Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

China hits back at US smears on arms supplies to Ukraine at UN Security Council

Global Times | August 1, 2025

China’s deputy permanent representative to the UN Geng Shuang spoke at a UN Security Council meeting on the issue of arms supplies to Ukraine on Thursday local time, refuting accusations made by the US representative against China.

Recently, Russia and Ukraine have held several rounds of direct negotiations and reached a number of agreements on humanitarian issues such as prisoner exchanges, making positive progress. At the same time, however, the crisis continues, with no signs of the war coming to an end. A large volume of weapons and ammunition continues to flow into the battlefield, causing new casualties and damage to infrastructure, Geng noted.

What is particularly concerning is that the types and scope of weapons entering the battlefield are expanding, with their lethality and destructiveness constantly increasing, Geng said. Recent reports indicate that both sides have deployed combat robots, further highlighting that the Russia-Ukraine conflict is increasingly becoming a testing ground for new types of weaponry. This suggests that the nature of warfare could undergo dangerous changes, he added.

“I would like to reiterate that while weapons may win wars, they cannot bring lasting peace. The reckless transfer of arms to the battlefield will only intensify the conflict, prolong the fighting, increase the risk of proliferation, and inflict more casualties and suffering on people in both the conflict zone and the broader region,” Geng said.

The Chinese diplomat pointed out that the urgent priority now is for both parties to work together to de-escalate the battlefield situation as soon as possible, maintain the momentum of dialogue and negotiation, continue building consensus, and ultimately reach a comprehensive, durable, and binding peace agreement.

In response to US representative’s false narratives and malicious smearing of China on the issue, Geng said “this is completely unacceptable,” saying that he responded to such accusations on multiple occasions in past meetings. “Since the US insists on repeating the same rhetoric, I find it necessary to set the record straight once again,” Geng said.

First, China is not the creator of the Ukraine crisis, nor is it a party to the conflict. China has never provided lethal weapons to any party involved in the conflict. We have always strictly controlled the export of dual-use items, including drones, the Chinese diplomat said.

Second, the UN Security Council has not imposed sanctions on any party to the conflict. China maintains normal trade relations with both Russia and Ukraine, in full compliance with international law and without breaching any international obligations, he said.

China’s legitimate and lawful rights and interests must not be infringed upon. “In fact, the US itself continues to engage in trade with Russia to this day. Why should it be acceptable for the US to do so, but not for others? Isn’t this ‘only allowing oneself to set fires while forbidding others from lighting lamps?’” Geng asked.

Third, the Ukraine crisis is currently at a critical juncture, with a genuine prospect for a political resolution. The US cannot on the one hand ask China to play a constructive role in ending the war, while on the other hand continuously smear and pressure China, he said, urging the US to stop playing the blame game and scapegoating others, and instead contribute positively to efforts for a ceasefire, de-escalation, and the promotion of dialogue and negotiation.

The Chinese diplomat emphasized that China maintains normal economic and trade relations with both Russia and Ukraine – this does not violate international law, nor does it breach any international obligations. “The US itself continues to conduct trade with Russia, so why should China be prohibited from doing the same?” he said.

“It is the US that repeatedly engages in smearing, slandering, and attacking other countries in the UN Security Council chamber. Does the US not recognize how different its behavior is from that of other Council members?” Geng asked.

What the resolution of the Ukraine crisis requires is unity and cooperation, not division and confrontation. Once again, we urge the US to stop its baseless accusations and scapegoating, to invest more in diplomatic efforts, and to contribute genuinely to promoting a ceasefire, de-escalating the conflict, and advancing peace talks, the Geng said.

August 1, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , | Leave a comment

US and UK behind cyberattack on Aeroflot – Russian MP

RT | July 31, 2025

US and UK intelligence services were behind this week’s major cyberattack that disrupted operations at Aeroflot and other Russian companies earlier this week, a senior Russian lawmaker has claimed.

Andrey Svintsov, the deputy chairman of the State Duma Committee on Information Policy, has said the attack is part of a coordinated campaign by Western powers to damage the Russian economy after failing to achieve their objectives through military means and sanctions.

Aeroflot, Russia’s largest airline, was forced to cancel or delay dozens of flights on July 28 after pro-Ukrainian hacker groups claimed to have crippled the airline’s internal IT systems. The cyberattack also disrupted airport operations and affected other companies, including a nationwide pharmacy chain.

”These are not isolated hackers, but a planned action by American and British intelligence agencies,” Svintsov told Russian outlet Abzats. He described the campaign as a “systematic effort that is being carried out against Russia,” suggesting that it’s a sign of desperation by the country’s adversaries.

”This is a systematic approach by our Western enemies, who have failed to defeat Russia on the battlefield. They are moving to weaken the economic potential, since sanctions are not helping,” Svintsov said. He warned that cyber sabotage could continue until Russia achieves victory in the Ukraine conflict.

In May, Defense Secretary John Healey said the UK would significantly increase cyber operations against Russia and China. He confirmed the creation of a new Cyber and Electromagnetic Command, adding that “the keyboard is now a weapon of war.”

The Kremlin has urged Russian businesses to replace foreign-made software and hardware to reduce exposure to cyber threats. Last month, President Vladimir Putin instructed the government to accelerate import substitution.

Hacker groups Silent Crow and Cyberpartisans BY have claimed responsibility for Monday’s attack on Aeroflot. They claim to have been inside the airline’s corporate network for over a year, stealing more than 20 terabytes of data and destroying around 7,000 servers.

Communications regulator Roskomnadzor said the data leaks have not been confirmed. Russia’s Prosecutor General’s Office has confirmed the cyberattack and opened a criminal case.

July 31, 2025 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism | , , , | Leave a comment

Kicking the peace can down the road

In discussion with Glenn Diesen
Ian Proud | July 28, 2025

Nice to catch up with Glenn Diesen to discuss recent developments, including my article on Trump’s 50-day ultimatum to Putin, which has now been reduced to 10-12 days, whatever that means. I continue to judge that the threat of secondary sanctions against Russia’s trading partners will have a greater impact on the US than on China, India or any other country that does business with Russia.

Meanwhile, Zelensky’s short-lived attempt to shut down anti-corruption organisations closing in on his cronies has been a big wake up call, not just for European political leaders and journalists, but more importantly, citizens.

Faced with admitting defeat in Ukraine and throwing Zelensky under the bus and continuing with an ineffective foreign policy towards Russia, I judge that Starmer, VdL and others will keep kicking the peace can down the road.

Yet every day the war continues, Ukraine loses more ground and more lives on the battlefield, and slides further towards the status of a failed state. My optimism remains low that the war will end in 2025.

July 29, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Video | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Pentagon Eyes Ukraine as Drone Testing Ground After Alaska Failures

Sputnik – 28.07.2025

WASHINGTON – The US Department of Defense (DOD) views Ukraine to be a potential polygon for drone testing after it ran into difficulties during the June trials in Alaska, Defense News reported, citing sources in Pentagon.

Earlier this summer, five US companies underwent drone testing in Alaska to see if their prototypes were able to withstand GPS disruption and if they were ready to transition to the military services.

“Providing an opportunity for these companies to assess their products in a contested environment against a notional threat is really valuable, one, for the DOD to assess their product in that way. But it’s also important for the companies to see where they’re succeeding or where they’re falling short so they can make tweaks and have a better product,” one of the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) officials told Defense News.

Commercial companies, especially small ones, do not have access to test spaces that are similar to field conditions, so the Pentagon needs to provide such conditions if it wants to achieve new technologies fast and efficiently, the report said.

“If we want to succeed, we have to embed engineers with warfighters, and we have to be out in the field testing. We have to do it all the time,” DIU’s Trent Emeneker was quoted as saying by Defense News.

To solve this issue, Emeneker proposed testing drones on the Ukrainian front lines, adding that “there’s no better place in the world” to do it. However, according to the report, it is difficult for the Department of Defense to officially send start-ups to Ukraine for in-country testing after US President Donald Trump assumed office, and the political tension between the current administration and the Ukrainian government increased.

On Friday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he had reached an agreement with US President Donald Trump on the supply of Ukrainian-made drones worth $10-30 billion to the United States.

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

Russia’s Laser Weapon Supremacy: Short Guide

Sputnik – 27.07.2025

While the US and its European pals can only dream about developing laser weaponry, Russia is already light years ahead of them.

Unlike kinetic weapons, lasers do not use ammo and do not require reloading, only a power source, Russian military analyst Alexander Artamonov explained to Sputnik.

Lasers can also display a better rate of fire and would be much harder to evade than, for example, a missile.

“It is more efficient in terms of cost and the rate of fire, depending on the nature of the target you want to hit, and in terms of the time it takes to hit the target,” Artamonov remarked.

Nowadays, Russia, the United States and China run laser weapon programs. When it comes to actual working laser weapons, only Russia can present tangible proof.

Peresvet is a Russian mobile laser system designed to ‘blind’ enemy optical and optical-electronic surveillance systems, including drones, reconnaissance aircraft and even satellites. It has already been adopted by the Russian Armed Forces.

“Peresvet lasers are currently deployed not only in the Moscow region but on the front line as well,” Artamonov said, referring to the Ukrainian conflict zone.

Meanwhile, the US simply lacks the technology and know-how – like, for example, a sufficiently powerful and compact power source – to achieve comparable results.

“They conducted tests in the Indian Ocean. The US lasers perform poorly in water mist – under adverse weather conditions, that is,” Artamonov said.

Simply put, Russia’s Western rivals cannot field actual laser weapons whereas Russia is already developing more advanced and deadly military lasers.

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

Tehran’s new war plan: Build an anti-NATO

Russian FM Sergey Lavrov attends a meeting with foreign ministers of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in Beijing, China. © Sputnik / Russian Foreign Ministry
By Farhad Ibragimov | RT | July 27, 2025

What if the next global security pact wasn’t forged in Brussels or Washington – but in Beijing, with Iran at the table?

This is no longer a theoretical question. At the mid-July meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Council of Foreign Ministers in China, Iran made it clear: Tehran now views the SCO not just as a regional forum, but as a potential counterweight to NATO. In doing so, it signaled a profound strategic pivot – away from an outdated Western-dominated system and toward an emerging Eurasian order.

The summit highlighted the increasing resilience of multilateral Eurasian cooperation in the face of growing global turbulence. Russia was represented by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who also met with Chinese leader Xi Jinping – an encounter that underscored the strength of the Moscow-Beijing axis. On the sidelines, Lavrov held bilateral meetings with the foreign ministers of China, Pakistan, India, and notably, Iran. His talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi focused on diplomatic solutions to the nuclear issue and emphasized deepening strategic coordination.

The Iranian side used the platform with purpose. Araghchi expressed his appreciation for the SCO’s solidarity amid Israeli aggression and stressed that Iran views the organization not as symbolic, but as a practical mechanism for regional unity and global positioning.

A platform that works – despite the skeptics

India’s full participation also contradicted predictions in Western circles that geopolitical tensions would paralyze the SCO. Instead, New Delhi reaffirmed its commitment to the platform. The implication is clear: unlike NATO, where unity depends on compliance with a central authority, the SCO has proven flexible enough to accommodate diverse interests while building consensus.

For Russia, the SCO remains a cornerstone of its Eurasian strategy. Moscow serves as a balancing force – linking China with South and Central Asia, and now, with an assertive Iran. Russia’s approach is pragmatic, multi-vector, and geared toward creating a new geopolitical equilibrium.

Iran’s strategic breakout

The heart of the summit was Abbas Araghchi’s speech – an assertive and legally grounded critique of Israeli and American actions. He cited Article 2, Section 4 of the UN Charter, denounced attacks on Iran’s IAEA-monitored nuclear facilities, and invoked Resolution 487 of the UN Security Council. His message: Western aggression has no legal cover, and no amount of narrative control can change that.

But beyond condemnation, Araghchi delivered a concrete roadmap to strengthen the SCO as a vehicle for collective security and sovereignty:

  • A collective security body to respond to external aggression, sabotage, and terrorism

  • A permanent coordination mechanism for documenting and countering subversive acts

  • A Center for Sanctions Resistance, to shield member economies from unilateral Western measures

  • A Shanghai Security Forum for defense and intelligence coordination

  • Enhanced cultural and media cooperation to counter cognitive and information warfare

These are not rhetorical gestures – they are blueprints for institutional transformation. Iran is operationalizing a new security doctrine built on multipolarity, mutual defense, and resistance to hybrid threats.

SCO vs. NATO: Two models, two futures

While NATO is structured around a rigid hierarchy dominated by Washington, the SCO embodies a post-hegemonic vision: sovereignty, equality, and civilizational plurality. Its member states represent over 40% of the global population, possess vast industrial capacities, and share a collective desire to break the unipolar mold.

Tehran’s bet is clear: the SCO offers not just a geopolitical shelter, but a platform for advancing a new global logic – one rooted in strategic autonomy, not dependency.

The sophistication and clarity of Araghchi’s initiatives suggest that Tehran is preparing for the long game. Behind closed doors, the summit likely featured discussions – formal and informal – about deepening SCO institutionalism, perhaps even rethinking the organization’s mandate.

Araghchi made that vision explicit: “The SCO is gradually strengthening its position on the world stage… It must adopt a more active, independent, and structured role.” That’s diplomatic code for institutional realignment.

The West responds – predictably

The Western response was immediate. Within days of Iran’s proposals, the EU imposed new sanctions on eight individuals and one Iranian organization – citing vague claims of “serious human rights violations.” Israel, by contrast, faced no new penalties.

It is geopolitical signaling. Tehran’s push to turn the SCO into an action-oriented bloc is seen in Brussels and Washington as a direct threat to the current order. The more coherent and proactive the SCO becomes, the harsher the pressure will grow.

But that pressure proves Iran’s point. The rules-based order is no longer rules-based – it is power-based. For countries like Iran, the only path to sovereignty is through multilateral defiance and integration on their own terms.

The stakes ahead

Iran is not improvising. It is positioning itself as a co-architect of a post-Western security order. Its vision for the SCO goes beyond survival – it is about shaping an international system where no single bloc can dominate through sanctions, information warfare, or coercive diplomacy.

This strategy has implications far beyond Tehran. If the SCO embraces Iran’s proposals and begins to institutionalize them, we could be witnessing the early formation of the 21st-century’s first true alternative to NATO.

The West may dismiss this as fantasy – but in Eurasia, the future is already being drafted. And this time, it’s not happening in English.

Farhad Ibragimov – lecturer at the Faculty of Economics at RUDN University, visiting lecturer at the Institute of Social Sciences of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

July 27, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Europe’s addiction to sanctions is terminal

By Samuel Geddes | Al Mayadeen | July 26, 2025

It has been said there are two kinds of European countries: small countries and those that have not yet realized they are small. As of mid-2025, it appears most of the continent has yet to reach this realization.

More than three years into the grinding attritional war between Russia and Ukraine, the European Union, having finally secured President Trump’s support for its maximum pressure campaign against Moscow, announced its most severe round of sanctions to date. In this 18th round, the EU expanded its blacklist of Russia’s so-called ‘shadow-fleet,’ used to export energy, to 444 vessels, denying operators access to European ports as well as insurance services. EU-member states were also prohibited from any dealings with a further 22 Russian banks, bringing the total to 44, to strangle Moscow’s financial channels to the outside world.

Alongside expanded export bans on ‘dual-use’ technologies, Brussels sanctioned entities in China, Türkiye, and 11 other countries for assisting Russia to circumvent sanctions and further lowered the price-cap on Urals crude oil, aiming to choke off the entry of Russian energy, in any form, from entering the bloc.

Besides the impressive hubris involved in declaring that Europe, as an importing region, will dictate the price it and other customers will pay for Russian energy, last weeks’ measures serve only to make permanent the long-term damage to its own economic viability, while Russia simply pivots to other buyers.

Parallel to the drafting of the latest sanctions salvo, the EU’s two largest members, Germany and France, alongside the UK, also pursued a maximum hostility campaign against another crucial energy exporter. Rather than condemning the 12-day war launched against Iran by “Israel”, European leaders, German Chancellor Merz in particular, chose to give the game away entirely, announcing their support for Israeli aggression because it was doing their “dirty work” (undermining the Islamic Republic) for them.

Upon the beginning of a ceasefire, the French and British foreign ministers, as if taunting Tehran after its nuclear facilities and scientists had been attacked, threatened to initiate the “snapback” mechanism of the defunct nuclear agreement, the JCPOA, if Tehran retaliated. The “snapback” mechanism would enable any of the signatory countries in the JCPOA to unilaterally trigger the reimposition of UN sanctions against Iran, which had been lifted under its terms post-2015. As the JCPOA itself will expire by October, the window for European states to trigger the snapback is closing.

Talks between Iran and the E3 were announced this week to take place in Istanbul over exactly this issue. Given Europe’s enthusiasm for compensating for its shrinking global clout with economic warfare, as well as pursuing American [Israeli] geopolitical goals ahead of its own, the likelihood of all three states foregoing the chance to “punish” Tehran for adhering to the agreement they signed on to seems a fading possibility.

If Europe ultimately follows through on its snapback threat, it will in a matter of months have destroyed any possible rapprochement with two states who could realistically have helped it out of its self-inflicted economic blood-loss. While no doubt damaging to both Moscow and Tehran, it will have solidified in the minds of both the necessity of forming economic routes and institutions outside the control of Western states.

The International North-South Economic Corridor, connecting Russia to the Indian Ocean via Iran, is the most prominent example of such cooperation. Since its effective launch in 2022 at the onset of operations in Ukraine, cargo traffic in energy, food, and other raw materials along the route has risen year-on-year, nearly hitting 27 million tons in 2024. As well as bilateral trade, the route’s growth has been fueled by intensified exchange between Russia and India. The latter is largely ignoring economic sanctions on Moscow, with two-way trade expected to approach $100 billion by 2030. The INSTC also crucially grants land-locked Central Asian states much-needed maritime access, magnifying regional buy-in.

The reimposing of UN-sanctions, along with the threat of secondary measures against third-party states could ironically create the kind of space for Chinese involvement with the region, leveraging INSTC’s points of interoperability with Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative.

Whatever course it takes, the leaders of Europe still seem not to have realized either the declining impact of their actions, nor the long-term negative consequences they will have for the continent. The last five centuries of economic history undoubtedly belonged to Europe, but Brussels’ seemingly terminal lack of vision writes it out of the coming chapter being authored in Asia.

July 26, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , , , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine War Will Now Be Resolved on Battlefield

John Mearsheimer, Alexander Mercouris & Glenn Diesen
Glenn Diesen | July 25, 2025

I had the great pleasure of speaking with John Mearsheimer and Alexander Mercouris about developments in Ukraine. The Ukrainian frontlines are falling apart with greater speed and NATO’s recent plans of rearming Ukraine will not be able to turn the tide. Yet, the NATO countries have not sought to end the war through a peace agreement and instead continue to push for an “unconditional ceasefire” without a political settlement. Without an agreement to end NATO expansion, Russia will impose its own settlement through a military victory. Such an “ugly peace” will not benefit anyone.

July 25, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Video | , , , | Leave a comment

German foreign minister makes new threat against Russia

RT | July 24, 2025

Ukraine will soon have the capability to strike targets inside Russia, German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said on Wednesday, raising the prospect of Berlin supplying long-range weapons that Moscow has warned could escalate the conflict.

Speaking to Die Zeit, Wadephul did not name specific systems, but appeared to reference the Taurus missile – a long-range weapon capable of hitting targets up to 500km away, including inside Russian territory.

”Ukraine will also have the means to strike back into Russian territory,” he said. “However, we will not reveal to [Russian President Vladimir] Putin… which weapons systems we are providing to Ukraine.”

Wadephul added that he had been cautious about weighing in on the Taurus debate, citing the missile’s technical complexity as the reason for the delay in coming to a decision.

Moscow has repeatedly warned that supplying Taurus missiles would make Germany a direct party to the conflict. Russian officials have long criticized Western arms deliveries to Ukraine, saying they prolong hostilities and risk a broader confrontation.

Berlin has resisted supplying the Taurus system to Kiev for months. Former Chancellor Olaf Scholz repeatedly blocked the transfer, citing a risk of escalation. His successor, Friedrich Merz, has since stated that no decision has been taken on the matter.

Since taking office in May, Merz has adopted a hardline stance toward Russia. Earlier this month, he declared that diplomatic options in the Ukraine conflict had been “exhausted” and reaffirmed his commitment to arming Ukraine. In response, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov accused him of fueling escalation by abandoning diplomacy.

German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius reiterated earlier this month that Berlin would not send Taurus missiles to Ukraine.

Senior German General Christian Freuding said recently, however, that Ukraine would receive its first batch of long-range missiles financed by Berlin before the end of July. He did not specify the type, but suggested that Ukrainian forces consider striking Russian airfields and weapons factories to relieve pressure at the front.

July 24, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | 1 Comment

NATO Expansion — The Root Cause of the War in Ukraine

By Larry C. Johnson | SONAR21 | July 23, 2025 

I know there is a lot of interest in the Jeffrey Epstein story and the new revelations from Tulsi Gabbard about Barack Obama and his team’s efforts to fan the flames of Russiagate. I have been all over the Russiagate matter since 2017. Here is the link to a piece I published on December 18, 2018 with the nifty title, The Trump Coup Is a Threat to Our Republic. I am glad the information is finally coming out, but I knew this seven years ago. What took them so long? While Tulsi’s revelations are legit, I think she is releasing this information now to distract attention away from the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. Trump is getting killed in the polls — reportedly he is down 40% points on this issue.

For now, I want to focus on the war in Ukraine, i.e., the Special Military Operation (SMO), and clarify Russia’s motivation and objective for ending that conflict. We keep hearing the phrase, root causes. Russia wants the West to address the root causes. Ok, what are those? I think it is pretty simple — read the draft treaty that Vladimir Putin presented to Joe Biden in December 2021 and then you will understand. To spare you reading the entire document (I have linked to it in the next paragraph) I am going to summarize the key points.

The draft “Treaty between the United States of America and the Russian Federation on Security Guarantees” that Russia presented to Biden in December 2021, outlined a series of far-reaching security demands, reflecting Russia’s intent to reshape the post-Cold War security architecture in Europe. Here are the key points from the published text:

  1. No Further NATO Expansion
    • The US would commit to preventing further enlargement of NATO, specifically barring Ukraine and other former Soviet republics from joining the alliance.
    • This also included a ban on NATO military activity in Ukraine, Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia.
  2. No Deployment of US Forces or Weapons in Certain Countries
    • The treaty would forbid the US from deploying military forces or weaponry in countries that joined NATO after May 1997 (such as Poland, the Baltic states, Romania, and others).
    • NATO infrastructure would have to be rolled back to pre-1997 locations.
  3. Ban on Intermediate-Range Missiles
    • Both Russia and the US would be prohibited from deploying ground-launched intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles outside their national territories, as well as in areas of their own territory where such missiles could strike the other’s territory.
  4. Limit Military Maneuvers and Activities
    • Limits on heavy bombers and surface warship deployments: Both sides would restrict the operation of heavy bombers and warships in areas from which they could strike targets on the other’s territory. (Note: In September 2020, Trump’s DOD authorized a B-52 to fly along the Ukrainian coast in the Black Sea.)
  5. Nuclear Weapons Restrictions
    • All nuclear weapons would be confined to each country’s own national territory. Neither side could deploy nuclear weapons outside its borders. (Note: US just sent a batch of nukes to England.)
    • Withdrawal of all US nuclear weapons from Europe and elimination of existing infrastructure for their deployment abroad.
  6. Mutual Security Pledge
    • Each side would agree not to take any security measures that could undermine the core security interests of the other party.
  7. Establishment of Consultation Mechanisms
    • Proposals included the renewal or strengthening of direct consultation mechanisms, such as the NATO–Russia Council and the establishment of a crisis hotline.
  8. Indivisibility of Security Principle
    • Included a reaffirmation that the security of one state cannot come at the expense of the security of another, formalizing Russia’s interpretation of the “indivisible security” concept.

Instead of engaging the Russians in negotiations on these matters, Biden’s Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, essentially told Russia’s Foreign Minister Lavrov, that Russia could take the treaty and shove it up its own ass. So much for diplomacy. Had the US agreed to discuss the draft treaty with the Russians, the SMO would not have been launched in February 2022. But that is the critical point… The US had no intention of seeking a peaceful settlement with Russia. For example, the CIA, using DOD cover, had already invested tens of millions of dollars in bio labs scattered throughout Ukraine. According to Russia’s Ministry of Defense, it recovered documents that identified a network of 30 US-funded biological laboratories in Ukraine that were conducting research on dangerous pathogens as part of a bioweapons program. Ukraine was nothing more than a pawn in a Western game of strategic chess, with the ultimate goal of wrecking Russia and taking control of its natural resources. The West was not ready to quit that game.

Until NATO’s threat to Russia is taken off the table, Russia’s war with the West will continue… It represents an existential threat to the Russian people. The talks in Turkey between Russia and Ukraine do nothing to address or resolve the root causes.

July 24, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Istanbul Talks: Russia’s Constructive Stance vs. Ukraine’s Theater

Sputnik – 24.07.2025

Russia’s proposal demonstrated a constructive approach focused on a real political and diplomatic settlement, deputy director of research at the Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy Dmitry Suslov tells Sputnik.

Ukraine, meanwhile, must address the issue of the illegal detention of Russian civilians taken hostage in the Kursk region.

“These peaceful Russian residents, who were illegally taken to Ukrainian territory or, more precisely, are currently being illegally detained, are in fact being treated as hostages. If this is the case, then the Kiev regime is once again proving its terrorist nature,” Suslov noted.

Ukraine’s demands for a leaders’ summit and a ceasefire only prove their unwillingness to negotiate. Their goal is to portray Russia as uncooperative to the US president.

“The Ukrainian side has once again shown that its goal is not a political and diplomatic settlement but rather an attempt to portray Russia negatively in the eyes of the West, including Donald Trump,” Suslov added.

July 24, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , | 1 Comment

Trump’s weapons plan for Ukraine bound to fail

By Ahmed Adel | July 24, 2025

The idea of resuming the supply of weapons to Ukraine began with applause in the West, but was followed by shock as it turned out that many countries in Europe are not ready for various reasons, either because they themselves do not have the weapons or they openly admit that they do not have the money for such an adventure.

United States President Donald Trump recently said that the Europeans will take on the burden of sending weapons to Kiev by purchasing them from the US, and as a start, they will send the Patriot missile defense systems.

The problem is that there are neither as many Patriot systems nor as many cruise missiles as Ukraine would need to change the catastrophic situation on the front. Some Europeans have caught on to this issue, but in general, most are unwilling to go to Ukraine militarily, to wage war and fight against the Russians, but they are all ready to verbally support it.

Patriot systems are not a miracle weapon that will mark a turning point in the war. Although some analysts have claimed that the Patriot is capable of shooting down some Russian missiles, the system is not capable of intercepting a hypersonic missile traveling at 12,000 kilometers per hour.

Even the US itself does not have enough Patriot missiles after transferring a significant number to Israel. As a result, the total stock of these missiles in the US is 25% depleted, which is why Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth has decided, on his own initiative, to halt deliveries of these missiles to Kiev. Moreover, it takes between one and two months to produce one missile.

An additional factor is the price: it is a huge and expensive scale of construction that costs nearly $2 billion, and each rocket costs an average of $1.5 to $2 million.

Another problem is the training of personnel to operate the Patriot systems. Each battery has 92 crew members, and with 17 units, in addition to a reserve, Ukraine will face difficulties in finding so many personnel. Furthermore, training for one Patriot system according to NATO standards takes a year and a half without evaluation. It is also worth noting that in 2023, Kiev sent trained crews to the infantry, but many of them were subsequently lost.

At the same time, Radar stations are not mobile and are often targeted by drones, rendering them ineffective.

Finally, the American logistics system means that if a Patriot malfunction or maintenance cannot be performed in the field, it must be packed, transferred from Ukraine to Rzeszów, Poland, and then loaded onto cargo planes and sent to the US.

Previously, the F-16 fighter jets, as well as the Leopard and Abrams tanks, were also praised as “miracle weapons” in Ukraine. Now, no one mentions that Russia has better weapons that are doing their job on the front to deadly effect.

Europe’s financial situation is a weak point in the plan to send weapons to Ukraine, with many European countries refusing to participate in Trump’s project to purchase American weapons for Kiev. Italy openly admitted that it did not have the necessary funds.

The European Union is on a rather gloomy downward trajectory, following several blows, including the migrant wave, COVID-19, and the Ukrainian crisis, and is clearly starting to lag behind the BRICS and G20 countries, which have several comparative advantages over it.

Brussels lacks relevant resources. Russia has the largest resources among all the power centers, the US has somewhat fewer, and China has even fewer. European military power is dwarfed compared to that of the US, Russia, and China.

At the same time, Russia is a prominent member of intercontinental economic alliances, including BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. European goods are becoming more expensive and less competitive, yet they want to give more money for weapons to Ukraine.

Trump’s entire plan is a game in which, as a businessman, he tries to make the best possible deal for the US. He is aware of the limited scope of the American role in Ukraine, which will have an inglorious end. The billionaire is realistic and understands that no success can be achieved and that time is not on Ukraine’s side.

In general, things are not going well for the West because Europe is falling even faster, and Trump is facing several ambitious world powers that possess real spheres of influence. He wants to play a subtle game where there is no clear winner. But he does not want a repeat of Saigon or Afghanistan, where American collaborators were grabbing onto departing helicopters. Trump wants to avoid those humiliating scenes and make a deal, showing collegiality with the Russian president as much as possible.

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

July 24, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , | 1 Comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »