Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

USAID funded Ukraine group that smeared Vance

Protesters gather outside USAID headquarters, February 3, 2025 © Bill Clark / CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
RT | March 10, 2025

The US Agency for International Development (USAID) has been implicated in funding a Ukrainian organization, Molfar, which labeled Vice President J.D. Vance and other US officials and public figures as “foreign propagandists” aligned with Russia, according to an investigation by The Grayzone.

Molfar, established in 2019, describes itself as an open-source intelligence community platform which “collects lists of Ukrainian enemies to bring war criminals to justice.” The group’s website identifies USAID and the US Civil Research and Development Fund (CRDF) as partners, indicating financial and operational support from US government agencies.

The group’s online blacklist not only targeted Vice President Vance for his statements opposing continued US financial support for Kiev and his stance against Ukraine’s NATO membership, but also targeted other American figures, including US Counterterrorism Director Joe Kent and Representative Thomas Massie. Molfar’s website advocated for their “removal from public positions, the introduction of sanctions, and investigations into personal involvement in crimes.”

In addition to political figures, Molfar has targeted American journalists, including Max Blumenthal, editor-in-chief of The Grayzone. The organization accused Blumenthal of disseminating Russian narratives and threatened to expose his personal information, including home addresses and family details.

Other notable figures targeted by Molfar include billionaire tech entrepreneur Elon Musk, journalists Glenn Greenwald and Tucker Carlson, and award-winning American economist and public policy analyst Jeffrey Sachs.

A report published by Ukraine’s National Coordination Cybersecurity Center (NCSCC), bearing USAID’s logo, highlighted that Molfar assisted in training thousands of Ukrainian government employees in cyber warfare techniques and psychological operations. The report stated that over 2,000 public workers participated in practical assignments covering topics such as open-source searches, contact search, using Telegram bots, psyop as a method of information warfare, human intelligence and social engineering.

According to The Grayzone, Molfar’s activities are part of a broader network of Ukrainian organizations involved in Kiev’s information war efforts at the expense of US taxpayer money.

Another self-styled “fact-checking” outfit, VoxUkraine, has received substantial funding from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and USAID. Its VoxCheck project has been involved in censoring Americans’ social media posts deemed pro-Russian. Similarly, the Center for Countering Disinformation (CCD), an official body under Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council, has collaborated with both Molfar and VoxUkraine to combat “disinformation,” often labeling US public figures as promoters of Russian propaganda, including smearing now-Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.

Immediately upon assuming office, President Donald Trump suspended most US foreign assistance pending a three-month review to determine whether programs should continue based on their alignment with the new administration’s “America First” goals.

USAID, Washington’s primary mechanism for funding political projects abroad, has seen tens of billions of dollars’ worth of approved grants frozen as a result. The NED’s government funding was also frozen. Officially a US State Department-funded nonprofit for distributing grants to pro-democracy causes abroad, the NED has long faced allegations of acting as a CIA cutout for toppling foreign governments.

March 11, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

Trump’s ingenuity vis-à-vis Russia, Iran

By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | March 10, 2025  

Through the past three year period, Moscow claimed that it faced an existential threat from the US-led proxy war in Ukraine. But in the past six weeks, this threat perception has largely dissipated. The US President Donald Trump has made a heroic attempt to change his country’s image to a portmanteau of ‘friend’ and ‘enemy’ with whom Moscow can be friendly despite the backlog of a fundamental dislike or suspicion. 

Last week, Trump turned to the Iran question for what could be a potentially similar leap of faith. There are similarities in the two situations. Both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian are quintessential nationalists and modernisers who are open to westernism. Both Russia and Iran face US sanctions. Both seek a rollback of sanctions that may open up opportunities to integrate their economies with the world market. 

The Russian and Iranian elites alike can be described as ‘westernists’. Through their history, both Russia and Iran have experienced the West as a source of modernity to ‘upgrade’ their civilisation states. In such a paradigm, Trump is holding a stick in one hand and a carrot on the other, offering reconciliation or retribution depending on their choice. Is that a wise approach? Isn’t a reset without coercion possible at all? 

In the Russian perception, the threat from the US has significantly eased lately, as the Trump administration unambiguously signalled a strategy to engage with Russia and normalise the relationship — even holding out the prospects for a mutually beneficial economic cooperation. 

So far, Russia has had a roller coaster ride with Trump (who even threatened Russia with more sanctions) whose prescriptions of a ceasefire to bring the conflict in Ukraine to an end creates unease in the Russian mind. However, Trump also slammed the door shut on Ukraine’s NATO membership; rejected altogether any US military deployment in Ukraine; absolved Russia of responsibility for triggering the Ukraine conflict and instead placed the blame squarely on the Biden administration; openly acknowledged Russia’s desire for an end to the conflict; and took note of Moscow’s willingness to enter into negotiations — even conceded that the conflict itself is indeed a proxy war. 

At a practical level, Trump signalled readiness to restore the normal functioning of the Russian embassy.  If reports are to be believed, the two countries have frozen their offensive intelligence activities in cyber space. 

Again, during the recent voting on a UN Security Council resolution on Ukraine, the US and Russia found themselves arrayed against Washington’s European allies who joined hands with Kiev. Presumably, Russian and American diplomats in New York made coordinated moves. 

It comes as no surprise that there is panic in the European capitals and Kiev that Washington and Moscow are directly in contact and they are not in the loop. Even as the comfort level in Moscow has perceptively risen, the gloom in the European mind is only thickening, embodying the confusion and foreboding that permeated significant moments of their struggle. 

All in all, Trump has conceded the legitimacy of the Russian position even before negotiations have commenced. Is an out-of-the-box thinking conceivable with regard to Iran as well?  

In substantive terms, from the Russian perspective, the remaining ‘loose ends’ are: first, a regime change in Kiev that ensures the emergence of a neutral friendly neighbour; second, removal of US sanctions; and, third, talks on arms control and disarmament attuned to present-day conditions for ensuring European and global balance and stability. 

As regards Iran, these are early days but a far less demanding situation prevails. True, the two countries have been locked in an adversarial relationship for decades. But it can be attributed entirely to the American interference in Iran’s politics, economy, society and culture; an  unremitting mutual hostility was never the lodestar, historically. 

A constituency of ‘westernists’ exists within Iran who root for normalisation with the US as the pathway leading to the country’s economic recovery. Of course, like in Russia, super hawks and dogmatists in Iran also have vested interests in the status quo. The military-industrial complex in both countries are an influential voice. 

The big difference today is that the external environment in Eurasia  thrives on US-Russia tensions whereas, the intra-regional alignments in the Gulf region are conducive to US-Iran detente. The Saudi-Iranian rapprochement, a steady and largely mellowing of Iran’s politics of resistance, Saudi Arabia’s abandonment of of jihadi groups as geopolitical tool and its refocus on development and reform as national strategies — all these mould the zeitgeist, which abhors US-Iran confrontation. 

This historic transformation renders the old US strategy to isolate and ‘contain’ Iran rather obsolete. Meanwhile, there is a growing realisation within the US itself that American interests in West Asia no longer overlap Israel’s. Trump cannot but be conscious of it.   

Equally, Iran’s deterrence capability today is a compelling reality. By attacking Iran, the US can at best score a pyrrhic victory at the cost of Israel’s destruction. Trump will find it impossible to extricate the US from the ensuing quagmire during his presidency, which, in fact, may define his legacy. 

The US-Russia negotiations are likely to be protracted. Having come this far, Russia is in no mood to freeze the conflict till it takes full control of Donbass region — and, possibly, the eastern side of Dniepr river (including Odessa, Kharkhov, etc.) But in Iran’s case, time is running out. Something has to give way in another six months when the hourglass empties and the October deadline arrives for the snapback mechanism of the 2015 JCPOA to reimpose UN resolutions to “suspend all reprocessing, heavy water-related, and enrichment-related activities” by Tehran. 

Trump will be called upon to take a momentous decision on Iran. Make no mistake, if push comes to shove, Tehran may quit the NPT altogether. Trump said Wednesday that he sent a letter to Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, calling for an agreement to replace the JCPOA. He suggested, without specifics, that the issue could quickly lead to conflict with Iran, but also signalled that a nuclear deal with Iran could emerge in the near future.

Later on Friday, Trump told reporters in the Oval Office that the US is “down to the final moments” negotiating with Iran, and he hoped military intervention would prove unnecessary. As he put it, “It’s an interesting time in the history of the world. But we have a situation with Iran that something is going to happen very soon, very, very soon. 

“You’ll be talking about that pretty soon, I guess. Hopefully, we can have a peace deal. I’m not speaking out of strength or weakness, I’m just saying I’d rather see a peace deal than the other. But the other will solve the problem. We’re at final moments. We can’t let them have a nuclear weapon.”

Trump aims at generating peace dividends out of any normalisation with Russia and Iran, two energy superpowers, that could give momentum to his MAGA project. But cobwebs must be swept away first. Myths and misconceptions have shaped contemporary Western thinking on Russia and Iran. Trump should not fall for the phobia of Russia’s ‘imperialistic’ ambitions or Iran’s ‘clandestine’ nuclear programme.

If the first one was the narrative of the liberal-globalist neocon camp, the second one is a fabrication by the Israeli lobby. Both are self-serving narratives. In the process, the difference between westernisation and modernisation got lost. Westernisation is the adoption of western culture and society, whereas, modernisation is the development of one’s own culture and society. Westernisation can at best be only a subprocess of modernisation in countries such as Russia and Iran.

Trump’s ingenuity, therefore, lies in ending the US’ proxy wars with Russia and Iran by creating synergy out of the Russian-Iranian strategic partnership. If the US’ proxy wars only has drawn Russia and Iran closer than ever in their turbulent history as quasi-allies lately, their common interest today also lies in Trump’s ingenuity to take help from Putin to normalise the US-Iran ties. If anyone can pull off such an audacious, magical rope trick, it is only Trump who can,   

March 10, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ex-Ukrainian PM outraged by German intel chief’s warning

RT | March 10, 2025

Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Timoshenko has hit out at German intelligence chief Bruno Kahl after he claimed that resolving the conflict with Russia before the end of the decade could pose a security threat to Western Europe.

An end to the Ukraine conflict before 2029 or 2030 could allow Russia to regroup and “increase security risks for Europe,” Kahl told state broadcaster Deutsche Welle.

Kahl’s statement is the first official confirmation that the EU’s security is being prioritized at the expense of Ukraine’s sovereignty and the lives of its citizens, Timoshenko, who leads the opposition Fatherland (Batkivshchyna) party in Ukraine, claimed in a Facebook post on Friday.

“At the cost of Ukraine’s very existence and the cost of the lives of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians, did anyone decide to pay for Russia’s ‘demolition’ for safety in Europe? I didn’t think they would dare to say it so officially and openly…” she wrote.

Kahl’s remarks “explain a lot,” she said, urging the Ukrainian parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, to respond while calling for an immediate end to the conflict.

The German official’s comments echoed recent remarks by French President Emmanuel Macron, who claimed that Russia poses a direct threat to the rest of Europe and urged EU member states to increase defense spending.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has consistently dismissed Western leaders’ claims that Moscow could attack NATO as “nonsense.”

Divisions remain within the EU on the Ukraine conflict, with some countries advocating a stronger military response from Kiev while others, such as Hungary, call for peace talks. Brussels has continued to push for military aid to Kiev.

In March, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen launched the “rearm Europe” initiative to boost EU defense with up to €800 billion ($870 billion). In February, she announced €3.5 billion ($3.78 billion) in aid to strengthen Ukraine, calling its resilience an EU priority. Moscow has vowed to take measures to protect its security, warning that the EU’s militarization and confrontational rhetoric could escalate tensions.

Timoshenko’s response comes amid reports that she and members of former Ukrainian President Pyotr Poroshenko’s party recently held discussions with the team of US President Donald Trump. According to Politico, Ukrainian opposition figures presented themselves as more open to negotiations than Vladimir Zelensky. Both Timoshenko and Poroshenko, presently sanctioned on suspicion of high treason, confirmed their contacts with Trump’s team.

March 10, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Starlink is ‘backbone’ of Ukrainian military – Musk

RT | March 9, 2025

The Ukrainian military is fully dependent on the Starlink internet system, and turning it off would result in the collapse of the “entire frontline,” Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has claimed.

The system “is the backbone of the Ukrainian army,” Musk said on Sunday in a post on X.

“Their entire front line would collapse if I turned it off,” he wrote, claiming that the Russia-Ukraine conflict has become a stalemate and that peace must be achieved now. “What I am sickened by is years of slaughter in a stalemate that Ukraine will inevitably lose. Anyone who really cares, really thinks and really understands wants the meat grinder to stop.”

In late February, Reuters reported that Musk had been considering cutting off Ukraine’s Starlink internet access in order to provide Washington with leverage in bargaining over a deal for natural resources. At the time, Musk denied the claims, accusing the news agency of “lying” and fabricating the entire report.

SpaceX has provided the Ukrainian military with Starlink internet since the escalation of the conflict with Russia in 2022. More than 40,000 terminals have been delivered over the years, with the system becoming a crucial component in the command and control architecture of the Ukrainian military.

Apart from providing comms, the terminals have seen direct combat use. Starlink dishes have been repeatedly seen rigged to Ukrainian sea and aerial drones, providing the unmanned systems with difficult-to-jam, reliable control access.

Space X has been providing Kiev with access to Starshield, a more secure and militarized version of the system. According to a Bloomberg report, Musk’s company secured a new contract with the Pentagon late last year, with an additional 3,000 Starlink terminals in Ukraine granted access to Starshield.

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

U.S. admits Ukraine proxy war defeat while European elites persist in self-destruct delusions

Strategic Culture Foundation | March 7, 2025

In an interview on Fox News this week, America’s top diplomat Marco Rubio made a damning admission. He called the conflict in Ukraine a proxy war between the United States, its NATO allies and Russia.

Stop the press. In one fell swoop, the narrative justifying the NATO-backed war for the past three years was exposed as a naked lie. It is not about “defending Ukraine” from alleged Russian unprovoked aggression. It is a proxy war. That means it has deeper causes and responsibilities.

This is what Moscow and many other international observers have been saying all along. To recognize the conflict as a proxy war is to begin admitting wider culpability for it and to start addressing the root causes for a genuine peaceful settlement.

Secretary of State Rubio went on to emphatically call for an end to the war to spare lives. He claimed the conflict was in a stalemate, not quite bringing himself to utter the word, “defeat”. But defeat is what this debacle is.

Rubio decried how the previous Biden administration and Congress (including himself as a Senator) had fueled the conflict along with other NATO members in a futile campaign. It is now time to bring the conflict to an end, he said.

Appropriately, the U.S. foreign minister appeared on television with a prominent Lenten cross of ash marked on his forehead. Christians around the world begin preparations for Easter by donning ashes as a sign of repentance. Rubio’s “confession” of a failed U.S. policy of proxy war against Russia in Ukraine may be seen as a belated recognition in Washington that it needs to cease, desist and make amends for peace.

Not so the European leaders, however, who this week persisted in their lies about a noble purpose in Ukraine.

Following the humiliating rebuke of Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky by U.S. President Donald Trump in the Oval Office last week, the European politicians have been rallying their support for the Kiev regime.

Trump aides ejected Zelensky from the White House last Friday because he testily refused to comply with a U.S. initiative for peace in Ukraine. This week, the chastened Zelensky wrote a letter to Trump appealing for forgiveness – and more U.S. military aid. It’s not clear if the Ukrainian redundant president has convinced the Trump administration that he is ready to sign a peace deal.

In the meantime, the White House has now cut off military aid and intelligence sharing with the Kiev regime. Again, proving the reality of a proxy war.

That move has thrown the European allies into a quandary and existential crisis. It is a crisis of their own making.

An emergency EU leaders’ summit was convened to drum up more military support for Ukraine. The EU 27 could not agree on a package because Hungary vetoed it. Another summit is to be called on March 20,  when it is intended to bypass Hungarian objection to funding the war in Ukraine.

European leaders are desperate. The about-turn in U.S. policy to walk away from the failed proxy war in Ukraine has left them holding a dead-end hand of cards. Rather than folding, they are doubling down on their worthless chips.

Trump upbraided Zelensky in the Oval Office by telling him, “You don’t have the cards” to keep this war going.

The same advice can be leveled at the European governments, including the British, who strangely have wormed their way back into calling shots in Europe despite exiting the bloc five years ago.

This war has been lost with appalling losses. Three years of the biggest war in Europe since World War Two has resulted in over one million deaths – mainly on the Ukrainian military side – and hundreds of billions of dollars and euros wasted, which the American and European public will pay over generations through debts.

This war is an abominable crime perpetrated by Washington and its European allies. All the more so because it could have been avoided if Russian diplomatic efforts in late 2021 had been reciprocated to deal with Moscow’s legitimate security concerns over NATO’s expansion. But no, the Western imperialists wanted to strategically defeat Russia and they used a NeoNazi regime in Ukraine as their pawn following the CIA-backed coup in Kiev in 2014 against an elected president.

Western leaders must be held to account for their nefarious machinations and the colossal damage in Ukraine and Russia. Russian civilians have been killed by NATO weapons and over $300 billion in Russian assets have been confiscated. Russia has the right to seek massive war reparations.

At least, to their credit, the Trump administration has realized that the evil of this fraudulent war must stop.

U.S. Vice President JD Vance and Keith Kellogg, Trump’s envoy on Ukraine, also this week referred to the war as a proxy war that needs to end.

The Americans are calling on the Europeans to stop funding the war with military aid. This is an amazing turn around. Since WWII, the Americans have been the diehard warmonger with the European lackeys following suit. Now it’s the other way around. The European elites want the war in Ukraine to continue – albeit with the lie that they are seeking “lasting peace.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin has consistently said that if the Western powers stopped funneling weapons into Ukraine, the conflict would quickly stop. And then diplomacy could begin for dealing with the root causes and establishing mutual, sustainable peace.

Vice President Vance rightly pointed out that the Europeans by puffing up Zelensky as a hero “freedom fighter” are prolonging the slaughter and destruction of Ukraine as well as provoking the risk of a wider war.

The problem is that whereas the Americans have adopted realism and common sense (at last), the Europeans are continuing to persist in the lies and delusions about the proxy war against Russia.

This week, French President Emmanuel Macron echoed other European political figures by calling Russia a threat to Europe. The French, British and others are insisting on fueling the dead-end war by racking up astronomical debts and proposing to send “peacekeeper” troops to Ukraine. Moscow has warned that such a move would mean direct war.

So desperate is Macron that he is engaging in nuclear saber-rattling, offering to deploy French nuclear weapons to “defend” Europe. Why don’t Macron and other European elites simply engage in diplomacy like the Americans?

The insane recklessness of the Europeans stems from multiple sources: their incorrigible Russophobia, ties to the military industrial complex, chagrin over their American patron dumping the Ukraine war mess on them, and in their existential need to keep lying about the war as some noble cause instead of it being a sordid proxy war against Russia.

The Europeans are so full of lies, duplicity, guilt, and ultimately impotence that they will likely persist in their delusions of grandeur. To repent would be politically fatal. Thus persisting in their lies, the European Union and its military arm NATO are being destroyed.

Napoleon, Hitler, and now the elitist European leaders have all fallen into oblivion from miscalculations over Russia.

March 8, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

Germany Doesn’t Have Money for Merz’s Defense Boost – Ex-AfD MEP

Sputnik – 07.03.2025

Berlin plans to change its fiscal rules and “invest” €500 billion ($543 billion) in infrastructure and defense, as explained by the chancellor-in-waiting, Friedrich Merz.

It’s alarming that Merz is prioritizing military spending because of the mythical Russian threat, especially amid efforts for peace in Ukraine, Gunnar Beck, a legal academic and former AfD MEP, tells Sputnik.

Merz has long pushed for higher defense spending. Last December, he stated the Bundeswehr would need at least $87 billion annually, up from the current $57 billion. German media also reported a proposed $433 billion defense fund.

“Germany hasn’t got the money,” Beck stresses. “It’s got to borrow the money. It’s at the expense of social spending and badly needed investments in infrastructure and research and development.”

“It’s not only Germany that’s proposing to increase military spending. The EU, under [Ursula] von der Leyen, has announced it will borrow another €800 billion ($866 billion) to support Ukraine. When you add up these figures, it’s already more than a trillion. And they are clearly coordinating their policies,” Beck concludes.

March 7, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine cut off from US satellite imagery – media

RT | March 7, 2025

Ukraine has lost access to US satellite imagery after American space technology company Maxar blocked Kiev’s use of its services, a local media outlet reported on Friday. The move follows Washington’s recent decision to freeze military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine.

Ukrainian media outlet Militarnyi has claimed that several anonymous Maxar users have confirmed that they have been denied access to the service. The company has reportedly explained that the restriction had been introduced “in response to an administrative request.”

The outlet noted that the limit appears to apply to both government and private users, adding that the request cited by the company likely refers to US President Donald Trump’s order to cease all intelligence sharing with Ukraine.

Maxar, according to Militarnyi, has been one of the leading providers of high-resolution commercial satellite imagery to Ukraine’s armed forces who used it to track the movements of Russian troops, assess battlefield conditions and damage to key infrastructure. The US company has not yet confirmed the alleged restriction of services.

The report comes as Washington has halted the delivery of billions of dollars worth of military aid to Ukraine, while the CIA has confirmed that intelligence sharing with Kiev has been suspended. The decision to freeze military support for Ukraine follows last week’s heated meeting between Trump, US Vice President J.D. Vance and Zelensky at the White House. During the exchange, Trump accused Zelensky of ingratitude and “gambling with World War III” by refusing to seek peace with Russia. The Ukrainian leader was asked to leave the US capital and return only when he was ready for serious negotiations.

On Wednesday, during his address to the US Congress, Trump claimed that he had received a letter from Zelensky in which he had apparently agreed to come to the negotiating table in the near future in order to work towards a peace agreement.

Moscow has welcomed Washington’s suspension of military aid to Kiev, noting that such steps could potentially encourage Ukraine to seek a peaceful resolution to the conflict. At the same time, the Kremlin has expressed cautious optimism about Zelensky’s supposed U-turn on negotiations with Moscow, noting that the Ukrainian leader has yet to lift his legal ban on such contacts.

March 7, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Hungary to be stripped of voting rights, demand MEPs from pro-EU Volt party

Remix News | March 7, 2025

MEPs from the Volt party in the European Parliament submitted a proposed “action plan” earlier this week, as reported by Politico. Among the plan’s nine points is a call to strip Hungary of its guaranteed voting rights as a member of the European Union.

Volt is a pan-European federalist party that favors strengthening and centralizing the European Union’s authority over its member states.

Volt’s call to deprive Hungary of its right to veto all decisions made by the EU, which is a fundamental right guaranteed in the bloc’s founding treaties, is doubtless a response to Viktor Orbán’s veto of €20 billion in military aid that Brussels had wanted to send to Ukraine this week. This aid was intended to partially compensate for the United States’ recent suspension of aid to the country as part of the Trump administration’s attempts to force an end to the conflict.

Orbán has been strongly critical of the EU’s support for Ukraine from the outset of the current war. He has frequently used his country’s veto powers in an effort to pressure the bloc to stop arming Ukraine and instead force it to come to the negotiating table.

Other points in Volt’s proposal were a call for the formation of a European army, as is being discussed by others in the European Parliament, as well as a revision of the bloc’s treaties to give it greater authority in matters of defense. Also included is a suggestion to make Kaja Kallas, the European Commission’s current Vice President as well as its High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, an official foreign minister for the EU.

Given that Volt has only five MEPs in the European Parliament, its suggestions are unlikely to have much effect. They nevertheless reflect the growing frustration in the bloc with Hungary’s ongoing efforts to stop the war.

This is not the first time that the idea of depriving Hungary of its voting rights has been floated in European circles. Last summer, 63 MEPs demanded that Hungary’s rights be suspended in response to Orbán’s diplomatic visits to Kyiv, Moscow, and Beijing while his country held the rotating Presidency of the Council of the European Union.

March 7, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Zelensky changed his tune after Trump stopped (some) of the military aid to Kiev

By Ahmed Adel | March 6, 2025

Although US President Donald Trump announced the halt of military assistance to Ukraine, he cannot stop all the programs. Nonetheless, the threat of no longer receiving US military assistance was enough for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to change his tune toward his American counterpart after their spat on February 28 by expressing “regret” and announcing his support for a peace process.

Aid to Ukraine is provided through a specific program for the supply of foreign military equipment, which is included in the US budget for the current fiscal year and continues. Other assistance is also provided through a special program for Ukraine.

Before leaving the post of US President, Joe Biden signed an order for the Pentagon to deliver surplus ammunition and equipment. Trump could stop this program, but he cannot stop the funds that are financed from the budget because Congress approved it.

Therefore, as in many other things, what is said aloud does not necessarily correlate with reality. In fact, Ukraine has enough weapons and ammunition for at least six months, meaning that combat operations are not decreasing. Real consequences for Ukraine may arise when the Americans stop providing them with intelligence and help in guiding missiles and other weapons at Russian forces.

Three days after the bitter clash between Trump and an ungrateful Zelensky in the White House, the US president ordered a freeze on military aid to Ukraine until the Kiev regime shows a “commitment to peace,” adding that the sending of all the military assistance that is not yet in Ukraine will be suspended, including weapons in transit on planes or ships, or located in warehouses in Poland.

Trump again sharply criticized Zelensky for his statement that an agreement to end the war with Russia is “still very, very far away.” On his Truth Social media network, Trump described it as “the worst statement that could have been made” and that “America will not put up with it for much longer,” in a threat that sounded as if regime change in Kiev was being considered.

“It is what I was saying, this guy doesn’t want there to be Peace as long as he has America’s backing,” Trump added.

US Vice President J.D. Vance, speaking about security guarantees for Kiev, said on March 3 that the best option is to give Americans an economic perspective for the future of Ukraine because it “is a way better security guarantee than 20,000 troops from some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years.”

The offer Trump made to establish peace in Ukraine included various forms of pressure on those involved. For some, it was a ‘stick,’ like stopping arms deliveries to Ukraine, and for others, it was a ‘carrot,’ like promising Russia that some sanctions would be eased.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, in principle, said that talks are welcomed but that military operations will not end until peace talks come to fruition. Therefore, the possibility that peace negotiations could begin in the near future cannot be ruled out.

The US president mentioned an April 20th deadline and that his meeting with Putin would take place by then, too. However, that is a whole month and a half away, and much can happen between now and then.

It is estimated that the loss of American aid will increase the losses of the Ukrainian armed forces on the front. Ukrainian military experts say that the front can hold out for only another month or two without American military support.

For this reason, Zelensky said on March 4: “Our meeting in Washington, at the White House on Friday, did not go the way it was supposed to be. It is regrettable that it happened this way.”

He also claimed that Kiev wants to end the war and is “ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer,” stressing that “my team and I stand ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts. We are ready to work fast to end the war.”

What Trump’s decision to halt military aid shows is that the Biden administration always had the ability to force Zelensky to the negotiating table but refused to do so in the false belief that Ukraine would bleed Russia whilst Western sanctions would collapse the Russian economy.

As has been proven, it is Ukraine that has been bled and its economy collapsed, while now with the threat of military aid halting, Zelensky is seemingly being forced to begin negotiations with Moscow.

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

March 6, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Zelensky’s New ‘Ceasefire’ Offer Shows He’s Back to His Old Jokes

Sputnik – 05.03.2025

Zelensky’s latest so-called ‘peace offer,’ which the ex-comedian claims could help end the conflict, has zero chance to succeed as it contains NO NEW proposals, a source in military and diplomatic circles has said.

A ‘Truce at Sea’

  • Such a truce was actually implemented during the Black Sea Grain Initiative (BSGI) during 2022-2023.
  • Whereas Russia honored all of its BSGI commitments, the other parties to the agreement did not fulfil their part of the deal.
  • That ‘truce’ was in fact used by the West to ship weapons into Ukraine on vessels that were ostensibly meant to ferry Ukrainian grain to global markets.
  • In November last year, a proposal similar to the BSGI was made by Ukraine to Russia via Turkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The offer was reviewed by Russia’s Ministry of Defense and Foreign Ministry, but ultimately rejected due to being one-sided, with Moscow expected to make concessions but receive nothing in return.

No Attacks on Energy Infrastructure

  • Again, a similar offer was made to Russia before via Turkiye, former Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu revealed last year.
  • Russia studied that offer carefully. President Vladimir Putin even postponed plans to launch a campaign of massed precision strikes against energy facilities that supplied power to Ukraine’s military-industrial complex, both because of such offers and due to humanitarian concerns.
  • Ukraine, however, proceeded to launch drone strikes on Russian energy infrastructure, achieving some of their goals. However, superior Russian strikes have now rendered inoperable about 70 percent of the energy infrastructure that provides power to the Ukrainian military and to Kiev’s arms industry.

Thus, it seems highly likely that Volodymyr Zelensky simply wants to use his old tricks to gain an advantage over Russia, and is not really interested in peace.

March 5, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

How Does Trump Resume Shipments of Arms to the Regime that Started the War?

By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | March 5, 2025

Imagine if war had broken out between the United States and Soviet Russia during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Let’s assume that two American cities — New York and Washington, D.C., and two Russian cities —Moscow and St. Petersburg — were destroyed by nuclear missiles before a peace agreement was entered into.

Who would the U.S. mainstream press, the U.S. national-security establishment, and U.S. public officials today be saying started the war?

There is no doubt that the official narrative would be that it was Russia that started the war when it installed its nuclear missiles in Cuba and then refused to remove them. If Russia had not installed those missiles, their argument would be, the U.S. government would not have had to attack and invade Cuba in order to remove them.

But what if someone were to point out that Cuba had the legitimate authority under international law to invite the Russians to install nuclear missiles in Cuba? After all, even though Cuba is only 90 miles away from the United States, it is a sovereign and independent country. As such, it had the authority to install whatever missiles it wanted in its own country.

Nonetheless, even conceding the legalities of the situation, the official U.S. narrative would have been that as a practical matter, Russia started the war by provoking it with its installation of nuclear missiles pointed at the United States from only 90 miles away and its refusal to remove them.

Undoubtedly, it is this type of reasoning that President Trump had in mind when he recently declared that Ukraine, under the presidency of Volodymyr Zelensky, started the Ukraine-Russia war.

But to be more exact, it was the U.S. national-security establishment, in complicity with Zelensky, that started the war by provoking Russia into invading Ukraine, just as it would have been Russia that started the war by provoking the United States into invading Cuba back in 1963.

Provoking war is what U.S. officials were doing when they were violating U.S. promises not to move the old Cold War dinosaur NATO eastward toward Russia after the end of the Cold War. Knowing full well that Russia was objecting to the violation of those U.S. promises, the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA used NATO to absorb former members of the Warsaw Pact, which enabled U.S. and German tanks, missiles, armaments, and troops to get ever closer to Russia’s border.

It was President Biden and the U.S. national-security establishment, operating in complicity with Zelensky, that pulled the final trigger to start the war by suggesting that NATO intended to absorb Ukraine, which would enable U.S. and German missiles, tanks, troops, bases, and weapons to be placed on Russia’s border. They knew that Russia would react with an invasion, just as the U.S. would have invaded Cuba had Russia not removed its nuclear missiles from that nation.

What many Americans do not want to confront is the fact that a Russian invasion of Ukraine was precisely what the U.S. national-security establishment wanted, given that this would convert Russia into a renewed Cold War enemy, would avoid a critical examination of the 20-year-long U.S. war in Afghanistan, would “degrade” Russia by having hundreds of thousands of Russian soldiers killed, injured, or maimed, and, it was hoped, would result in the removal of Russian president Vladimir Putin from power and his replacement with a pro-U.S. stooge.

The fact is that Zelensky was not forced to participate in this political game. He chose to do so. He chose to sacrifice his country and his countrymen in order to please U.S. officials by having Ukraine join NATO, the old Cold War dinosaur. If he had chosen differently and declared no intention of having Ukraine join NATO, there would have been no deadly and destructive Russian invasion of his country.

Trump obviously gets this. Even though the U.S. mainstream press and the national-security establishment continue to mindlessly repeat the same tiresome official narrative, their mindsets are quite irrelevant. What is relevant is Trump’s mindset, which clearly sees Zelensky, especially with his NATO machinations, as having started the war.

Today, there are many people, including Zelensky, who are exhorting Trump to cancel his suspension of U.S. arms to Ukraine. But how can Trump do that, given his conviction that Ukraine was the one that started the war? How could he possibly justify to himself helping a regime that started the war to kill soldiers in a regime that did not start the war?

March 5, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Something is smelling really bad among the peace brokers of Ukraine

By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 5, 2025

You don’t have to be a genius to work out that if you exclude Russia and just look at the three groups who are vying for war, or whining for peace, that no one is being very honest about their intentions. Previously, I tackled head on how Trump is not being very honest when he talks of peace as he has the means to enforce it at the drop of a hat, but chooses to drag his feet and hold out for deals. This is not simply Trump Basic who we all know well – where’s the deal? – but also Trump playing out a longer game with Russia, looking at where the sweet spot could be. Trump’s tour de force is always to create a crisis and then position himself to be the only person on the planet who is capable or willing to resolve it. His personality is always paramount to everything.

And so the stunt in the White House needs to be seen in the correct context. Zelensky was not honest in coming to the White House in the first place as it was believed that he was to meet Trump and JD Vance to sign a mineral deal which he agreed to and retracted from signing a number of times leading up to the visit. This became apparent when he met with Trump behind close doors and so the Plan B was to lower Zelensky into a trap and make him look ungrateful, arrogant and entirely impossible to work with. But what’s the real story behind Zelensky’s decision? Again, we see the puppet Zelensky having his strings pulled by others. Is it a coincidence that just days earlier British PM Keir Starmer arrives in the White House where, just a matter of hours earlier he announces in the British parliament that defence spending will be increased, in line with Trump’s demands for European members of NATO? Was it merely that Starmer needed to show some goodwill to Trump even to get the meeting, or was Starmer preparing for choppier waters to come, when Trump would finally hear the rumours? According to some reports, Zelensky has sold all the mineral rights already to the UK, so he was playing a game with Trump all along.

But there are more lies and games to come.

If we look at Zelensky’s European partners can we honestly say they are being honest with the public which elected them? While Macron announces a no-fly zone rule, Starmer tells his own people that Britain will send its own troops to Ukraine. Has the world gone mad, or are these leaders actually serious about their intentions? How many of UK soldiers, airmen and sailors could Starmer actually send out of a total of barely 150,000 in uniform? In reality, probably only a third at best. And presumably this move would be without the support of the U.S., who would keep out of it? If that isn’t the craziest batshit idea, there is more madness to follow. Zelensky, since arriving in the UK for the emergency meeting of mostly EU leaders who support him – including Erdogan of Turkey – has started saying some very odd things to the press, while he picks up these huge checks for military support. He keeps talking about getting a peace deal with Russia.

As Starmer prepares to send British troops to Ukraine, he continues to jail people for posting nasty messages in Facebook, in particular when they slur his own party members – an irony that only Joe Stalin would appreciate, as it’s straight from the dictators’ handbook. Starmer preaches about supporting a free and democratic Ukraine while persecuting anyone who doesn’t agree with his views or uses social media to complain about the state of Britain. In reality it’s one despot supporting another and it’s hard to see how many days this could last with body bags coming back to the UK while pensioners get plain clothed policeman come to their houses and threaten them with imprisonment – or even more cuts to the poor. Of course the body bags will be hidden by a tawdry deal struck between the government and the British press, just as so many ‘no-go zones’ were agreed beforehand. But citizen journalism will call them out as the families won’t stay quiet. Starmer and Macron seem to think that just as Churchill pulled a few stunts to draw the U.S. into the Second World War, that European soldiers on Ukrainian soil will override any agreement that the U.S. and Russia could pull off. The move by Starmer is so idiotic that it leaves many wondering whether he is being controlled by Mossad or the Obamas, comes from the same camp which so fabulously made so many poor predictions from the beginning – namely Russian sanctions.

There is only one conclusion to it, although it leaves Trump and Putin with two options, neither particularly edifying. One, to let the Europeans go ahead with their stunt and watch the collapse of NATO as a credible organization worthy of its funding; or two, to pull the rug out from under the feet of Zelensky and force presidential elections, where of course Trump will install his own puppet to replace the incumbent one. The huge mistake Starmer is making is that he is assuming British troops need not be sent to the front line, but can encircle Kiev to show political support for Zelensky. Yet, each day Russian troops will gain ground and move closer to the Ukrainian capital. For Trump to attempt regime change will be harder of course with a strong contingent of European soldiers on the ground as the State Department and all its dirty tricks doesn’t normally encounter such resistance. Is Zelensky’s ‘we want peace’ mantra a trick so that time can be bought to re-arm? Likely. Monty Python would have had a lot of fun with these clowns. Blessed are the peace brokers.

March 5, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Militarism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »