Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Western strategists launch a new war doctrine against Eurasian powers

By Lucas Leiroz | VT Uncensored Foreign Policy | July 7, 2025

In recent months, a wave of publications by Western think tanks and military-affiliated media has revealed a significant shift in how the West views conflict with global powers like Russia and China.

Institutions such as the RAND Corporation, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), and Military Review have laid out what they consider the foundations of future warfare.

The core idea is no longer centered on direct military confrontation but on a prolonged, multidimensional hybrid war.

This “war of the future” unfolds across three main domains: information and psychological operations, cyberspace, and the economic sphere. Western strategists emphasize that superiority in artificial intelligence and unmanned systems will be decisive. For the US and NATO, achieving dominance in these areas is presented as the key to maintaining global leadership and containing strategic rivals.

This form of warfare is not expected to deliver fast results. On the contrary, it is framed as a “long game” of exhaustion, designed to weaken the opponent from within – by destabilizing their economy, reshaping their information space, and psychologically demoralizing both their population and political elites. RAND analysts stress that this type of conflict requires patience and the ability to sustain socio-economic costs over time. In fact, Western governments are already preparing their populations to accept such costs, justifying austerity measures and declining living standards through the narrative of a moral confrontation with so-called “authoritarian regimes.”

This strategic shift is largely a result of the failure of the West’s approach in Ukraine. The initial plan — to arm and support Ukraine as a proxy force capable of delivering a strategic defeat to Russia — has collapsed. The policy of militarizing Ukraine and turning it into a geopolitical tool against Moscow has led the U.S. and its allies into a dead end. Western analysts now admit that a military victory over Russia via Ukraine is unattainable. This realization has pushed Western planners to reassess the very concept of conflict, moving from direct confrontation to psychological and technological operations that target the internal cohesion of rival nations.

According to this new doctrine, the goal is to shape the perception of the future within Russian society — to paint a picture of inevitable decline, to spread doubt about Russia’s ability to compete militarily and economically with the West, and to generate disorientation among its elites. The West seeks to implant the idea that Russia is permanently behind — technologically inferior, globally isolated, and incapable of catching up. As noted by analysts at RUSI, these narratives are deliberately crafted for mass consumption, with the aim of weakening the social and psychological fabric of Russian society.

Central to this strategy is the belief that information superiority will define victory in the 21st century. Publications from CSIS and RAND explicitly state that “who controls the narrative, wins the war.” Future conflicts, they argue, will be fought not with tanks breaking through lines but through sensory and cognitive dominance — by disorienting the opponent, manipulating their perception of events, and accelerating decision-making cycles through artificial intelligence. This is not just about warfare; it is about psychological supremacy.

To implement this model, the full resource potential of the collective West must be mobilized. Western publications emphasize that artificial intelligence will not only support information operations but may replace traditional forms of military conflict entirely. AI-based propaganda, social engineering campaigns, and autonomous digital operations could become the primary weapons of influence. RAND’s vision also includes a technological race with China, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region, where AI superiority is expected to define the balance of power.

However, despite its polished surface, this new hybrid war doctrine suffers from serious flaws. It neglects historical experience and cultural realities. Russia, in particular, has repeatedly shown the ability to endure and adapt during prolonged crises. Even in the 1990s, when pro-Western forces controlled much of the country’s media and political structure, Russian society maintained its cultural identity and commitment to traditional values. Western analysts seem to overlook this fundamental resilience. The failure of Western sanctions is a clear example. Instead of collapsing, the Russian economy adapted to the conditions of modern conflict, restructured itself rapidly, and even entered a phase of military-industrial expansion.

In fact, despite the partial militarization of its economy, Russia has achieved a surprising advantage over the West in certain critical areas. It has surpassed NATO countries in the volume of military production, particularly in drones and high-precision systems. Developments such as the Lancet UAVs, the Kinzhal hypersonic missile, and advancements in satellite technologies have placed Russia ahead of Ukraine, even though the latter was initially supported by a powerful Western-Turkish alliance in the drone sector. Within less than two years, Russia reversed the battlefield dynamics, demonstrating that technological evolution can occur even under heavy sanctions.

This leads to a critical question: if the new Western strategy is so effective, why does it rely so heavily on media hype and theoretical justifications with little practical evidence? Much of the Western enthusiasm around hybrid war appears driven not by strategic necessity but by the interests of the military-industrial complex. Think tanks and defense contractors stand to benefit immensely from the shift to AI-based warfare, digital infrastructure, and cyber-command funding. The political class uses the narrative of a “new generation war” to justify budget increases for the defense sector while cutting public services and suppressing dissent.

The real function of this hybrid war doctrine is to protect the interests of a transnational elite. Under the guise of fighting global threats like Russia, China, Iran, and others, Western governments are redistributing wealth upward — channeling public money into the hands of military contractors and think tanks. Ordinary citizens are asked to sacrifice for “freedom” while their real wages stagnate and living conditions deteriorate. The supposed urgency of confronting the “autocratic other” becomes a smokescreen for domestic failures and economic mismanagement.

The media’s role in this operation is essential. Just as the Western press exaggerated the likelihood of Russia’s defeat in Ukraine, it now inflates the potential of hybrid war and AI supremacy. But the track record of these predictions is poor. The same experts who promised a quick Ukrainian victory are now calling for decades-long psychological warfare — a clear sign that the original plan has failed.

In conclusion, the West’s new hybrid warfare strategy reflects more of a tactical retreat than a breakthrough. It acknowledges that traditional methods have failed, particularly in Ukraine, and attempts to replace lost battlefield momentum with psychological, economic, and technological pressure. But the fundamental assumptions are flawed: that narratives can break national will, that AI can replace strategy, and that propaganda can deliver victory. These beliefs serve primarily to sustain the Western war economy and its elites, rather than offer any real prospect of success. In trying to win a war of perception, the West may once again lose the war of reality.

Lucas Leiroz is a member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert. You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

July 9, 2025 Posted by | Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

France names ‘red line’ in Ukraine conflict

RT | July 9, 2025

Demilitarizing Ukraine and leaving it without NATO membership, as Russia demands, is a red line for Europe, French Defense Minister Sebastien Lecornu told weekly magazine Valeurs Actuelles.

Moscow insists that any resolution to the conflict must comprehensively address its security concerns. Russian officials want Ukraine to acknowledge the new territorial realities on the ground, agree to neutral status, guarantee that its Russian-speaking population is not discriminated against, and undergo demilitarization and denazification. As of now, all of these demands have been rejected by Kiev.

In an interview, published on Wednesday, Lecornu argued that Europe cannot allow Ukraine to be left without a functioning army while denying it NATO membership.

“Our absolute red line is the demilitarization of Ukraine,” the minister said. “We must be coherent. One cannot refuse Ukraine entry into NATO and at the same time accept that it no longer has an army,” he added.

Ukraine formally applied for fast-track NATO membership in September of 2022, months after the conflict with Russia escalated. While Western nations initially supported Kiev’s bid, no timeline for accession has been set. Meanwhile, support for Kiev’s bid has been eroded by mounting military setbacks and shifting US policy.

Pentagon Inspector General Robert Storch reported last November that “corruption continues to complicate” Ukraine’s efforts to join NATO, citing multiple scandals in its Defense Ministry. US President Donald Trump, who is pushing for a peace deal with Moscow, has ruled out NATO membership for Kiev.

Russia views NATO’s eastward expansion as a direct threat to national security and has indicated that Ukraine’s ambition to join the US-led military bloc was one of the key issues that triggered the current conflict. President Vladimir Putin stressed last month that Moscow’s concerns had consistently been ignored.

Putin also said that Ukraine had agreed to military limitations during the 2022 Istanbul talks, including troop numbers and weapons restrictions, but later withdrew from the deal to seek military victory with Western backing. He added that now, instead of a “peaceful settlement to this issue,” Moscow has been forced to resolve the task – namely, demilitarization – by military means.

Speaking ahead of this week’s meeting of the Western-led ‘coalition of the willing’ – a UK-French initiative to deploy troops in Ukraine after a truce is reached with Russia – Lecornu said the group will urge Kiev to “rethink” the future shape of its army, noting “opportunities” for the French defense industry.

Moscow has accused the West of encouraging Kiev to fight “to the last Ukrainian” and maintains that no amount of military aid will reverse Kiev’s fortunes on the battlefield. It has also repeatedly warned that any foreign forces fighting alongside Ukrainian troops will be treated as legitimate targets, while warning this could escalate the conflict.

July 9, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Russia declares Yale University ‘undesirable’

RT | July 9, 2025

Russia has banned Yale University from operating within its territory, accusing the Connecticut-based institution of meddling in domestic affairs and attempting to destabilize its economy.

The Prosecutor General’s Office added Yale to the list of “undesirable” organizations on Tuesday. “The university’s activities are aimed at violating the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation, enforcing an international blockade, undermining its economy, and destabilizing the country’s socio-economic and political situation,” the office said in a statement.

Prosecutors claim that the Maurice R. Greenberg World Fellows Program at the Yale Jackson School of Global Affairs has been used to “train opposition leaders from foreign countries.” Russian opposition figure Aleksey Navalny and his close associate Leonid Volkov participated in the program in 2010 and 2018, respectively.

Navalny died in prison in February 2024 while serving a lengthy sentence on extremism charges. In 2021, a Russian court banned Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation (FBK) under extremism laws. Last month, Volkov, who lives outside Russia, was sentenced in absentia to 18 years in prison for his activities as an FBK leader.

Prosecutors alleged that FBK used “the knowledge and techniques” acquired at Yale to “escalate protest activities in Russia.” Prosecutors also claimed that Yale has worked to create a “legal framework” for using frozen Russian assets to fund the Ukrainian army. Moscow regards the freezing and seizure of its assets related to the Ukraine conflict as illegal and tantamount to theft.

Since 2022, Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, a professor at the Yale School of Management, and his team have campaigned to pressure foreign companies to cut ties with Moscow and advocated for tougher sanctions on Russia. In a 2024 Fortune article, Sonnenfeld and Steven Tian, research director of the Yale Chief Executive Leadership Institute, credited themselves with helping the US Treasury design sanctions targeting Russia’s oil trade.

July 9, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

3 killed in ‘barbaric’ Ukrainian drone strike on public beach – governor

RT | July 8, 2025

A Ukrainian drone struck a public beach in the city of Kursk in western Russia on Tuesday, killing three people and injuring seven others, regional governor Aleksandr Khinshtein said.

The victims, including two women and a five-year-old boy, were hospitalized with burns and shrapnel wounds, Khinshtein wrote on Telegram. At least one is in critical condition.

Ukrainian troops deliberately targeted civilians in a “barbaric” attack as people gathered on the beach to mark the Day of Family, Love and Fidelity, a holiday celebrated on July 8, the governor said.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova condemned the strike, criticizing the countries providing military aid to Ukraine. “Those supplying weapons to the Kiev regime should understand that they are being used to kill children,” she wrote on Telegram.

The Kursk region, which borders Ukraine, has frequently come under drone and missile attacks since the conflict erupted in 2022. Earlier on Tuesday, a drone struck a house in the village of Karyzh, injuring one person.

Khinshtein added early Wednesday morning that two more people were injured in the city of Rylsk, where Ukrainian drones damaged an infectious disease center and an EMS station, and caused a fire at an office building of a farming complex.

In August 2024, Ukraine carried out a large-scale incursion into the region, capturing dozens of villages and the border town of Sudzha. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky said the offensive aimed to gain leverage during negotiations with Moscow. However, the Ukrainian gamble ultimately failed, as Russian forces had fully liberated the entire Kursk region by April.

July 9, 2025 Posted by | War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

EU Seeks to Plug Ukraine’s $19Bln Budget Gap in 2026

Sputnik – 08.07.2025

The European Union is urgently exploring options to cover Ukraine’s $19 billion budget deficit in 2026, including by using frozen Russian state assets, as US support for Kiev continues to decline and a ceasefire remains out of reach, the media reported on Tuesday, citing sources familiar with the matter.

A senior European official involved in discussions with Kiev told the newspaper that many who anticipated a ceasefire agreement in 2025 had to reassess costs, acknowledging a financing “hole” despite efforts to minimize it.

The European Commission has been forced to adjust Ukraine-related spending 2025. A European diplomat told the newspaper that the EU intends to ensure that Kiev’s needs are covered before winter, especially given uncertainty over renewed US support for Kiev.

The commission is reviewing a G7 proposal to provide military aid to Ukraine via bilateral grants, recorded as “off-budget external transfer” but counted toward national defense spending targets.

Another option involves leveraging the existing $50-billion G7 loan scheme, funded by proceeds generated by frozen Russian assets. Additionally, countries are exploring reinvesting Russian assets into riskier categories to maximize returns.

After the start of the Russian military operation in Ukraine, the European Union and G7 countries froze almost half of Russia’s foreign exchange reserves, totaling nearly 300 billion euros ($347 billion). More than 200 billion euros are in the EU, mainly in the accounts of Euroclear, a Brussels-based clearing house.

The Russian Foreign Ministry has repeatedly condemned the freezing of Russia’s central bank money in Europe as theft. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that Moscow could respond by withholding assets held in Russia by Western countries.

July 8, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Ukrainian attacks on civilians in Donbass reflect Kiev’s desperation

By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | July 7, 2025

The escalation of Ukrainian attacks on civilian areas in Donbass reveals not only the criminal nature of Kiev’s conduct but also the regime’s growing desperation in the face of the Russian forces’ imminent victory. In a new chapter of this terror strategy, recent bombings hit residential neighborhoods in the cities of Donetsk and Gorlovka, killing innocent civilians, destroying essential infrastructure, and with no military value present at the sites.

According to the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation, an attack that took place in the Petrovsky district of Donetsk was carried out by Ukrainian armed formations using, apparently, American-made HIMARS rockets. Fragments found at the site point to high-precision cluster missiles, which are currently undergoing technical analysis. The attack targeted a peaceful residential area with no troops or military equipment present, killing four civilians who were in a passenger car as part of a funeral procession. Nearby houses were also hit, causing significant material damage, with the number of victims possibly increasing as investigations continue.

A few days earlier, in the Voroshilovsky district, also in Donetsk, another deliberate attack struck exclusively civilian areas. The Russian investigation states that the missiles used were Storm Shadows – long-range cruise missiles supplied to the Ukrainian army by the United Kingdom. Among the targets were a public market, a bank branch, residential buildings, and even civilian vehicles in transit. One woman died at the scene, and a child was seriously injured. According to eyewitnesses, although air defense systems intercepted some missiles, others managed to hit the urban area.

On the same day, the city of Gorlovka – one of the most important urban centers in the Donetsk People’s Republic – was hit by an aerial assault carried out by Ukrainian explosive drones. One building was completely destroyed, while at least a dozen others suffered varying degrees of structural damage. In addition to residential buildings, healthcare units, pharmacies, and essential service establishments were also affected, demonstrating that the targets chosen were clearly civilian in nature. This pattern of bombardment reinforces the perception that the intention behind these actions is to provoke social disorder and weaken Russian administrative control in the region.

It is noteworthy that this intensification of attacks coincided with the official confirmation of the full retaking of the Lugansk People’s Republic by Russian forces. With the complete withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from the area, a prolonged period of instability has come to an end – a development strongly celebrated by the local population. However, this achievement appears to have triggered a hostile response from Kiev, which began venting its frustration on the population centers of Donetsk, still close to the front lines and thus more vulnerable to such offensives.

Faced with its inability to reverse Russia’s military gains on the battlefield, the Ukrainian government has adopted a tactic of reprisal against civilians – a form of psychological and political pressure aimed at halting the Russian advance through fear and social exhaustion. However, this approach has produced results contrary to Kiev’s expectations. The local communities are increasingly aligned with Moscow’s military efforts, realizing that only the complete defeat of the Kiev regime can ensure lasting peace.

Russia’s response has been both strategic and proportional. Precision strikes have targeted key elements of Kiev’s operational capacity, including logistical depots and command centers, even in areas far from the contact line, such as the Ukrainian capital. These actions undermine the enemy’s war infrastructure and limit its ability to continue offensives against civilian targets.

Ultimately, the facts point to an unavoidable conclusion: the worsening of attacks against the Donbass population is a direct reflection of the Ukrainian government’s military and political weakness. Far from intimidating the residents of the liberated regions, these brutal actions only strengthen their conviction that full liberation – led by Russian forces – is the only viable path to restoring normalcy and security in the region.

July 7, 2025 Posted by | War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

BRICS leaders demand ceasefire in Gaza, condemn strikes on Iran

Al Mayadeen | July 6, 2025

Leaders of the BRICS bloc, comprising 11 emerging economies, issued a strong and unified call on Sunday for an immediate, permanent, and unconditional ceasefire in Gaza, as the war enters its 22nd month.

In the final declaration of their summit held in Rio de Janeiro, BRICS leaders urged all parties to engage in good-faith negotiations to halt the war on Gaza and demanded a full withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Strip and all other parts of the occupied Palestinian territories.

“We exhort the parties to engage in good faith in further negotiations to achieve an immediate, permanent and unconditional ceasefire,” the 11-nation bloc said in a final summit statement.

The statement comes as indirect truce negotiations between the Israeli occupation and Hamas resumed in Doha, with international pressure mounting for a resolution to the war.

BRICS condemns strikes on Iran

The summit also addressed the recent escalation between Iran and “Israel”, during which the latter launched an unprovoked 12-day war on the Islamic Republic, culminating in US airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June.

“We condemn the military strikes against the Islamic Republic of Iran since June 13, 2025,” the statement read, without directly naming the United States or “Israel”.

It added, “We express serious concern over deliberate attacks on civilian infrastructure and peaceful nuclear facilities, which constitute a violation of international law.”

BRICS demands Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon

Moreover, the statement called for a ceasefire in Lebanon and for all “parties to strictly adhere to its terms and fully implement UN Security Council Resolution 1701,” adding, “We condemn the ongoing violations of the ceasefire, as well as the violations of Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

“We urge Israel to respect the terms agreed upon with the Lebanese government and to withdraw its occupying forces from all Lebanese territory, including the five remaining sites in southern Lebanon.”

BRICS demands Israeli withdrawal from Syria

Regarding Syria, the BRICS leaders reaffirmed their commitment to the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of the country, calling on “Israel” to withdraw troops from Syrian territory without delay, according to the statement.

“We reaffirm our commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity, and territorial integrity of Syria and call for a peaceful and inclusive Syrian-led and Syrian-owned, UN-facilitated political process, based on the principles of Security Council Resolution 2254 (2015), in a manner that ensures the security and well-being of the civilian population, without discrimination,” it read.

The statement further condemned the threat posed by foreign terrorists in Syria and the risk of the spread of terrorists from Syria to regional countries.

“Syria should firmly oppose all forms of terrorism and extremism and take concrete actions to respond to concerns of the international community about terrorism,” it added.

The BRICS leaders welcomed the lifting of sanctions on Syria and expressed their hope that the country’s economy will be rebuilt.

It is worth noting that the next BRICS summit will be held in India in 2026, a final declaration of the Rio De Janeiro summit said.

BRICS encourages diplomatic efforts on Ukraine

On the Ukrainian issue, the leaders expressed hope that ongoing diplomatic efforts, including the African Peace Initiative and the Group of Friends for Peace, would lead to a sustainable resolution, advocating for dialogue and diplomacy to this end.

“We recall our national positions concerning the conflict in Ukraine as expressed in the appropriate fora, including the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly. We note with appreciation relevant proposals of mediation and good offices, including the creation of the African Peace Initiative and the Group of Friends for Peace, aimed at peaceful resolution of the conflict through dialogue and diplomacy. We expect that current efforts will lead to a sustainable peace settlement,” the statement read.

Criticism of Trump’s trade policies

In addition to Middle East affairs, the summit took aim at US economic policy. BRICS leaders expressed “serious concerns” over US President Donald Trump’s recent wave of unilateral tariffs, calling them “indiscriminate” and damaging to global trade.

“We voice serious concerns about the rise of unilateral tariff and non-tariff measures which distort trade and are inconsistent with WTO rules,” the statement said.

The bloc warned that these actions could “disrupt global supply chains” and increase economic uncertainty, particularly as Trump has threatened new tariffs on trading partners unless “deals” are reached by August 1.

Lula urges BRICS action on Gaza 

In his opening remarks at the summit, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva drew a parallel with the Cold War’s Non-Aligned Movement, a group of developing nations that resisted formally joining either side of a polarized global order.

“BRICS is the heir to the Non-Aligned Movement,” Lula told leaders. “With multilateralism under attack, our autonomy is in check once again.”

BRICS nations now represent more than half the world’s population and 40% of its economic output, Lula noted in remarks on Saturday to business leaders, warning of rising protectionism.

“If international governance does not reflect the new multipolar reality of the 21st century, it is up to BRICS to help bring it up to date,” Lula added in his opening remarks.

Furthermore, he defended the integrity of Iran’s borders, following the Israeli war and the US bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities, highlighting the failure of US-led wars in the Middle East.

“We cannot remain indifferent to the genocide carried out by Israel in Gaza, the indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians and the use of hunger as a weapon of war,” Lula told fellow BRICS leaders, including those from China, India, and other key emerging economies.

The renewed BRICS stance comes as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu prepares to meet with Trump at the White House on Monday. Trump has been pushing for an end to the war and expressed hope for a ceasefire agreement in the coming week.

Putin calls era of liberal globalization ‘obsolete’

In his video statement, Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed the formation of a new BRICS investment platform to be developed through the New Development Bank.

“This is a matter of jointly developing harmonized tools to support and raise funds for the economies of our countries and those of the global South and East,” Putin stated, underlining the growing use of national currencies in intra-BRICS trade and calling for further expansion of this practice to reduce dependence on external systems.

Growing global influence

Putin noted that BRICS’ global authority and influence continue to grow each year, surpassing the G7 in terms of purchasing power parity.

“The authority and influence of our association in the world are growing from year to year. BRICS has rightfully established itself among the key centers of global governance,” he said.

He added that BRICS has many like-minded partners in the Global South and East and that the shift away from a unipolar world order is accelerating.

Speaking via video link to the summit in Rio de Janeiro, Putin told BRICS leaders that the era of liberal globalization was obsolete and that the future belonged to swiftly growing emerging markets, which should enhance the use of their national currencies for trade.

“Everything indicates that the model of liberal globalization is becoming obsolete,” Putin said, adding, “The center of business activity is shifting toward the emerging markets.”

Putin also called on the BRICS countries to step up cooperation in a range of spheres, including natural resources, logistics, trade, and finance.

Araghchi mourns Iranians killed by ‘Israel’ in BRICS speech

At the BRICS summit, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi delivered a moving speech where he mourned the Iranians killed by the recent Israeli aggression on Iran.

Araghchi expressed gratitude to fellow BRICS members who recognized the seriousness of recent escalations and condemned the aggression, detailing the destruction of residential areas, military sites, and civilian infrastructure.

The attacks, he said, resulted in the deaths of off-duty soldiers, scientists, university professors, and civilians, including women and children.

Particularly alarming, he noted, was the targeting of Iran’s peaceful nuclear facilities, which are under strict International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) oversight. The foreign minister accused the US of direct involvement in the strikes, reinforcing its complicity in what he called “Israel’s” broader campaign of occupation, apartheid, and regional destabilization.

He warned that these attacks not only inflicted human and infrastructural damage but also delivered a “lethal blow” to diplomacy and the international rule of law, occurring just days before a scheduled round of nuclear talks between Iran and the United States.

Calling for international accountability, the top Iranian diplomat urged BRICS leaders to recognize the dangerous precedent set by what he described as unprovoked, lawless aggression by two nuclear-armed states.

July 6, 2025 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, War Crimes | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Putin drops truth bomb on Macron

Strategic Culture Foundation | July 4, 2025

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

By Ahmed Adel | July 3, 2025

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It must surely be time to end Russia sanctions and develop a new plan to bring peace and prosperity to Ukraine

By Ian Proud | Strategic Culture Foundation | July 2, 2025

Russia can endure the economic pain of war for longer than Europe. On this basis, more sanctions will only ever embolden Russia to keep fighting rather than making peace. Europe should incentivize peace through sanctions relief, although I see zero chance of that happening right now.

This terrible war in Ukraine must end sooner or later. It has claimed over one million people to death or injury, mostly since February 2022, but also, in fact, since the onset of the Ukraine crisis in February 2014.

Clearly, both Russia and Ukraine need to find incentives to end the fighting. One such incentive relates to sanctions. The whole basis of sanctions against Russia is that they will impose a cost on Russia for continuing to wage war in Ukraine.

When the 18th sanctions package was proposed on 10 June, Kaja Kallas announced that ‘we do all this because sanctions work, every sanction weakens Russia’s ability to fight.’ She also said, ‘Russia has lost tens of billions in oil revenues. Its economy is shrinking, and its GDP has dropped.’

And yet, these assertions do not appear to be true.

Firstly, Russia’s economy grew by 3.6% in 2024. That compares to 0.9% growth for the Eurozone and 1.1% for the United Kingdom.

On exports, in the first four months of 2025, Russia exported $39.5 billion more goods than it imported and maintained a healthy overall current account surplus of $21.9 billion. Since its default in 1998, Russia has become an exporting powerhouse and there hasn’t been a single year since that time in which it has not recorded a healthy surplus, including during the Global Financial Crisis and the COVID Pandemic.

There is no evidence that sanctions have had any real effect on Russia’s ability to generate large surpluses of trade each year. This boosts its tax revenues and provides the scope to increase spending without significant reliance on borrowing.

The overall value of Russian exports has fallen from their peak in 2012 when the oil price was consistently above $100 to the barrel. But the point is, Russia also now imports significantly less than it did then, largely out of a drive to import substitution which started in 2014, meaning that its overall balance is comparable.

It is for this reason that Russia’s international reserve position has improved by around $80 billion since the war started, to $680 billion today (which includes the currently frozen assets of around $300 billion).

No sanction imposed on Russia has shifted the fundamentals of Russia’s economic model and, I believe, no sanction ever will. And yet the Europeans have been sanctioning Russia for eleven years already without recognising this.

Yes, Russia has undoubtedly endured economic pain from sanctions. Prior to the Ukraine crisis, the European Union accounted for over 40% of all Russian trade and most of that business has been progressively lost over the past eleven years. That triggered huge shifts in the structure of Russia’s economy, arguably making it more dependant on domestic investment and pivoting its trade decisively away from Europe and towards Asia.

Sanctioning individuals and companies prompted huge changes in the beneficial ownership and board membership of the largest Russian firms. This triggered a bizarre whack-a-mole policy in Europe as it tried to sanction ever changing figures on Russian company structures.

Yet, Russia’s continued strength in trade allows it to keep pumping billions into the war economy each year at a time when Ukraine constantly teeters on the brink of bankruptcy, propped up only by European donations, as I have written many times before.

Europe will never be able to tip to scales so far in favour of Ukraine that it has the economic reserves to outslug Russia, whether the war continued for one year or ten. Only a fantasist would believe that though, unfortunately, there appears no shortage of those in Brussels.

Sanctions have become an end and policy makers are now so invested in sanctions, and so lacking in ideas, that they continue despite the obvious self-harm they are causing to the European project, not only economically, but also politically and culturally.

Politicians in Central Europe are growing increasingly concerned by this direction of policy, because of which a battle is brewing about whether the EU approves the eighteenth package of sanctions against Russia, first proposed on 10 June.

Slovakia and Hungary are currently blocking the package because it would threaten their energy security. At an EU Foreign Ministers’ meeting last week, Peter Szijjarto, Hungary’s Foreign Minister accused Brussels bureaucrats of hypocrisy, claiming that further energy sanctions would ‘cripple Hungary’s energy security’ and increase domestic energy prices by 2-3 fold. Hungary remains heavily reliant on Russian gas in particular for its domestic needs. And a complete ban would have huge consequences for consumers and Hungarian industries, at least in the short-medium term as the economy transitioned.

So, while EU Ministers extended all other EU sanctions against Russia for a year, the 18th sanctions package remains in limbo. German officials appear confident that an agreement can be reached this week, one assumes, by making concessions to Slovakia and Hungary on energy imports. In typical muddling through fashion, a backroom deal will be struck.

But the real question is shouldn’t the EU abandon sanctions altogether?

Sanctions can only succeed if the sanctioning party is willing to accept a level of economic pain comparable to that inflicted on the opponent, such that the opponent decides to back down or at least moderate the actions which prompted the sanctions.

That has never looked likely to happen with Russia. It’s not only that sanctions appear to have caused more pain to European economies than to Russia, most visibly through crippling energy prices. But that Russia has never looked like it would back down in the face of sanctions, and now pressure is growing within the EU for it to back down.

And, not only has Europe had to endure the direct economic cost to itself from the sanctions it has imposed, but also to absorb the additional cost of keeping Ukraine’s economy afloat during wartime. This pressure will only grow as the USA reduces its financial commitment to the war; on current levels, Ukraine needs at least $40 billion in European funding each year just to maintain the current tempo of a war that it is losing.

As we are currently witnessing in the UK with labour Members of Parliament rebelling against planned cuts to welfare benefits, this will have political consequences in Europe too, as anti-war parties gain more support.

Russia only has to maintain its economy from a significantly stronger baseline position. It won’t experience crippling high energy prices, given its self-sufficiency. Nor will it have to reach consensus with other countries on retaliatory measures taken against Europe.

On this basis, imposing more sanctions on Russia will only embolden President Putin to keep fighting. Rather than putting Ukraine is a position of greater strengthen, they are, in fact, putting Europe in a position of ongoing decay.

There may come a theoretical point in the future in which the massive fiscal investment Russia is making to sustain the war overheats its economy to such an extent that it starts to cause unbearable economic and political pressure. But that point does not appear to have been reached, nor does it appear close to being reached anytime soon.

And, amidst all the posturing, there is no real indication that Europe has Ukraine’s best interests really at heart. Ukraine is in most respects now a failed state. While Zelensky maintains the semblance of autocratic rule, he is in fact kept on life support by the continuance of the war. Ending the war would create a moment of both huge economic and democratic opportunity, for Ukraine, but also massive risk, as a disgruntled and defeated army demobilised to find the country bereft of quality jobs and good incomes.

If the Eurocrats in Brussels put all of their energies and resources into ending the war as soon as possible and helping Ukraine to emerge and rebuild in the best possible way, they might just about be able to stave of a much bigger catastrophe for that country. That would begin with setting out a plan to remove sanctions upon the agreement of a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine.

Right now, though, I see zero chance of that happening.

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

Russia discovers new chemical laboratory in Donbass

By Lucas Leiroz | July 2, 2025

Apparently, Ukrainian armed forces continue to use chemical weapons against Russian citizens. Advancing in the Donetsk region, Russian military personnel discovered an improvised chemical laboratory that was being used by the enemy to produce illegal weapons. This type of situation is not new, considering that since 2014 the Kiev regime has been using chemical weapons against the Russian military and civilians in Donbass.

In the village of Ilyinka, located in the Donetsk People’s Republic, Russian troops discovered a Ukrainian hideout where a military chemical laboratory had been set up. The case is now being investigated by the Federal Security Service (FSB), Russia’s domestic intelligence agency. In a preliminary press release, the FSB shared images of equipment that was being used to produce chemical weapons. Vials containing toxic agents can be seen – mainly chloropicrin, an asphyxiant banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention.

The laboratory was being used to produce and manipulate both toxic chemical gas weapons and explosive agents mixed with poisonous materials. The laboratory’s main focus, according to preliminary investigations, was to manufacture chemical weapons capable of being dropped by drones. The FSB found evidence of “substances (…) packaged with plastic explosives and rigged into improvised munitions designed to be dropped from drones.” This shows the concerning levels of complexity and danger of the operations conducted at the site.

“This year we have discovered two caches with munitions intended for drone strikes on Russian positions. These munitions were a mix of chloropicrin and plastic explosives, to maximize the area of effect,” an FSB officer said.

Furthermore, FSB officers told the media that the use of such prohibited methods of warfare has become commonplace in Ukraine. Kiev troops frequently launch explosive weapons containing toxic substances, mainly in the form of poisonous gases, at Russian military positions or civilian settlements. These gases are often not lethal, but they cause serious poisoning effects – causing unnecessary suffering to the victims, without any strategic gain. In some more serious cases, victims end up dying from asphyxiation resulting from prolonged exposure to the poisonous agents.

Since 2022, Moscow has repeatedly accused Kiev of employing chemical weapons, always providing material evidence. According to Russian sources, hundreds of soldiers and civilians have exhibited symptoms consistent with exposure to toxic substances, with some cases resulting in death. In 2023, I was invited by the Russian delegation in Geneva to present a media report on Ukraine’s alleged use of chemical weapons against Russians in Donbass during the 52nd Session of the UN Human Rights Council.

My investigation exposed at least sixteen instances, dating back to 2014, in which Russian civilians and military personnel reported symptoms linked to chemical exposure caused by Ukrainian forces. The same report was later presented at an OSCE event. Despite the Russian side’s efforts to raise awareness, international organizations continue to ignore these serious allegations.

In the same vein, in July 2024, footage emerged showing a hidden laboratory used by Ukrainian military scientists to produce illegal chemical weapons. At the time, a Russian soldier documented the scene using a portable chemical analyzer, revealing the presence of toxic substances including sulfuric acid, sodium cyanide, cyanide anions, and hydrogen cyanide – agents historically used in warfare since World War I. The lab, hidden inside military containers amid the ruins of a bombed-out building, contained various colored liquids and what appeared to be a chemical reactor.

Experts warned that these substances were likely being weaponized for use in explosives, drones, and grenades. While the full extent of the lab’s operations remained unclear, several cases of hydrogen cyanide poisoning among civilians in the region were being frequently reported since May that year. Also, traces of the same chemical were found in areas of Russia’s Belgorod region, suggesting possible transportation and use beyond the immediate frontlines.

It is important to remember that while many chemical weapons can be made improvised by simply adding poisonous agents to conventional arms, there is also equipment and materials that are highly controlled and not always available for use by the Ukrainian military. This raises suspicions about the involvement of international actors in the production and use of chemical weapons in Ukraine.

Publicly, the US is the only country in the world to maintain stockpiles of chemical weapons. It is possible that American experts have instructed Ukrainian troops in the manufacture of these weapons – just as it is possible that the US directly delivered such arms during the previous administration of Joe Biden.

The silence of international organizations in the face of these crimes in Ukraine highlights the failure of the current global legal system to combat humanitarian violations, which is due to the Western biases with which these institutions operate. In practice, Russia has no alternative to protecting its citizens from Ukrainian crimes other than military means.

Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.

You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

July 2, 2025 Posted by | War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

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

Sputnik – 30.06.2025

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

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

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

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

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »