Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The Rise And… Rise Of ‘Color Revolutions’

By Kit Klarenberg | Global Delinquents | September 28, 2026

It’s rather forgotten today how Washington’s post-9/11 imperial adventurism was not restricted to military intervention. A core component of the Bush administration’s “Freedom Agenda” – under the auspices of which calamitous wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere were waged – was overt sponsorship of civil society-led coups throughout the former Soviet Union, Warsaw Pact and Yugoslavia. Citizens of these regions, and the world, live with this meddling’s destructive consequences to this day. The seemingly never-ending – and ever-escalating – Ukraine proxy war is a particularly visceral legacy.

The 1983 creation of the National Endowment for Democracy, a US state entity avowedly concerned with executing overtly what the CIA once did covertly, ushered in a new era of “spyless coups”. Working in close conjunction with USAID and George Soros’ Open Society Institute, NED ever after provided funding, training and material assistance to NGOs, ‘independent’ media outlets, opposition groups, and other initiatives in service of regime change, across every corner of the world.

Come 9/11, NED and its confederates had devised a supremely cunning, cost-effective template for toppling troublesome governments – be they left-wing, nationalist, or even former US puppets who’d stepped out of line. The previous October, longtime Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milosevic was brought down in what the Washington Post bombastically dubbed “an extraordinary US effort to unseat a foreign head of state, not through covert action of the kind the CIA once employed in such places as Iran and Guatemala, but by modern election campaign techniques.”

At the anti-Milosevic effort’s forefront was Otpor! (Serbian: Resistance!), a rebellious NED-funded youth activist group. Through a mix of civil disobedience, non-violent resistance, rock concerts, street theatre, and graffiti, they fomented mass public opposition to the Yugoslav President. When election day came and official results pointed to Milosevic’s victory, an NED-funded “parallel vote tabulation” purported to expose major fraud, sending millions to the streets of Belgrade to peacefully demand the President’s resignation. Milosevic duly capitulated, in the face of seemingly overwhelming people power.

The supposedly heroic struggle of Otpor! and other US-supported anti-Milosevic groups was immortalised in a slick ‘documentary’, Bringing Down A Dictator. Milosevic’s fall provided a precise blueprint for future ‘color revolutions’ – so-called because frequently, the Empire-supported activists who led these mob putsches prominently adopted specific colours for their banners, branding and logos. Initially, US officials eagerly associated themselves publicly with this upheaval. Meanwhile, the mainstream media routinely published remarkably illuminating post-mortems of the revolts, extensively exposing Washington’s guiding hand and oft-enormous financial outlay.

Nonetheless, politicians, pundits and journalists alike universally framed colour revolutions as ultimately spontaneous uprisings by liberal, progressive elements with legitimate grievances, who yearned for democracy and freedom. In reality, they almost invariably produced corrupt, repressive governments that ruled via intimidation and brutality, including political assassinations. Post-colour revolution regimes also typically conducted sweeping privatisation and other ravaging ‘reforms’, destroying living standards for average citizens by prostrating their countries to the EU, IMF, NATO, World Trade Organization, and other mechanisms of Western economic, military, and political subjugation.

Slobodan Milosevic’s NED-orchestrated ouster is nicknamed the ‘Bulldozer Revolution’, due to iconic scenes during the upheaval of a wheel loader helping anti-government agitators occupy state buildings. However, its driver quickly turned against the “Revolution”. Subsequent “shock therapy” decimated Yugoslavia’s mixed market economy, causing his successful independent business to fail, and him to go bankrupt. He subsisted until his dying day on meagre state welfare payments. For most participants, subsequent colour revolutions were similarly an object lesson in being careful about what one wishes for.

‘External Shove’

In February 2005, President George W. Bush gave a swaggering address in Bratislava, Slovakia. He hailed how “in recent times, we have witnessed landmark events in the history of liberty.” This included Georgia’s November 2003 Rose Revolution, Ukraine’s Orange Revolution the next year, and Iraq’s Purple Revolution a month prior. “The advance of freedom is the concentrated work of generations,” Bush declared. He looked ahead to Moldova, and “inevitably” Belarus, “someday proudly [belonging] to the country of democracies [sic]”:

“Eventually, the call of liberty comes to every mind and every soul. And one day, freedom’s promise will reach every people and every nation.”

Moldova’s forced transformation into a staggeringly corrupt effective EU-US colony took many years. Belarus conversely remains stubbornly resistant to “freedom’s promise”, as defined by Brussels, London, Washington, and other centres of imperial power. Still, President Bush’s confidence was well-founded. Waves of insurrectionary unrest unleashed by his government’s “Freedom Agenda” had systematically swept away designated enemy governments one by one annually since he took office. Indeed, within weeks of Bush’s speech, Kyrgyzstan’s insufficiently pro-Western leader fell victim to yet another colour revolution.

He would not be the last. Prior colour revolutions had enthusiastically emphasised the importance of techniques of nonviolent resistance – many of which were crafted by Gene Sharp, who was intimately enmeshed within the US military and intelligence establishment for much of his life. However, Kyrgyzstan’s NED-created regime change army, KelKel – directly modelled on Otpor! – attacked police, torched government buildings and even carried out bombings. Their ferocity was actively encouraged and promoted by US-funded TV stations locally. Such belligerence subsequently became a colour revolution calling card.

Ukraine’s Orange Revolution

That colour revolutions represented a formal weapon of war in the Empire’s post-9/11 arsenal was enthusiastically spelled out by arch-neoconservative Max Boot in late December 2004. He gushed how Ukraine’s Orange Revolution days earlier, which brought a pro-Western government to power, was “one of the most inspiring events” of that year. Boot declared the “triumph” and “miracle” of the revolution “should dispel the quaint notion still prevalent in many Western universities and foreign ministries that democracy is a luxury good suitable for rich countries”:

“These revolutions reveal the hollowness of the cliché that ‘democracy can’t be imposed by outsiders’… sometimes, when dealing with an entrenched dictatorship, this requires military intervention of the kind that occurred in Iraq and Afghanistan. More brittle regimes can be brought down by their own people, but even they often need a little external shove… There was nothing nefarious about the US intervention in Ukraine.”

Boot boasted how Washington had “spent $58 million on democracy promotion in the last two years” in Ukraine. He proposed Kiev receive “expedited NATO and European Union membership,” to finish off the Orange Revolution. “In the meantime, we need to apply elsewhere the lessons of Ukraine” Boot demanded, suggesting “an obvious candidate for a similar transformation is Iran.” He explained, “it’s hard to think of a higher priority than the overthrow of the mullahs,” encouraging the Bush administration to prioritise “liberating Iran.”

‘USAID Help’

Such was the insurrectionary fervour of the time, in January 2006 USAID went to the extent of publishing a glossy magazine, Democracy Rising, revealing in detail Washington’s central role in fomenting “grassroots” rebellions as far afield as Afghanistan, Gaza and Lebanon. Dedicated sections on colour revolutions to date were replete with stunningly forthright passages. A section on Georgia’s November 2003 Rose Revolution described how NED had financed regime change training for local “lawyers, judges, journalists, members of parliament, NGOs, political party leaders, and others.”

The stated purpose of this investment was to give Georgians “a sense that they should regulate the government.” The Rose Revolution “was the climax of these efforts.” One recipient of US financial support remarked, “without foreign assistance, I’m not sure we would have been able to achieve what we did without bloodshed.” Meanwhile, several pages were dedicated to the Orange Revolution. It noted how thousands of Ukrainian journalists were given training in “investigative reporting”, bankrolled by NED and USAID.

An alumni told Democracy Rising this sponsorship “created a feeling that others stood with them ‘in the trenches’.” Concurrently, NED-affiliated Freedom House flooded the coffers of NGOs “that sponsored voter education, mobilized voters to get to the polls and observed elections.” These organisations “also held meetings, youth dances, rock concerts and karaoke to attract young voters,” and “ran public service ads on TV stations, informing people about their right to vote.” Meanwhile, “democracy trainers from Serbia, Slovakia, Russia and Croatia” were flown into the country.

In the second round of Ukraine’s presidential election, NED-financed NGOs claimed to have been inundated with tens of thousands of reports of fraud from voting stations all over the country, while exit polls they produced pointed to widespread rigging having denied pro-Western candidate Viktor Yushchenko a landslide victory. Vast protests, combined with opposition-organised general strikes, widespread civil disobedience and occupations of government buildings forced a rerun. A US-funded think tank apparatchik asserted:

“USAID help for the poll was absolutely important – the poll results after the second round made people go to the street.”

For all the hype and self-assurance of Democracy Rising, its publication came at a time when colour revolutions were increasingly being viewed with hostility and suspicion at a state and public level throughout the Global South. In every case, the radical outcomes promised by colour revolution leaders and advocates failed to materialise, while US rhetoric about the commitment of resultant pro-Western regimes to democracy and freedom was a perverse fraud.

In Ukraine, US-installed Yushchenko implemented economic austerity, slashed regulations and social spending, bailed out criminal banks, broke open state industry and natural resources for foreign plunder, attacked the rights of Russian speakers, and began preparing the country for locally-feared NATO membership. Within just nine months of entering office, his coalition government – comprised of Orange Revolution activists – collapsed due to deeply corrupt battles with feuding Ukrainian oligarchs over control of key media and industrial assets.

Yushchenko was voted out in the January 2010 presidential election, finishing fifth in the first round with just 5.5% of the vote. As Empire house journal Foreign Policy lamented years later, the Bush administration’s much-vaunted colour revolutions all turned out to be “terribly disappointing.” Each and every time, “elite corruption still continued apace” and “promises of far-reaching change never really materialized.” Damningly, “maladies that typified the preceding regimes quickly came to describe” the governments created by colour revolutions themselves.

‘Revolution Business’

That’s quite some euphemism. In Georgia, longtime Soros acolyte Mikheil Saakashvili granted himself unilateral power in key policy areas, before brazenly exploiting his position to harass and jail business and political rivals. Saakashvili’s targets would be raped and/or tortured in prison, their ordeals filmed for primetime broadcast on local TV networks. Grave questions abound over his personal involvement in several suspicious deaths, including government ministers’. He was voted out in October 2012, despite NED’s best efforts.

Kyrgyzstan’s 2005 Tulip Revolution installed Kurmanbek Bakiyev, who proceeded to run the country as his personal fiefdom for five years. Bakiyev’s relatives profited exorbitantly from legally questionable privatisation of state industries. For example, his family signed a highly controversial $1.8 billion deal to supply fuel to a local US military base, close to Kyrgyzstan’s total GDP in 2003. Elsewhere, Bakiyev’s brother oversaw Bishkek’s security apparatus – arbitrary detentions, bogus convictions, torture, and murders of opposition activists, journalists, and politicians became commonplace.

Bakiyev was himself chased out of not only the presidential palace but Bishkek itself in April 2010, following a massacre of anti-corruption protesters in which up to 100 were killed and at least 450 wounded. Thereafter, Kyrgyzstan was plunged into economic and political chaos for a decade, with numerous governments collapsing along the way. The freest and most stable Central Asian state prior to the Tulip Revolution, it is only since 2020 – following another Anglo-American coup – the country has regained some semblance of stability.

A key player in that upheaval was British ambassador Charles Garrett. He arrived in Bishkek from Macedonia, where as this journalist has revealed from April 2016 he steered what was known as the “colorful revolution”. Illegally obtained, deceptively edited wiretaps seemingly implicating government officials in shocking crimes produced huge protests, featuring widespread arson attacks and brutal clashes between demonstrators and police. Garrett distributed cash to NGOs and activists involved in the unrest from his diplomatic pouch, encouraging them to cause mass havoc.

Paralajmërimi i gazetarit maqedonas: Pas protestave në Ballkan ...

George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, NED, and USAID were also colorful revolution participants. Some protesters even proudly wore “Soros Army” shirts. Despite a huge public counter-revolutionary fightback, the tumult paralysed the Macedonian economy and state, leading to the installation of a doggedly pro-Western, dangerously dysfunctional administration that engaged in industrial scale graft, jailed political opponents on bogus charges, and changed the country’s name despite widespread opposition. Meanwhile, existing economic problems, including crippling brain drain, were gravely exacerbated.

The unfailingly disastrous results of colour revolutions surely contributed to White House officials abruptly and firmly distancing themselves from the entire enterprise, before the Bush administration’s second term was even over. The “Freedom Agenda” was quietly forgotten. The President – who in October 2004 openly mandated financial assistance to Belarusian opposition activists, and once publicly praised the Rose Revolution as an example to be followed throughout the Caucasus and Central Asia – went so far as to deny the US was in the “revolution business” at all.

‘Alternate Reality’

Colour revolutions have continued apace ever since, with the same strategies being recurrently applied the world over, to varying degrees of success. All along, non-Western governments – in particular China, Iran and Russia – have become increasingly vocal in their condemnation of and opposition to colour revolutions, in some cases passing legislation seeking to curtail the operations of foreign funded NGOs on their soil. Yet, the mainstream media long ago adopted a rigid Omertà on Washington’s culpability for civil society-driven destabilisation overseas.

In a striking example of this paradigm shift, in November 2004, before the Orange Revolution was over, The Guardian published a revealing report exposing the “US campaign behind the turmoil in Kiev.” The outlet stated unambiguously the revolt was “an American creation, a sophisticated and brilliantly conceived exercise in Western branding and mass marketing that, in four countries in four years, has been used to try to salvage rigged elections and topple unsavoury regimes.” NED, the State Department and USAID were all fingered as culprits.

Fast forward to July 2015 however, and a Guardian article on Russia’s banning of NED under foreign agent laws quite amazingly relied on a brief quote pulled from the Endowment’s official website to describe its operations. In the intervening time, the Maidan Revolution overthrew Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014, setting Kiev on the warpath with Moscow. Washington’s irrefutable involvement was strenuously denied at the time by the mainstream media, and has been ever since.

Following the Ukraine proxy war’s February 2022 eruption, The New York Times took vigorous aim at independent journalists for spreading the “conspiracy theory” Maidan was US-orchestrated, dubbing the proposition an “alternative reality” and “Russian disinformation”. This is despite every prominent Maidan actor – including the individuals who started the demonstrations – receiving NED or USAID funding, leaders of US-bankrolled organisations in the country advertising their intention to overthrow Yanukovych years prior, and the Endowment spending $20 million in the country in 2013 alone.

After the outbreak of war in Ukraine, NED removed its grant records on Ukraine, listing its investment in a panoply of initiatives in the country over many years – many of which ultimately targeted Russia, one way or another. In mid-2024, the Endowment undertook the unprecedented step of removing grant records for the entire world. Today, brief entries on different geographical regions describe in vague terms the Endowment’s specific aims locally, and overall sums being spent. The crucial questions of where, and on what, aren’t clarified.

NED going underground makes the task of tracking and exposing contemporary colour revolutions difficult, but not impossible. In September 2025, mass rioting ignited in Nepal. Major news outlets without exception reported the fiery agitation as an organic burst of dissent by the country’s disaffected “Gen Z”, motivated by corruption, unemployment, and state censorship of social media. Publications barely acknowledged demonstrators committed serious crimes, including torching Nepal’s parliament and the Prime Minister’s official residence, which sent occupants fleeing in helicopters.

Based on publicly available information, the clear insinuations of a colour revolution could be discerned. An NGO that organised the protests, Hami Nepal, had clear links to organisations known to be in receipt of NED funding. Subsequent leaks amply demonstrated the Endowment and USAID expended substantial sums over the years preceding the coup training young Nepalese citizens how to protest, founding NGOs and political parties, and “advocate concerns” on issues such as corruption. Evidently, the post-9/11 “Freedom Agenda” never actually ended.

September 28, 2026 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Rise And… Rise Of ‘Color Revolutions’

The Bulldozer Revolution: A Blueprint For American Meddling in Eastern Europe

By Patrick Pillow | The Libertarian Institute | June 8, 2026

By the summer of 2000, Yugoslav President Slobodan Milošević appeared firmly entrenched in power.

A decade earlier, he had risen to prominence by harnessing Serbian nationalism as Yugoslavia began to fracture. Over time, he consolidated control over political institutions and much of the media while leading Serbia through wars, sanctions, and NATO’s 1999 bombing campaign. Yet beneath the surface, public frustration was growing. The economy was struggling, unemployment remained high, and many Serbians had grown weary of international isolation and authoritarian rule.

When Milošević changed election rules in July 2000 to allow the presidency to be decided by popular vote, he likely expected another victory. Instead, the move created an opportunity for a united opposition.

On September 24, voters went to the polls. Milošević faced Vojislav Koštunica, the candidate of the Democratic Opposition of Serbia (DOS). Election observers from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe later described the vote as fundamentally flawed, citing irregularities, restricted monitoring, and unequal media access. State television overwhelmingly favored Milošević while opposition voices received little coverage.

When results were announced, the opposition claimed Koštunica had won outright. The government election commission insisted that no candidate had received a majority and ordered a runoff election. The opposition rejected the decision and called for nationwide resistance.

The first major challenge came from the Kolubara coal mines, where thousands of workers launched a strike. The mines were critical to Serbia’s electricity supply, giving the protest movement leverage over the government. Despite a heavy police presence, authorities proved unwilling to use significant force. Officers were instructed to appear tough, but many showed little enthusiasm for confronting the workers.

The regime’s position weakened further as demonstrations spread across the country.

On October 5, hundreds of thousands of protesters converged on Belgrade. Opposition leaders issued an ultimatum demanding Milošević step aside. When he refused, demonstrators stormed parliament and the headquarters of Radio Television Serbia (RTS), long viewed as a symbol of state propaganda.

The moment that gave the uprising its name came when construction worker Ljubisav Đokić drove a wheel loader through police lines and into the parliamentary complex. Yet the decisive factor was not the wheel loader itself. Police units increasingly refused orders, roadblocks collapsed, and security forces largely stood aside. Within days, Milošević’s rule unraveled.

The protests were undeniably driven by genuine domestic grievances. Yet Serbia’s opposition was not operating alone.

According to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), its Office of Transition Initiatives began programs promoting political transition in Serbia as early as 1997—three years before Milošević’s removal. USAID later acknowledged that it intensified support in the run-up to the 2000 election.

Between 1999 and 2000, at least $41 million flowed into Serbia through USAID, the State Department, the National Democratic Institute, and the International Republican Institute. The money supported opposition coordination, polling, election monitoring, media projects, and mass political messaging. Thousands of cans of spray paint, millions of stickers, and tons of campaign materials helped spread anti-Milošević messaging throughout the country.

The overt funding was only part of the story.

Journalist David Shimer reports that the CIA spent millions of dollars supporting efforts to unseat Milošević. Former CIA officer John Sipher later acknowledged that one successful American election-interference operation involved “certainly millions of dollars” directed against the Serbian leader. Outgoing President Bill Clinton defended assistance to the opposition, stating that while the United States did not rig the vote, he had no objection to CIA involvement.

Perhaps the most influential opposition organization was Otpor, a youth movement founded in 1998.

Otpor became famous for its clenched-fist logo, creative activism, and the slogan “Gotov Je!”—”He’s Finished!” Rather than building around charismatic personalities, organizers sought to create a decentralized movement capable of surviving arrests and repression. Small actions such as sticker campaigns gradually escalated into mass demonstrations.

Western organizations played a significant role in Otpor’s development. The National Endowment for Democracy provided funding—$282,000 in 2000 alone—while retired U.S. Army Colonel Robert Helvey trained activists using concepts developed by political theorist Gene Sharp. Sharp’s work on nonviolent resistance became so influential that some activists referred to it as Otpor’s unofficial manual.

George Soros’ Open Society network was another important source of support for Serbia’s opposition. According to Ivan Vejvoda of the Fund for an Open Society-Yugoslavia, the organization provided one of Otpor’s first grants in 1998, helping support the student movement before it became a national force. The organization’s Belgrade branch also funded independent media and opposition-linked groups such as the G-17 economists. Velimir Curgus of the Soros network later stated that “most of our work was undercover,” while another Open Society official described the organization as one of Otpor’s earliest financial backers. Foreign financial support also helped fund the production of roughly 60 tons of posters and leaflets distributed before the election.

The movement’s success later became a model for future political campaigns abroad. Otpor veterans established the Center for Applied Nonviolent Action and Strategies (CANVAS), which advised activists in countries ranging from Georgia and Ukraine to Egypt.

European governments were also involved. According to reports in Der Spiegel, U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer coordinated with Yugoslav opposition figures before the election. Germany and other European actors provided substantial financial support to opposition-controlled municipalities and political organizations.

None of this means the Bulldozer Revolution was simply a foreign creation. Milošević was genuinely unpopular, and hundreds of thousands of Serbians willingly participated in the protests that ended his rule.

But the historical record leaves little doubt that Western governments were more than passive observers. Through funding, training, media support, election monitoring, and covert intelligence operations, they actively worked to shape Serbia’s political future.

The Bulldozer Revolution became a blueprint. The combination of grassroots activism, youth mobilization, foreign funding, independent media networks, and nonviolent resistance training would reappear in later movements across Eastern Europe and beyond. Whether viewed as democracy promotion or regime change, Serbia in 2000 became one of the clearest examples of domestic opposition and foreign intervention operating side by side to bring down a government.

June 9, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular | , , , , | Comments Off on The Bulldozer Revolution: A Blueprint For American Meddling in Eastern Europe

How Israel moved Hermes 900 drone production to Serbia to hide from Iranian missiles

By Ivan Kesic – Press TV – April 25, 2026

The Israeli regime has quietly embarked on an effort to relocate production of its most important long-range strike drone – the Hermes 900- outside the occupied territories.

In Serbia, it has found its latest and most controversial partner. The strategy is simple: protect Tel Aviv’s supply chain from Iranian ballistic missiles.

On March 7, 2026, Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić made a cryptic announcement. Serbia, he said, would soon open a factory for “the most serious drones in the world” with a foreign partner from the Israeli regime.

By early April, reports had uncovered the full scope of the deal. Elbit Systems – the largest military company in the occupied territories and a firm repeatedly named by UN experts as profiting from the ongoing genocide in Gaza – had agreed to establish a joint drone production facility in Šimanovci, just thirty kilometers west of Belgrade.

The factory, which could begin operations as early as late April 2026, is designed to produce two types of unmanned aerial vehicles, including a long-range model capable of flying at altitudes exceeding six kilometers.

While most media attention has focused on the emerging arms race between Serbia and Croatia, a far more consequential story has gone largely unreported.

What makes this deal particularly significant is not merely the technology transfer or the financial terms, but the strategic logic driving it.

The Israeli regime, having suffered devastating losses of its Hermes 900 fleet during the recent US-Israeli war of aggression against Iran, is desperately seeking to diversify its production base – outside the reach of Iranian retaliation.

Serbian factory: Details of the 2026 agreement

The joint venture agreement between Elbit Systems and Serbia’s state-owned Yugoimport SDPR gives the notorious Israeli arms company a controlling 51 percent stake, while the Serbian partner holds the remaining 49 percent.

According to documents obtained by some journalists and confirmed by two independent sources close to the military industry, the factory will produce two distinct drone types.

The first is a short-range model with a high payload and rotary wings, designed for tactical reconnaissance and strike missions in confined operational environments.

The second is far more advanced: a long-range model, faster and capable of operating at altitudes exceeding six kilometers, making it suitable for deep-penetration surveillance missions well beyond Serbian borders.

A source familiar with the deal described the long-range drone as “more advanced” than the Pegasus, a combat reconnaissance drone that Serbia already produces domestically.

“It has a higher flight altitude and greater operational autonomy,” the source explained. “The essence of the whole story is the transfer of technology, because our engineers will also work on it. This drone is actually the crowning glory of the entire project.”

Experts from Utva, an aircraft factory owned by the SDPR, will also be involved in the production process, a clear indication of significant investment in local technical expertise.

The planned site of the factory has itself become a source of controversy: a facility owned by Pink Media Group, the media empire of Željko Mitrović, a businessman with close ties to Vučić’s ruling party.

Following the publication of investigative reports, Pink Media Group issued a denial, claiming that neither Mitrović nor any entity associated with him had participated in negotiations or leased any facility for the project.

However, the denial did not address the documentary evidence or the two independent sources that confirmed the arrangement. The question of the factory’s precise location remains unresolved.

Serbian-Israeli cooperation: Weapons, spyware, and political connections

The drone factory agreement is merely the latest chapter in a rapidly deepening relationship between Belgrade and Tel Aviv that encompasses weapons trade, intelligence technology, political consulting, and diplomatic alignment.

The value of ammunition and weapons exports from Serbia to the Israeli regime has increased by an astonishing 42 times since 2023, reaching 114 million euros by the end of 2025, according to available evidence.

The vast majority of these exports were conducted through Yugoimport SDPR, the same state-owned company now partnering with Elbit on the drone factory.

Beyond conventional weapons, the partnership extends into the shadowy realm of surveillance and espionage technology.

Serbian authorities have used forensic products purchased from the Israeli company Cellebrite to unlock and extract data from mobile devices belonging to journalists and social media activists.

A new spyware tool designated “NoviSpy” has been deployed to infect these devices, enabling the Serbian internal security service to monitor and suppress critical voices.

The methods employed bear the unmistakable signature of Israeli technology and training. The personal connections between the two regimes run deep.

Asaf Eisin, an Israeli consultant, has been described as the main architect of Vučić’s victorious election campaigns.

His role extends beyond mere political consulting; he is widely considered Vučić’s secretive strategist, providing the Serbian president with the kind of sophisticated campaign management techniques developed in the occupied territories.

The Serbian opposition has characterized Eisin as an “agency for winning elections,” and his track record across multiple political campaigns in the Balkans supports this assessment.

In September 2024, while the Israeli regime faced increasing international isolation over its genocidal actions in Gaza, the regime’s president, Isaac Herzog, paid an official visit to Belgrade, meeting with top Serbian officials.

The timing was significant: the Israeli regime was under diplomatic pressure worldwide, yet Vučić welcomed Herzog as a gesture of solidarity.

Foreign policy analysts noted that Serbia saw this as an opportunity to demonstrate its alignment with Washington’s closest West Asian ally, a calculated move to curry favor with the incoming Trump administration.

This alignment was formalized in September 2020 through the Washington Agreement, in which Serbia committed to opening a chamber of commerce office and a state office in Jerusalem al-Quds.

The move was hailed in Tel Aviv as “an important and courageous step,” while critics noted that it placed Serbia firmly on the side of the occupation and against Palestinian sovereignty.

The United Arab Emirates, which normalized relations with the Israeli regime in 2020, has emerged as a significant investor in Serbia, while also serving as a conduit for technology transfer and military cooperation.

The connection to the UAE, brokered through the same Washington Agreement, has created an axis that runs from Abu Dhabi through Tel Aviv to Belgrade.

This triangular relationship has allowed Serbia to access advanced defense technologies while providing the Israeli regime with a European production and logistics hub.

Elbit Systems: A company surrounded by global controversy

Elbit Systems, the Israeli military firm at the center of the Serbian drone factory deal, has accumulated a staggering record of international controversies spanning human rights violations, financial divestment campaigns, grassroots activism, and legal challenges.

The company generates approximately 90 percent of its revenue from military activities and is deeply integrated into the Israeli regime’s military apparatus, making it a focal point of criticism amid the ongoing genocide in Gaza or the occupied West Bank.

One of the longest-running controversies concerns Elbit’s involvement in infrastructure tied to the Israeli occupation, particularly the surveillance systems installed along the separation wall in the occupied West Bank.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an advisory opinion in 2004 declaring the wall contrary to international law, yet Elbit continued to supply technology for its operation.

This triggered early international backlash. In 2009, Norway’s sovereign wealth fund divested from Elbit, with the finance minister stating at the time: “We do not want to finance companies that contribute so directly to violations of international humanitarian law.”

Similar decisions followed from Danish and Swedish financial institutions.

The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement has made Elbit a primary target, noting that the company’s technology contributes directly to horrendous human rights violations against Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied territories.

These campaigns have achieved tangible results. HSBC withdrew its investment from Elbit in 2018 after the company acquired IMI Systems, which manufactures cluster munitions.

In 2026, a major Canadian investment arm divested from Elbit following sustained protests over its role in supplying equipment used in the Gaza genocide.

A UN Special Rapporteur report published in June 2025 listed Elbit among companies profiting from the genocide in Gaza. The report specifically mentioned drones developed and supplied by Elbit, describing how they operate alongside warplanes during bombing campaigns, used to monitor Palestinians and gather intelligence on targets.

The report concluded that “drones, hexacopters and quadcopters have become ubiquitous killing machines in the skies over Gaza.”

Direct action activism has targeted Elbit facilities worldwide. In the United Kingdom, groups such as Palestine Action have broken into and occupied Elbit-linked sites. The 2024 Filton facility break-in caused significant damage and led to arrests and high-profile court cases.

In 2025, Elbit closed a UK facility after sustained protests, a symbolic victory for activists demonstrating that reputational and military costs can affect even large arms firms.

In Spain, a steel shipment linked to Elbit’s subsidiary IMI Systems was canceled following protests. In France, the government barred Israeli military firms, including Elbit, from displaying offensive weapons at the Paris Air Show in 2025, citing the genocide in Gaza.

In 2025, a NATO-affiliated procurement agency barred Elbit from contracts due to a corruption investigation, suggesting that the company’s liabilities extend beyond activist campaigns into formal military-sector governance.

Meanwhile, in North Macedonia, Elbit’s involvement in “Safe City” surveillance systems has raised concerns about mass surveillance, transparency, and potential misuse, extending the ethical debate beyond armed conflict into civil liberties and digital rights.

Hermes 900: Capabilities and role in the aggression against Iran

The Hermes 900 unmanned aerial vehicle, produced by Elbit Systems, has proven to be the most important drone in the Israeli regime’s inventory for long-range strikes, and its performance during the recent US-Israeli aggression against Iran demonstrated both its strategic value and its acute vulnerabilities.

As a medium-altitude, long-endurance platform, the Hermes 900 can remain airborne for over 30 to 40 hours, operating at high altitudes that allow it to monitor vast areas without requiring frequent refueling.

This endurance is enhanced by satellite communications, enabling beyond-line-of-sight control and real-time data transmission across distances that would be impossible for ground-controlled systems.

The drone’s long-range capability made it particularly suitable for surveillance missions far from Israeli-occupied territories, including monitoring Iranian military infrastructure and tracking the movements of the Axis of Resistance forces throughout the region.

The Hermes 900 is equipped with sophisticated intelligence-gathering systems, including electro-optical and infrared sensors, synthetic aperture radar, and signals intelligence tools.

These allow it to detect troop movements, missile systems, and communication signals, even at night or in poor weather conditions.

Crucially, the Hermes 900 can designate targets using laser systems and relay precise coordinates, enabling fighter jets or other platforms—including long-range cruise missiles—to conduct strikes based on the intelligence it gathers.

This targeting capability made the drone a critical component of the regime’s aggression against Iranian infrastructure during the war that began on February 28, 2026.

The cost to the Israeli regime was still catastrophic. The largest number of Israeli drones shot down during the recent aggression were of the Hermes 900 type—approximately 20 units, with several more downed in 2025.

No official figure exists for how many Hermes 900 units the Israeli regime originally possessed, but estimates place the number in the dozens, somewhere between 25 and 50.

Some military analysts estimate that the attrition rate for the Hermes 900 fleet may have exceeded 80 percent during the unprovoked war of aggression.

The blow was so severe that the Israeli Air Force reportedly avoided deploying its remaining units over Iran for extended periods, effectively ceding the skies to Iranian air defenses and forcing Tel Aviv to rely on less capable platforms.

This degradation of Israel’s most important long-range surveillance and targeting asset represented a strategic victory for Iran’s air defense network, which had demonstrated the ability to detect, track, and destroy even the most advanced unmanned platforms.

Strategic logic: Foreign production as a hedge against Iranian retaliation

The timing of Serbia’s drone factory agreement with Elbit Systems is not coincidental.

The contract was signed in August 2025, a month and a half after the first US-Israeli aggression against Iran, when it became clear to Tel Aviv that Iranian ballistic missiles could threaten domestic production facilities.

The Israeli regime has since been insisting on peripheral supply chains, offering its clients relatively outdated surveillance technologies while using the arrangement to secure aircraft platforms for new aggressions throughout the region.

This strategy is not new. According to military analysts, the Israeli regime agreed to cooperate with India on Hermes 900 production as early as 2018 through a joint venture between Adani Defence & Aerospace and Elbit Systems, with a dedicated UAV facility in Hyderabad becoming operational in December 2018 for producing components.

By approximately 2020, this facility had expanded to assembling and exporting Hermes 900 units, making India the first production site outside the occupied territories.

Military analysts estimate that India produced approximately 20 of the estimated 50 Hermes 900 drones in the Israeli fleet, meaning that nearly 40 percent of Tel Aviv’s long-range unmanned surveillance capability was manufactured outside the occupied territories, a significant hedge against the vulnerability of domestic production facilities to Iranian retaliation.

In 2024, India formally fielded its own version, the Drishti-10 Starliner, with the first indigenously assembled unit delivered to the Indian Navy in January 2024.

The Swiss experience with Hermes 900 production has been far less successful, offering a cautionary tale for Serbia. Switzerland acquired the drones in 2015 but required extensive modifications through the Swiss partner RUAG to enable safe operation in civilian airspace.

The integration of a detect-and-avoid system proved extremely difficult, leading to repeated delays that pushed full operational capability to around 2029.

Some delivered drones could not meet expected performance standards, and one notable incident involved structural issues that caused a drone to break apart during testing.

The Swiss government was forced to scale back its requirements, abandoning certain advanced features while costs continued to rise.

Parliamentary committees raised doubts about whether RUAG and Elbit could fix ongoing problems, with some officials discussing potential cancellation.

For a neutral country like Switzerland, the deal also sparked debate about whether such partnerships compromise neutrality or align the country too closely with foreign military-industrial interests.

Brazil’s experience offers a different set of challenges. While the Hermes 900 is assembled locally through AEL Sistemas, a Brazilian subsidiary of Elbit, the program has been plagued by technical reliability issues.

Multiple crashes have occurred, including one during the 2024 floods in Rio Grande do Sul when a drone used in rescue operations crashed due to a technical problem.

In March 2026, another Hermes 900 crashed during a military exercise in Mato Grosso do Sul, reportedly leaving the Brazilian Air Force with only one operational unit at the time.

These incidents have raised concerns about fleet fragility and whether Brazil is over-reliant on a complex foreign system that it does not fully control.

Even with local assembly, critical components, software, and maintenance expertise remain tied to Israeli suppliers, creating a structural dependency that critics argue limits Brazil’s technological sovereignty.

Serbian gamble: Risks and domestic opposition

Within Serbia, the drone factory agreement has generated significant controversy.

Military observers point out that Elbit will retain complete control over intellectual property, meaning that while Serbian workers may assemble drones, the country will not gain the ability to independently produce or replicate the systems.

Petar Vojinović, an aviation analyst, explained that the most likely arrangement gives Elbit control over sales and intellectual property, with Yugoimport merely participating in production and collecting revenue percentages from sales.

“It is expected that Elbit will retain complete control over the intellectual property,” he noted.

“Thus, Elbit’s intellectual property will be protected, and Serbia will most likely not be able to produce or replicate the drones that will be manufactured.”

Other analysts emphasized that the key issue is knowledge transfer, arguing that If part of the development and production occurs in Serbia, it means training personnel, access to technology, and the possibility of further development without complete dependence on partners.

The political dimension of the deal has also drawn sharp criticism. UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese, during a visit to Serbia in March 2026, described Serbia as “one of Israel’s strongest and most determined allies, without any shame.”

Serbian civil society organizations have raised concerns that by hosting an Elbit production facility, Serbia could become a legitimate military target in any future conflict involving the Israeli regime.

Unlike Croatia, which has secured its position through NATO and EU membership, Serbia remains outside both alliances, lacking the protective umbrella that would deter potential retaliation.

The Serbian people are widely critical of their authorities, with many claiming that officials are reaping lucrative commissions from such controversial agreements.

The fact that the factory may be located on property associated with a media mogul closely tied to the ruling party has only intensified suspicions about corruption and self-dealing.

While Vučić has portrayed the deal as a triumph of Serbian diplomacy and technological advancement, critics see it as a risky alignment with a pariah regime that could expose Serbia to diplomatic isolation or worse.

April 25, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, War Crimes | , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How Israel moved Hermes 900 drone production to Serbia to hide from Iranian missiles

Evidence points to Ukraine being behind TurkStream attempted sabotage, but that should come as no surprise

Remix News | April 7, 2026

Secret service documents allegedly prove that the Ukrainians planned to blow up the Turkish and Blue Stream pipelines years ago, permanently cutting Europe off from cheap Russian gas, reports Magyar Nemzet, citing a report out of Ellenpont.

However, Serbia’s intelligence chief is denying that Ukrainians were the perpetrators, instead claiming that they had reports of a possible attack planned by a certain migrant gang group of radical muslims but had not considered it legitimate intel. However, this same chief also does not rule out that Ukraine was the contractor behind the scheme.

The Serbian section of the Turkish Stream gas pipeline was set on fire in a sabotage operation on Sunday. Since this pipeline supplies Hungary with gas, blowing up the pipeline would have put the country’s gas supply at risk.

The portal also reported that, in response to the explosives found near the TurkStream pipeline in Serbia last weekend, a presenter on one of Zelensky’s propaganda TV stations stated: “If the Ukrainians want to blow up the Turkish Stream, they will blow it up.”

President Zelensky has been accused by Budapest of openly interfering in the Hungarian elections by creating an energy crisis to help opposition leader Péter Magyar. Kyiv wants to cut Hungary off from all Russian oil, and they are counting on Magyar’s Tisza Party to do this.

Since January, Kyiv has refused to reopen the Druzhba after a Russian attack, with Hungary and Slovakia claiming Zelensky is keeping the pipeline closed on purpose. Back in August last year, after a Ukrainian attack on part of the pipeline in Russia, the section was repaired quickly, and Hungary’s foreign minister made it clear that they expected no further attacks on such vital energy infrastructure.

In September 2022, when the Ukrainians destroyed Nord Stream, they were allegedly planning a double attack, writes Magyar Nemzet, with the other target being the TurkStream.

“This pipeline is essential for Hungary’s natural gas supply, as 56 percent, or more than half, of the natural gas in our system comes through the Turkish Stream pipeline,” wrote Hungarian Foreign Minister Szijjártó after the incident.

Calling the situation “extremely serious,” Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said, “We are currently under a Ukrainian gas blockade, but we can make up for the loss from the south. If this umbilical cord is cut, the Hungarian economy will come to a standstill.”

April 7, 2026 Posted by | Economics, War Crimes | , , , | Comments Off on Evidence points to Ukraine being behind TurkStream attempted sabotage, but that should come as no surprise

Serbia thwarts plot to bomb Russia-Hungary gas pipeline – Vucic

RT | April 5, 2026

The Serbian authorities have discovered explosives of “devastating power” planted near a key gas pipeline transporting Russian energy to Hungary, President Aleksandar Vucic has announced, adding that he has briefed Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban on the matter. This comes after Ukraine essentially shut down Russian oil supplies to Hungary through its territory.

Speaking to reporters on Sunday, Vucic said “two large packages of explosives with sticks” were found in the municipality of Kanjiza, around 10 km from the Hungarian border.

The city of Kanjiza is located near the Balkan Stream gas pipeline – the regional extension of the TurkStream pipeline. The Balkan Stream runs through Türkiye, Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungary, and currently ends at Slovakia’s border. Hungary imports 7.4-7.6 billion cubic meters of gas annually via Serbia.

Vucic said the Serbian intelligence agencies “fortunately, did a good job” and vowed to ramp up energy security in the area. “We will deal mercilessly with anyone who thinks they are endangering the vital infrastructure of the Republic of Serbia,” he said.

The president did not assign blame but said he spoke with Orban about the situation, noting that an explosion would have caused gas outages in Hungary and northern Serbia.

Orban has confirmed the phone call, saying “the investigation is ongoing” and that he “has called an emergency defense council for this afternoon.”

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has suggested that the masterminds of the plot are seeking “to strip Hungary of its sovereignty.”

“They are doing this in various ways: Politically, by trying to interfere in internal affairs and elections; economically, by forcing it to make decisions under pressure that harm the economy and the well-being of Hungarians, and through energy, by trying to prevent Hungary from obtaining quality resources at reasonable prices.”

Hungary and Ukraine have for months butted heads over supplies of Russian oil via the Druzhba pipeline. In January, Kiev shut down the pipeline, citing a Russian drone strike on the infrastructure. Moscow has dismissed the claim; Hungary and Slovakia accused Kiev of lying and using the purported strike as grounds for political blackmail.

Ukraine has on numerous occasions also attempted to attack TurkStream infrastructure. Russia has accused Ukrainian saboteurs of blowing up the Nord Stream pipelines in 2022, suggesting that the attack was supported by Western intelligence services.

April 5, 2026 Posted by | War Crimes | , , | Comments Off on Serbia thwarts plot to bomb Russia-Hungary gas pipeline – Vucic

Israel’s Elbit Systems reports record profits on the back of Gaza genocide

The Cradle | November 18, 2025

Israel’s leading defense technology company, Elbit Systems, reported a sharp rise in quarterly profit on 18 November after months of fueling the genocide in Gaza by supplying weapons, munitions, and surveillance systems, while simultaneously securing a wave of new European contracts.

The company posted $3.35 per diluted share excluding one-time items, up from $2.21 a year earlier, and reported $1.92 billion in revenue compared to $1.72 billion last year.

Its order backlog reached $25.2 billion, with the company saying 69 percent comes from outside Israel.

Elbit CEO Bezhalel Machlis said the performance reflected “the significant contracts the company has secured across Europe and from customers worldwide,” driven by expanding defense budgets.

Israel accounted for over 33 percent of revenue, with Elbit supplying munitions, drones, guided rockets, and reconnaissance systems during the Israeli genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.

Sales to Europe, the world’s second-largest buyer of Israeli weapons, rose from $430 million to $536 million, comprising 28 percent of total revenue.

The company said 69 percent of its backlog comes from outside Israel and declared a quarterly dividend of $0.75 per share.

Separately, Elbit announced the largest contract in its history, a $2.3-billion deal with an undisclosed international buyer for weapons systems to be delivered over eight years.

The company did not reveal the customer or the type of systems being supplied, citing confidentiality.

Elbit Systems has also expanded its footprint across Europe, the Balkans, and the UK through a series of new agreements disclosed in recent months.

In Albania, the company is leading a government-to-government deal that includes ATMOS howitzers, SPEAR mortars, and Magni-X and Thor drones, and will assist the state-owned KAYO firm in establishing production lines and a new weapons plant.

Elbit deepened its presence in the country earlier this year through a flight-school agreement and is expected to support Albania’s goal of developing local drone manufacturing by 2027.

The firm has simultaneously continued to sign additional contracts worldwide, including Hermes 900 sales to Singapore and Brazil.

In the UK, Elbit is competing with Raytheon for a $2.7-billion Ministry of Defense contract that would make the company a “strategic partner” responsible for training 60,000 British troops annually.

The prospective agreement follows a separate $1.64-billion Elbit deal with Serbia and builds on the company’s existing role managing the Ministry of Defense’s Project Vulcan, a $75-million simulation-training program for tank crews.

Elbit subsidiaries in Britain have come under sustained protest, and Elbit’s central role in Israel’s war on Gaza has prompted renewed scrutiny, with the UN special rapporteur for Palestine noting that “for Israeli companies such as Elbit Systems … the ongoing genocide has been a profitable venture.”

November 18, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

West-Russia war becoming inevitable – Serbian president

RT | November 12, 2025

A direct military confrontation between Western nations and Russia is becoming unavoidable, Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic has warned, citing widespread rearmament efforts across Europe.

Speaking during a televised interview on Tuesday, Vucic said the possibility of such a war is no longer hypothetical, pointing to an acceleration of military spending. The European Union seeks rapid militarization over a perceived threat from Russia, which Moscow has dismissed as misleading political rhetoric aimed at distracting from internal economic troubles.

“My conclusion is that there is a growing certainty that a war between Europe and Russia will happen,” Vucic said. “They are preparing for war – or for defense, as they call it. Romania, Poland, Finland, smaller countries too. And the Russians as well.”

“Everyone is preparing,” the president continued. “What can come from that? Only conflict.” He added that Serbia itself is caught “between a rock and a hard place,” and therefore must also strengthen its military readiness.

Although Serbia continues to pursue EU membership, its application has effectively been frozen due to Belgrade’s refusal to adopt sanctions and other measures targeting Moscow. The two nations maintain deep cultural and historical ties, and Russia remains one of Serbia’s key energy suppliers.

Moscow has repeatedly accused NATO and the EU of provoking instability in Europe through continued expansion and by ignoring Russian proposals for a shared continental security architecture, which it says could have prevented the current confrontation over Ukraine.

November 12, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

Refinery Fires Help EU Topple Pro-Peace Governments to Wage War on Russia

Sputnik – 23.10.2025

While it is too early to tell who exactly is responsible for the recent fires at the refineries in Hungary and Romania as investigations are still ongoing, figuring out who benefits from them is easier, Endre Simó, the president of the Hungarian Community for Peace, tells Sputnik.

According to Simo, it is “those who want to gain a market with their own products by displacing cheaper Russian products.”

“Given the history, namely the explosion of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline and the series of Ukrainian attacks against the Druzhba oil pipeline, intentionality cannot be ruled out either in Hungary or Romania,” he points out.

He further notes that the main victim of these incidents is Serbia which, due to its only significant refinery being targeted by US sanctions, is forced to rely heavily on the now-damaged MOL’s refinery in Százhalombatta.

Thus, the refinery fires are also a boon to those seeking to overthrow the pro-peace government of Viktor Orban in Hungary and Alexandar Vucic in Serbia, and using “impermissible means” to meddle in Hungary and Serbia’s internal affairs “in order to bring opposition forces that serve the Brussels policy to power.”

October 23, 2025 Posted by | Economics, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Von der Leyen issues ultimatum to EU aspirant

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. © Getty Images / Amir Hamzagic; Anadolu
RT | October 15, 2025

Serbia will not be able to join the EU unless it aligns fully with the bloc’s foreign policy, including adopting all sanctions against Russia, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has said.

Serbia, which applied to join the EU in 2009 and received candidate status in 2012, remains one of the few European states that has refused to impose any restrictions on Moscow. Belgrade has cited its historic ties with Russia and continues to rely on energy supplies from the country.

Speaking alongside Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic at a press conference in Belgrade on Wednesday, von der Leyen stated that Belgrade must “take concrete steps” toward membership and demonstrate “a greater level of alignment” with EU positions, including on sanctions.

She added that Serbia’s current level of alignment with EU foreign policy stands at 61%, but that “more is needed,” insisting Brussels wants to see Belgrade act as a “reliable partner.”

Vucic has repeatedly said that Serbia will not impose sanctions on Russia under any circumstances, calling his country’s stance “independent and sovereign.” However, Belgrade’s refusal to comply has drawn increasing pressure from both Brussels and Washington.

Last week, the US activated sanctions against the Petroleum Industry of Serbia (NIS), a major oil company partly owned by Russia’s Gazprom Neft, prompting Croatia to suspend crude deliveries. Vucic has warned that the measures could force Serbia’s only oil refinery to shut down by November, threatening the country’s gasoline and jet fuel supply.

At the same time, Serbia has been shaken by a wave of violent anti-government protests over the past year, which Belgrade claims are being fueled by Western influence in an effort to destabilize the government.

Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) has alleged that the EU is attempting to orchestrate a “Serbian Maidan” and install a pro-Brussels administration.

Budapest has voiced similar concerns, claiming that Brussels seeks to “overthrow” the governments of Hungary, Slovakia, and Serbia for maintaining ties with Moscow and refusing to abandon Russian energy.

October 15, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

US sanctions Serbian oil major over Russia ties

RT | October 10, 2025

US sanctions on Serbia’s Russian-majority-owned oil company, NIS, have been activated, prompting neighboring Croatia to halt crude deliveries and raising the risk of a shutdown at Serbia’s only refinery.

Washington had granted Belgrade several temporary exemptions from restrictions imposed in January on NIS (Petroleum Industry of Serbia), in which Russia’s Gazprom and Gazprom Neft hold a majority stake. The most recent waiver, issued on October 1, was valid for only one week.

NIS confirmed Thursday that the US Treasury Department had not extended the waiver, leaving the company under full sanctions. It said it was “working to overcome the situation” and would engage with the US authorities to seek delisting.

The new sanctions have forced Croatia to stop crude supplies, pushing Serbia’s only refinery to the brink of a shutdown, President Aleksandar Vucic said on Thursday. He warned the facility, a critical supplier of gasoline and jet fuel, faces closure by November 1 unless deliveries resume.

“These are extremely severe consequences for our entire country. It’s not just about the functioning of one company,” Vucic said in a televised speech.

The sanctions effectively bar the company from purchasing crude oil or exporting refined products.

Croatian pipeline operator JANAF, the sole supplier of crude to the refinery, has already announced it will halt all business with NIS. Analysts say the company’s only recourse is for the US to reverse the sanctions or for its Russian shareholders to divest.

The impact swiftly reached consumers, as NIS notified customers that its network of some 350 stations would no longer accept American Express, Mastercard, or Visa cards.

NIS is a leading Balkan energy company with an oil refinery in Pancevo, near Belgrade, and a retail network of more than 400 filling stations. Gazprom Neft is the largest shareholder with a 44.85% stake, Gazprom holds 11.3%, and the Serbian state owns 29.87%.

Although Serbia formally seeks to join the EU, it has refused to take part in Western sanctions on Russia over the Ukraine conflict. Brussels and Washington have repeatedly pushed Belgrade to sever its energy ties with Moscow, a key historical partner.

October 11, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

Orban vows to fight ‘warmongering bureaucrats’ in Brussels

RT | September 29, 2025

The European Union is now a “war project” that puts the economies of its members at risk, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has said, vowing to oppose Brussels’ belligerent policies.

Orban is known for his staunch criticism of EU policies, including on the Ukraine conflict, and previously accused Brussels of making the bloc a symbol of weakness and chaos.
Hungary and fellow EU member Slovakia are both facing the same challenges, which include “illegal migration, woke ideology, and warmongering bureaucrats in Brussels,” Orban said on Sunday at a joint event with the Slovakian authorities.

“We will continue to defend our sovereignty, our values, and our future!” Orban said in a post on X to mark the occasion. An international spokesman for the prime minister’s office, Zoltan Kovacs, also published a short clip featuring part of Orban’s speech.

“Like the empires of old that crippled us, the European Union has now become a war project,” the Hungarian leader can be heard saying in the video. Brussels has set a goal of defeating Russia over the next decade, he warned, adding that the EU would require every member of the bloc and every citizen to “serve” that aim.

Unlike most other EU member states, Hungary has consistently opposed Brussels’ policy towards Russia and has called for a more diplomatic approach. Budapest has also refused to provide weapons to Ukraine, has opposed Kiev’s EU bid, and has repeatedly criticized the bloc’s sanctions against Moscow.

Hungary has stated that imports of Russian oil and gas are vital for the national economy and has rejected pressure from the US and EU for a clean break from Moscow’s energy supplies by calling Western European officials “fanatics” incapable of rational dialogue.

Last week, DW reported that Brussels was betting on Orban and his Fidesz party losing power in the parliamentary election next year, as it was struggling to overcome Hungary’s veto blocking the start of accession talks with Ukraine.

Last month, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto also claimed that EU officials were conspiring to overthrow the “patriot Slovak, Hungarian, and Serbian governments” and replace them with puppet regimes.

September 29, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

Russia Strongly Condemns Western Attempts to Oust Republika Srpska President Dodik – Lavrov

Sputnik – 09.09.2025

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that Russia strongly condemns attempts by the West to remove Milorad Dodik, president of Republika Srpska in Bosnia and Herzegovina, from power.

“We strongly condemn attempts to remove Serbian leaders disliked by the West from power through fabricated criminal cases. In particular, our interlocutor today, our friend, the legally elected, legitimate president of Republika Srpska, Milorad Dodik,” the Russian foreign minister said at a press conference on Tuesday.

Sergey Lavrov said he considers the upcoming October 25 referendum on confidence in Republika Srpska President Milorad Dodik to be an honest initiative.

“I want to mention the referendum that Republika Srpska, under President Dodik, is planning for October 25, asking citizens whether they support the republic’s leadership or not. I consider this an honest step,” Lavrov said.

Lavrov added that Russia will raise the issue of Bosnia and Herzegovina during its October chairmanship of the UN Security Council.

“As a permanent member of the UN Security Council and one of the guarantors of the Dayton Accords, Russia will continue efforts to support this key document and the forces that defend the preservation and unconditional respect of Dayton principles in practice. We will pay special attention to this topic in October, when Russia will chair the Security Council, and the next meeting on Bosnia and Herzegovina is scheduled for October 31,” Lavrov said following talks with Republika Srpska President Milorad Dodik.

The foreign minister emphasized that Russia will carefully prepare for the upcoming meeting. “Our colleagues will have to answer uncomfortable but entirely legitimate questions,” he said.

Lavrov also noted that “the West does not like referendums; Kosovo’s independence was declared without any referendum at all.”

September 9, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries