The EU wants Ukraine in the European Union, and they are willing to use underhanded methods in violation of the founding treaty, including cutting Hungary out of the process and ignoring the country’s veto.
Marta Kos, the European Commission’s commissioner for enlargement, spoke to the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday, where she made it clear that they want to complete the enlargement process for Ukraine by the end of the next EU term, which is 2029.
“We must and will succeed in the next phase of European unification. We have a realistic chance of bringing one or more candidate countries to the finish line in this cycle,” said Kos.
To speed up the process, Brussels is also working on introducing an “alternative” decision-making mechanism. This is intended to ensure that bilateral disputes – such as Hungarian vetoes – can no longer hold back EU enlargement.
“Together with EU member states, the commission is exploring options to simplify access procedures so that bilateral issues do not hinder enlargement in this very sensitive geopolitical situation,” she said.
Kos also specifically addressed the accession process of Ukraine and Moldova, stating: “Now we absolutely have to take the next step with Ukraine and Moldova. Both countries have done their homework.” She also emphasized that all preparations have been made, so it is now up to the Council of Member States to open the first negotiation cluster.
According to the commissioner, enlargement is not only an economic opportunity, but also a key security guarantee for the European Union. To this end, the EU commission is already starting to open up the internal markets to the countries concerned — in particular in the areas of defense and security, energy and connectivity.
“To complement the accession negotiations, the commission is stepping up its efforts to accelerate the integration of the internal market: now in the areas of defense and security, and then in connectivity, energy and other areas, together with EU member states,” she added.
Kos said: “Ukraine’s access to the EU is a key security guarantee. We must make it happen. We must move forward to maintain the momentum of reforms in Ukraine, to help our member states address their concerns and, ultimately, to respond to the greatest security challenges since the Second World War.”
It is worth remembering that it was Marta Kos who recently admitted that accession negotiations with Ukraine would begin in June, and also spoke of doing everything she could to accelerate Ukraine’s accession.
She even said that a thousand people are already working in the Brussels institutions to accelerate the accession. This is interesting because it was EU Commissioner Marta Kos who showed Alex Soros that Ukraine could not meet a single EU accession condition.
Ukraine is considered the most corrupt country in Europe, a point that many top officials and organizations have acknowledged repeatedly in the past. The EU has already sent tens of billions to the country, but if EU membership occurs, European taxpayers can expect to be on the hook for many tens of billions more. The EU agriculture sector is also expected to experience even more losses if markets are opened up to cheap Ukrainian products, which is not just a concern of Hungary, but of countries across the bloc.
Indian Ambassador M.K. Bhadrakumar argues that Trump’s words do not match his actions. It is extremely unlikely that the US was not involved in the attack on Russia’s nuclear forces, and Bhadrakumar argues that the failure by Russia to respond would be profoundly irresponsible. Ambassador Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat for 30 years in the Indian Foreign Service, and is now a columnist for Hindu and Deccan Herald Indian newspapers.
President Donald Trump’s special envoy to the Ukraine conflict said that recent Ukrainian attacks on Russian air bases have created a significant risk of escalation in the war.
“I’m telling you, the risk levels are going way up – I mean, what happened this weekend,” Trump’s envoy, Keith Kellogg, told Fox News. “People have to understand in the national security space: when you attack an opponent’s part of their national survival system, which is their triad, the nuclear triad, that means your risk level goes up because you don’t know what the other side is going to do. You’re not sure.”
On Sunday, the Ukrainian intelligence service, the SBU, launched a major attack on Russian airbases thousands of miles from the front lines. Kiev claims to have disabled one third of Moscow’s fleet of strategic bombers.
Washington and Moscow each possess the ability to conduct nuclear attacks via bombers, submarines, and land-based ballistic missiles, known as the nuclear triad. The White House claims that it was not informed of the attack by Kiev. However, the CIA is deeply tied to the SBU.
The SBU has conducted other provocative attacks in recent days, hitting Russian railways and bridges and reportedly killing seven civilians.
Trump said he spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin about the attacks on Wednesday. “I just finished speaking, by telephone, with President Vladimir Putin, of Russia. The call lasted approximately one hour and 15 minutes,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “We discussed the attack on Russia’s docked airplanes, by Ukraine, and also various other attacks that have been taking place by both sides. It was a good conversation, but not a conversation that will lead to immediate Peace. President Putin did say, and very strongly, that he will have to respond to the recent attack on the airfields.”
Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has refused to seriously consider Russia’s latest peace proposal, dismissing it as an unacceptable “ultimatum”.
Russian and Ukrainian delegations exchanged their respective roadmaps for peace at their second meeting in a month, in Istanbul on Monday. In its proposal, Moscow proposed that Ukraine recognizes the loss of five of its former regions that joined Russia in public referendums, withdraws its forces from them, commit to neutrality, and limit its own military capabilities.
Russia also floated a “package proposal” for a ceasefire, in which Kiev would halt deploying its troops, suspend mobilisation, stop foreign weapons shipments, and hold a presidential election.
Zelensky rejected the peace memorandum out of hand. “This is an ultimatum, and it will not be taken seriously by the Ukrainian side… This memorandum is a misunderstanding,” he said on Wednesday.
The Ukrainian leader claimed that any territorial concessions to Russia would contravene Ukraine’s constitution.
Russia’s lead negotiator at the Istanbul talks, Vladimir Medinsky, defended the memorandum, describing it as an opportunity to end the conflict. “This is not an ultimatum. It’s a proposal that will truly allow for achieving real peace — or at least a ceasefire — and make a huge step towards achieving long-term peace,” he said.
Zelensky also criticized the diplomatic process itself, saying, “To continue diplomatic meetings in Istanbul at a level that decides nothing — it’s meaningless.”
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, however, suggested that Zelensky dismissed the outcome of the talks because they were focused not on financial aid or weapons supplies, but on people.
Zakharova was referring to Moscow and Kiev’s agreement to carry the largest prisoner exchange to date, which is expected to take place this weekend and involved 1,200 people on each side.
Explosives used to blow up two railway bridges in Russia over the weekend were foreign-made, the head of Russia’s Investigative Committee Aleksandr Bastrykin has announced. The attack, which claimed the lives of seven civilians, was organized by Ukrainian intelligence, he added.
Speaking at a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin and government officials on Wednesday, Bastrykin said that the “evidence collected by the investigators directly points to [the fact] that all three terrorist attacks [in Bryansk and Kursk regions] were beyond any doubt arranged by Ukrainian special services.”
According to Bastrykin, the bombs used in the attacks “were composed of foreign-made plastic explosives equivalent to 15kg of TNT,” and set off by a Ukrainian-made detonator.
He added that the probe into the blasts is still underway, with the authorities working to identify all those responsible.
Bastrykin reported that between May 20 and May 25, Russian security services were conducting an operation in Bryansk Region against a group of Ukrainian saboteurs. He revealed that during the raid, the authorities uncovered a cache containing 13kg of similar plastic explosives and Ukrainian-made remote detonators.
The official estimated the material damage caused by the explosions at over 1 billion rubles ($13mn).
On Saturday evening, debris from a bombed bridge fell in front of, and derailed, an inter-city passenger train in the Bryansk Region. Seven people were killed and over one hundred seriously injured in the crash.
Early on Sunday, a railway bridge was blown up as a freight train passed over it in neighboring Kursk Region, wounding the driver and two assistants.
Later on Sunday, a stretch of railroad in a different part of Bryansk Region was damaged when a bomb went off in front of a switcher locomotive. No casualties have been reported from the third incident.
The attacks were carried out the day before the second round of direct Russia-Ukraine talks in Istanbul. While no breakthroughs were achieved in Türkiye, the two sides agreed to conduct a prisoner swap as well as to exchange the bodies of thousands of fallen soldiers.
Russia and Ukraine also exchanged memorandums containing drastically different visions for ending the conflict. Both sides have indicated that dialogue would continue.
For starters, defensive operations are “carried out on one’s own territory,” says retired Russian military intelligence colonel Rustem Klupov, commenting on President Putin and the Russian Investigative Committee’s statements on the terror attacks targeting Russian infrastructure in Bryansk and Kursk.
If the targeted objects, including bridges and rail lines, were clearly delineated as Russian military forces or supply lines, perhaps Ukraine would be able to get away with justifying them to its foreign sponsors. But the fact is, in both Bryansk and Kursk, it was civilian infrastructure that was targeted, Klupov said.
Even the “dual use” excuse doesn’t fly in this case, the observer emphasized.
“When a civilian train is traveling along a route, when civilians are killed, when an explosion occurs with the aim of causing maximum harm to the ordinary civilian population, it cannot be interpreted as anything other than a terrorist act aimed at intimidating the civilian population and changing the policy of the leadership,” Klupov said.
In short, these were terrorist acts, pure and simple, the analyst stressed.
George Beebe is director of Grand Strategy at the Quincy Institute. Beebe was the former director of the CIA’s Russia analysis and a staff advisor on Russia matters to Vice President Cheney. Beebe outlines why Trump should not walk away from negotiations, and why the attack on Russia’s nuclear forces (possibly with NATO support) was extremely dangerous.
As the media is reporting, Ukraine just launched a massive drone attack that wreaked major destruction deep inside Russia. Ukrainian officials smuggled the drones in trucks into Russia and launched them from inside the country. U.S. officials and the U.S. mainstream press are praising the attack as a brilliant maneuver. They are hoping that the attack will force Russia to the negotiating table with the aim of bringing an end to the war.
One thing is clear: the attack now escalates the conflict in a major way. Ukraine has now shown that it can attack military installations, towns, and cities deep inside Russia,
An important question that is not being asked is: Did Pentagon or CIA officials serve as secret advisors or directors in the drone operation? Since Congress is effectively owned by the U.S. national-security establishment, it’s a question that unfortunately is not going to be asked by any congressional committee. Given the longtime deference to the national-security establishment by the mainstream media, the question is unlikely to come from them either and even if it did, there is no doubt that the Pentagon and CIA would deny it even if they were involved.
Why is the question important? Well, think about it: The U.S. government furnishes weaponry to the Ukrainian government to use against Russian forces. But let’s assume that it goes one step further than that. Let’s assume that it also assists, advises, and directs Ukrainian officials in the use of such weaponry.
That would mean, as a practical matter, that it was the U.S. government that launched that drone attack and was simply using Ukraine as its agent — in order to preserve “plausible deniability.” It would mean, as a practical matter, that it is the U.S. government that is using its weaponry to kill and injure Russian soldiers and destroy Russian armaments, not only in Ukraine but also deep inside Russia.
Ukraine and U.S. officials are hoping that Ukraine’s drone attack will force Russia to end the war. But what they are ignoring in this calculus is the big elephant in the room — NATO. It was because of NATO’s expansion eastward and its threat to absorb Ukraine that caused Russia to invade Ukraine in the first place.
After considerable sacrifice of men, money, and armaments, how likely is it that Russia would agree to a peace treaty that leaves NATO on Ukraine’s border and ready to absorb Ukraine on a moment’s notice? I say: Not likely at all. Even if a peace treaty promised that NATO would not absorb Ukraine, everyone knows that the U.S. government cannot be trusted to keep its word. After all, let’s not forget that U.S. officials promised that NATO would not move eastward, and it broke that promise.
Thus, with NATO still in existence and still on Ukraine’s border, why would Russia be interested in settling the war, given that that’s what motivated Russia to invade Ukraine in the first place? And yet we all know that U.S. officials would not think of dismantling NATO or even just moving it back to Western Europe as part of a peace treaty.
Given these intractable positions, the war will inevitably continue, notwithstanding the fondest hopes of U.S. and Ukrainian officials. But the problem is that the longer it goes on, the more dangerous it is becoming. What if U.S. officials actually are secretly assisting, advising, and directing Ukrainian attacks on Russia? Wouldn’t this be sufficient importantly that Congress, not the Pentagon and the CIA, should decide it? Isn’t that why the Constitution places the decision to go to war against another nation-state in the hands of Congress rather than the Pentagon and the CIA?
One of the big problems with war is its unpredictable nature. How long will Russia put up with U.S. armaments being used to kill and maim Russian soldiers and destroy Russian armaments and property without attacking the armaments before they reach Ukraine, especially if Russia concludes that it is actually the Pentagon and the CIA who are waging the war using Ukraine as their agent? If Russia were to attack such armaments before they arrived in Ukraine, say in staging grounds in NATO member Poland, we all know what that would mean — all-out nuclear war between the United States and Russia. Even if the U.S were to “win” such a war, the United States would cease to exist as a viable nation.
All this is simply to show that the U.S. national-security establishment, operating through its Cold War dinosaur NATO, is getting the United States ever close to the possibility of the nuclear destruction of our nation. Would “winning” a nuclear war with Russia be worth it? Is NATO worth it? I say no. I say it’s time to throw not only NATO into the dustbin of history but also the U.S. national-security state form of governmental structure that was foisted upon our land in the 1940s to protect us from the supposed international communist conspiracy that, U.S. officials claimed, was based in Moscow.
The peace memorandum developed by Russia and presented to the Ukrainian delegation during the talks in Istanbul, Türkiye, on Monday calls on Kiev to withdraw its troops from the former Ukrainian territories that have joined Russia and confirm its neutral and non-nuclear status, according to the text of the document seen by RT.
The proposal consists of three parts, which include the conditions for a comprehensive settlement of the Ukraine conflict, steps toward achieving a ceasefire, and a peace roadmap that includes some unilateral steps by Russia.
The “final settlement” of the conflict would require international recognition of the former Ukrainian territories as parts of Russia. The two Donbass republics, as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions, officially joined Russia following a series of referendums in autumn 2022. Crimea voted to rejoin Russia in 2014 in the wake of the Western-backed Maidan coup in Kiev.
Ukraine would also have to withdraw all its forces and armed groups from those territories, the document said.
Kiev would have to reaffirm its neutral status and introduce a ban on any military activities of third-party states on Ukrainian territory, as well as to withdraw from international treaties incompatible with such a status. It would also have to reaffirm its nuclear-free status and prohibit the acquisition, transit, or deployment of nuclear weapons on its territory.
The memorandum expects Ukraine to set certain limits on the size of its armed forces, as well as military equipment, but does not provide any fixed numbers. All Ukrainian nationalist armed groups within the armed forces and the National Guard would have to be disbanded, according to the document.
Under the peace proposal, Kiev would have to guarantee the rights of the Russian and Russian-speaking people in Ukraine and grant Russian the status of an official language, stop the persecution of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, ban Nazi propaganda and any nationalist groups, as well as lift sanctions imposed against Moscow. Both Russia and Ukraine would renounce claims to compensation of damage linked to the conflict.
The document suggests two options for reaching a ceasefire. One of them requires Kiev to start withdrawing its troops from the territories that have joined Russia and pulling them away from the Russian borders to a certain distance. This process would have to be completed within 30 days.
The second option – the “package option” – would include a ban on any Ukrainian troop movements (except for the withdrawal of forces) and the cessation of the Ukrainian mobilization campaign and Western military aid to Kiev, including arms shipment and intelligence sharing. The sides would then establish a bilateral monitoring center and release each other’s citizens held by the other side.
Ukraine would also have to lift martial law and set a date for presidential and parliamentary elections. All the steps listed within this option would also have to be completed within 30 days, according to the document.
According to the proposal, the final peace treaty between Moscow and Kiev would be signed after the elections in Ukraine and endorsed by a legally binding UN Security Council resolution.
Last week, Reuters published what it called the details of Ukraine’s peace proposal where Kiev reportedly rejected Moscow’s demands for the recognition of Ukraine’s former territories as parts of Russia, and also ruled out abandoning its ambition to join NATO. The Ukrainian memorandum also demanded reparations from Russia.
Russian delegation head Vladimir Medinsky, an aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin, reported the key outcomes of the negotiations with Ukrainian representatives in Istanbul.
Key statements:
Russia handed Ukraine a draft memorandum on settlement, which Kiev took for study
The Russian settlement memorandum is in two parts and is detailed and well-developed
The first part focuses on how to achieve genuine long-term peace
The second part outlines steps for a full ceasefire, allowing for flexibility and multiple paths to that goal
Russia will unilaterally transfer 6,000 bodies of Ukrainian soldiers to Kiev next week, having identified all the deceased
The parties agreed on the largest-yet prisoner exchange
The total exchange will be at least 1,000 prisoners, possibly more
Sick and seriously wounded prisoners will be exchanged on an “all for all” basis
Moscow and Kiev will create a commission to exchange seriously wounded troops without political decisions
The sides will exchange soldiers under the age of 25
Russia offered Ukraine a concrete ceasefire for two to three days in certain frontline sectors
Moscow and Kiev agreed to a ceasefire in specific areas so commanders can retrieve the bodies of their soldiers
The Ukrainian armed forces promised to work out the ceasefire proposal for those areas soon
Kiev turned the issue of ‘child abductions’ into a ‘show for sentimental Europeans’
No children have been kidnapped by Moscow, only rescued by Russian soldiers
Russia received a list of 339 children from Ukraine who are in difficult situations due to the conflict
Moscow returns children to Kiev if their parents or legal guardians are present
Russia is working on reuniting families separated by the Ukraine conflict
The negotiations with Ukraine were conducted in Russian
The Russian delegation was satisfied with the results of the second round of talks with Ukraine, Medinsky said.
Moscow and Kiev have agreed to exchange the bodies of thousands of fallen soldiers, Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov announced on Monday following the second round of direct talks in Istanbul, Тürkiye.
Speaking to the press after the negotiations, Umerov, who led Kiev’s delegation, stated that the two sides had discussed a number of topics, including a ceasefire, humanitarian issues, and a potential meeting between Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin.
On the question of prisoner exchanges, Umerov said Moscow and Kiev had agreed to “focus on specific categories, not numbers.” Both sides have reportedly reached an agreement to exchange all seriously wounded and seriously ill prisoners of war in an “all-for-all” format.
“The second category is young soldiers aged 18 to 25. Also all for all. We also agreed to return 6,000 for 6,000 bodies of dead soldiers,” Umerov said.
Umerov added that Kiev has proposed holding a third round of talks at some point between June 20 and 30.
Monday’s talks mark the second time Russian and Ukrainian negotiators have met directly to discuss the resolution of the Ukraine conflict since Kiev abandoned peace efforts back in 2022. The first round of the renewed talks was held at the initiative of Putin on May 16.
Opposition candidate Karol Nawrocki has been elected as the president of Poland, according to data published on the official website of the election commission. Nawrocki received 50.9% of the votes, just ahead of Warsaw Mayor Rafal Trzaskowski (49.1%), Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s ally.
Poland’s stance on the Ukrainian crisis may change after the presidential election, as the country’s politicians and ordinary people alike seem increasingly reluctant to support Zelensky’s regime.
Here is a closer look at where Karol Nawrocki stands on Ukraine and other major issues.
No Free Pass for Ukraine
Nawrocki does not see it in either the European Union or NATO until bilateral issues like the 1943 Volyn massacre committed by Ukrainian nationalists during WWII are addressed.
While promising support, he blasted Volodymyr Zelensky for “ingratitude”.
Accused “European elites” (plus their “butler” Tusk) of fueling the war.
Unequivocally will not deploy Polish troops to Ukraine.
Accused Ukrainian refugees of taking advantage of Polish generosity, vowed to shield Polish farmers and truckers from unfair Ukrainian competition.
Opposes any Ukraine-EU trade liberalization.
On Russia
Karol Nawrocki swerved from telling Radio ZET that maintaining diplomatic ties with Russia was “not good for Poland,” to claiming he was ready to sit down at the negotiating table with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
As former head of the Institute of National Remembrance (IPN), he oversaw demolition of Soviet war monuments—earning himself a spot on the Russian Interior Ministry’s “wanted” list of Polish nationals in 2024.
Skepticism Towards EU
Karol Nawrocki called the EU weak and chaotic, citing its exclusion from Ukraine peace talks.
He pledged to not allow the liberalization of trade between the EU and Ukraine.
Nawrocki vowed to keep Poland on the zloty, not the euro.
How powerful is the Rothschild banking family? How did they amass their fortune? Just how rich are they? Do they secretly control the world? Sputnik explores. … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.
