the creation of biological weapons components, in close proximity to Russian borders.” Kirillov led Russia’s investigation into the labs until he was assassinated in 2024, allegedly by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU).
Among the facilities mentioned by the ministry was the Institute of Veterinary Medicine in Kharkov. The Russian military accused Ukraine of researching potential biological weapons in the institute’s basement. According to Gabbard’s documents, the facility did have a basement level, where anthrax and brucella bacteria were stored. Both are considered bioweapons due to their extreme infectivity and capacity to cause debilitating illness.
Did the US deny that the biolabs existed?
Back in March 2022, then-US Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland admitted under oath that “Ukraine has biological research facilities.” However, Nuland denied that these facilities worked on biological weapons, and insisted that “the United States does not own or operate any chemical or biological laboratories in Ukraine.”
The US State Department claimed that “the Kremlin is intentionally spreading outright lies that the United States and Ukraine are conducting chemical and biological weapons activities in Ukraine,” while the then-US ambassador to the UN, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, stated that “there are no Ukrainian biological weapons laboratories supported by the United States.”
What is Tulsi Gabbard doing about the biolabs?
“Despite the obvious potential for catastrophic global impact research on dangerous pathogens in biolabs can have, politicians, so-called health professionals like Dr. Fauci, and entities within the Biden administration’s national security team lied to the American people about the existence of US-funded and supported biolabs, and threatened those who attempted to expose the truth,” Gabbard said in a statement on Friday.
Gabbard said that she has issued new guidance to US intelligence agencies on collection of data from the laboratories in Ukraine, and from the broader network of US-linked biolabs around the world. At present, her office is collecting “new details on clinical trials that are underway at these facilities, raising significant ethical, financial, and security concerns,” her statement read.
However, Gabbard will not be in a position to act on this intelligence for much longer. Following her husband’s diagnosis with a rare form of bone cancer last month, Gabbard announced that she would retire at the end of June. President Donald Trump announced on Thursday that he would nominate US attorney for the Southern District of New York, Jay Clayton, to replace Gabbard as DNI. Clayton has never commented publicly on the biolabs issue.
Will Trump Break JFK’s Agreement on Cuba?
By Jacob G. Hornberger – Future of Freedom Foundation – June 8, 2026
In October 1962, the United States and the Soviet Union (i.e., Russia) came within an inch of all-out nuclear war with each other. To resolve the crisis, President John F. Kennedy and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev entered into an agreement in which the United States agreed not to invade Cuba in return for Russia’s decision to withdraw nuclear missiles it had installed in Cuba.
For more than 50 years, both Russia and the United States have complied with that agreement. Russia has never re-installed nuclear missiles into Cuba. In turn, the United States has never re-invaded Cuba.
Given President Trump’s recent acts of aggression against Cuba, the question naturally arises: Will Trump and the US national-security establishment break the commitment that President Kennedy made by initiating another military invasion of Cuba?
Soon after Kennedy was inaugurated in 1961, the US national-security branch of the federal government, which, by this time, had become the most powerful branch, employed deception, subterfuge, lies, and manipulation to induce the new president into authorizing a US invasion of Cuba. The plan called for using a contingent of CIA-trained Cuban exiles to invade the island, with the aim of ousting the communist regime that had come into power with the Cuban revolution in 1959.
The CIA told Kennedy that no US air support would be needed. They also told him that the Cuban people hated Cuban leader Fidel Castro and would rise to the assistance of the US invaders.
Both were lies, and the CIA knew it was lying to Kennedy. The CIA figured that once its invasion got underway and was going to go down to defeat at the hands of the communists, JFK would have no other effective choice but to authorize the air support — as a way to “save face.”
But JFK stood his ground, and the US invasion of Cuba went down to defeat. This was, of course, the beginning of the vicious and ruthless war between JFK and the US national-security establishment that would end in JKF’s defeat on November 22, 1963. See FFF’s book JFK’s War with the National-Security Establishment: Why Kennedy Was Assassinated by Douglas P. Horne, who served on the staff of the Assassination Records Review Board in the 1990s.
After the disaster of the Bay of Pigs invasion, the Pentagon continued to pressure Kennedy into ordering an invasion of Cuba. As part of this pressure, the Joint Chiefs of Staff presented JFK with one of the most shameful and immoral plans in US history — Operation Northwoods. It called for terrorist attacks on American soil in which innocent Americans would be intentionally sacrificed at the hands of US agents who would be falsely portraying themselves as Cuban communists. The terrorist attacks would then be used as a justification for invading Cuba and violently achieving regime change.
To Kennedy’s everlasting credit, he rejected Operation Northwoods, much to the deep anger and rage of the national-security branch against which he was at war.
Why was the national-security branch so obsessed with invading Cuba? Their mindset was part of their old Cold War racket, which came into existence after World War II to justify the conversion of the federal government from a limited-government republic to a national-security state, which is a totalitarian-like governmental structure with omnipotent powers, including the power of assassination.
The Cold War racket involved inculcating the American people with a deep fear that the Reds were coming to get them. Central to this racket was the notion that the Reds in Cuba were only 90 miles away from American shores and, therefore, needed to be taken out before they invaded Miami, fought their way up the Eastern seaboard, and captured Washington, D.C. Never mind that Cuba was an impoverished Third World Country that lacked the remotest capability of even crossing that little stretch of water and successfully conquering the well-armed citizens of Miami. Never mind also that Cuba has never initiated any act of aggression against the United States and that it simply has always wanted to be left alone by the US national-security branch, which has always steadfastly and obsessively refused to leave Cuba alone.
Castro knew that the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA were pressuring Kennedy into ordering another invasion of Cuba. That’s when the Russians came to his assistance. They installed nuclear missiles in Cuba to hopefully deter the US from invading again. Alternatively, the missiles were to serve as a means of self-defense if the US were to initiate another war of aggression against Cuba.
It’s important to recognize something important here: The Cubans had every right in the world to have those nuclear missiles installed in Cuba. After all, Cuba is a sovereign and independent country. It is also worth noting that Cuba, like every other nation, has the right to defend itself from invasions and wars of aggression, including those initiated by the United States.
But no one (including Russia), likes to have nuclear missiles pointed at it from just a short distance away. The US certainly didn’t like it (just as Russia wouldn’t like it if US or NATO nuclear missiles were installed in Ukraine). And so, JFK demanded that the Russians withdraw their missiles from Cuba. If Russia had refused to do so, it is a virtual certainty that JFK would have ordered an attack on the missiles and an invasion of Cuba, both of which the Pentagon and the CIA were demanding. The result would have been World War III.
To resolve the crisis, Russia agreed to withdraw its missiles, and the US committed to not invade Cuba again. It’s an agreement that has been honored for more than 60 years.
Of course, Trump, the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA can argue that the agreement, which they considered was a betrayal of America and a grave threat to US “national security” was not a treaty. That’s true. It was simply an oral agreement — a handshake, if you will. Nonetheless, an agreement is an agreement. There was no time limit on the agreement, which meant that it would exist into perpetuity. The Russians would not reinstall their nuclear missiles and the United States would not invade Cuba again.
If Trump and US national-security establishment decide to break JFK’s agreement, undoubtedly the Russians will not retaliate. But it will be another reason why people around the world understand that the United States can never be trusted to keep its word.
Iran, Russia, China reject IAEA resolution as politically driven
Al Mayadeen | June 10, 2026
Iran’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations and other international organizations in Vienna has issued a sharp rebuke of the latest International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors’ resolution, rejecting its call on Tehran to declare its uranium stocks and denouncing the move as a politically motivated act unworthy of a technical body.
The mission said the measure was “another political resolution” adopted through a “shaky vote,” saying it falls well short of the standards expected of an agency tasked with technical oversight of nuclear affairs.
The US-backed resolution, passed on Wednesday, calls on Tehran to declare its remaining enriched uranium stocks and allow inspectors to verify them. Submitted by the United States, Britain, France, and Germany, it cleared the 35-nation board with 21 votes in favor, three against, and 10 abstentions. Russia, China, and Niger cast the three opposing votes, while Venezuela was barred from taking part.
‘Instrumentalized by warmongers’
Questioning the IAEA’s fitness to act as a neutral arbiter, the mission asked how the agency can be regarded as credible when it is “instrumentalized by warmongers” while remaining unable to register concern over “the most extensive unlawful armed attacks” on safeguarded nuclear facilities.
Iran further accused the resolution of cloaking confrontation in the language of diplomacy, noting that it purports to advance dialogue even as Washington “engages in further acts of aggression, including against Iranian civilian infrastructure, and promotes confrontation in different fora.”
Tehran made clear it does not intend to comply with “a flawed instrument,” stating that any genuine diplomatic process demands “a minimum of good faith” from all parties. Iran added that it will “protect its inalienable rights in response to this flawed resolution.”
Iran, China, Russia reject US draft
In a joint statement delivered at the Board of Governors meeting, Iran, China, and Russia denounced the US draft resolution as politically motivated and unconstructive, warning that it would further aggravate an already fragile situation.
The three countries stressed they oppose any attempt to mislead member states about the true status of Iran’s nuclear programme, including through the director general.
Strikes disrupted verification
Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi revealed on Tuesday that it was US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities that had disrupted IAEA verification, forcing inspectors out of the country over safety concerns and halting routine monitoring.
Washington, he stressed, then sought to exploit that disruption to intensify pressure on Tehran through the agency’s Board of Governors.
Gharibabadi called on the international community to hold those who carried out the attacks accountable, highlighting that obstructing international verification at safeguarded facilities should be treated as a legal and international responsibility.
The US-Israeli war on Iran began on February 28 with attacks on Iranian territory, including the nuclear facilities at Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz.
Tehran maintains its nuclear programme is entirely peaceful, a position confirmed by multiple US intelligence assessments, and argues that the strikes are precisely what have made implementation of its safeguards obligations impossible at the damaged sites.
US Leads Nuclear Spending Surge as Global Arsenal Costs Hit Record $119 Billion

Sputnik – 09.06.2026
The US heads a record rise in nuclear arsenal spending, accounting alone for $69.2 billion of the $119 billion spent on nuclear arsenals in 2025 by the world’s nine nuclear-armed states, according to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN).
The total represents a 19% increase from 2024, the highest level since ICAN began tracking spending of Russia, China, the US, France, the UK, India, Pakistan, North Korea, and Israel in 2020.
Other major increases included:
- China: 7% increase to $13.5 billion
- United Kingdom: 17% increase to $12.6 billion
- Russia: 6% increase to $9.5 billion
‘Biden’s war’ has become Trump’s – Lavrov
RT | June 5, 2026
America’s position on the Ukraine conflict has become almost indistinguishable from that of the EU, making US President Donald Trump’s stated ambition to mediate an end to the fighting hollow, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has told RT.
Trump repeatedly blamed the conflict between Russia and Ukraine on his predecessor, Joe Biden, and claimed that he could bring it to a swift conclusion while campaigning in 2024.
However, recent statements by members of his administration suggest a different course, Lavrov said on Thursday in an interview on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum.
“Biden’s war has become Trump’s war,” the Russian foreign minister said.
Speaking to Congress this week, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said efforts to facilitate Russia-Ukraine talks were complicated “because, frankly, we’re not an impartial mediator.” He cited the continuation of the sanctions on Russia and sales of US weapons to Ukraine.
“After we agreed to the United States proposal in Anchorage [in August 2025], Washington began to shift its position. Instead of advancing those same proposals in its dealings with Ukrainians, it is now pretending that the parties should sort things out themselves. This is not a very consistent position,” Lavrov said.
“It is the West that cannot be trusted to keep its agreements. Its approach is: ‘I’ll promise something now, then stall for time.’ If the US had truly advanced its own initiative, I think… the fighting would already have stopped.”
According to Lavrov, the only major difference between Trump’s policy and that of Biden and the EU is that his administration resumed direct talks with Russia. Dialogue is important, he said, but it must be matched by action on commitments already made. … Full video interview
FSB Blows Lid on Western Plot to Hack Russian Officials’ Phones — But Here’s the Shocker
Sputnik – 02.06.2026
Russia’s FSB has uncovered a foreign spy operation using malware implanted on the smartphones of high-ranking Russian officials. The goal? To extract data, eavesdrop on conversations, and covertly monitor the situation.
But here’s what the headlines won’t tell you.
How the US is weaponizing the global digital backbone — a threat to the entire world
Think of Fastly and Cloudflare. These aren’t basement startups. They are the largest CDN (content delivery network) providers and “security perimeter” operators on the planet. They serve half of the Fortune 500, EU and Asian government websites — including, for example, the official site of the British government, major EU institutions, and critical financial infrastructure spanning the world’s democratic nations.
In plain terms: they are the infrastructural spine of the internet. When you access a government service, a bank, or a news outlet in most of the Western world, your data almost certainly passes through their networks.
This brings up an uncomfortable question: if these companies permit US intelligence agencies to embed spyware code within their services, can anyone still trust American cloud technology?
Because this is not a hypothetical. The FSB’s revelation about malware on Russian officials’ smartphones is just one thread. The larger fabric is this: the US has spent years building legal frameworks — from the Patriot Act to the Cloud Act — that compel American tech companies to cooperate with intelligence agencies, often in secret. FISA warrants, National Security Letters, and classified directives turn cloud infrastructure into a surveillance platform.
Fastly and Cloudflare are not rogue actors. They are deeply integrated into the US national security apparatus. And if the backbone is compromised, every node connected to it becomes a potential target — whether in Moscow, Berlin, or New Delhi.
Is this merely one hack? Hardly. This is systemic betrayal — plain and simple.
The same digital spine that guards the West also feeds allies, neutral nations, and every global power. Break that trust — and the internet shatters. So, get ready for national clouds. Localized walls. Sovereign webs. Welcome to the fragmentation that the open internet promised would never happen.
So when Washington lectures the world about “rules-based order” in cyberspace, the rest of the world is now asking: whose rules? And who is watching the watchers?
Here’s the real takeaway: American tech’s reputation just took a devastating hit. The same internet giants that run global communications stand accused of spying — not on enemies, but on their own allies.
And when the internet’s backbone is no longer solid or trustworthy, the entire digital world turns into a battleground.
Do Palantir’s bosses have blood on their hands over the Starobelsk massacre?
By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | June 2, 2026
The murder of 21 Russian students at a college dormitory on May 22 has yet to be fully understood in terms of the exact involvement of NATO states.
The university building in Starobelsk, Lugansk, was attacked in the early hours of the morning with 16 drones in three consecutive waves of assault. The targeting of the dormitory was deliberate. There were no Russian military installations in the vicinity.
NATO’s involvement in this act of terrorism is on multiple levels. Ukraine’s use of unmanned aerial vehicles has ramped up in recent months, in line with the massive financial support provided by the European Union in the form of a €90 billion loan, most of which is dedicated to boosting Ukraine’s drone arsenal, with European manufacturing companies working in partnership.
At another level, the Western corporate news media have largely ignored the Starobelsk atrocity and NATO’s involvement. The Western media have distorted the de facto war crime by highlighting implausible denials from the Ukrainian regime. In short, covering up.
At yet another level is the new and remarkable efficiency of Ukrainian-launched drones to evade Russian air defenses. Since the conflict in Ukraine escalated in 2022, NATO intelligence from satellite surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft has been supplying the Kiev regime with targeting data to attack Russian units.
But in recent months, NATO information flow and data analysis have taken a quantum leap regarding targeting range and lethality. Thus, the close partnership between Ukrainian and NATO drone manufacturing is amplified by the involvement of U.S.-based Palantir Technologies in operating systems.
Palantir was cofounded in 2003 by German-U.S. billionaire Peter Thiel. It has grown to become the “brains” behind operating weapon systems for the Pentagon, as well as the Israelis in their genocide in Gaza and Lebanon, and aggression towards Iran.
Palantir’s CEO Alex Karp visited Kiev on May 12, where he met with the regime leadership to firm up military partnerships for using Artificial Intelligence in attack drones. Karp was ecstatic about the global business opportunities accruing to Palantir by using the Ukraine war as a laboratory for developing technology.
He boasted that his company’s software was the “operating system” for Ukraine’s military deploying against Russia. Significantly, the Palantir boss remarked that the real-time learning and development of his company’s systems were giving Palantir a huge commercial advantage that could not be achieved in peacetime laboratories. In other words, the killing fields of Ukraine are plugging into Palantir’s profitability and global status as a company.
“It’s our software primitives or infrastructure and your people building things that are completely different from what we would have ever built on top of this,” Karp said in an interview with Ukrainian media.
“You’re doing it on the battlefield with a very small number of people and then showing the world how these things work.”
This strategic collaboration between the Kiev regime and Silicon Valley’s hottest company was also revealed in an exclusive report this week by CNN. The CNN report did not mention Palantir by name, but screenshots reposted clearly showed that the Ukrainian drone operators were using the company’s PRISMA software. As reported, the software allows the processing of vast amounts of aviation and radar data in seconds, which is then used to deploy drones that evade Russian air defense systems and hit deep inside Russia.
The success of Ukrainian-NATO drones to strike deep inside pre-war Russian territory has improved dramatically. The air strikes have reportedly damaged 24 out of a total of 33 of Russia’s top oil refineries. Last month alone, it was reported that six refineries were hit, as well as major fuel depots. The installations, such as at Saratov and Volgograd, are hundreds of kilometers inside Russia. The disruption in fuel supplies has necessitated the Kremlin’s imposition of rationing on public purchases.
Palantir’s data processing and AI are such that interception of Ukrainian drones by Russian air defenses is incorporated into the targeting programs, which permits subsequent drone waves to circumnavigate anti-aircraft systems. This feedback loop brings new challenges for defense systems.
The increase in EU and NATO drone funding and technology would account for the quantitative surge in attacks on Russian territory. The complicity of NATO states, primarily the Baltic states, in lending their territories as launch sites is also a factor. The NATO propaganda machine, too, plays a role in minimizing the civilian deaths and thereby blindsiding European and American public opposition to a dangerous provocation and escalation of war with Russia.
But the involvement of Palantir in increasing the kill machine is another crucial qualitative dimension in the escalation, whereby Ukrainian-NATO drones are evading Russian defenses and increasing their capability at hitting its deep interior and vital infrastructure.
The massacre at the Starobelsk college in Lugansk points to the systematic involvement of Palantir in executing such a deadly attack.
Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Nikolay Azarov (2010-14) expressed his astonishment at how 16 drones were able to penetrate Russian air defenses and hit the college in three waves. Azarov told Tass, the Russian news agency: “I think [NATO countries] are involved. Because, first, the drones that were sent flew right past all Russian air-defense systems, which means that someone guided them through. And you can only guide them if you have space reconnaissance data – it was a whole wave of 16 drones, and they passed by air-defense systems. It means they were guided through, solely thanks to the intervention of Western intelligence agencies. I think that, strictly speaking, they [NATO states] were behind this provocation,” he said.
Azarov did not mention Palantir per se. But the complex navigation ability of the NATO drones to thread through layers of Russian defense is the very kind of qualitative edge that the American software company is giving to the Ukrainian operators.
The other grave implication is that the extensive mapping of Russian targets, from oil refinery installations to fuel depots, suggests that the information supplied by the NATO “brains” has a detailed picture of what is being targeted. There is no way that the air strikes on a college dormitory could be confused with military installations that are not even present in the area.
That means Palantir and its multi-billionaire bosses like Alex Karp and Peter Thiel have blood on their hands, no matter how much they scrub their hands at their company’s newly opened office in Kiev.
In a perverse sidenote, Thiel, who was a friend of pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, has a personal interest in the topic of the Anti-Christ, traveling the globe delivering exclusive lectures to wealthy audiences about Armageddon and the end of times. It’s not clear what his exact views are on manifestations of the Anti-Christ. But the murder of teenage student girls sleeping in their beds should surely be relevant to his lectures.
US Eyes Spreading its Nuclear Footprint Deeper into Europe – Report
Sputnik – 02.06.2026
The US is weighing whether to expand NATO’s nuclear-sharing framework by inviting more alliance members to host American dual-capable aircraft—warplanes configured to deliver nukes, reports the Financial Times.
At present, the arrangement includes Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkiye and the UK.
Under its terms, the US retains full custody of the nuclear warheads, which are stored at select European bases, while allied air forces train for nuclear deterrence missions using aircraft such as the F-35, F-15, and Tornado.
The discussions are reportedly driven in part by a need to reassure European allies of Washington’s enduring commitment to NATO’s nuclear deterrent—even as the US scales back some conventional troop deployments on the continent and pushes allies to shoulder more defense responsibility.
The talks remain at an early, highly confidential stage, with no imminent decisions anticipated.
Nevertheless, nations on NATO’s eastern flank—notably Poland and several of Russia’s neighbors—have already signaled interest in a possible expansion of the nuclear-sharing deal.
Russia has repeatedly cautioned that any deployment of nuclear-capable assets close to its borders would be seen as a destabilizing factor, and a direct threat to its national security.
Russia Raises Alarm Over Ukraine’s Surging Black Sea Terrorist Activity
Sputnik – 02.06.2026
MOSCOW – Russia is concerned about Ukraine’s mounting terrorist activity in the Black Sea, which is raising risks for civilian shipping, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said Tuesday.
“We are concerned about the noticeable escalation of terrorist activity in the Black Sea by Ukraine, which leads to a deterioration of conditions and an increase in risks to civilian shipping,” Zakharova said in a statement.
On May 29, the Turkish Foreign Ministry announced that a drone had attacked a Turkish-owned vessel in the Black Sea, injuring two people. Ankara said it had conveyed its concern to all parties about a possible escalation in the region.
Ukraine’s military stages bandit raids on Black Sea ships with drones and unmanned boats — then pins the attacks on Russia, the spokeswoman said.
“These attacks on civilian commercial vessels have once again shown that the Kiev junta has complete disregard for the principles and norms of international law — preferring instead to deny any involvement in the incidents,” Zakharova said.
The spokeswoman branded Ukraine’s Black Sea provocations outright banditry — and warned that organizers and perpetrators alike will have to answer for these criminal acts.
“We believe such provocations — which are nothing but terrorist acts — must be the subject of a thorough, impartial investigation, receive a clear public response, and face condemnation from all coastal states that bear special responsibility for navigation safety in the Black Sea,” Zakharova stressed.
Neutralizing Black Sea security threats is crucial to any full crisis settlement, the diplomat noted.
“We confirm our readiness for close cooperation with Ankara in the interests of finding optimal ways to stabilize the Black Sea’s maritime space and exert effective influence on Kiev,” Zakharova added.
