Ukraine’s New Arms Plan? EU Pays, US Cashes in, NATO Watches
Sputnik – 11.07.2025
US President Donald Trump said NATO, to which Washington also belongs, will pay for American weapons that the alliance will subsequently supply to Ukraine.
Strategic analyst Paolo Raffone (CIPI Foundation, Brussels) explains how Washington’s role is evolving:
“European NATO members may play a role to support the military needs of Ukraine within a framework coordinated by the US that remains the single largest armament contributor.”
He describes a triangulation scheme:
- The US provides military equipment to EU NATO states
- Ukraine buys that equipment from those states
- Purchases are covered by EU funds
“Technically, European NATO members are the sellers — but it ensures the equipment is effectively paid for by Ukraine using EU funds. NATO as an entity would not be directly involved… national governments will do it. At best, NATO will coordinate the scheme.”
Who pays and who supplies?
“UK, France, Germany and Poland are high on the list. However, the idea is that all European NATO members should participate.”
And what can they afford?
“Despite announced increases in spending, EU countries will need years to become effective armament producers… The munitions immediately available depend on US willingness to sell — and EU/Ukraine capacity to pay.”
UK’s F-35 Fleet: Mission-Ready in Theory, Grounded in Reality
Sputnik – 11.07.2025
The UK air force’s F-35 fighter jets are capable of carrying out only a third of the number of missions set by the defense ministry’s target due to a shortage of engineers, spare parts and metal corrosion, a report by the National Audit Office (NAO) showed on Friday.
“The MoD [Ministry of Defense] has not been able to sustainably deliver its targets for aircraft availability, resulting in flying hours that were below its requirements for pilots. In 2024 the UK F-35 fleet had a mission capable rate (defined as the ability of an aircraft to perform at least one of its seven possible required missions) which was approximately half of the MoD’s target. It had a full mission capable rate, (defined as the ability of an F-35 aircraft to perform all its required missions) which was approximately one-third of the MoD’s target,” the report said.
In particular, between October 2024 and January 2025, the F-35 fleet had aircraft “unavailable to perform any missions” as they were undergoing maintenance.
The report concluded that the problems with combat capability were driven by slow maintenance activity and a lack of spare parts, as well as an emerging issue with higher corrosion than expected in maritime environments.
The NAO also found issues with the arsenal of missiles for fighter jets. Due to delays in installation, the F-35s are currently armed only with bombs, which significantly reduces their combat capability and “stealth” capabilities against the enemy.
The UK began purchasing F-35 fighter jets in 2012 and intended to purchase only 138 aircraft. At the moment, agreements already concluded with the United States involve the purchase of 48 aircraft, of which 38 are already in service with the UK air force. In July, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s office announced that London would purchase 12 US F-35 fighter jets capable of carrying nuclear weapons. The new fighters are to be used in the NATO missions.
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.
Protesters in London defy ban to rally in support of Palestine Action
Palestine Action supporters outside London’s High Court in London, July 4, 2025. (Reuters)
Press TV – July 5, 2025
In a direct challenge to the British government’s new ban, protesters have gathered in central London to show solidarity with the pro-Palestinian campaign group, Palestine Action.
The group, which uses direct action against Israeli weapons factories in the UK and their supply chain, was officially designated a “terrorist organization” after a late-night legal bid to delay the move failed on Friday. The proscription came into force on Saturday.
Under the new legislation, membership of or public support for the group is now a criminal offense in the UK, punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
Protesters on Saturday gathered at Parliament Square, defying a warning from the Metropolitan Police, who said expressing support for the group “is a criminal offence.”
The demonstration, organized by campaign group Defend Our Juries, however, saw protesters holding signs and chanting in support of the pro-Palestine group.
Pictures from the rally showed protesters holding placards reading, “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action” in Westminster.
Police had warned that chanting slogans, wearing clothing, or displaying flags and signs in support of the group could lead to arrest under the Terrorism Act.
The Met said more than 20 people have been arrested in London.
In a letter addressed to Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, protesters said that they “refuse to be cowed into silence by your order.”
Palestine Action has focused much of its campaign on Elbit Systems UK, which it accuses of manufacturing and supplying weapons to the Israeli military amid the regime’s genocidal war on Gaza.
In its most recent action, activists stormed Guardtech, a subcontractor the group says provides “essential clean room services” to Instro Precision—a subsidiary of Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest arms producer.
Protesters blocked the company’s only entrance on Wednesday and covered it in red paint, symbolizing the blood shed by the Israeli regime in the Gaza Strip.
Palestine Action says Instro Precision cannot operate without Guardtech’s services, which are used to maintain the controlled environments necessary for producing radar kits and targeting systems.
Reacting to the ban on the group, a spokesperson for Palestine Action said, in a statement, “While London is rushing through Parliament absurd legislation to proscribe Palestine Action, the real terrorism is being committed in Gaza.”
It said that the activist group “affirms that direct action is necessary in the face of Israel’s ongoing crimes against humanity of genocide, apartheid and occupation, and to end British facilitation of those crimes.”
Russia warns of Israeli ‘war party’ seeking to reignite aggression against Iran
Press TV – July 4, 2025
Russia has warned about various Israeli officials’ efforts to trigger the resumption of aggression against Iran.
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov made the remarks during a press conference alongside his visiting Saudi counterpart Faisal bin Farhan in Moscow on Friday.
“We sincerely hope that the so-called 12-day war is indeed over,” the Russian top diplomat said.
He was referring to the Israeli regime’s launching attacks against the Islamic Republic’s nuclear, military, and civilian targets on June 13. The assaults claimed the lives of at least 935 Iranians, including senior military officials and nuclear scientists, the latter group being targeted inside their residential buildings.
The Islamic Republic responded with decisive defensive maneuvers and counterstrikes, hitting critically sensitive nuclear, military, and industrial infrastructure across the occupied Palestinian territories. The retaliation forced the regime to request a ceasefire.
Lavrov, however, warned, “We intend to stay vigilant, as the ‘war party’ remains highly active in the Middle East.”
“We keep hearing a variety of statements from some representatives of the Israeli leadership,” he added, suggesting that those officials were persistently agitating for the resumption of aggression against the Islamic Republic.
Iran has, on many occasions since the cessation of the attacks, cautioned that its next reprisal against potential renewed aggression would be of far more intensity and magnitude to the extent that it would take Tel Aviv and its allies by surprise.
‘European states role in war’
Elsewhere in his remarks, Lavrov criticized some European states’ “aggressive” anti-Iranian efforts, which saw them force the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)’s Board of Governors to issue its most recent anti-Iranian resolution.
He pointed out how the European countries “unnecessarily and aggressively pushed through anti-Iranian resolutions, which did nothing to ease tensions or advance negotiations, but instead created a pretext for forceful measures.”
The Israeli regime used the resolution as a pretext to launch the war. The resolution was also used by the United States, the regime’s biggest ally, as a plea to join it in attacking Iran towards the end of the warfare.
“I sincerely hope that European nations will come to recognize their responsibility and their share of the blame,” Lavrov said.
For his part, the Saudi foreign minister also underlined that differences with the Islamic Republic had to be resolved through diplomatic processes.
Ofcom seeks powers to preemptively block viral content, censor potentially illegal speech, and mandate broad Digital ID
By Cam Wakefield | Reclaim The Net | July 1, 2025
The UK’s increasingly controversial Office of Communications, Ofcom, is charting a path that could reshape the internet as we know it, and not for the better.
Under the banner of the Online Safety Act, the regulator is proposing a sweeping expansion of its authority that, if enacted, would hand it unprecedented influence over what we see, share and say online.
Part of Ofcom’s plan is the goal of preventing illegal content from gaining traction.
Platforms would be required to block material that even appears to be unlawful from being recommended by algorithms until it’s reviewed by a human moderator.
The idea, on paper, is to stop harmful content from “going viral.”
In practice, it risks creating a system where lawful speech is caught in digital limbo, held back by automated systems that err on the side of caution.
Ofcom frames these proposals as a necessary response to modern online threats.
It talks about “highly effective age assurance,” a term that sounds innocuous enough but points toward invasive digital ID checks.
The aim is to ensure that children aren’t exposed to harmful material, but the solution would come at the cost of privacy and anonymity for everyone, two pillars of an open internet.
This new regime would compel tech firms to act as frontline enforcers of ill-defined standards of legality, long before a court has had a chance to weigh in.
In times of crisis; riots, terror attacks, or other major incidents; platforms would be under pressure to throttle spikes in content rapidly.
That effectively puts Ofcom in the position of deciding, in real-time, what the public is allowed to see.
One of the more troubling proposals targets livestreaming; a tool that has become vital for journalists, activists, and artists.
All of it would be wrapped in tighter age verification systems that threaten to chill participation and expression.
The regulator also wants to see wider deployment of technologies like perceptual hash matching and automated tools; not just for known illegal content, but for material that might be illegal or harmful.
That includes everything from suicide-related posts to fraudulent schemes. While the intent is understandable, the risk of overreach is significant.
Without proper safeguards, lawful speech could be swept into censorship systems, and surveillance could become embedded in the core of our digital infrastructure.
Oliver Griffiths, who leads Ofcom’s Online Safety Group, summed up the regulator’s stance: “We’re holding platforms to account and launching swift enforcement action where we have concerns.”
It’s a statement that highlights how determined Ofcom is to push these changes through, no matter the consequences.
The public has until 20 October 2025 to respond to Ofcom’s consultation.
Given the political climate, the proposals seem likely to pass with little resistance.
But if they do, the UK’s online environment may come to be defined not by the free exchange of ideas, but by cautious, preemptive censorship and intrusive oversight; all in the name of safety.
Spying on Iran: How MI6 infiltrated the IAEA
Leaked confidential files indicate the IAEA was infiltrated by a veteran British spy who has claimed credit for sanctions on Iran
By Kit Klarenberg | The Grayzone | July 1, 2025
A notorious British MI6 agent infiltrated the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on London’s behalf, according to leaked documents reviewed by The Grayzone. The agent, Nicholas Langman, is a veteran intelligence operative who claims credit for helping engineer the West’s economic war on Iran.
Langman’s identity first surfaced in journalistic accounts of his role in deflecting accusations that British intelligence played a role in the death of Princess Diana. He was later accused by Greek authorities of overseeing the abduction and torture of Pakistani migrants in Athens.
In both cases, UK authorities issued censorship orders forbidding the press from publishing his name. But Greek media, which was under no such obligation, confirmed that Langman was one of the MI6 assets withdrawn from Britain’s embassy in Athens.
The Grayzone discovered the résumé of the journeyman British operative in a trove of leaked papers detailing the activities of Torchlight, a prolific British intelligence cutout. The bio of the longtime MI6 officer reveals he “led large, inter-agency teams to identify and defeat the spread of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons technology, including by innovative technical means and sanctions.”
In particular, the MI6 agent says he provided “support for the [IAEA] and Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons [OPCW] and through high level international partnerships.”
Langman’s CV credits him with playing a major role in organizing the sanctions regime on Iran by “[building] highly effective and mutually supportive relations across government and with senior US, European, Middle and Far Eastern colleagues for strategy” between 2010 and 2012. He boasts in his bio that this achievement “enabled [the] major diplomatic success of [the] Iranian nuclear and sanctions agreement.”
The influence Langman claimed to have exerted on the IAEA adds weight to Iranian allegations that the international nuclear regulation body colluded with the West and Israel to undermine its sovereignty. The Iranian government has alleged that the IAEA supplied the identities of its top nuclear scientists to Israeli intelligence, enabling their assassinations, and provided critical intelligence to the US and Israel on the nuclear facilities they bombed during their military assault this June.
This June 12, under the direction of its Secretary General Rafael Grossi, the IAEA issued a clearly politicized report recycling questionable past allegations to accuse Iran of violating the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Three days later, Israel attacked the country, assassinating nine nuclear scientists as well as numerous top military officials and hundreds of civilians.
Iranian former Vice President for Strategic Affairs Javad Zarif has since called for the IAEA’s Grossi to be sacked, accusing him of having “abetted the slaughter of innocents in the country.” This June 28, the Iranian government broke ties with the IAEA, refusing to allow its inspectors into the country.
While Iranian officials may have had no idea about the involvement of a shadowy figure like Langman in IAEA business, it would likely come as little surprise to Tehran that the supposedly multilateral agency had been compromised by a Western intelligence agency.
Langman’s name placed under official UK censorship order
In 2016, Langman was named a Companion of the Order of St Michael and St George, the same title bestowed on fictional British spy James Bond. By that point, the supposed secret agent held the dubious distinction of being publicly ‘burned’ as an MI6 operative on two separate occasions.
First, in 2001, journalist Stephen Dorril revealed that Langman had arrived in Paris weeks prior to Princess Diana’s fatal car crash in the city on August 31 1997, and was subsequently charged with conducting “information operations” to deflect widespread public speculation British intelligence was responsible for her death.
Then, in 2005, he was formally accused by Greek authorities of complicity in the abduction and torture of 28 Pakistanis in Athens. The Pakistanis, all migrant workers, were suspected of having had contact with individuals accused of perpetrating the 7/7 bombings in London, July 2005.
Brutally beaten and threatened with guns in their mouths, the victims “were convinced their interrogators were British.” When Greek media named Langman as the MI6 operative who oversaw the migrants’ torture, British news outlets universally complied with a government D-notice – an official censorship order – and kept his identity under wraps when reporting on the scandal.
London vehemently denied any British involvement in torturing the migrants, with then-Foreign Secretary Jack Straw dismissing the charge as “utter nonsense.” In January 2006 though, London admitted MI6 officers were indeed present during the Pakistanis’ torture, although officials insisted the operatives played no active part in their arrests, questioning or abuse.
Following his withdrawal from Athens, Langman returned to London to head the UK Foreign Office’s Iran Department, a shift which highlights his importance to MI6 and suggests the British government had no qualms about his allegedly brutal evidence gathering methods.
Britain’s Foreign Office collaborates closely with MI6, whose agents use it as cover just as the CIA does with State Department diplomatic postings.
MI6’s man on Iran takes credit for “maximum pressure” strategy
While leading the Foreign Office’s Iran Department from 2006 – 2008, Langman oversaw a team seeking to “develop understanding” of the Iranian government’s “nuclear program.”
It’s unclear exactly what that “understanding” entailed. But the document makes clear that Langman then “generated confidence” in that assessment among “European, US and Middle Eastern agencies” in order to “delay programme [sic] and pressurise Iran to negotiate.” The reference to “Middle Eastern agencies” strongly implied MI6 cooperation with Israel’s Mossad intelligence services.
In April 2006, Tehran announced it had successfully enriched uranium for the first time, although officials denied any intention to do so for military purposes. This development may have triggered Langman’s intervention.
The Islamic Republic has rejected any suggestion it harbors ambitions to possess nuclear weapons. Its denials were corroborated by a November 2007 US National Intelligence Estimate expressing “high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted” any and all research into nuclear weapons. This assessment remained unchanged for several years, and was reportedly shared by the Mossad, despite Benjamin Netanyhau’s constant declarations that Iran was on the brink of developing a nuclear weapon.
Langman’s IAEA support work overlaps with Iran sanctions blitz
International governmental attitudes towards Iran changed abruptly between 2010 and ‘12. During this period, Western states and intergovernmental institutions initiated an array of harshly punitive measures against the country, while Israel ramped up its deadly covert operations against Iran’s nuclear scientists.
This period precisely overlapped with Langman’s tenure at the Counter-Proliferation Centre of the UK Foreign Office. His bio implies he used this position to influence the IAEA and other UN-affiliated organizations to foment a campaign of global hostility towards Iran.
In June 2010, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1929, which froze the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps’ assets, and banned overseas financial institutions from opening offices in Tehran. A month later, the Obama administration adopted the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act. This set off a global chain of copycat sanctions by Washington’s vassals, who often imposed even more stringent measures than those levied by the UN and US.
In March 2012, the EU voted unanimously to cut Iranian banks out of the SWIFT international banking network. That October, the bloc imposed the harshest sanctions to date, restricting trade, financial services, energy and technology, along with bans on the provision of insurance to Iranian companies by European firms.
BBC reporting on the sanctions acknowledged European officials merely suspected Tehran of seeking to develop nuclear weapons, but lacked concrete proof. And behind the scenes, the MI6 operative Langman was claiming credit for helping legitimize the allegations against Iran.
Nuclear agreement lays foundations for war
Following the Western-led campaign isolation of Iran from 2010 – 2012, over its purported nuclear weapon program, the Obama administration negotiated a July 2015 agreement known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Under the JCPOA’s terms, the Islamic Republic agreed to limit its nuclear research activities in return for sanctions relief. In the years that followed, the IAEA was granted virtually unlimited access to Tehran’s nuclear complexes, ostensibly to ensure the facilities were not used to develop nuclear weapons.
Along the way, IAEA inspectors collected vast amounts of information on the sites, including surveillance camera photos, measurement data, and documents. The Iranian government has since accused the Agency of furnishing the top secret profiles of its nuclear scientists to Israel. These include the godfather of Iran’s nuclear program, Mohsen Fakrizadeh, who was first publicly named in a menacing 2019 powerpoint presentation by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The following year, the Mossad assassinated Fakrizadeh in broad daylight with a remote-controlled machine gun.
Internal IAEA documents leaked this June indicated that IAEA Secretary General Rafael Grossi has enjoyed a much closer relationship with Israeli officials than was previously known, and suggested he leveraged his cozy ties with Tel Aviv to secure his current position.
During a June 24 interview with Fox News’ war-crazed anchor Martha MacCallum, Grossi did not deny making the inflammatory claim that “900 pounds of potentially enriched uranium was taken to an ancient site near Isfahan.” Instead the IAEA director asserted, “We do not have any information on the whereabouts of this material.”
Well before Grossi rose to the top of the IAEA with Western and Israeli backing, the agency appears to have been penetrated by a British intelligence agent who took responsibility in his bio for engineering the West’s economic attack on Iran.
The IAEA has not responded to an email from The Grayzone seeking clarification on its relationship with Langman and the MI6.
UK arrests 4 in crackdown on Palestine Action over RAF incursion
Al Mayadeen | June 28, 2025
UK counterterrorism authorities have arrested four individuals in connection with a break-in at RAF Brize Norton, reportedly carried out by members of Palestine Action. The incident, which took place last Friday, involved activists entering the Royal Air Force base in Oxfordshire and spray painting on two military aircraft in protest against Britain’s support for “Israel” and its ongoing genocide in Gaza.
South East Counter Terrorism Police confirmed the arrests, stating that a 29-year-old woman without a fixed address, along with two men aged 36 and 24, were detained on “terrorism-related grounds”. A fourth suspect, a 41-year-old woman, was arrested on suspicion of “assisting an offender.”
Authorities said the three were being held under suspicion of committing, preparing, or instigating acts of terrorism, as defined under Section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000.
Government crackdown on pro-Palestine activism
Following the arrests, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced her intention to designate Palestine Action as a proscribed organization under the UK’s Terrorism Act. If implemented, the designation would make it illegal to support, join, or promote the group, an escalation that has drawn concern from human rights advocates and civil liberties organizations.
On the same day, hundreds gathered in Trafalgar Square to express solidarity with the group, warning against the criminalization of activism aimed at opposing the UK’s complicity in supplying weapons to “Israel”.
In response, Palestine Action issued a statement via X, condemning the government’s treatment of the protest. “Despite us not being proscribed, the state is treating red paint on warplanes as an act of terrorism,” the group stated. It further revealed that the arrested activists were being held in solitary confinement without charge for several days.
Authorities moved quickly to suppress related demonstrations, dispersing planned rallies outside Parliament and pushing protesters into Trafalgar Square. Several arrests were made, with the Metropolitan Police citing public order risks. Meanwhile, counter-terrorism police have launched a broader security review across UK military installations.
Wider context
Palestine Action, founded in 2020 by British-Palestinian activist Huda Ammori and co-founder Richard Barnard, is known for its confrontational yet non-lethal tactics aimed at arms companies tied to “Israel’s” military-industrial complex. Previous campaigns have led to the temporary shutdown of Elbit Systems-linked factories in Oldham and Tamworth, as well as disrupted contracts with Israeli weapons suppliers.
Legal experts have raised doubts about whether Palestine Action meets the statutory requirements for proscription under the Terrorism Act 2000, which include posing a real threat to national security or British citizens. Critics argue that the group’s actions, while disruptive, remain rooted in civil disobedience rather than terrorism.
The proposed ban has renewed scrutiny of UK-“Israel” cooperation, with campaigners pointing to past evidence of coordination between British counterterrorism units and the Israeli embassy. Concerns are growing that this measure could set a precedent for further repression of pro-Palestine activism.
Families of detained activists face deepening uncertainty, as support efforts, ranging from legal aid to court appearances, could be criminalized. Foreign nationals involved in the group may also face deportation or visa revocation if the ban is enacted.
The West waging ‘centuries-old war’ against Moscow – Russia’s top UN diplomat
RT | June 28, 2025
Western nations are using Ukraine as their proxy in a longstanding confrontation with Russia that is deeply rooted in history, Russian Ambassador to the UN Vassily Nebenzia told RT’s Rick Sanchez.
In an interview on The Sanchez Effect aired on Friday, the diplomat argued that the conflict “should be seen in a larger context.”
“They do not care about Ukraine. This is not a war between Russia and Ukraine,” Nebenzia said. “Ukraine is a proxy in this war. This is a centuries-old war of the West against Russia, starting with the Polish invasion in the 17th century,” he added.
As examples of earlier confrontations, Nebenzia cited Napoleon’s invasion of Russia, the 1854–1856 Crimean War, Western military intervention during the Russian Civil War, and the invasion by Nazi Germany and its allies during World War II. He emphasized that Hitler’s army included not only Germans, but also units drawn from allied countries and occupied territories.
The Ukrainians and “their sponsors” in the West sabotaged the 2014–2015 Minsk accords, which were aimed at ending the conflict between Kiev and the breakaway Donbass republics, the Russian diplomat said. Former French President Francois Hollande and former German Chancellor Angela Merkel later admitted the agreement was used by Kiev to buy time and rearm, Nebenzia stated. “We are not going [to fall] into the same trap once again,” he said.
He added that politicians like former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson similarly helped derail the 2022 peace talks between Russia and Ukraine.
Ukraine’s European backers were forced to adjust their position, Nebenzia argued, after US President Donald Trump launched efforts to broker peace and Ukrainian troops began losing more ground.
“They changed their rhetoric from ‘We should inflict strategic defeat on Russia’ to ‘Russia should not win in this war.’ Now they are advocating for a full, immediate, and unconditional ceasefire, which is testimony that they want to shield and protect their proxy, as they are obviously losing on the battlefield,” he said.
At the same time, Nebenzia noted that the resumption of direct Russian-Ukrainian negotiations earlier this year provides hope that the conflict could be resolved soon.
Why BBC editors must one day stand trial for colluding in Israel’s genocide
Journalist Peter Oborne sets out six ways the state broadcaster has wilfully misled audiences on Israel’s destruction of Gaza
By Jonathan Cook | June 20, 2025
Veteran journalist Peter Oborne eviscerated the BBC this week over its shameful reporting of Gaza – and unusually, he managed to do so face-to-face with the BBC’s executive news editor, Richard Burgess, during a parliamentary meeting.
Oborne’s remarks relate to a new and damning report by the Centre for Media Monitoring, which analysed in detail the BBC’s Gaza coverage in the year following Hamas’ one-day attack on 7 October 2023. The report found a “pattern of bias, double standards and silencing of Palestinian voices.” These aren’t editorial slip-ups. They reveal a systematic, long-term skewing of editorial coverage in Israel’s favour.
Oborne was one of several journalists to confront Burgess.
Oborne makes a series of important points that illustrate why the BBC’s slanted, Israel-friendly news agenda amounts to genocide denial, and means executives like Burgess are directly complicit in Israeli war crimes:
1. The BBC has never mentioned the Hannibal directive, invoked by Israel on 7 October 2023, that green-lit the murder of Israeli soldiers and civilians, often by Apache helicopter fire, to prevent them being taken captive by Hamas. The Israeli media has extensively reported on the role of the Hannibal directive in the Israeli military’s response on 7 October, but that coverage has been completely ignored by the BBC and most UK media outlets.
Israel’s invocation of the Hannibal directive – essential context for understanding what happened on 7 October – explains much of the destruction that day in Israel usually attributed to Hamas “barbarism”, such as the graveyard of burnt-out, crumpled cars and the charred, crumbling remains of houses in communities near Gaza.
Hamas, with its light weapons, did not have the ability to inflict this kind of damage on Israel, and we know from Israeli witnesses, video footage and admissions from Israeli military officers that Israel was responsible for at least a share of the carnage that day. How much we will apparently never know because Israel is not willing to investigate itself, and media like the BBC are not doing any investigations themselves, or putting any pressure on Israel to do so.
2. The BBC has never mentioned Israel’s Dahiya doctrine, the basis of its “mowing the lawn” approach to Gaza over the past two decades, in which the Israeli military has intermittently destroyed large swaths of the tiny enclave. The official aim has been to push the population, in the words of Israeli generals, back to the “Stone Age”. The assumption is that, forced into survival mode, Palestinians will not have the energy or will to resist their brutal and illegal subjugation by Israel and that it will be easier for Israel to ethnically cleanse them from their homeland.
Because Israel has been implementing this military doctrine – a form of collective punishment and therefore indisputably a war crime – for at least 20 years, it is critically important in any analysis of the events that led up to 7 October, or of the genocidal campaign of destruction Israel launched subsequently.
The BBC’s refusal even to acknowledge the doctrine’s existence leaves audiences gravely misinformed about Israel’s historical abuses of Gaza, and deprived of context to interpret the campaign of destruction by Israel over the past 20 months.
3. The BBC has utterly failed to report the many dozens of genocidal statements from Israeli officials since 7 October – again vital context for audiences to understand Israel’s goals in Gaza.
Perhaps most egregiously, the BBC has not reported Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s biblically-inspired comparison of the Palestinians to “Amalek” – a people the Jews were instructed by God to wipe from the face of the earth. Netanyahu knew this clearly genocidal statement would have especial resonance with what now amounts to a majority of the combat soldiers in Gaza who belong to extreme religious communities that view the Bible as the literal truth.
The hardest thing to prove in genocide is intent. And yet the reason Israel’s violence in Gaza is so clearly genocidal is that every senior official from the prime minister down has repeatedly told us that genocide is their intent. The decision not to inform audiences of these public statements is not journalism. It is pro-Israel disinformation and genocide denial.
4. By contrast, as Oborne notes, on more than 100 occasions when guests have tried to refer to what is happening in Gaza as a genocide, BBC staff have immediately shut them down on air. As other investigations have shown, the BBC has strictly enforced a policy not only of banning the use of the term “genocide” by its own journalists in reference to Gaza but of depriving others – from Palestinians to western medical volunteers and international law experts – of the right to use the term as well. Again, this is pure genocide denial.
5. Oborne also points to the fact that the BBC has largely ignored Israel’s campaign of murdering Palestinian journalists in Gaza. A greater number have been killed by Israel in its war on the tiny enclave than the total number of journalists killed in all other major conflicts of the past 160 years combined.
The BBC has reported just 6 per cent of the more than 225 journalists killed by Israel in Gaza, compared to 62 per cent of the far smaller number of journalists killed in Ukraine. This is once again vital context for understanding that Israel’s goals are genocidal. It hopes to exterminate the main witnesses to its crimes.
6. Oborne adds a point of his own. He notes that the distinguished Israeli historian Avi Shlaim lives in the UK and teaches at Oxford University. Unlike the Israeli spokespeople familiar to BBC audiences, who are paid to muddy the waters and deny Israel’s genocide, Shlaim is both knowledgeable about the history of Israeli colonisation of Palestine and truly independent. He is in a position to dispassionately provide the context BBC audiences need to make judgments about what is going on and who is responsible for it.
And yet extraordinarily, Shlaim has never been invited on by the BBC. He is only too ready to do interviews. He has done them for Al Jazeera, for example. But he isn’t invited on because, it seems, he is “the wrong sort of Jew”. His research has led him to a series of highly critical conclusions about Israel’s historical and current treatment of the Palestinians. He calls what Israel is doing in Gaza a genocide. He is one of the prominent Israelis we are never allowed to hear from, because they are likely to make more credible and mainstream a narrative the BBC wishes to present as fringe, loopy and antisemitic. Again, what the BBC is doing – paid for by British taxpayers – isn’t journalism. It is propaganda for a foreign state.
Burgess’ answer is a long-winded shrugging of the shoulders, a BBC executive’s way of acting clueless – an equivalent of Manuel, the dim-witted Spanish waiter in the classic comedy show Fawlty Towers, saying: “I know nothing.”
Other lowlights from Burgess include his responding to a pointed question from Declassified journalist Hamza Yusuf on why the BBC has not given attention to British spy planes operating over Gaza from RAF base Akrotiri on Cyprus. “I don’t think we should overplay the UK’s contribution to what’s happening in Israel,” Burgess answers.
So the British state broadcaster has decided that its duty is not to investigate the nature of British state assistance to Israel in Gaza, even though most experts agree what Israel is doing there amounts to genocide. Burgess thinks scrutiny of British state complicity would be “overplaying” British collusion, even though the BBC has not actually investigated the extent or nature of that collusion to have reached a conclusion. This is the very antithesis of what journalism is there to do: monitor the centres of power, not exonerate such power-centres before they have even been scrutinised.
Labour MP Andy McDonald responded to Burgess: “To underplay the role of the UK is an error.”
It is more than that. It is journalistic complicity in British and Israeli state war crimes.
Here are a few key statistical findings from the Centre for Media Monitoring’s report on BBC coverage of Gaza over the year following 7 October 2023:
- The BBC ran more than 30 times more victim profiles of Israelis than Palestinians.
- The BBC interviewed more than twice as many Israelis as Palestinians.
- The BBC asked 38 of its guests to condemn Hamas. It asked no one to condemn Israel’s mass killing of civilians, or its attacks on hospitals and schools.
- Only 0.5% of BBC articles mentioned Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine.The BBC mentioned “occupation” – the essential context for understanding the relationship between Israel and Palestinians – only 14 times in news articles when providing context to the events of 7 October 2023. That amounted to 0.3% of articles. Additional context – decades of Israeli apartheid rule and Israel’s 17-year blockade of Gaza — were entirely missing from the coverage.
- The BBC described Israeli captives as “hostages”, while Palestinian detainees, including children held without charge, were called “prisoners”. During one major hostage exchange in which 90 Palestinians were swapped for three Israelis, 70% of BBC articles focused on those three Israelis.
- The BBC covered Ukraine with twice as many articles as Gaza in the time period, even though the Gaza story was newer and Israeli crimes even graver than Russia ones. The corporation was twice as likely to use sympathetic language for Ukrainian victims than it was for Palestinian victims.
- In coverage, Palestinians were usually described as having “died” or been “killed” in air strikes, without mention of who launched those strikes. Israeli victims, on the other hand, were “massacred”, “slaughtered” and “butchered” – and the author of the violence was named, even though, as we have seen, the Hannibal directive clouded the picture in at least some of those cases.
As is only too evident watching Burgess respond, he is not there to learn from the state broadcaster’s glaring mistakes – because systematic BBC pro-Israel bias isn’t a mistake. It’s precisely what the BBC is there to do.
UK seeks to ban Palestine Action over RAF base protest
Al Mayadeen | June 21, 2025
British news outlets on Saturday revealed that the UK government is preparing to ban Palestine Action, a pro-Palestinian direct action group, by classifying it as a terrorist organization. This move, spearheaded by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, is expected to be announced in a ministerial statement on Monday and will require parliamentary approval. If enacted, the ban would criminalize membership and support for the group under the Terrorism Act 2000.
The proposed proscription follows a high-profile protest at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire, where Palestine Action activists gained access to the military airbase and sprayed red paint on two aircraft. The group described the action as part of a campaign to disrupt the UK’s complicity in “Israel’s” assault on Gaza. “Activists have interrupted Britain’s direct participation in the commission of genocide and war crimes across the Middle East,” the group said.
Video footage released by the group showed two individuals entering the base at night on electric scooters, with one spraying red paint into the engine of a Voyager aircraft, used to transport British leaders and refuel allied jets. A spokesperson for the group declared: “Despite publicly condemning the Israeli government, Britain continues to send military cargo, fly spy planes over Gaza and refuel US and Israeli fighter jets.”
Though the RAF claimed the damage is being assessed and does not expect major operational disruptions, the incident has sparked a wider security review across UK military bases. The government’s response has drawn criticism for targeting activism rather than addressing its own military entanglements.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer condemned the protest as “disgraceful” and labeled it “an act of vandalism,” while counter-terrorism police and the Ministry of Defence continue their investigations.
Disruptive Solidarity
Founded in 2020 by Huda Ammori, a British-Palestinian activist, and Richard Barnard, Palestine Action is known for its non-violent yet disruptive tactics aimed at corporations that profit from the Israeli military-industrial complex.
The group has previously shut down two Elbit Systems-linked arms factories in Oldham and Tamworth and forced companies like Dean Group International to cut contracts with Israeli weapons manufacturers. Their disruptive tactics—ranging from factory occupations and sabotage to sustained divestment pressure, have challenged British institutions to reckon with their role in supplying the machinery of occupation.
Friday’s action at Brize Norton marks one of the group’s most significant actions yet, directly confronting a military base central to the UK’s support operations.
Critics say the proscription is a politically motivated attempt to silence dissent against Britain’s role in arming and supporting “Israel”. “We represent every person who stands for Palestinian liberation. If they want to ban us, they ban us all,” Palestine Action posted on X. The Palestine Solidarity Campaign called the move “outrageous,” defending the group as a non-violent direct action network.
The planned ban raises serious concerns about the criminalization of solidarity with Palestine and the suppression of dissent.
Featured Video
Stanislav Krapivnik: Massive Escalation – Attack on Putin’s Residence
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Book Review
Truth and Public Policy in the Digital Age
The Kevin Barrett-Chomsky Dispute in Historical Perspective – 10th part of the series “9/11 and the Zionist Question”
Prof. Tony Hall | American Herald Tribune | August 9, 2016
… In Among The Truthers Kay repeats the core idea of The Volunteer: A Canadian’s Secret Life in the Mossad. As Kay would have it, 9/11 confirms the role of Israel as the West’s primary bulwark against Islamic savagery. In making this case Kay repeats the assertion of Benjamin Netanyahu that 9/11 was good for Israel.
Kay asserts, “Following the attacks supporters of Israel spoke of a silver lining. The war against militant Islam suddenly was a global one. Now the whole world would see and understand the sort of nihilistic hatred that Israelis confront every day.” As Kay sees it, Jews are being enlisted en masse to serve as primary soldiers in a war of civilizations.
He writes, “The Jew was the perfect anti-Islamist, whose zeal and reliability was hard-wired into his political DNA thanks to six decades of Israeli warfare against Islamic terrorists in the Middle East.” … Read full article
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
Rod on How Intelligence, Politics, an… papasha408 on Trump Says Hamas Will Be Given… papasha408 on Is Israel About to Return to G… Bill Francis on NSW Premier Admits New “Securi… Richard Ong on Israeli forces arrest writer a… Bill Francis on How reporting facts can now la… loongtip on Europe’s Panic Economy: Frozen… Gemma on Israel’s diamond industr… Bill Francis on Victoria Moves to Force Online… papasha408 on The Empire of Lies: How the BB… loongtip on US Weighs Port Restrictions on… Bill Francis on Chris Minns Defends NSW “Hate…
Aletho News- Did Netanyahu just ask Trump for another war — and get it?
- As Israel bans aid orgs in Gaza, notorious mercenary firm seeks “Targeter”
- The Bari Weiss Playbook: How a Zionist Operative Conquered American Media
- How Intelligence, Politics, and Foreign Interests Shaped America’s Religious Movements
- Welcome To 2026: Europe Laying Groundwork For Climate Science Censorship!
- The new German totalitarianism
- Stanislav Krapivnik: Massive Escalation – Attack on Putin’s Residence
- Gaza races to preserve what remains of its 5,000-year-old archaeological legacy
- Dayton At 30: US Betrayal Old And New
- UNRWA head slams ‘outrageous’ Israeli law to cut water, energy to agency’s facilities
- If Americans Knew
- Tikvah Fund Secures $10.4M Grant From Trump, Pushes for Censorship to Advance Zionism
- Did Netanyahu just ask Trump for another war — and get it?
- Israel suspends operations of multiple humanitarian organizations in Gaza, including Doctors Without Borders
- Cold kills another Palestinian baby in Gaza as Israel continues to block shelter aid
- AIPAC Is Retreating From Endorsements and Election Spending. It Won’t Give Up Its Influence.
- Gaza health officials report outbreaks of water-borne illnesses, flu – Not a ceasefire Day 82
- TCN Warns – “ISRAEL FIRST: U.S. May Attack Iran Again”
- Hamas calls on Israel to allow impartial investigation into 7 October attacks
- Indiegogo Withholds $51K In Donations From MintPress in Financial Censorship Crackdown
- Gaza races to preserve what remains of its 5,000-year-old archaeological legacy
- No Tricks Zone
- Welcome To 2026: Europe Laying Groundwork For Climate Science Censorship!
- New Study Finds A Higher Rate Of Global Warming From 1899-1940 Than From 1983-2024
- Meteorologist Dr. Ryan Maue Warns “Germany Won’t Make It” If Winter Turns Severe
- Merry Christmas Everybody!
- Two More New Studies Show The Southern Ocean And Antarctica Were Warmer In The 1970s
- Der Spiegel Caught Making Up Reports About Conservative America (Again)
- New Study: 8000 Years Ago Relative Sea Level Was 30 Meters Higher Than Today Across East Antarctica
- The Wind Energy Paradox: “Why More Wind Turbines Don’t Always Mean More Power”
- New Study Reopens Questions About Our Ability To Meaningfully Assess Global Mean Temperature
- Dialing Back The Panic: German Physics Prof Sees No Evidence Of Climate Tipping Points!
Aletho News 