Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

US business wants easing of Russia sanctions

RT | March 7, 2025

The American Chamber of Commerce in Russia (AmCham) has called on the US government to ease the sanctions on Russia, according to its chief, Robert Agee. He argued that restrictions in aviation, investment, and banking are harming both American and Russian businesses.

In an interview with the Russian business daily RBK on Friday, Agee welcomed the dialogue between US President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, after a three-year hiatus in ties due to tensions over the Ukraine conflict.

In light of US signals that it is willing to normalize relations with Moscow, the AmCham is preparing a report for the US government outlining challenges for American businesses in Russia, as well as exploring possibilities for lifting some of the sanctions, Agee said.

One of the AmCham’s main requests is to remove sanctions in the aviation sector, including the supply of spare parts and technical support, with Agee stressing that the restrictions in this field mostly affect ordinary citizens. He also called for the lifting of investment restrictions, which he said have prevented American companies from expanding their operations in Russia.

Banking sanctions remain another key concern, as they have made cross-border transactions increasingly difficult and costly, the AmCham head said. He also criticized the sanctions on imports of luxury goods, including American cosmetics, to Russia, calling them counterproductive and harmful to US companies that have lost market share.

While these represent the chamber’s top priorities, Agee noted that other issues also require attention. He did not rule out the return of US businesses to Russia, adding that companies which maintained a skeleton presence in the country or retained buy-out options would have an easier time re-entering the market compared to those that completed an asset sell-out when emotions were running high.

Kirill Dmitriev, the CEO of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, earlier estimated that US companies lost more than $300 billion by leaving the Russian market. Agee suggested that this figure could be correct, depending on the metrics that were taken into account.

Agee’s comments come after Reuters reported earlier this week that the White House had directed the State and Treasury departments to draft proposals for easing certain restrictions on Russia. The potential relief could reportedly apply to specific Russian entities and individuals, including some business leaders.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said Moscow has yet to receive official statements from Washington regarding sanctions relief, while stressing that Russia has always viewed Western sanctions as “illegal.”

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

Trump: Everybody Should Get Rid of Their Nuclear Weapons

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | March 6, 2025

President Donald Trump restated his desire to abolish nuclear weapons during a White House presser on Thursday.

“It would be great if everybody would get rid of their nuclear weapons. [I know] Russia and us have by far the most,” the president told reporters in the Oval Office. “China will have an equal amount within four to five years. It would be great if we could all de-nuclearize because the power of nuclear weapons is crazy.”

Currently, nine countries – the US, UK, France, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, North Korea, and Israel – possess nuclear weapons. With global tensions on the rise, several nations, including the US, are adding to their strategic capability.

According to the Defense Intelligence Agency, Beijing is working to ramp up its production of nuclear weapons. Last year, the agency predicted that China could have over 1,000 nuclear weapons. However, that would still give Beijing a far smaller arsenal than Washington and Moscow, which each have around 1,500 deployed nuclear weapons and thousands more in storage.

Shortly after returning to the White House in January, Trump said he spoke with President Vladimir Putin about denuclearization during his first term, and that the Russian leader was receptive to the idea. “We were talking about denuclearization of our two countries, and China would have come along. China right now has a much smaller nuclear armament than us, or field, than us, but they’re going to be catching [up] at some point,” Trump said.

“I will tell you that President Putin really liked the idea of cutting back on nuclear, and I think the rest of the world, we would have gotten them to follow, and China would have come along too. China also liked it,” he added. “Tremendous amounts of money are being spent on nuclear, and the destructive capability is something that we don’t even want to talk about. It’s too depressing.”

Trump has also discussed negotiating a deal with Moscow and Beijing that would see all three countries drastically cut military spending.

However, while Trump has at times voiced support for demilitarization and denuclearization, during his first term in office he scrapped two major arms control agreements, the Open Skies and the Intermediate Range Nuclear Force treaties.

Additionally, Trump refused to engage in bilateral discussions with Russia on extending the last nuclear arms control agreement between the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals, the New Start Treaty. He insisted that Moscow must pressure Beijing to make it a trilateral deal, a demand that almost led to the downfall of the landmark deal.

Though President Joe Biden was able to reach an agreement with Putin to extend the treaty for five more years in 2021, it is set to expire next year without another extension.

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

Kremlin responds to Polish PM’s ‘arms race’ call

RT | March 7, 2025

Moscow will not engage in an arms race with the EU, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov has said. He was speaking after Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk urged the bloc to ramp up its military spending.

Tusk on Wednesday accused Moscow of starting a new arms race and insisted that Western Europe must respond. “The war, the geopolitical uncertainty and the new arms race started by [Russian President Vladimir] Putin have left Europe with no choice,” he stated on social media.

Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Peskov said it was regrettable to hear such statements. “They will not win against us because we will not play with them; we will be busy ensuring our own interests,” he said.

“We regret the confrontational, even militaristic, statements coming from Warsaw and Paris, which show that Europe has yet to adjust to the new dynamic between Moscow and Washington,” Peskov said. He didn’t rule out, however, that European leaders would eventually “feel which way the wind is blowing.”

The Polish prime minister further claimed that “Europe must be ready for this race, and Russia will lose it like the Soviet Union 40 years ago,” arguing that the EU would arm itself faster than Russia.

Tusk’s comments follow statements by French President Emmanuel Macron during an address to the nation on Wednesday claiming that Russia poses a threat to the EU. Macron urged the bloc to boost defense spending and suggested extending France’s nuclear umbrella to other EU countries.

On Tuesday, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed a massive defense spending hike. As part of the ‘ReArm Europe Plan’, the bloc would spend about $840 billion on defense – double total EU defense expenditures in 2024.

The European leaders’ calls come as US President Donald Trump’s administration has recently signaled a major policy shift, urging European nations to take the lead in their own defense, as well as in supporting Kiev.

Last month, Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth said that Washington intended to refocus its military priorities on countering China, warning the EU not to assume that American forces would remain in the region indefinitely.

Moscow has rejected accusations that it poses a military threat to Europe, condemning Macron’s remarks as “highly confrontational.” Russian President Vladimir Putin dismissed Western claims of an imminent Russian attack as “nonsense” and accused European leaders of inflating the threat to justify higher military spending.

Putin earlier reiterated that Russia has no interest in being drawn into an arms race but stressed that Moscow would take all necessary steps to safeguard its own security and that of its allies.

March 7, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Russophobia | , , | 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

Trump’s threats encourage Israeli breach of Gaza ceasefire: Hamas

Al Mayadeen | March 6, 2025

US President Donald Trump’s threats complicate the ceasefire agreement in Gaza and encourage the Israeli occupation to continue violating its requirements, Hazem Qassem, the spokesperson for the Palestinian Resistance movement Hamas, stated on Thursday.

Trump told Hamas that he would authorize fresh Israeli strikes on Gaza unless the group released the remaining Israeli captives.

Trump’s ultimatum came during direct discussions in Doha between his envoy for captive matters, Adam Boehler, and Hamas leaders in an attempt to achieve a fresh Gaza ceasefire and prisoner exchange agreement.

“‘Shalom Hamas’ means Hello and Goodbye – You can choose. Release all of the Hostages now, not later, and immediately return all of the dead bodies of the people you murdered, or it is OVER for you,” Trump wrote on his social media platform.

Trump advised Hamas officials in Gaza to evacuate the area “while they still have a chance” and warned that “not a single Hamas member will be safe” if the captives are not released. “This is your last warning!” he warned.

In response, Qassem, in a statement to Anadolu Agency, said, “There is a deal that was signed, and the United States was a participating mediator, and it includes the release of all captives in three separate phases.”

“These threats complicate matters regarding the ceasefire agreement and encourage the occupation to avoid implementing its terms,” he warned.

The spokesperson stressed that Hamas fully complied with the requirements during the first phase, while “Israel” consistently evaded adhering to its commitments.

He called on the US administration to pressure “Israel” into commencing the second-phase negotiations, as per the ceasefire agreement.

The first phase of the truce ended at the weekend after six weeks that included exchanges of Israeli captives for Palestinian prisoners and detainees held in Israeli occupation prisons.

While “Israel” has said it wants to extend the first phase until mid-April, Hamas has insisted on a transition to the second phase, which should lead to a lasting ceasefire.

“Israel” has ramped up its rhetoric and halted the flow of goods and supplies into Gaza, in violation of the agreement.

March 6, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | 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

USAID and the Venezuelan opposition: Corruption and intervention in the name of ‘humanitarian aid’

By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 5, 2025

In recent years, Venezuela has been the stage for an intense political battle, marked by polarization and foreign intervention. In this context, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has played a controversial role, repeatedly accused of diverting funds intended for humanitarian aid and being involved in corruption schemes that include prominent figures from the Venezuelan opposition. Recently, following controversies surrounding the American agency, these accusations have taken on new dimensions, with allegations that opposition leaders misappropriated 116 million dollars provided by USAID, exposing a scandal that calls into question not only the integrity of the opposition but also the true intentions behind international “aid.”

During the period of the self-proclaimed “interim government” of Juan Guaidó, large sums of money were directed into Venezuela under the guise of humanitarian assistance. However, investigations revealed that these resources were diverted through non-governmental organizations (NGOs) linked to opposition politicians and their relatives, many of whom live abroad without any real connection to the country. Leaked documents from the U.S. embassy in Venezuela indicate that Carlos Vecchio, an opposition figure wanted by Venezuelan authorities, allegedly received 116 million dollars from USAID. Additionally, the FBI is investigating Juan Guaidó himself for corruption and embezzlement, further raising suspicions about the legitimacy of the Venezuelan opposition.

This diversion of resources is not only a betrayal of the trust of Venezuelans who genuinely need help but also raises serious questions about the transparency and accountability of the opposition. While millions of Venezuelans face social hardships (largely due to American economic coercion), opposition leaders appear more interested in enriching themselves at the expense of the population and foreign funds.

The situation becomes even more complex when considering the revelations made by Jordan Goudreau, a mercenary who orchestrated a failed armed incursion into Venezuela in May 2020. Goudreau claimed that U.S. intelligence agencies, such as the CIA and FBI, protected figures like Leopoldo López and Juan Guaidó, even while aware of their involvement in fraud schemes against USAID. These allegations suggest a deep complicity between the Venezuelan opposition and U.S. agencies, revealing that the Venezuelan crisis is not merely an internal conflict but rather a geopolitical game in which U.S. interests play a central role.

In light of these allegations, the Venezuelan government has launched investigations against opposition figures involved in corruption schemes. These actions are seen as an attempt to dismantle the networks that undermine the opposition’s credibility and expose the hypocrisy behind the “humanitarian aid” promoted by the U.S. However, USAID, which in theory should be an instrument of development and assistance, sees its reputation seriously compromised. The accusations of corruption and embezzlement not only tarnish its image but also make clear how the institution has become a tool of imperialist aggression in Latin America and other continents.

The truth is that USAID was never truly a development agency but rather a weapon of political intervention — which is why Donald Trump’s recent decision to dismantle it should be celebrated among Global South countries. Under the guise of “promoting democracy” and “helping the needy,” the agency has been used to destabilize governments considered adversaries of U.S. interests. In Venezuela, as in other Latin American countries, USAID acted as a soft power tool, conducting resources to groups and individuals aligned with U.S. geopolitical objectives.

This strategy, however, comes at a high cost. By financing and supporting opposition groups that are often corrupt and disconnected from the real needs of the population, USAID has contributed to political and social instability, exacerbating the problems it supposedly seeks to solve. In the case of Venezuela, the result has been the perpetuation of a crisis that benefits only a reactionary elite minority and their foreign allies, attempting to create dissent in the local political situation.

In an increasingly multipolar world, it is essential to question the role of agencies like USAID and their influence in the internal affairs of sovereign nations. Venezuela is just one example of how “humanitarian aid” can be used as a geopolitical weapon, serving the interests of foreign powers at the expense of the local population. Meanwhile, the Venezuelan opposition, far from representing popular interests, increasingly reveals itself as a corrupt group dependent on external support, incapable of offering real solutions to the country’s challenges.

The so-called “Venezuelan crisis” is, ultimately, a reflection of the complex power dynamics that define international politics, particularly concerning American interventionism in Latin America. And in this game, USAID and its local allies demonstrate that, for them, “the ends justify the means” — even if it means sacrificing the sovereignty and well-being of an entire nation.

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

‘Israel’ voiced position to US on direct talks with Hamas: Netanyahu

Al Mayadeen | March 5, 2025

The Israeli occupation has informed the United States of its opinion on holding direct negotiations with Hamas, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said on Wednesday without providing any further details on what said “opinion” was.

“Israel has expressed to the United States its position regarding direct talks with Hamas,” Netanyahu’s office said.

The United States has been holding separate talks with Hamas to secure the release of two American captives still held in Gaza, Reuters reported, citing sources.

Ceasefire talks fail to advance to second phase

On Saturday, a senior Palestinian Resistance official told Al Mayadeen that negotiations in Cairo have failed to pave the way for the second phase of the ceasefire agreement, blaming the Israeli regime for obstructing progress.

According to the official, the Israeli occupation is deliberately stalling to prolong the first phase of the agreement while gradually securing the release of its captives.

He accused the Israeli regime of violating the deal by delaying entry into second-phase negotiations and reaffirmed that the resistance would not release any captives without a comprehensive agreement.

“The Israeli side is attempting to use blackmail tactics, but we reject any deal that is not part of a full-package agreement,” the official stated.

The official also noted that mediators have been unsuccessful in persuading the Israeli regime to engage in the next phase of talks. He added that Israeli political leaders are pressuring negotiators to extend the first phase on the condition that Hamas releases additional captives.

March 5, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Leave a comment

German ministry dismisses lawyer for supporting Gaza, rejecting genocide

MEMO | March 4, 2025

The German federal ministry has dismissed a lawyer in Berlin due to her opposition to the Israeli assault on Gaza, the Palestinian Information Centre reported.

On Saturday lawyer Melanie Schweizer posted a video on X stating: “Yesterday I got fired as a civil servant working at the Federal Ministry in Germany. Why? In a nutshell because I was speaking out against the genocide in Palestine committed by Israel, against the German support thereof, against the violence and crimes happening there.” Highlighting the German government and police’s efforts to silence pro-Palestine voices, she added: “This is where we’re at in Germany. This is a blatant attack on our constitutional rights to freedom.”

She called on supporters of Gaza to make their stance clear and “keep speaking up, keep using your voice, losing your job is not the worst that can happen to you, losing your life is. Losing your freedom right is.”

https://twitter.com/Melaniebelizi/status/1895904365225058324

Many European and American companies have previously dismissed employees over their stance on the war on Gaza and their opposition to genocide.

In October 2024, Microsoft dismissed two employees after they organised a sit-in at its headquarters in Washington, D.C., in solidarity with the victims of the Israeli assault on Gaza.

On 22 January, the Washington Post reported that Google had dismissed more than 50 employees last year after they protested against the “Nimbus” contract, citing concerns that the technology could support military and intelligence programmes used by the Israeli occupation army in its war on Palestinians in Gaza.

In September 2024, the Noguchi Museum in New York announced the dismissal of three employees for allegedly violating the dress code by wearing keffiyehs, which have become a symbol of solidarity with the Palestinian cause.

March 5, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Solidarity and Activism, War Crimes | , , , , , | 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

‘Neocons Should Be Unhappy’ as Trump Calls Out NATO, Pushes for Peace – Analyst

By Oleg Burunov – Sputnik – 05.03.2025

US President Donald Trump pledged to go ahead with his campaign of “swift and unrelenting action” in reorienting the country’s economy, immigration and foreign policy in his address to Congress.

“It seems he [Trump] wants more and more peace, urging Zelensky to conclude a ceasefire agreement and sign the US-Ukraine minerals deal,”Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, a retired US AirForce official and former analyst for the US Department of Defense, told Sputnik.

Kwiatkowski stressed that Trump didn’t talk about Europe or NATO other than noting that they depend on the US and use American money, “and yet they seem not to want peace.”

She noted that peace means prosperity for the working people and younger generations rather than those not working and the government.

“It makes sense after watching his speech that he is most popular among the under 40 demographic in the United States according to current polling,” the ex-Pentagon analyst pointed out.

Former DoD officer David Pyne, in turn, said in an interview with Sputnik that “Trump had no reservations about ending all US military assistance to Ukraine” in order “to pressure the Zelensky regime to accept a cease-fire and the peace deal the US is working to negotiate with Russia.”

78% of Americans support Trump’s effort to negotiate an end to the conflict, Pyne stressed. “Even while Democrat leaders continue to support feeding Ukrainian soldiers into the meat grinder.”

Trump will continue to transform the US relationship with Russia “from one of adversaries to a new historic era of strategic partnership,” the analyst believed.

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

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »