Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Idea of limited, fast strike on Iran misjudges our capabilities: IRGC

Al Mayadeen | January 27, 2026

The notion of carrying out a “limited, rapid, and clean” operation against Iran stems from flawed assumptions and a poor judgment of Tehran’s defensive and offensive capabilities, a senior military official at Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters of the Iranian Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) stated in response to threats levelled by the United States and “Israel”.

The official emphasized that the Iranian armed forces “do not monitor enemy movements only during the execution phase; they carefully track early indicators of any threat to the nation’s security.”

“Operational decisions will be made based on field assessments at the appropriate time,” he asserted.

He cautioned that any scenario “designed around surprise or control over the scope of conflict will spiral out of control from the very first stages,” noting that “the presence of US aircraft carriers and military equipment in the region has been exaggerated.”

Highlighting Iran’s strategic advantage in its waters, he said, “The maritime environment surrounding Iran is familiar and fully monitored by the Iranian armed forces. The concentration of forces and equipment from outside the region in such an environment will not serve as a deterrent; rather, it increases their vulnerability and makes them accessible targets.”

The official further asserted that, over recent years, “Iran has relied on its local naval capabilities, its asymmetric defense doctrine, and unique geopolitical strengths, shaping military equations in the Gulf and the Sea of Oman in a way that prevents any aggressor from assuming the security of its forces and bases is guaranteed.”

No attempt to undermine Iran will succeed

Referring to past attempts to influence Iran’s internal affairs or undermine its political structure, he noted that “whether through political and economic pressure, military threats, or psychological warfare, such efforts have always failed, and this flawed approach will not succeed in the future either.”

“Iran will not be the initiator of any war, but it will not allow any threat to its national security to progress to the execution stage, even at its earliest phases,” he stressed.

The official placed full responsibility for any unintended consequences “directly on parties that jeopardize the stability of the entire region, whether through provocative and interventionist presence or through direct and indirect support.”

This closely follows remarks by the head of the Iranian Journalists’ Association and member of the Government Media Council, Masha’Allah Shams al-Wa’izin, who told Al Mayadeen that Washington has conveyed, through a third party, that Iranian facilities could be targeted by attacks, while expecting Tehran to absorb any such strikes “without a severe response.”

Shams al-Wa’izin stressed, however, that from Iran’s perspective, any so-called limited strike would be treated as a full-scale war, dramatically increasing the cost for any potential aggressor. He further claimed that the United States and “Israel” had orchestrated recent events involving armed riots inside the country following what he described as the failure of a 12-day war on Iran.

He also dismissed what he called “conflated and false” reports circulated by opposition groups regarding alleged developments in Iran, saying they originated from “armed opposition based in Tel Aviv and Paris.”

“The United States wants Iran to surrender,” Shams al-Wa’izin said, adding that no self-respecting nation could accept such threats. He described the recent US military buildup in the region as political signaling by President Donald Trump toward Iran’s leadership, while underscoring that Tehran possesses multiple leverage points and capabilities to respond to any form of pressure.

January 27, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

US Military Buildup on Land, Air, and Sea Raises Fears of Imminent Attack on Iran – Expert

Sputnik – 27.01.2026

The US and Israel “have outlined a plan for the next phase in resolving the Iranian issue… The level of military readiness at all levels in Iran is high and has reached a red line,” Lebanese expert Brigadier General Malik Ayub tells Sputnik.

However, Israel is unlikely to participate in a war against the country, Ayub notes. Its involvement would be a “serious mistake,” given its inability to withstand the previous confrontation with Iran.

The expert suggests that if war breaks out, Iran will strike Israel to use it as leverage against the US, and if Israel joins the conflict, the war will be devastating and with unpredictable outcomes.

As for the American military bases in the region, Iran will consider them US territory, not Arab land, Ayub believes.

He also mentions that Hezbollah could use a war as a “golden opportunity” to liberate five positions in southern Lebanon, shifting the balance of power both domestically and internationally.

Speaking about Iran’s allies in the region, Ayub notes that the conflict would threaten the Gulf states’ interests, particularly Saudi Arabia, by jeopardizing the Strait of Hormuz and disrupting access to significant oil supplies and global maritime trade.

January 27, 2026 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

WEF Calls for ‘Cultural Revolution’ to Promote Lab-Grown Meat

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | January 26, 2026

Participants at last week’s annual meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF) called for a “cultural revolution” to increase acceptance of lab-grown meat — despite the public’s “terrible” resistance to the products, The Blaze reported.

The meeting, held in Davos, Switzerland, brought together leading global political and business leaders.

During the “Food @ the Edge,” panelist Sam Kass, a senior policy adviser for nutrition during the Obama administration, asked about the growth of “replacements” for “core foods.” The former chef said he doesn’t want to see a future “where we’re starting to drink coffee from a factory as opposed to from a tree.”

Andrea Illy, chairman of the Italian coffee giant illycaffè, countered that “there is a terrible cultural resistance from consumers to accept tech foods” but that he believes such foods “represent the way forward.”

Illy, affiliated with the WEF for over a decade, said reducing meat consumption yields environmental and health benefits. He said that “70% of the ecological footprint of agriculture is due to animal proteins.”

Illy claimed “excessive consumption” of real meat products is the leading cause of noncommunicable diseases — the “number one health problem” in the West. He called for the reduction of real meat consumption to a “healthy” level and for a decades-long “cultural revolution” to get people to consume lab-grown meat.

Experts tout benefits of real meat, question safety of lab-grown alternatives

Internist Dr. Meryl Nass, founder of Door to Freedom, hit back at Illy’s claims. Since health officials started recommending less meat — which they blamed for certain health conditions — “we had child obesity rise from 4% to 20%,” Nass said. “Childhood Type 2 diabetes doubled. Adult diabetes and prediabetes skyrocketed.” Nass blamed high carbohydrate consumption for the increase.

“Meat is extremely healthy, especially when animals graze on grasses as they were meant to and when they are not fed antibiotics, hormones and contaminated feed,” Nass said. She said the animal feed used in industrial meat production is typically “drenched with glyphosate or grown on sewage sludge.”

Biologist Heidi Wichmann, Ph.D., a member of Make Europe Healthy Again’s advisory committee, said the primary driver of non-communicable diseases is not meat, “but the way food is produced, treated and disconnected from natural biological cycles.”

“Excessive consumption of biologically degraded, highly processed products is problematic, regardless of whether they are of animal or plant origin,” she said.

Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., senior research scientist for Children’s Health Defense, said that while animal agriculture is “an ample source of disease variants,” questions remain about the safety of lab-grown meat.

“Lab-grown meat has all the unknowns of any new technology,” Jablonowski said. “In theory, lab-grown food can be healthy. In practice, only if consumers demand it.”

According to Sayer Ji, chairman of the Global Wellness Forum and founder of GreenMedInfo, these unknowns associated with lab-grown meat include “novel risks” that are not fully studied.

“Many products rely on immortalized cell lines, which by definition evade normal cellular aging and death mechanisms — raising legitimate concerns about oncogenic potential and long-term biological effects,” Ji said.

Technologies like this “centralize food production into highly patented, proprietary systems that displace decentralized, local and farmer-based food networks — a shift away from food sovereignty and toward industrial dependency,” Ji said.

WEF calls development of lab-grown meat from stem cells ‘revolutionary’

The WEF last week released a video promoting lab-grown meat produced from animal stem cells, describing the technology as “revolutionary.”

The video featured Singapore-based Shiok Meats, which grows “meat” and “seafood” from animal stem cells. The WEF said Shiok’s technologyoffers “a promising solution to the environmental and ethical concerns associated with conventional animal agriculture.”

Singapore, which approved the sale of lab-grown meat in 2020, is a global leader in promoting alternatives to conventional meat. In 2024, Singapore approved 16 insects for human consumption.

Several experts suggested that the global elite are pushing to reduce meat consumption by suggesting tactics such as making people allergic to red meat, or convincing wealthy countries to switch to “100% synthetic beef.”

“Narratives had to be created by the globalists to demonize meat,” Nass said. “The push for lab-grown meat comes from the desire to control food by central authorities,” who “want food to only come from outside authorities, who can withhold it if you do not comply — or who make it too expensive and control you that way.”

Seamus Bruner, director of research at the Government Accountability Institute, suggested that what “ties all of this together” is “an obsession by what I call the ‘Controligarchs’ — a small, self-appointed elite that believes every aspect of human life must be managed, optimized and ultimately owned by them.”

Seven states, including Florida, Texas and Montana, have banned lab-grown meats. Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released new dietary guidelines favoring the consumption of protein, dairy, healthy fats, vegetables and fruit and deemphasizing grains.

Consumers have increasingly rejected alternative meat products. For instance, the stock price of synthetic meat producer Beyond Meat cratered last year, dropping from an all-time high of $240 to less than $1 amid low consumer demand in the U.S.

Jeffrey Tucker, president and founder of the Brownstone Institute, said, “There is near-zero market demand for this ‘frankenfood’ born of the same intellectual class and lab technicians who have given us poison food and medicine.”

Tucker said producers of synthetic meats “rely on government regulations and restrictions to throttle genuine health and good lives while deprecating what we know is both good for us and delicious.”

WEF: phasing out artificial additives placing ‘stress’ on food industry

Other WEF panelists criticized efforts by the HHS to phase out synthetic dyes and artificial additives in food products.

According to Slay News, Jasmin Hume, founder and CEO of Shiru, an AI-powered “protein discovery company,” said HHS’ recommendations are placing the food industry “under an unprecedented amount of stress.”

Hume claimed removing synthetic ingredients from foods would require significant changes by food manufacturers and would have a negative effect on consumers and the planet.

Nass noted that approximately 10,000 artificial food additives have been approved in the U.S. compared with only about 400 in the European Union. “Companies already know how to produce food without most such additives,” she said.

Slay News reported that Hume’s remarks came as the Trump administration “ramps up its Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) crackdown on ultra-processed junk, synthetic additives, and added sugars,” leaving WEF members “scrambling to defend” synthetic food that faces growing public and political resistance.

Mass vaccinations or culls of livestock linked to lab-grown meat agenda

Politico Europe reported Jan. 16 that authorities in Greece are responding to a nationwide sheep pox outbreak with mass culls of sheep flocks — but are facing increasing pressure to engage in mass vaccination of sheep instead.

According to Politico Europe, many Greek farmers are “begging for vaccines to save their flocks.” Mass vaccination was among the demands of farmers who recently protested against Greek government policies by blocking highways throughout the country.

“Sheep pox is so infectious that global farming regulations require whole herds to be slaughtered immediately after even a single case is detected,” Politico Europe reported. The outbreak has resulted in over 470,000 sheep and goats being culled, and the closure of over 2,500 farms in Greece.

The European Union’s Animal Welfare Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi told Greek authorities last year that vaccination is the only new measure that can stop new sheep pox outbreaks.

The Greek government and its advisers have “repeatedly rejected this option, citing the steep financial consequences and damage to exports” and the fact that no sheep pox vaccine has been approved in Greece or the EU, Politico Europe reported.

Regenerative farmer Howard Vlieger, a member of the board of advisers of GMO/Toxin Free USA, said choosing between mass culling and mass vaccination ignores a tried-and-true method in which farmers “let the ones die that are going to die” and use the surviving animals as the “genetic base for building your seed stock.”

“Vaccine-induced immunity does not replicate the breadth, durability, or ecological integration of naturally acquired immunity, which is what inspired the creation of vaccination but has never been effectively replaced by it,” Ji said.

Bruner, author of “Controligarchs: Exposing the Billionaire Class, Their Secret Deals, and the Globalist Plot to Dominate Your Life,” said lab-grown meat and mass culling or vaccination of livestock are part of the “Controligarch worldview.” This includes “centralized control over natural systems in the name of efficiency, safety and sustainability.”

“They seek to replace organic, decentralized life with systems that can be surveilled, patented and governed from the top down,” he said.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

January 27, 2026 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | Leave a comment

The Board For Peace – Whitewashing Ethnic Cleansing and Genocide

DOC MALIK | January 26, 2026

ABOUT THIS CONVERSATION:

Last week in Davos at the WEF meeting, Trump announced the Board of Peace and the technocratic takeover of Gaza. I break down what this actually means.

This podcast is highly addictive and seriously good for your health.

SUPPORT DOC MALIK

For the full episodes, bonus content, back catalogue, and monthly Live Streams, please subscribe to either:

The paid Spotify subscription here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://creators.spotify.com/pod/show…

The paid Substack subscription here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://docmalik.substack.com/subscri…

Thank you to all the new subscribers for your lovely messages and reviews! And a big thanks to my existing subscribers for sticking with me and supporting the show!

January 27, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Video | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Trump and Iran, War or Negotiations?

By Samyar Rostami – New Eastern Outlook – January 26, 2026

Although the likelihood of a US attack on Iran has greatly increased. If Iran shows widespread strength and resistance, the Americans will retreat. Iran’s response to military attacks will certainly be more severe and comprehensive than in previous cases.

In the national security document published in Trump’s second administration, like the previous two documents, the national defense of the United States is characterized, as it includes the defense of the territory, the defense of the people, the defense of the political system, and the defense of the economy.

Iran’s position was also prominent in previous documents. In that document, the name of Iran was repeated six times, and it was one of the greatest threats to US national security. It was proposed, and in addition, in two other cases, it referred to the threat of Iran.

In the latest document, the number of these references has been reduced to three. In the new document, direct reference to Iran’s nuclear program has been almost eliminated. But the issue and role of waterways is still prominent in this document; in fact, this time the name of the Strait of Hormuz is explicitly mentioned and emphasized in the new document.

The new US national security document depicts Iran in the general framework of “weakening” and does not actually mention Iran as a fundamental threat. But this does not mean that the United States no longer considers Iran a threat.

War or negotiations

The behavior of the Trump administration, namely in recent months, has been not only in rhetoric but also in practice anti-Iranian, from pressuring European governments to activate the snapback mechanism to supporting Israeli military actions, seizing ships suspected of carrying weapons to Iran, and even actions such as seizing ships off the coast of Venezuela.

Given the current state of US-Iran relations, the US has two options: moving towards an agreement or adopting a military option, but Washington’s desire is to stop Iran’s nuclear capability without falling into the quagmire of eternal wars.

The issue of negotiations had been stalled since the 12-day war because Tehran refuses to return to negotiations before receiving the necessary guarantees from the US about not starting another attack against Iran by Israel or the US and having the right to enrich uranium.

Not all Trump officials and aides share the same view and approach, and some believe that negotiating with Tehran will increase Iran’s legitimacy. Within the administration, it seems that some are willing not to move towards a military option before diplomatic solutions are exhausted.

Also, the United States, which previously adopted a policy of “maximum pressure campaign,” still claims to protect the rights of the Iranian people. In this regard, Donald Trump has now imposed a 25% customs tariff on any country that has trade relations with Iran, which could have a negative impact on Iran’s economic relations. Trump also called for illegal actions, including the occupation of government institutions, by asking Iranian protesters to continue the protests and even promised that help was on the way.

The United States is also using the protests inside Iran as a tool to gain more concessions from Tehran in any possible agreement.

Iran’s readiness for diplomacy and defense

Previously, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi had emphasized that the United States and the regime would not achieve a different result by repeating the previous failed experience. “Iran is much more prepared than the 12-day war,” he said, adding, “I hope the wise option will be chosen. We will prepare diplomatic and economic options.”

In a situation where an average of $10 billion was allocated annually for the import of basic goods, the government came to the conclusion that economic surgery should be performed in this area; the preferential currency should be eliminated for consumers.

The protests in Iran have been carried out peacefully since early January by a group of people and trades in response to currency fluctuations and the living conditions. The government announced that it recognizes these protests and efforts to address these concerns are ongoing. However, after a week and on January 8-9, the protests by terrorist elements turned into riots in cities, destroying government, public, relief, and mosques.

Iranian authorities have made mass arrests of terrorist elements in team houses and terrorist cells, and they even have documents about the connections between these terrorist elements and the United States and Israel.

In the view of government spokeswoman Fatemeh Mohajerani, the peaceful protests of the people were subjected to a terrorist attack. Also, Brigadier General Ahmad Ali Goodarzi, Commander of the Faraj Border Guard, announced the identification and destruction of 3 terrorist teams before they entered the country at the country’s borders and the discovery of weapons and ammunition from them.

Amir Saeed Iravani, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Iran in the United Nations, stated in a letter to the Security Council and the Secretary-General of the UN: “The Islamic Republic strongly condemns the continuous, illegal, and irresponsible behavior of the United States of America in coordination with Israel to interfere in Iran’s internal affairs through threats, incitement, and deliberate encouragement of instability and violence.”

Also, internal cohesion among political groups and figures in Iran is established and stable. Apart from the words and positions of the Leader of Iran, the representatives of the Islamic Consultative Assembly (Parliament) considered the government’s decision (end of the consumption chain) a courageous act and an important step.

The parliament speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said, “At this time, the responsibility of us as Iranian officials is to confront the enemy in the economic war.”

From the perspective of Hassan Rouhani, if a foreign aggressor wants to abuse the protest within the family, the family members will put aside the difference and break the aggressor’s hand.

In fact, from Tehran’s perspective, Iran is ready for both war and negotiation. That means fair, honorable, and equal negotiations with mutual respect and based on mutual interests are still the priority, not giving orders and dictating. Iran also has preconditions.

Although the US has greatly increased its forces in the region. Iran’s military forces are also at the peak of defensive readiness and are ready to confront any aggression and evil of the enemy against Iran. Therefore, any action must face retaliation from Iran.

The amount of oil sales in the past 14 months in the form of export shipments has been record-breaking. The creation of new restrictions on the sale of Iranian oil does not create any serious restrictions on Iran’s oil sales processes.

Outlook

It seems that the US is paying special attention to shaping a soft transformation and a colorful and internal revolution in Iran, along with hard threats as a means of pressure. But internal cohesion among political groups and figures in Iran is established and stable.

Although the likelihood of a US attack on Iran has greatly increased. If Iran shows widespread strength and resistance, the Americans will retreat.  Iran’s response to military attacks will certainly be more severe and comprehensive than in previous cases.

In the meantime, Washington’s failure in the direction of the hard programs could make the path of interaction or resolution of issues between Iran and the United States, in the new framework, more complex.

Samyar Rostami is а political observer and senior researcher in international relations.

Follow new articles on our Telegram channel

January 26, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

US pressure contributing to Israeli influence in Latin America: Experts

Press TV – January 26, 2026

US political pressure is contributing to the Israeli regime’s influence across Latin America, even as long-standing regional support for the Palestinian cause continues through diplomatic, legal, and grassroots channels, experts say.

For decades, several left-wing governments in the region shaped their foreign policy around anti-imperialism and de-colonial identity, aligning openly with Palestinian rights, but analysts warn the legacy is now at the disposal of a mix of US interference, far-right political shifts, and economic leverage, the Middle East Eye news and analysis website reported on Monday.

Following the launch of the Israeli regime’s war of genocide on Gaza in October 2023, Brazil’s president verified the nature of the onslaught as being “genocidal,” Colombia suspended diplomatic ties with the regime, and Chile sought accountability for Israeli atrocities at international courts. Yet experts cited by the outlet said Washington has worked to counter that momentum through lobbying, political threats, and direct pressure on outspoken governments.

“Latin American states lack instruments of hard power and are therefore constrained in how they can respond to US pressure,” said Ali Farhat, a Latin American affairs specialist. “That limitation creates openings for Israel to consolidate influence, particularly where governments seek to avoid confrontation with Washington.”

US officials have increasingly framed cooperation with Washington as a test of “security” and “democratic alignment,” while linking regional diplomacy to broader American foreign policy goals that dovetail with closer ties with Tel Aviv.

Argentina has emerged as the clearest example of this shift. Far-right President Javier Milei has announced plans to move the country’s embassy to the holy occupied city of al-Quds and expand security and economic cooperation with the regime, while openly backing its war on Gaza as “legitimate self-defense.”

Last year, Argentina received a $20-billion bailout from Washington, which US President Donald Trump defended as support for a “good financial philosophy,” despite skepticism over its impact on the country.

Farhat said US meddling has reshaped the regional landscape, pointing to Washington’s targeting of Venezuela’s leadership as part of a broader effort to weaken vocal supporters of Palestine.

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, long seen as one of the most uncompromising defenders of Palestinian rights in Latin America, was kidnapped by US forces earlier this year and is now standing trial in New York on “drugs, weapons, and narco-terrorism” charges.

“He (Maduro) was among the most uncompromising defenders of Palestine on the continent,” Farhat said. “His marginalization [and now ouster] represents the loss of a fierce advocate for the cause.”

The pundit said Maduro framed the Palestinian struggle as inseparable from anti-imperialism and viewed the US as a colonial power and the regime as an occupying entity backed by it.

Since Trump’s return to office last year, Farhat said, left-leaning leaders have shifted tactics rather than abandoning Palestine, opting for recalibration over confrontation, but far-right governments have accelerated alignment with both Washington and Tel Aviv.

As of 25 January, Argentina is the only Latin American country to have agreed to join Trump’s controversial “Board of Peace” initiative in Gaza, which describes itself as an international organization seeking to promote stability and secure “peace.”

Nilto Tatto, a congressman from Brazil’s Workers’ Party, urged Latin American governments to reject the board and any initiatives undermining Palestinian rights.

“Any framework managed by Washington would not serve peace so much as reproduce hegemony under an international guise,” Tatto said.

“Brazil, evidently, cannot take part in a process whose outcome is already predetermined, namely one that focuses on the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip only to then keep the territory under US control.”

Julia Perie, a former Argentine lawmaker, said Argentina’s shift reflected ideological realignment.

“Argentina’s position is part of a geopolitical vision that prioritizes alignment with the United States,” said Perie.

She added that Latin American solidarity with Palestine has always been cyclical. “This is another phase in a longer historical transformation, not the end of solidarity.”

‘Recalibration not abandonment’

Amid the situation, observers noted, support for Palestine in countries facing mounting political pressure was increasingly being channeled through legal action, multilateral institutions, and popular movements rather than overt diplomatic confrontation.

Ramon Medero, president of Venezuela’s La Danta TV, said the current moment represented adaptation, not retreat.

“It is difficult to argue that the Palestinian cause has suffered a decisive blow,” Medero said.

“What we are seeing is a repackaging of escalation through legal and multilateral avenues to reduce the costs of sanctions and backlash.”

Medero added that the Palestinian cause was now embedded in a broader Global South struggle.

“The Palestinian cause has become a structural symbol of liberation, sovereignty, and self-determination,” he said. “What is shifting is agency – away from governments and toward popular consciousness.”

He added that far-right advances could intensify grassroots mobilization.

January 26, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

China Rejects U.S. Claims of Coercion in Central America

teleSUR | January 26, 2026

On Monday, Guo Jiakun, a spokesperson for China’s Foreign Affairs Ministry, rejected U.S. accusations of alleged Chinese “coercion” and “interference” in Central America.

His remarks came after Rep. John Moolenaar, chairman of the U.S. House Select Committee on China, traveled to several Central American countries to counter Chinese influence and question the involvement of Asian companies in strategic sectors such as the operation of ports linked to the Panama Canal.

In response, Guo described the U.S. claims as “complete lies and fallacies,” saying they reflect ideological bias and a Cold War mentality. “China firmly opposes certain U.S. politicians interfering in the normal relations between Central American countries and China,” the Chinese diplomat said.

He also stressed that the Chinese foreign policy toward Latin America and the Caribbean is based on principles of mutual respect, sovereign equality, mutual benefit, openness and inclusiveness, and cooperation aimed at shared development.

According to Guo, relations between China and Central American countries have produced tangible benefits for local populations, particularly in areas such as infrastructure, trade, logistics connectivity, productive investment, and technology transfer.

China maintains that its presence in Central America is not aimed at political domination but rather at a model of South-South cooperation that has been “well received by the countries involved.”

Guo urged U.S. politicians to stop instrumentalizing China-related issues for geopolitical purposes and to focus their efforts on initiatives that contribute to regional development. In multiple international forums, China has reiterated its rejection of bloc-based thinking and confrontation, advocating for a multipolar international order based on multilateralism and respect for state sovereignty.

Earlier, U.S. President Donald Trump released the new U.S. National Security Strategy, which prioritizes strengthening his country’s influence in Latin America and the Caribbean and seeks to reconfigure strategic control over key trade corridors such as the Panama Canal.

January 26, 2026 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

New US defense strategy downgrades Russian ‘threat’

RT | January 26, 2026

The Pentagon has downgraded the alleged threat level from Russia in its newly released US National Defense Strategy.

A similar document issued under the previous administration of President Joe Biden in October 2022, less than a year after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict, described Moscow as an “acute threat.”

But the updated defense strategy, published by the War Department on Friday, referred to Russia as “a persistent but manageable threat to NATO’s eastern members for the foreseeable future.”

The document also stressed that Moscow “possesses the world’s largest nuclear arsenal, which it continues to modernize and diversify, as well as undersea, space, and cyber capabilities that it could employ against the US Homeland.”

It said the fighting between Moscow and Kiev has proven that Russia “retains deep reservoirs of military and industrial power,” as well as “national resolve required to sustain a protracted war in its near abroad.”

However, according to the Pentagon’s assessment, Moscow is “in no position to make a bid for European hegemony. European NATO dwarfs Russia in economic scale, population, and, thus, latent military power.”

The document said that the US will “continue to play a vital role in NATO” and “remain engaged in Europe,” but from now on it will “prioritize defending the US Homeland and deterring China,” echoing the White House National Security Strategy published in October.

Despite Europe having “a smaller and decreasing share of global economic power,” NATO members on the continent are “strongly positioned to take primary responsibility for Europe’s conventional defense, with critical but more limited US support,” according to the strategy.

The EU and UK should also be “taking the lead in supporting Ukraine’s defense,” the Pentagon stressed. It also reiterated the stance of US President Donald Trump that the conflict between Moscow and Kiev “must end.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin opined last October that the Trump administration is guided by American interests, which he called a “rational approach.”

“Russia also reserves the right to be guided by our national interests. One of which, incidentally, is the restoration of full-fledged relations with the United States,” he stressed.

January 26, 2026 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Donald Trump Is No Peace President

By José Niño | The Libertarian Institute | January 26, 2026

Donald Trump presented himself as someone who would end America’s perpetual conflicts and chart a fresh course in global affairs. Supporters routinely placed him alongside noninterventionist figures such as Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul, insisting he would deliver prudence and realism to the nation’s capital. Reality paints an entirely different picture. Across Venezuela, Somalia, Iran, and Yemen, Trump’s tenure has featured military expansion, financial coercion, and overseas operations that mirror his predecessors in both breadth and destructiveness.

Hard data confirms this assessment. Information from the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data project reveals that Trump authorized roughly the same number of airstrikes during merely the opening five months of his second administration as President Joe Biden greenlit throughout his complete four-year tenure. During 2025 by itself, American forces struck seven nations on Trump’s authority, marking an unparalleled extension of Washington’s military footprint globally.

Trump’s Venezuela strategy epitomizes his administration’s hawkish disposition. The maximum pressure initiative intensified sharply beginning in 2017, cutting off Caracas from American financial systems and targeting the state petroleum enterprise PDVSA. Venezuela’s petroleum export earnings plummeted from $4.8 billion in 2018 to merely $477 million in 2020.

Trump’s present administration enacted secondary tariffs, punishing any nation buying Venezuelan petroleum and raised the bounty on Nicolás Maduro to $50 million. Subsequently, a Christmas Eve assault and accounts of a CIA drone strike toward the end of 2025 added more fuel to the first. Trump kicked off 2026 on an escalatory note with his successful abduction of President Maduro on January 3 in clear violation of international law.

Past Venezuela, Trump’s Caribbean and Eastern Pacific assault initiative stands as among the most legally questionable military campaigns in contemporary American history. Commencing September 2, the administration began executing strikes against vessels it alleged transported narcotics. Based on figures disclosed by the Trump administration, thirty strikes total have been executed, with over one hundred individuals killed in what amount to summary executions plainly violating American and global statutes. During this entire assault initiative, the Pentagon has furnished zero proof supporting its allegations and has conceded ignorance regarding the identities of numerous victims.

Somalia witnessed extraordinary intensification under Trump during 2025. The administration executed no fewer than 127 airstrikes, exceeding twofold the prior yearly maximum of American bombardments there, a benchmark Trump personally established at sixty-three during his initial presidency. Per New America, the airstrikes executed in 2025 surpass those performed in Somalia throughout the Joe Biden, Barack Obama, and George W. Bush administrations when totaled together.

Accounts exist of non-combatants being slain in American airstrikes and campaigns executed by American-supported units. Conditions remain challenging to verify since practically zero American press attention addresses the aerial campaign notwithstanding the extraordinary expansion.

President Trump authorized the initial documented American missile bombardments in Nigeria on Christmas Day, launched by an American vessel in the Gulf of Guinea. Nigerian authorities identified the objective as “two major Islamic State terrorist enclaves” within a zone not recognized as a significant center for ISIS-linked combatants, provoking doubts concerning the objective choice. American projectiles additionally struck two villages beyond the designated objective, leading to the destruction of numerous dwellings.

Yemen endured especially catastrophic outcomes from Trump’s military campaigns in 2025. The administration initiated an intensive bombardment operation commencing March 15 responding to the Houthis reinstating their maritime embargo against Israeli commerce. The American operation, termed “Operation Rough Rider,” eliminated over 250 non-combatants, per Air Wars. Bombardments encompassed the April 17 destruction of the Ras Issa Fuel Port, killing eighty-four individuals, entirely civilians. Subsequently, American forces struck a migrant detention installation in Sadaa, killing sixty-eight African migrants.

American forces have executed airstrikes across Iraq and Syria this year while deploying thousands of personnel in both territories. On December 19, Washington initiated substantial bombardments throughout Syria allegedly targeting ISIS following a December 13 assault killing two American National Guard personnel and one American civilian translator. Yet the assault originated from a Syrian governmental security apparatus member without any ISIS attribution.

Trump’s Iran strategy constitutes arguably his sharpest divergence from moderation. Following American withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal during May 2018, he initiated the maximum pressure sanctions offensive. He characterized the agreement as “the worst deal ever,” asserting it “enriched the Iranian regime and enabled its malign behavior, while at best delaying its ability to pursue nuclear weapons.”

During October 2019, Trump penalized Iran’s construction sector, connecting it to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which he had labeled a foreign terrorist entity during April that year. Trump boasted, “If you are doing business with the IRGC, you will be bankrolling terrorism. This designation will be the first time that the United States has ever named a part of another government as an FTO.”

The most explosive incident arrived during January 2020, when Trump greenlit the drone bombardment eliminating Iranian General Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad. Trump contended Soleimani had been “plotting imminent and sinister attacks on American diplomats and military personnel,” an action propelling Washington and Tehran toward the precipice of direct warfare.

Following this volatile incident, Trump persisted in raising tensions. Approaching the conclusion of his initial presidency, he explored martial alternatives for assaulting Iran’s atomic infrastructure. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley resisted strenuously, cautioning, “If you do this, you’re gonna have a fucking war.”

Trump discreetly authorized preliminary measures for striking Iranian objectives. Per The Wall Street Journal, Trump communicated to advisors that he “approved of attack plans for Iran, but was holding off on giving the final order to see if Tehran will abandon its nuclear program.”

During June 2025, Trump commanded direct bombardments against three Iranian atomic installations utilizing B-2 stealth aircraft and bunker-penetrating munitions. Trump proclaimed Iran’s atomic capabilities were “completely and totally obliterated,” notwithstanding assessments from the Defense Intelligence Agency and International Atomic Energy Agency indicating the bombardments failed neutralizing Iran’s subterranean infrastructure. Rafael Grossi declared Iran could restart uranium enrichment “within a matter of months.”

Trump became the inaugural American president to bomb Iran directly. Washington additionally supported extensive Israeli bombardments throughout Iran, which eliminated over 1,000 individuals across twelve days of combat. Trump recently stated he would endorse an Israeli assault if Iran “continues” its missile development or reconstructs its compromised atomic installations.

Notwithstanding pledges transforming the foreign policy establishment, Trump selected conventional politicians who undermined his commitments toward improved Russian relations. Throughout Trump’s tenure, Washington abandoned the Open Skies Treaty and INF Treaty, furnished deadly weaponry to Ukraine, and assaulted Russian military personnel in Syria. Trump endorsed the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, the harshest penalties enacted against Russia.

Throughout his opening term, Trump relaxed engagement protocols for military leadership, producing a sharp surge in airstrikes. Regarding clandestine counterterrorism campaigns, Trump sanctioned roughly 375 to 450 bombardments throughout his opening term. Comparing merely the opening two years, Trump initiated 238 bombardments versus Obama’s 186 bombardments, constituting a 28 percent elevation. Throughout every theater, American forces released roughly 67,206 munitions throughout 2017 through 2020, averaging 16,802 munitions yearly, a 46 percent elevation versus Obama’s average.

Trump additionally rescinded Obama era disclosure mandates during March 2019 requiring yearly documentation of drone bombardments and non-combatant fatalities, rendering campaigns more clandestine and abolishing formal transparency.

The trajectory proves undeniable. From Somalia through Syria, Venezuela through Iran, Trump has overseen an enlargement of American military campaigns rendering his antiwar rhetoric farcical. He resembles neither Pat Buchanan cautioning against foreign entanglements nor Ron Paul advocating for modest foreign engagement. He constitutes a traditional interventionist demonstrating readiness deploying military power globally with diminished restrictions and reduced accountability than his forerunners. Those believing Donald Trump would deliver restraint to American foreign policy have been thoroughly deceived.

January 26, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Militarism | | Leave a comment

Building Disney Land on the Moon More Likely than Kushner’s Gaza Plan

By Robert Inlakesh | The Palestine Chronicle | January 25, 2026

On Thursday, Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, presented his Gaza “master plan.” “We have no Plan B,” he remarked, pre-empting queries regarding what happens if the project fails.

In the more than three months since the Gaza ceasefire was implemented, this is all the Trump administration has to show for its alleged “hard work.” The reality is, the plan is flat out ridiculous.

To break down what was just presented in Davos, Switzerland, we need only use common sense. No geopolitical mastermind is required to figure out that the project just outlined is not only disconnected from reality, but flat-out cruel.

The sticking point here is that the US and Israeli governments are demanding that Hamas, along with the other Palestinian resistance groups, disarm. Without disarmament, as Kushner made clear, there can be no reconstruction.

In other words, either surrender or the genocide will start once again – but perhaps in a different form this time.

It is important to consider the following stances adopted by the Palestinian and Israeli sides. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu demands total disarmament, with zero compromises.

On the other side, Hamas and the rest of the resistance say that they will store their weapons, but will not disarm until a Palestinian state is created. Only to a Palestinian state military will they hand over their weapons.

The so-called “Board of Peace,” which makes Trump the de facto Supreme Leader of Gaza, is tasked with a nation-building endeavour – something that contradicts the White House National Security Strategy doctrine.

Its military wing will be provided in the form of the “International Stabilisation Force” (ISF).

The ISF has not yet been formed, but is projected to be composed of tens of thousands of soldiers. It is set to be a multinational force, which will be headed up by the US military, coordinate with Israel, and run certain details by Egypt.

One enormous issue the ISF will face is that, in the event it is used to inflict regime change by attempting to disarm Hamas, it will not have the soldiers necessary.

It will be hundreds of soldiers from one country, perhaps thousands or dozens from others, who will be roughly the same in total manpower as the Palestinian resistance.

For a little perspective, when Israel announced its Operation “Gideon’s Chariots 2,” a mission to occupy Gaza City, Israeli military experts projected that a minimum of 150,000 soldiers would be required to complete such a task and that it could take up to a decade to achieve their goals.

Even if private military contractors, the five ISIS-linked militias Israel created in Gaza, and some form of a new Palestinian police force are used to do this, it is a messy, long-term, and costly mission – one that will undoubtedly result in foreign soldiers returning to their home nations in coffins.

Reconstruction Delusions

Jared Kushner presented a reconstruction and economic development proposal, during which he made it clear that he has no idea what he is doing.

The slides he displayed — which appear to have come from an early proposal floated around weeks ago — featured futuristic skyscrapers along the beaches of Gaza, which they claim will be for tourism.

The figure presented for what this will cost is around $25 billion, and they say it will be completed in a decade.

Let’s assume Hamas disarms, or that Israel agrees to allow the Palestinian resistance to store its weapons. Working on this assumption, there are a few basic follow-up questions that demonstrate just how flimsy the proposal is:

  1. Why are the Israelis still destroying Gaza’s infrastructure?
  2. What happens to the Palestinians?
  3. How are the Israelis going to tolerate such a city’s existence, if at all?

To address the first question, which is in part rhetorical, the Israeli military has not stopped its military operations aimed at totally erasing the Gaza Strip’s remaining infrastructure since the so-called ceasefire came into effect.

If they were truly seeking to allow Palestinians to remain there and to permit reconstruction, then why continue a process — which is continuing as you read this article — of eliminating civilian infrastructure?

Is it plausible that Israel has spent over two years committing a genocide, mass displacing the civilian population, and destroying every square inch of Gaza’s infrastructure, all to allow a high-tech billionaire’s paradise to be built in Gaza?

To allow 500,000 Palestinians to take on the jobs built there? Will this be a Palestinian city?

Everyone can draw their own conclusions about how plausible that seems when the majority of the Israeli cabinet is in favor of ethnic cleansing and/or settlement construction.

This then brings us to what truly happens to the Palestinian people during this process. Israel has not even allowed mobile homes and basic materials to enter Gaza that would allow people to at least escape being forced to live in ever-deteriorating tents.

These tents are easily torn to pieces or worn out by moderate changes in weather conditions, let alone events like floods.

Is the plan to build a super city and let everyone live in tents? Do they want to displace the people into Egypt for a period of a decade?

If the people leave, can they return? What is to become of their homes? Can they not decide what happens to their own buildings and neighbourhoods, or have any say in their own future?

The questions here could go on for days.

If you look at the AI-generated images of what the “New Gaza” will look like, it is more impressive than Tel Aviv, let alone Israeli-controlled cities closer to Gaza like Ashkelon (Askalan) or Ashdod (Isdud).

Are we supposed to believe that Palestinians are going to build a massive city that resembles Dubai or Singapore, while the Israeli Jewish supremacist population living next to them remains in cities that don’t even come close to comparing?

The majority of Israeli society is genocidal. They hate Palestinians with such a passion that they seek to see them wiped off the face of the earth. Nothing is off limits when committing acts against the civilian population of Gaza.

Yet we are supposed to believe that they and their government are going to allow Gaza to become a territory that is more impressive than the stolen lands on which Israelis live?

Bringing us back to reality for a moment, the Israelis have killed around 500 Palestinians since the ceasefire. They refuse to withdraw even to the territory designated to them under the agreement they signed.

Instead, the Israelis continue their military operations as if no agreement is in place, with the only exception being that they are no longer murdering over 100 civilians per day.

Meanwhile, Phase 2 of the ceasefire was supposed to have started months ago, but somehow never seems to come about. Now we are told there will be another 30-day period in which Hamas will be forced to disarm, or there will be military action against them.

It is crystal clear why there are no detailed proposals, why everything is so incredibly flimsy and disorganised, and why they are kicking the can down the road.

The people of Gaza are being presented with a vague image of living in a super city. They are also being told that there is an unelected ex–Palestinian Authority figure being imposed upon them.

No one knows what is happening, and nobody has any answers for them.

Why? Because the US and Israelis are simply toying with the people of Gaza, demonstrating pure sadism. There is no genuine attempt to better their lives. If there were, the US would have put together meaningful plans.

Yet the Zionist son-in-law of the US President doesn’t even bother dedicating enough time in his day to put together anything coherent.

The message is to submit or feel our wrath, reviving the decades-old claim that “Gaza could have become Singapore.”

Another thing to point out here is that every country participating in this colonial-style “Board of Peace” is now complicit in genocide, just as all of the nations that participated in the Civil-Military Coordination Center (CMCC).

Leaders without backbones, who refuse to stand up to the US, even by simply leaving the CMCC for its failures or refusing to join the BoP without guarantees.

It may not be nice to hear, but history will record every individual who participated in this board, designed to reward Israel for genocide.

So, where does this go from here? Either Israel decides to continue its genocide, or the BoP works to keep the situation in a state of pause for a longer period of time, during which the people of Gaza suffer.

If the US seeks to pursue any of its BoP proposals, they will likely turn out exactly as the floating aid pier and the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation did.

– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine.

January 25, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

U.S. Funds Continue to Flow to Ecuadorian Groups Despite Trump-Era Suspension

teleSUR | January 25, 2026

Ecuadorian foundations, governmental entities, media outlets, private companies, and other organizations continue to receive U.S. financial support according to Foreign Assistance, despite a temporary funding suspension for international aid programs announced by the Trump administration in January 2025.

In 2025, U.S. financial allocations to Ecuador reached USD 59.96 million, representing a 38.06% reduction compared to the USD 96.8 million delivered in 2024.

Despite the decrease, the resources remain significant and primarily come from two sources: the Department of State, with USD 9.19 million, and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), with USD 35.52 million.

USAID has long been subject of criticism in several countries, including Ecuador, where previous governments have accused it of interference in internal affairs.

Main Beneficiaries

A Radio Pichincha report shows that the Andean Foundation for Media Observation and Study (Fundamedios, in Spanish) received USD 80,701 in 2025 for the “Fostering Accountability through Investigative Reporting (FAIR)” project. This figure is 44% lower than the USD 145,000 it obtained in 2024 from USAID for “Ecuador Verifies,” a coalition that brings together media, civil society organizations, and universities with the goal of underseeing political discourse.

The Pachamama Foundation, dedicated to the conservation of the Amazon rainforest and the “good living” concept in the Ecuadorian and Peruvian Amazon, recorded an inverse trend: it went from receiving USD 279,020 in 2024 to USD 1,570,207 in 2025.

This organization was shut down in December 2013 during the administration of President Rafael Correa, following a report by the Ministry of the Interior that determined it was carrying out “actions not included in its statutory purposes and objectives.”

According to a statement from the Ministry of the Environment that year, “with the collaboration of the Ministry of the Interior, it was determined that the NGO was engaging in actions that interfered with public policies, undermining, as stipulated by the Regulations for Social Organizations, the internal security of the state and public peace.”

Its legal status was restored in 2017 under the presidency of Lenin Moreno.

Despite the continuity of funding, several organizations remain on edge over the possibility that the U.S. may decide to suspend or modify its economic assistance in the future, which could force them to cut projects and lead to staff layoffs.

The uncertainty persists even though, between 2019 and 2025, total disbursements reached USD 824 million, with a notable increase since 2022 under the administration of Guillermo Lasso. Between 2022 and 2023 alone, aid exceeded USD 500 million, and between 2024 and 2025, during the government of Daniel Noboa, it surpassed USD 157 million.

January 25, 2026 Posted by | Corruption, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

US-Russia Arms Control May Face ‘Very Dark Period’ – Scott Ritter

Sputnik – 25.01.2026

Strategic arms control between Russia and the United States may face “a very dark period” after the expiration of the New START (New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) and without concluding a new agreement, Scott Ritter, a former US intelligence officer, told Sputnik.

“I sadly believe that the New START Treaty is dead and that we are entering a very dark period when it comes to arms control, that there’s no foundation upon which legitimate arms control could be built or constructed between Russia and the United States. And the problem isn’t Russia. I mean, I’m not blaming Russia. I’m blaming the United States,” Ritter said.

For any such deal to work, it requires mutual trust, honesty, and genuine commitment, which the US has yet to demonstrate, the officer said. He pointed to the now-defunct Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, both abandoned after US withdrawals.

The US government, not only the administration of US President Donald Trump, has gradually abandoned the principles underpinning arms control regimes, Ritter said.

On Thursday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that Moscow has yet to receive an official US response to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s proposal to extend New START restrictions for one year after the treaty’s expiration on February 5.

In September 2025, Putin said that Russia was prepared to continue adhering to the restrictions in accordance with the New Start for one year after February 5, 2026. He explained that steps to comply with the New START restrictions will be effective if the United States reciprocates.

January 25, 2026 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »