But what can one make of the turmoil in Romania these days? A new contender for the presidency of Romania jumped out of nowhere to be the leading candidate for the second round. Who is Călin Georgescu and what is his intellectual weltanschauung?

A good introduction to his thinking is found in an unedited interview with Reiner Fuellmich, ICIC on December 2022 and posted on May 27, 2023 on YouTube https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UhI2Fyr3ZRc. And it’s pretty embarrassing. This is a man with a serious pedigree, Secretary General of Romania’s Ministry of Environment, before he was catapulted up to the UN Agency for the same environmental protection as one of the regional directors; he worked there for some 18 years, visiting almost every country of the world and making or implementing decisions of global importance.

All of that despite his command of English being at the level of junior high school… And his general intellectual outlook was a call to traditional agrarian artisanal nostalgia. But when we get to promoting the benefits of such a simple life for our modern world, he explains that such a lifestyle made possible a life expectancy in the range of 180 to 200 years. Even Reiner flinched at that point and adjusted his glasses. I’m sorry, can you repeat that? Yes, of course, Georgescu explains, in Guinea I met people who were 180 years old. It is very possible.

Not sure about Reiner Fuellmich, and whether he realized that his guest was ruining his interview. Interestingly, it is not clear to this day what role he played and who promoted Reiner Fuellmich in those days, but he gathered a large following in the days of COVID as the lawyer of last resort, single-handedly setting up a peoples’ tribunal against the perpetrators of the COVID fraud. Suffice it to add that a month after the interview with Călin Georgescu, the Germans arrested him for alleged embezzlement and had him in preventive custody for over a year.

Well, back to our man Călin Georgescu. Now this is a fellow who, all his life, up to retirement with a fat pension from the same source, was one of the grandees of the liberal establishment. He served the liberal agenda and now he’s turned against his masters. Interesting conversion of someone who served his masters “against his conscience.”

But what can explain his meteoric rise and his sudden endorsement by obscure forces? The Russians stand accused. On what basis?

Let’s consider who are the main protagonists in the present conjuncture in Eastern Europe. The Russians, yes. Then the Americans. Biden’s Globalists or Trump’s sovereigntists? Then there is Netanyahu of Israel and its zealot ass-kisser Orban.

Little known to the public is Orban’s assiduous pursuit of revisionist claims on the Romanian territory of Transylvania, as well as claims against Ukraine’s Transcarpatica, regions once colonized by feudal Hungary. Orban is betting on two winners in the global war: Netanyahu’s Israel and Putin’s Russia, backed by Trump’s America, against the European Western establishment. That would almost guarantee his anointment as the Viceroy of Europe for a start.

But the current Romanian orientation is staunchly pro-EU, pro-Germany, especially with Klaus Johannis as president fully endorsing the Soros agenda, a sworn enemy of Orban.

Now the plot thickens. Brussels, Germany, Soros, and Biden on one side. Putin, Netanyahu, Trump and Orban on the other side. So who could have been behind the TikTok promotion of the inept Georgescu? Who had the skills and the motivation? And the alibi? The elephant in the room is … a 3-headed mastodon.

Putin obviously supports Netanyahu’s ethnic cleansing, so a little courtesy is due – just replace the anti-Russian government in Romania with a pro-Russian one, OK? At the same time, Orban is in high heaven betting on Trump, as he is anti-EU and opposes sanctions on Russia. Orban calls his personal friend, Netanyahu, and asks for a favor, as he, Orban, is the only European openly supporting the genocide in Gaza. Can you get this non-entity elected for me? And then he turns to Putin and claims to have helped him in a most critical moment. “Remember, Vlad, when we get to the next Yalta reconfiguration of Europe – all I ask for is that piece of real estate called Transylvania.” Never mind, Hungarians make up less than 6 percent of the population in Transylvania. We can work out a bit of ethnic cleansing, just like in Gaza.

Now the president of Romania has just resigned under huge pressure from the new Trump envoy for Europe, that’s Mr. Grenell, the personage much hated in Germany. The prime minister of Romania is compromised. The elections are compromised, and the entire leadership of Romania is suddenly compromised.

Orban goes to Spain and proclaims at the conference sponsored by Le Pen, Wilders and other pro-Israeli so-called conservatives, that this is the time for the Reconquista. First stage of the plan is a big success.

But where will all this Trump obscenity get us in the end? Only time will tell.

by Claudiu Secara

“If there is one thing we can thank US President Donald Trump for, it is this: he has decisively stripped away the ridiculous notion, long cultivated by western media, that the United States is a benign global policeman enforcing a ‘rules-based order’.

“Washington is better understood as the head of a gangster empire, embracing 800 military bases around the world. Since the end of the Cold War, it has been aggressively seeking ‘global full-spectrum domination’, as the Pentagon doctrine politely terms it.”

Commenting on the above words by Jonathan Cook, yes, it’s easy to blame the US for the world’s troubles of today. But let’s face the root of the 20th-century tragedy, and that is the very little-recognized destruction of Europe in two European wars (not so much world wars) in which both the Anglo-Americans and the Russians prevailed. Unfortunately for him, it was Tsar Nicholas II who betrayed his very specific commitment to his cousin, German Emperor Wilhelm II, not to fall for English intrigues and go to war with him.

The two wars were incited by the Anglos with the goal of taking over both Europe and Russia. The consequences were totally unforeseen. Europe was destroyed, so that there was very little to take over — but an even bigger menace was created for the Anglo perpetrators. Russia was lurking, biding its time in order to extend, little by little, further and further west. Remember the Crimean War of 1853-56, when the UK, France and the Ottomans defeated Russia? Little mentioned is that only 20 years later, in the war of 1877 pitting Russia and the Romanian provinces against the Ottomans, Russia completely defeated the Turks and pushed them almost entirely out, not only from Crimea but from the Balkans as well.

Same story in WWII. The net result of the four years of war was Western Europe’s loss of the Eastern European nations.

Now, one interesting question concerns the benefit vs loss endured by the Europeans on both sides of the divide. Most of the West in the end gained a good lifestyle, if not a good economy, due to the Marshall Plan and the continued supply of subsidies by the US in its cold war against the Soviet Union. For the Eastern European side, the outcome was more mixed. For Romania, for example, it was highly advantageous to have been liberated from the clutches of the West and its economic plunder; they were able to develop economically, educate the 85% illiterate peasant population and even develop their own high-quality industry and political personality. But for Hungary or Poland, it was a drawback as they lost their subservient internal colonies on the one hand and previous partnership with the West on the other hand.

But the Cold War ended in an undecided way. Did the Soviet Union really fold, in defeat? Is the new Russia just some kind of Nigeria with nukes? The (cold) war continued. So we come to today’s peak of the three year war in Ukraine. The new Russia is no longer acting under the auspices of the revolutionary soviet concepts of fraternity with the former economic underclass of the world. The new Russia demands its own pound of flesh. And that changes the political and the economic philosophy; now it acts just as ruthlessly as the West.

Case in point: Syria. When it found out that it was no longer cost effective to support the Assad people, it abandoned its best friends in the region to the hyenas’ massacres in broad daylight. And the new Russia went ahead with the killing of their own millennia-long brothers in Ukraine on an industrial scale. Why? Was it in order to help their brothers under the Ukrainian regime, as Igor Strelkov was asking the Kremlin to do in 2014? No. In 2014, Russia abandoned their brothers. It only became obvious to them 10 years later what was the aim of the West in attempting to take over Donbass. It wasn’t the environmentally negative coal reserves or the oil to be fracked. It was the rare earth metals that the Americans were out to get. The Russians were so far behind in focusing on the rare earth metals that they neglected to exploit their own resources, falling far behind countries like Myanmar and Thailand.

It turns out that we have a new Russia indeed, no longer anti-imperialist, but a Russia discovering its own economic imperialist ambitions. Not just imperial, but imperialist in its ambitions.

And that’s where the myopic Anglo American provocations have brought us, the rest of the world: to a new dilemma. Should we applaud the implosion of the US gangster monster? Or should we decry the bad situation, the loss of the US military umbrella which leaves all the European nations — and the Arabs in the Middle East — open to their aggressive neighbors, Russia and Israel?

As a classic mafia boss, Trump shrugs off any moral responsibility over the tragedy that has befallen the Ukainians, as well as the Europeans, and the Arabs, now defenseless in the face of ISIS and Israel — both offshoots of the same American policy in the region.

As for the Europeans, maybe a last minute wakeup call will enable them to regroup, marshal their potential, and manage, for the first time in modern history, to act as one — as the inheritor of the once powerful Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation. But maybe not. With such traitors as Hungary, always a mercenary nation since the Khazarian times, in the service of whoever pays them more, it is a tall order. The Hungarians were betting on the defeat of the Khazars by the Slavs in the 800s and abandoned their masters in the steppes of Asia. Having become the new Apostolic mercenaries for the Catholic Church, they established their own feudal fiefdom in Panonia. Now, they lick the asses of Russia and China.

But no matter the long term outcome of the Russian threat looming over Europe, the Old Continent has a duty to re-arm itself and consolidate itself on an equal footing with the new contenders on the geopolitical world map. And even if Europe decides to enter into a consortium of sorts with Russia in the long term, it should do it from a solid position as it represents the legacy of humanity’s explosive rise from destitution to the Industrial Age and then the AI Age.

by Gevorg Mirzayan via: https://vz.ru/world/2025/3/7/1318799.html

“This is evidence of a general warming of relations between Moscow and Washington.” With these words, experts assess reports that Washington has asked Moscow to mediate in negotiations with Iran. Such mediation opens up both opportunities and dangers for Russia. What is this about?

The United States needs Russian help in normalizing relations with Iran. This is reported by the American publication, Bloomberg. According to its sources, Donald Trump voiced the relevant request during his talks with Vladimir Putin on February 12, and then US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov discussed it at their meeting in Saudi Arabia.

The logic of the American side is clear. Despite Trump’s dislike of Iranians, he has no time for conflict with the Islamic Republic right now – there is neither time, energy, nor desire for this. “For the Trump administration, any reduction in tensions with … Iran could be a victory, as it would not have to focus on the Middle East,” writes The Jerusalem Post.

On the other hand, the United States cannot let the situation with Iran take its course either. After the failure in Syria, the Iranians feel vulnerable – and, according to Western media, they are accelerating the process of creating a nuclear bomb as their ultimate weapon of defense.

At the same time, there is now a unique chance to resolve all the problems peacefully, partly because Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian is also a proponent of a diplomatic solution to the conflict. And the defeat in Syria, multiplied by the economic crisis in the country, allows him and his supporters to “sell” a compromise with the United States as the best solution to all problems.

It is clear that Washington and Teheran cannot speak directly, which means that an intermediary is needed. Influential and at the same time honest, whose word is trusted by both sides. That is, Russia.

“The United States understands that negotiations with Iran will be difficult, and therefore, not wanting to greatly increase the number of intermediaries, they turned to Russia.”

“They took into account Moscow’s good relations with Teheran, as well as Russia’s proven ability to manoeuvre between various players,” says Yelena Suponina, an international political scientist and expert at the Russian International Affairs Council.

Yelena Suponina speaking (in Arabic) at the Emirates Policy Centre.

Moscow neither confirms nor denies the American request for cooperation. “I cannot confirm, but I said that, in general, Putin has repeatedly said that the problem of the Iranian nuclear dossier should be solved exclusively by peaceful means. Russia, being an ally and partner of Iran, is ready to do everything possible to facilitate this process,” said Dmitry Peskov, a spokesman for the Russian president.

[Russia wants] to contribute not only because it is beneficial to an ally, but also because Russia does not need a war in the Middle East, nor nuclear proliferation, which will increase if Teheran gets a nuclear bomb. And finally, to contribute because it is beneficial to Russia. Such mediation enhances its role in the Middle East, and also makes it an important and necessary partner for Washington.

However, we must not forget about the risks of such mediation. “This proposal is evidence of the general warming of relations between Moscow and Washington, but such proposals should be treated very carefully,” adds Suponina.

“Firstly, because the level of distrust between the parties is enormous. And it’s not just about Iranian-American relations. Washington – and this is not surprising after so many years of conflict – does not trust Moscow either. But trust in an intermediary is a key condition for successful negotiations. Moscow is also not sure that Washington will comply with the agreements reached under its leadership.”

“Secondly, there is an unstable domestic political situation in both countries. Donald Trump has actually declared war on a significant part of the American foreign policy establishment, and it is far from certain that he will win it. The Iranian leadership is also split, including into supporters and opponents of negotiations with the Americans. And not only with the Americans, but also personally with Trump, the man who withdrew from the previous peace deal (concluded under Barack Obama), and also ordered the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani, the most popular figure on the Iranian street.”

“At the same time, the serious state of health of the country’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei creates additional uncertainty – no one knows who will be chosen as the successor and what policy position this successor will take. And this uncertainty, both in the United States and in Iran, does not allow us to enter into any serious, long–term deals right now.”

“Thirdly, the position of the key American allies in the region, the Israelis, cannot be ignored. “Israel has a very negative attitude towards the idea of peace talks with Iran. And Trump himself is unpredictable. Therefore, it is possible that if the negotiations break down at some stage, he will take into account Benjamin Netanyahu’s idea of forceful solutions to the Iranian issue,” says Suponina.

Finally, Iran’s skepticism about the warming of Russian-American relations should be taken into account.

A number of politicians and experts in Teheran believe that Russia, in exchange for concessions from the United States, will be able to distance itself from allied relations with Iran. And neither the recently signed strategic agreement, nor the statements of the Russian leadership, nor elementary common sense (dictating that no one should change a strategic partner for American promises) can convince them. And Russia’s attempts to mediate, as well as generally discuss the Iranian issue in negotiations with the Americans, may strengthen these suspicions and, therefore, harm bilateral relations.

At the same time, there are always risks – they are the flip side of opportunities. And Russian diplomacy has repeatedly proven its ability to sail safely between the reefs of world politics.

by John Helmer, Moscow
@bears_with

President Donald Trump has asked President Vladimir Putin to assist him in arranging a grand Middle East peace deal. This, according to officials leaking to Bloomberg reporters, requires Iran to agree to dismantle its nuclear weapons programme, and also “Iran’s support for its allied groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah in the Middle East.”

The leakers, “people with knowledge of the situation, asking not to be identified”, according to Bloomberg, reportedly did not ask Putin to mediate the restoration of the Pahlavi monarchy.

The news agency story follows by three weeks the White House announcement on February 4 of “a National Security Presidential Memorandum (NSPM) restoring maximum pressure on the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, denying Iran all paths to a nuclear weapon, and countering Iran’s malign influence abroad. The NSPM establishes that: Iran should be denied a nuclear weapon and intercontinental ballistic missiles; Iran’s terrorist network should be neutralized; and Iran’s aggressive development of missiles, as well as other asymmetric and conventional weapons capabilities, should be countered. The NSPM directs the Secretary of the Treasury to impose maximum economic pressure on the Government of Iran, including by sanctioning or imposing enforcement mechanisms on those acting in violation of existing sanctions.”

The US officials briefing Bloomberg claim that after his big stick move, Trump made two small carrot moves in the direction of the Russians. On February 12, Trump told Putin on the telephone that he had a deal to end the war in the Ukraine if Putin would help with a deal to end Iran’s war in the Middle East.

Trump then told Secretary of State Marco Rubio to say more when he met in Riyadh with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on February 18. Whatever the Americans say they said, Lavrov omitted to mention it in the communiqué and press briefing in Riyadh.

During his subsequent meetings in Teheran on February 25, Lavrov was explicit – almost — in opposing Trump’s stick-wielding. “We underscored the inadmissibility of unilateral economic sanctions,” Lavrov announced after meetings with President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. “We will continue substantive and focused efforts to mitigate the adverse effects of these unlawful restrictions on the economies of Russia and Iran…We have discussed at length the developments around the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. We remain convinced that the diplomatic resource is still there and should not be left unused. Instead, it should be engaged as effectively as possible and no threats or allusions to forceful solutions should be made. We are committed to continuing the search for acceptable solutions to the situation at hand which was created by our Western colleagues, not Iran.”

Since the refusal of Kremlin support for Iran’s military alliance with Bashar al-Assad’s government in Damascus last November and December, the subsequent recriminations between Teheran and Moscow have not been entirely or clearly resolved. For the record of the recriminations, click; for the attempt to resolve them in the January treaty signing, read this; for the continuing irresolution, look again.

On Friday, March 7, Trump said he believes Putin will do more for Trump’s Ukraine “deal” than the Kremlin is admitting publicly. “I think he’s going to be more generous than he has to be, and that’s pretty good.” Is this true? Is it an American attempt to sow suspicion and distrust in Moscow between the General Staff and the Kremlin? Is it also aimed at splitting the Iranians from the Russians?

Lavrov’s announcement after his meeting with President Pezeshkian was non-committal on the concessions Trump wants from Iran for denuclearization and withdrawal of support for Hamas, Hezbollah, and Ansar Allah (Houthis). “During the exchange of views on pressing global and regional issues, the focus was placed on the evolving situations in Syria, Lebanon, Afghanistan, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict zone, and matters pertaining to the Caspian region. The sides coordinated their positions regarding the state of affairs surrounding the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on the Iranian nuclear programme,” the Russian communiqué announced after Lavrov met with Pezeshkian.

“Coordination” is a camouflage term in the current Russian-Iranian relationship. It appears 71 times in the January pact Pezeshkian signed in Moscow with Putin. Its meaning, Russian sources believe, carries outer ambiguity, inner secrecy – also uncertainty under the pressure Trump is applying.

A Russian source in a position to know believes the strategic consensus in Moscow, and also at the Ukraine front, is that “the empire [US] won’t stop its war with Russia. But we need time to correct the tactical mistakes that have been made. Trump’s peace is going to be short-lived. Maybe five years, maybe eight. There’s no point fighting him at every step. We’ll try to get the best deal possible that leaves him thinking he looks good. After losing eight years, Russia wants to gain eight years.”

A military source comments that in the short run the more confusion Trump and his officials create, the more time the Russian General Staff has to accelerate the military offensive westward from the current line of contact towards Kiev. “The American learning disability is showing across the board,” he says. “The kettle is now on the boil in Sumy. The Ukrainians are cut off in Kursk and don’t have much more time left. East of the Dnieper, it’s apparent that Putin’s foot is off the brake.”

The US side is now calling time. National Security Advisor Michael Waltz has announced that he, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Steven Witkoff will return for negotiations with their Russian counterparts in Riyadh next week. The Kiev regime has announced they will be meeting the US delegation on Tuesday.

As Russians report, analyse, and debate the implications of policy-making by press release and tweet from Trump and his officials, Moscow sources acknowledge what physicists have long recognized as the Observer Effect. The closer the observer and his methodology get to the object or target, the more disturbance is created, the less clear the object’s visibility, and the more unpredictability of how it will behave.

This is intentional on Trump’s part, the sources believe – it’s his idea of how to conduct deal-making. Uncertainty and confusion are also the condition in which Trump’s officials find themselves, competing with each other for factional policy positions, influence at the White House, and personal power. For the time being, the Russian response to Trump’s Ukraine end-of-war deal and also his Iran and Middle East end-of-war deal is – the sources emphasize — to delay, wait and see.

Responding to the Bloomberg report, Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov said: “”Russia believes that the United States and Iran should resolve all problems through negotiations” and that Moscow “is ready to do everything in its power to achieve this.”

The Iranian response has been similar. “Given the significance of these matters, it’s possible that many parties will show good will and readiness to help with various problems,” Bloomberg reported the Foreign Ministry spokesman, Esmaeil Baghaei, as saying during a press conference in Teheran on March 3. “From this perspective, it’s natural that countries will present an offer of help if it’s needed.” Baghaei refused to speak directly with Bloomberg.

In preparing for the coming round of Riyadh talks, the Russian positions on terms for the Ukraine settlement are clearer than the US terms. It is quite the opposite for the terms of the Iranian settlement – the US is clearer than Russia.

To understand how officials in Moscow are thinking, the state-funded internet publication Vzglyad is both a sounding board for different policy factions around the Kremlin and a windvane of the direction Putin is expected to take. Interpreting this new report, published on Friday afternoon, it is necessary to read between the lines where the meaning is reversed.

Source: https://vz.ru/world/2025/3/7/1318799.html

by John Helmer via https://johnhelmer.org/anti-imperialism-isnt-trump-derangement-syndrome/#more-71770
Excerpt
[ . . . ]
Finally, as discussed in the podcast, here is the evidence from dozens of US opinion polls that Trump’s claims about American voter support are false. In his speech to Congress, the President said “for the first time in modern history, more Americans believe that our country is headed in the right direction than the wrong direction. In fact, it’s an astonishing record: 27-point swing, the most ever.”

The week before, the White House Press Office published the headline claim of “massive support for President Trump and his agenda”. In point of fact, the poll revealed that on the question of whether the country is moving in the right direction or not, despite the improvement on the positive side since the end of the Biden Administration, the majority of Americans think the country is going in the wrong direction, 48% to 42%. Black Americans were significantly more pessimistic; 59% said the wrong direction.
[ . . . ]
A closer look at the February 19-20 panel interview poll cited by the White House also reveals strong voters majorities opposed to Trump’s line on negotiating peace with Russia. One of the reasons, the poll identifies, is that most Americans still believe Russia is expansionist and will move into other countries unless restrained by US forces.
[. . . ]
Compilations of this and 36 other national polls by Realclearpolitics.com, reporting as recently as March 2, reveal that since the Inauguration, public disapproval of Trump’s performance has been growing, and approval shrinking until this week there is just 1.3% between them. The Harvard Harris poll cited by the White House was the second most favourable to Trump of all 37 polls reporting.
[. . . ]
When the direction of the country, right or wrong, was questioned by the pollsters, the average of the poll results as of March 2 was a negative spread of 9%; that’s to say, 51.4% believe the country under Trump is going in the wrong direction, while 41.4% believe it is going in the right direction.
[. . .]
Trump’s negative job approval rating after his first month in office contrasts with Biden’s positive job approval for his first seven months. President Barack Obama’s job approval remained positive for the first 18 months of his term. “We’ve done more in two weeks than Obama and Biden!” Trump said in February. The majority of US voters don’t believe him.

Click to listen to the discussion.

Finally, some wake up in Europe. Polish PM tells us what we at Algora ha been saying all along.

“See how it sounds: 500 million Europeans asking 300 million Americans to defend them from 140 million Russians”.

Europe doesn’t need the warmonger US, and neither does it need to be afraid of the belligerent, expansionist Russia. Europe should reject both as the imperialists that they are.

Europe is the cradle of modern progress and should claim its preeminent role. Against the barbarians and the outsiders/ interlopers.

In my last post I concluded:

Note: Having said all of that, a note of caution. It is not entirely out of the realm of possibility that in their mutual desperation, the US and Russia might resort to the same formula for the third time. And that is, turning their rivalry into a military coalition in order to destroy Europe for the third time. And divide it again. They seem to have a sinister hatred of their natural superiors.

Two days later it seems that it is exactly that scenario that is in progress as we speak. A beligerant Russia supported by the US is being ushured in to overlord Europe.

But Europe doesn’t have to go to war against Russia. Just ignore it. No war, no peace.  And ignore the Yankees just as well. And it should come out ahead.

There will be no US-Russia negotiations in Saudi Arabia now. The Russian Foreign Ministry denied Trump – the negotiations will not begin on February 25. 

by Claudiu Secara

While people may think “US foreign policy forms like a cloud in the president’s head”, in reality it forms in think tanks arriving at consensus among powerful special interests, before being sent to Washington with lobbyists to attract support from BOTH sides of the aisle. Below is Project 2025 from the Heritage Foundation, a think tank comprised of reps of government/big-business. The table of contents: https://www.project2025.org/policy/

Now the intriguing question is the genuiness of Trump’s pivot to peace with Russia. The document below describes the priority of the US military on preventing the emergence of China as a rival, but it also regards Russia as a major threat alongside China. How to explain, then, Trump’s maverick move in appeasing Russia?

One explanation given by Brian Berletic is found in US Sec. of Defense Pete Hegseth’s comments in Brussels indicating that the US is far from seeking peace, but instead, a “division of labor” where Europe confronts Russia while the US pivots to China – as this was not just a random thought spoken out of turn.

And the matching part from the Project2025 PDF:

U.S. allies must also step up, with some joining the United States in taking on China in Asia while others take more of a lead in dealing with threats from Russia in Europe, Iran, the Middle East and North Korea.
The reality is that achieving these goals will require more spending on defense, both by the United States and by its allies, as well as active support for reindustrialization and more support for allies’ productive capacity so that we can scale our free-world efforts together.

Another signal, though, is the role played by Tucker Carlson in promoting Russia as a friendly country to the US. Why is that important? Because Tucker Carlson is the main spokesperson precisely for the Heritage Foundation. So while the document below, issued by the Heritage Foundation, doesn’t indicate any friendly gesture towards Russia, its star spokesperson promotes on the world stage exactly that position, which indicates that Trump’s peace offer over Ukraine is a very valid action supported by the main sponsor of Trump’s presidency.

Yes, Russia has to be confronted, be irritated by the Europeans, while the US can play the role of the good cop and even do favoritisms to Russia in exchange for a quid pro quo vs China. All very subtle, while smiling to both.

Let’s face it, the US is in a desperate situation and that is evident even to the top think tank, as it clearly spells it out: “Our disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, our impossibly muddled China strategy, the growing involvement of senior military officers in the political arena, and deep confusion about the purpose of our military are clear signals of a disturbing decay and markers of a dangerous decline in our nation’s capabilities and will.”

As for the immediate and practical steps to rejuvenate the US defense forces, every item in the Project is part of the text from which Trump’s speeches are written.

Under Section 2, part 4 “Department of Defense,” it specifically lays out the new US military strategy. See the entire chapter: https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_CHAPTER-04.pdf

By far the most significant danger to Americans’ security, freedoms, and prosperity is China. China is by any measure the most powerful state in the world other
than the United States itself. It apparently aspires to dominate Asia and then, from
that position, become globally preeminent. If Beijing could achieve this goal, it
could dramatically undermine America’s core interests, including by restricting U.S. access to the world’s most important market. Preventing this from happening
must be the top priority for American foreign and defense policy

[ …]

The FY 2017 National Defense Authorization Act established the position of
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering and assigned broad
responsibility for “all defense research and engineering, technology development, technology transition, prototyping, experimentation, and developmental
testing activities and programs, including the allocation of resources for defense
research and engineering, and unifying defense research and engineering e”orts
across the Department,” to the new Under Secretary, who also was tasked with
“serving as the principal advisor to the Secretary on all research, engineering,
and technology development activities and programs in the Department.”6 This
led to the single largest DOD structural change since the Goldwater–Nichols
act of 1986 and was organized effectively during President Donald Trump’s
Administration.

Every single item of Trump’s MAGA program can be found in the Project 2025 blueprint. Here are a few examples:

Restore standards of lethality and excellence. Entrance criteria for
military service and specific occupational career fields should be based on
the needs of those positions. Exceptions for individuals who are already
predisposed to require medical treatment (for example, HIV positive
or suffering from gender dysphoria) should be removed, and those with
gender dysphoria should be expelled from military service. Physical
fitness requirements should be based on the occupational field without
consideration of gender, race, ethnicity, or orientation.

3. Reinstate servicemembers to active duty who were discharged for
not receiving the COVID vaccine, restore their appropriate rank, and
provide back pay.
4. Eliminate Marxist indoctrination and divisive critical race theory
programs and abolish newly established diversity, equity, and inclusion
offices and staff.
6. Audit the course offerings at military academies to remove Marxist
indoctrination, eliminate tenure for academic professionals, and
apply the same rules to instructors that are applied to other DOD
contracting personnel.
7. Reverse policies that allow transgender individuals to serve in the
military. Gender dysphoria is incompatible with the demands of military
service, and the use of public monies for transgender surgeries or to
facilitate abortion for servicemembers should be ended.

Moscow is hoping to get Washington to vacate nations that joined NATO after 1990, the tabloid claims, citing anonymous sources

Western security services and politicians are worried about a potential exit of US troops from NATO member states in Central and Eastern Europe, Bild has reported on Wednesday, citing unnamed sources. The tabloid suggests that Russia is trying to get the US to radically downgrade its military presence on the continent.

Bild claimed that European members of NATO “feared” that the high-level US-Russia talks in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday, could lead to such an outcome. The German media outlet quoted an anonymous Western European security official as saying, “according to our information, we’re talking about [Vladimir] Putin’s 2021 demands, that is, the withdrawal of US troops from all NATO states that joined the alliance after 1990.”

In December 2021, Russia presented the US and NATO with a list of proposals aimed at reshaping the security architecture in Europe, and to rule out Ukraine’s accession. The West rejected the Kremlin’s overture as an ultimatum at the time.

Bild also quoted former Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis who posted on X on Tuesday that “it seems much more than likely” that the Kremlin would renew its demands that “NATO must go back to its 1997 borders, retreating from everything except East Germany.” He noted that while Trump technically cannot unilaterally implement a “reversal of NATO enlargement,” he could still “withdraw US troops from the Eastern Flank, which would have almost the same effect.”

The nations that would theoretically be affected include Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Sweden.

A Romanian official made similar allegations on Wednesday. Cristian Diaconescu, the president’s chief of staff and adviser for defense and national security, alleged that while the US team had rejected Moscow’s supposed demands in Riyadh, “the situation can change from hour to hour or from day to day,” and Washington could eventually cave in.

On Friday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov dismissed the claims as “not true,” adding, however, that Moscow’s concerns regarding “NATO’s military infrastructure having inched toward our borders as part of several waves” are “no secret to anyone.”

via RT