by Laura Harris | Natural News The United Kingdom’s Crime and Policing Bill 2025, now at the Committee stage, grants police access to over 50 million driver’s license photos for facial recognition searches. The bill revives a dropped Conservative plan, with Labour justifying it as necessary to combat crime, terrorism and violence against women. Big Brother Watch warns that the bill enables mass biometric surveillance, risking misidentification and unjust tracking of innocent citizens. Russia plans a 2025 rollout of facial recognition payments via 2 million terminals, linked to its state biometric database (UBS). Both systems face criticism for enabling government […]
Russia is investing hundreds of millions of dollars to build schools and universities across Central Asia, reinforcing the use of the Russian language at a time when younger generations in the region are increasingly exposed to Western and Chinese influences.
The attack stretched from night into day and the boom of explosions reverberated across cities. Officials said that 12 people were killed in Dnipro and six in Kyiv.
The attack stretched from night into day and the boom of explosions reverberated across cities. Officials said that 12 people were killed in Dnipro and six in Kyiv.
Vladimir Kara-Murza told Global News that mounting military and economic failures have stripped away Putin's strongman image and exposed him as 'increasingly weak.'
Vladimir Kara-Murza told Global News that mounting military and economic failures have stripped away Putin's strongman image and exposed him as 'increasingly weak.'
Xi Jiping et Vladimir Poutine en 2018 (Kremlin.ru, CC BY 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons), via Wikimedia Commons)
Xi Jiping et Vladimir Poutine en 2018 (Kremlin.ru, CC BY 4.0
One week after Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin is traveling to China for a 48-hour official visit aimed at strengthening the comprehensive partnership and strategic cooperation between Russia and China.
A Diplomatic Trip Rich in Geopolitical Symbolism
Putin’s visit to China, expected on Tuesday, May 19, is part of a carefully planned diplomatic strategy. The timing is no coincidence: it coincides with the 25th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Good-Neighborliness and Friendly Cooperation, a landmark agreement signed by the two countries in 2001.
This treaty holds major significance in Sino-Russian relations, as it marked the end of decades of mutual mistrust, border disputes, and geopolitical rivalries that characterized the Soviet era.
The timing of the visit is particularly revealing of current international dynamics. By arriving in China one week after Trump’s departure from Beijing, Putin creates a symbolic succession that deserves close analysis. This diplomatic “passing of the baton” among the world’s three major powers offers a valuable lens through which to observe today’s balance of power and each country’s positioning strategy.
Strengthening the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Amid Global Turbulence
The official purpose of the visit is clear: to reinforce the comprehensive partnership and strategic cooperation between Russia and China.
Beyond formal statements, however, the trip carries deeper significance for both governments. Moscow is seeking to consolidate its ties with Beijing at a time when the international environment has become highly volatile.
Dmitry Peskov, spokesperson for the Russian presidency, said on Friday that the trip would be “a good opportunity to exchange views on the contacts the Chinese have had with the Americans.”
This statement clearly shows that trilateral diplomacy lies at the heart of the visit. Russia wants to understand how China is negotiating with the United States and ensure that Russian interests are not sidelined in Sino-American discussions.
An “Eternal Friendship” Tested by Geopolitical Realities
The concept of an “eternal friendship” between Russia and China, frequently reaffirmed by both powers, is a central element of their diplomatic rhetoric.
However, this visit demonstrates that both countries are actively seeking to prove the strength of their ties in the face of current global upheavals. The phrase itself is revealing: it implicitly acknowledges that the international order is going through a period of major instability.
For Xi Jinping, the meeting with Putin offers a valuable opportunity to present himself as a world leader committed to geopolitical balance and harmony.
By hosting Trump and Putin in succession, the Chinese leader positions himself as a potential mediator in global conflicts and as a guardian of international stability. This posture significantly enhances China’s prestige and influence on the world stage.
The Dynamics of a Three-Way Geopolitical Rivalry
The triangular relationship among the United States, Russia, and China now shapes global geopolitics as a whole.
Every bilateral meeting between two of these powers is closely watched by the third as an indicator of emerging alliances and growing fractures. Putin’s trip to China must therefore be understood within this three-dimensional strategic framework.
Russia, while a major regional power, remains economically secondary compared with China. As a result, Moscow must continually reaffirm the importance of its partnership with Beijing.
This relative asymmetry helps explain why Russia places such importance on diplomatic rituals and public displays of strategic friendship. Maintaining strong ties despite structural imbalances is essential to preserving international equilibrium.
Toward a New Global Geopolitical Architecture
This visit takes place during a period of profound transformation in the international order.
China’s rise, Russia’s return as a disruptive power, and shifts in American foreign policy have created an environment in which old certainties no longer apply.
Diplomatic exchanges between Beijing and Moscow are therefore strategically crucial to maintaining stability in international relations.
The strengthening of the Sino-Russian partnership is not necessarily intended to form an alliance against the United States. Rather, it aims to establish a balance of power capable of withstanding external pressures and attempts at hegemony.
In this context, strategic cooperation between Russia and China has become an essential stabilizing factor in contemporary global geopolitics.
Putin has arrived in Beijing and received the same “warm welcome” package as Trump: a red carpet, the PLA Tri-Service Honor Guard, and the jumping children…
Xi Jinping can be heard saying “hello” (“你好,” nǐ hǎo) to Putin.
Methanier_aspher_(photo d'illustration Pline, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons)
Just as the European Commission was polishing up its new plan to ban all supplies of Russian gas disaster struck and at the worst possible moment.
Robert Harneis (DR)
By Robert Harneis
The Ban was announced to take effect in stages up to November 1st 2027. After that no more Russian gas and then as a result of the US Israeli attack on Iran, Teheran closed the straits of Hormuz and Qatar declared ‘force majeure and its inability to fulfill gas contracts. One fifth of global LNG gas passes through the straits. This comes as France and Germany have critically low levels of gas in storage – 21% and 20% respectively.
Record imports
Europe imported a record 142 billion cubic meters of LNG in 2025, a 28% increase from the previous year. US supplied 55% of Europe’s LNG imports last month, while Russia contributed just over 25%, In January, the EU’s monthly LNG imports from Russia hit a record high of 2.3bcm, up more than 10% y/y and nearly a fifth of all LNG imports.
President Putin chose this moment to observe that maybe it would be better if Russia stopped supplies to Europe immediately and got on with finding other more reliable trading partners as soon as possible.
New markets for Russia
““Other markets are opening now,” Putin said in an interview with state TV. “Maybe it’s better for us to end supplies to the European market right now? To go to those markets that are opening now and get a foothold there.”
At least half of Russia’s LNG exports already go to Europe but now without the Qatari supplies, the demand in Asia will spike and, Russia should be able to redirect all those exports to markets in Asia without difficulty.
Putin met Hungarian foreign minister Peter Szijjarto at the Kremlin on March 5 and said that Moscow intends to maintain supplies to what he described as reliable partners within Europe. Russia “remains ready to deliver energy resources to those who want to work with us,” he said, referring to Hungary and Slovakia as continuing customers.
To the highest bidder
He twisted the knife further reminding Brussels “there are customers who are ready to buy this natural gas at a higher price. In this case, this results from the developments in the Middle East and the closing of the Strait of Hormuz, and so on. Once you have these premium buyers on the market, this means, and I really believe that this is the case, that some suppliers who have been serving the European market for quite some time now, for example, the United States and US companies, will definitely switch to the highest bidder. This is quite natural.” He said.
Dictature du réel, les livraisons de gaz liquéfié russe vers la France ont augmenté de 41 % en 2023. Avec le retrait du gaz nord américain, la Russie pourrait devenir le premier exportateur de GLN vers la France. C’est aussi bien que par #nordstream2 mais c’est quatre fois plus… pic.twitter.com/G9Mla5LKYy
The United Kingdom government has denied Moscow’s claim that the UK and France have been secretly working on providing Ukraine with a nuclear weapon. The French government has issued a denial through its Moscow Embassy.
Robert Harneis (DR)
By Robert Harneis
Russia’s foreign intelligence service, SVR, has publicly claimed that the UK and France are “actively working” on providing Ukraine with a nuclear weapon, or a radioactive makeshift “dirty bomb”. The claim has been referred to by President Putin and his spokesman Dimitry Peskov.
The UK Prime Minister’s official spokesman claimed in a statement; “This is a clear attempt by Vladimir Putin to distract from his heinous actions in Ukraine… There is no truth to this.”
Illegal transfer of components
The intervention by President Putin indicates that the Russians take the claim seriously. Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service state that Britain and France are actively working to resolve the issue of providing Ukraine with nuclear weapons and their delivery systems. “This involves the covert transfer of European components, equipment, and technologies in this area. One option being considered is the French TN75 small-size warhead from the M51.1 submarine-launched ballistic missile,” the statement reads.
According to the SVR, British and French elites believe that Kyiv would be able to secure more favorable terms for ending the fighting if it possessed a nuclear bomb or at least a so-called dirty bomb. “The British and French recognize that their plans constitute a gross violation of international law,” the statement continues.
A flagrant violation of international law
If true, this would be a serious breach of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). London and Paris allegedly risk undermining the global non-proliferation system. “Consequently, Westerners are focusing their efforts on making Kyiv’s acquisition of nuclear weapons appear to be the result of Ukrainian development,” the SVR wrote in their statement.
Putin’s press secretary, Peskov, called information about the possible transfer of a nuclear bomb to Kyiv extremely important and dangerous for the non-proliferation regime. “This is a flagrant violation of all norms and principles, and relevant acts of international law,” he emphasized. Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin’s aide, Yuri Ushakov, told the Vesti news service that Moscow intends to inform Washington of the possible transfer of nuclear weapons to Kyiv from London or Paris.
Clichés
According to the official Russian government news agency Tass, Deputy Speaker Konstantin Kosachev, of the Russia Federation Council, has commented that the statements issued by the French and British embassies denying plans to arm Ukraine with nuclear weapons appear to be nothing more than rehearsed clichés, lacking depth or credibility, according to Federation Council.
Kosachev criticized these responses, stating, ‘The comments from the relevant press services – particularly, in France, not even from the government ministries but solely from the embassy here in Moscow – are simply pre-cooked clichés that add no real value. They deny the findings of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service.” He further pointed out that these statements fail to confirm that the involved countries are adhering to their obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
France’s awkward position
Britain has no independent nuclear weapons and depends entirely on US supply and consent for use. France is in a more embarrassing position as it has full control of its nuclear arsenal. The idea that Washington knew nothing about any of this – if it is true – is far-fetched. But it seems at the moment it suits Moscow to appear believe it.
Between geopolitical calculations, Russian economic resilience, and diverging interests, the conflict is bogged down in a war of attrition that neither side seems willing to end.
Robert Harneis (DR)
By Robert Harneis
The war in Ukraine is entering its fifth year with no negotiated way out in sight for either belligerent. Behind the mud of the trenches and the victory communiqués, a complex machinery — military, economic, diplomatic — has taken hold, keeping the conflict in a precarious equilibrium, so far. An in-depth look.
A long war no one wanted, pursued by everyone
Neither Moscow nor Kyiv anticipated such a prolonged conflict. In 2022, Russia hoped for a lightning victory through decisive strikes on Kyiv, Kharkov, and the corridor leading to Crimea. The West, for its part, was betting on a rapid collapse of the Russian economy under the weight of unprecedented sanctions — the freezing of $300 billion in reserves, exclusion from the SWIFT system, diplomatic isolation. Both sides were disappointed, although Russia did achieve the land corridor to Crimea and the capture of Europe’s biggest nuclear power plant.
Today, the conflict follows a logic of attrition much encouraged by the drone revolution. Russia is waging a slow war, aware that it faces a Ukraine backed by the financial and military arsenal of the United States, NATO, and most Western countries. The model is simple: Ukraine provides the men; the West provides the weapons. Unfortunately Ukraine is running out of men and the West is running out of weapons. Unlike the state owned Russian armaments industry, the Western military industrial complex is focused on profit not mass industrial warfare. The line of conflict in Ukraine is twice the length of the Western Front in the First World War, a situation totally outside modern Western military experience.
Russia: a more resilient economy than expected
One of the great surprises of this conflict has been the resilience of the Russian economy. The West had severely underestimated its degree of self-sufficiency. As a producer of its own energy and food resources, with an industrial base inherited from the Soviet era and relatively insulated from financialization, Russia has managed to adapt.
According to the IMF, measured in purchasing power parity (PPP), the country is now ranked the world’s fourth-largest economy, behind China, the United States, and India. Paradoxically, the sanctions stimulated local production through import substitution and encouraged the repatriation of capital. Russia’s military-industrial complex has demonstrated its capacity to sustain a prolonged war effort, notably through the reactivation of Soviet-era stockpiles and the use of low-cost guided munitions. Western media have regularly predicted Russia suffering economic collapse and running out of weapons.
There are no signs of either happening
By contrast the European Union, especially Germany has suffered severe economic damage, through the loss of a reliable supply of cheap Russian energy. This undoubtedly suits Russia but also the United States. The Eurozone has lost credibility as a result of freezing Russian government funds. Central banks across the world calculate, if they can do it to Russia, they can certainly do it to us.
Some commentators believe Washington deliberately pushed Europe to adopt these extreme sanctions with a view to weakening it as an economic rival. True or not, it is what has happened.
Ukraine: between survival and dependency
Ukraine, contrôle de l’armée russe (Wikipédia)
On the Ukrainian side, internal factors are complicating any prospect of negotiation. The Kyiv government benefits, both legally and illegally, from massive financial flows tied to the war effort. The radical nationalist units that form part of the military apparatus have publicly threatened to turn on Zelensky should he sign a peace deal with Moscow — thereby forcing him to betray his 2019 electoral promise that brought him to power. The Ukrainian people have never voted for a policy of hostility to Russia but it is what they are forced to endure. The idea that Ukrainians are dying heroically to defend democracy is laughable. The extreme nationalist minority is fighting with courage, skill and determination, the rest of the population is being forced to enlist and fight.
The war has many of the characteristics of a civil war. The Ukrainian commander in chief has a brother who is a colonel in the Russian army. Many Russians have relatives living in Ukraine.
A conflict with global geopolitical dimensions
For Moscow, as Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has stated, the Ukrainian war is not an isolated territorial conflict but a symptom of a broader struggle: the one waged by Washington to preserve its hegemony in the face of China’s rise and Russia’s renewed military power. In this context, Beijing is quietly backing Moscow — Sino-Russian trade has grown significantly — while Russia simultaneously maintains good relations with New Delhi to avoid exclusive dependence on a single partner.
The accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO represents a strategic setback for Moscow, however, adding some 1,340 kilometers of shared border with the Atlantic Alliance. By contrast, the development of BRICS offers Russia channels to circumvent sanctions, reducing its dependence on the dollar in international trade.
War objectives in flux
On the Russian side, war aims have gradually shifted. From a simple stabilization of the status quo in 2022, Moscow moved to formally annexing four Ukrainian regions, while some internal voices are now calling for even broader territorial conquests. Should the conflict continue without a negotiated solution, Ukraine could lose much more territory. Public opinion in Russia is strongly in favor of occupying Odessa and the Black Sea coast.
There has never been any doubt that the United States and its European allies are backing the war as a way to weaken Russia regardless of the fate of the people of Ukraine. It is more than a remote possibility that the United States would be happy to see Moscow maneuvered into occupying the whole country, resulting in years of economic strain and troublesome political complications. For the EU this would have the advantage of encouraging electoral support for re-armament but it would lead to serious political risks with governments like Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic no longer landlocked and benefiting from a border with Russia. This would give them new geopolitical choices in the face of a European Union determined on using the war to centralize control over member states.
BY THE NUMBERS
• 1.5 million lives lost according to various estimates since the conflict began in 2022
• 4th largest economy in the world — Russia’s ranking according to the IMF in purchasing power parity.
Indonesia’s relations with Russia have entered a new phase marked by intensified economic and geopolitical cooperation, particularly in the context of Eurasian regional development. While in the past, the partnership between the two countries was dominated by defence cooperation, contemporary dynamics show a significant shift toward strategic economic integration, underpinned by Indonesia’s membership in BRICS […]
The construction of the first prototype of Russia's Su-75 Checkmate fifth-generation fighter jet has officially begun, Vadim Badekha, Chief Executive Officer of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) said.
According to the official, the Checkmate program has already advanced to the prototype assembly stage, marking a significant milestone for one of Russia's most closely watched military aviation projects.
"The work on the Checkmate has already reached the stage of building a prototype aircraft," the official said, TASS reports.
A large-scale overnight Russian missile and drone attack on Kyiv killed at least four people and injured dozens, including children, Ukrainian officials said.
This story originally appeared in Professor Richard Wolff’s Substack on May 21, 2026. It is shared here with permission.
By the end of World War 2 in Europe, that continent’s extremely violent self-destruction had killed tens of millions and wrecked many economies. Its politically dominant employer classes had driven their national governments to a clash that had produced those results. By 1945 the war’s outcome had proved far worse than many in those classes had imagined or wanted before the war. Europeans had struggled after 1917/1918 to overcome their self-destruction in World War 1. In the short span between the end of the First and the beginning of the Second World War, Europe destabilized itself via its reparations program, Germany’s staggering inflation, and then global capitalism’s worst ever collapse in 1929. The consequences of those destabilizations ramified across Europe and undermined the League of Nations effort to prevent a second world war.
In 1945, for most Europeans, the greatest urgency attached to recovery from the war. For Europe’s employing classes, more urgent still were defenses against certain immediate threats. Russia’s army had been crucial to defeating the Nazis and to forging Russia’s post-war alliances with Eastern Europe. The mass of the USSR’s military forces, potentially supplemented by those of its new Eastern European allies, struck western Europe’s employer classes as existential threats. After 1945, western Europe’s employer classes smoothly and quickly refocused their hatred from a dead Hitler to the living Stalin and to their nations’ communist parties allied to Stalin.
Western Europe’s employer classes were threatened domestically by communist and socialist political parties whose militants had often led underground anti-fascist or anti-Nazi resistances. Thereby those militants often became broadly popular leaders. Across Europe national communist parties collaborated in various ways with one another (including the powerful Soviet party). Some post-war European heads of state such as France’s Charles de Gaulle included communist party leaders in their governments. In reaction to such developments, Europe’s employer classes quickly became obsessed with the great twin dangers of “communism at home and abroad.”
A parallel development had happened across the Atlantic in the US. There the Great Depression after 1929 had provoked a mass political shift leftward by the US public. Employees in unprecedented numbers had joined industrial unions allied in the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO). Tens of thousands joined two socialist parties and one communist party. Because the socialists and communists were often the militants in the CIO’s successful organizing drives across major industries, employers in the US were all the more alarmed by those successes in the 1930s and the 1940s. The CIO, socialist and communist parties also formed a far more powerful coalition within the Democratic Party than they had ever been before 1929.
The alliance between the Democratic Party under Franklin Roosevelt and the CIO-socialist-communist collaborations – the so-called “New Deal” coalition – terrified the employer class. The coalition’s key 1930s achievements included establishing the Social Security system, federal unemployment insurance, the nation’s first minimum wage, and a federal public jobs program that hired many millions of the then unemployed. What terrified the employer class even more was how the New Deal coalition paid for those achievements. It reformed the federal tax system in a sharply progressive direction. Because corporations and the rich were especially taxed, US wealth and income inequalities dropped sharply. Then in the 1940s, the same US government that took huge steps against economic inequality at home allied itself with the Communist Party leadership of the USSR (Stalin) to fight World War 2 against fascism.
By 1945, with the war over and Roosevelt dead, the US employer class had become, like its European counterpart, obsessed with the great twin dangers of “communism at home and abroad.” Parallel obsessions in western Europe and the US converged in a joint plan. Employers and their political supporters and dependents attacked Communist parties everywhere, depicting them as mere agents or dupes of a foreign power, namely the USSR. They demonized the USSR as the epitome of evil, a dark empire threatening democracy, freedom, Judeo-Christian values, religion per se, civil liberties, and so on. A Cold War was declared between the former allies, NATO emerged, and the Warsaw Pact followed as did arms races and geo-political confrontations. The US would lead NATO to “contain the Soviet threat.” The US organized alliances across other continents while locating hundreds of military bases across them. Beyond means of “containment,” the bases marked and enforced a new informal US global empire that replaced much of the old British, French, Dutch, Belgian, Japanese, and other expiring colonialisms.
“Anti-communism” ideologically unified the domestic and international strategies of the employer classes in Europe and the United States. Under that ideological banner, those employer classes mobilized their governments to collaborate with them to destroy national communist parties and the USSR. As global hegemon, the US went further. It demonized socialism and socialist parties by defining and treating them as nearly identical with their communist counterparts. It also used anti-communism as a major ideological weapon to replace formal European and Japanese colonialisms by the informal, US-dominated “rules based international order.”
The US-western Europe connection helped employer classes in both regions to repress or at least weaken their nations’ communist and socialist parties. The US moved very aggressively (as in the Taft-Hartley law of 1947) also to destroy labor unions at home and collaborated with anti-union forces across Europe. Where war-weakened Europe lost its colonies, a strong post-war US could and did rush in to integrate the ex-European colonies into a US empire. The new US empire had to be informal. It had to allow the ex-colonies formal political independence even as it subordinated them to US economic, military, and political dominance across most of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Europe sank into the role of the US’s very junior partner.
The US-western Europe connection brought the US valuable allies against the USSR. Given the military technology of the two world wars – reliance on huge armies fighting across immense terrains – Europe was a land buffer usefully located between the US and the USSR. It provided added protection to the Atlantic ocean’s water buffer. European colonialism had created a genuine world economy that the US could take over. Within that world economy’s particular hierarchy, Europeans were dominant nearly everywhere (except, of course, in the case of Japanese colonialism). Non-Europeans were integrated as subordinated people (economically, politically, culturally). As the Europeans’ formal empires gave way to the US informal empire, colonialist hierarchies persisted with the only real changes occurring at the top. There the civilian and military chiefs of the US (and their delegates) chose, elevated and enriched local elites to direct its informal empire’s development.
The Marshall Plan funded postwar Europe’s recovery in ways that also secured its subordinate role in the new US empire. Funds distributed by the US Central Intelligence Agency since 1947, by the US Endowment for Democracy since 1983, and by other public and private groups supplemented the Marshall money. The advisers who often came with the funds gave Europe’s anti-communist political parties, mass media, labor unions, academic and cultural organizations, many means to use against their domestic enemies. The post-1945 US-western Europe alliance mounted an immense, richly-funded, never ending campaign to shape and control world history. It worked well, overcoming numerous challenges, for 70 years until internal and external forces combined to end it. Now, as the US-western Europe connection dissolves, the contours of its totality and historical significance become clearer.
The relentless rise of China’s economy outgrew the economies of all parts of the US-western Europe alliance over recent decades. China thereby contributed crucially to that alliance’s dissolution. So too has China’s ability simultaneously to forge a new global economic coalition, the BRICS (initially Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa). The BRICS’ establishment and growth (with new members and partners) responded to their felt needs for mutual support and less economic dependence on the US. The BRICS passed a milestone in 2020 (downplayed in Europe and the US) when their aggregate GDP surpassed that of the G7. The former has continued without interruption to outgrow the latter through the present.
The anti-colonialism that inspired the transitions from colonies to independent nations over the last century has survived that transition. It sometimes infuses rebellions against the hegemony of the US. At other times and places it coalesces with religious movements and populist social movements. In these and other ways, it too helps shape changing patterns of global trade and investment. Ex-colonies seek and engage alternatives to trade and investment with former colonial masters in London, Paris, Berlin, etc. They form new economic partnerships with China and increasingly with other BRICS. Increasing competition and lost economic opportunities challenge western Europe, Japan and the US. They also reduce the role of the US dollar as world currency.
The Trump regime represents both the extent of that decline and extreme efforts to stop or at least slow it. Hitting nearly the whole world with tariffs, suddenly and massively without warnings or negotiations, is a desperate act. Offering subsequently to lower initially high tariff rates in exchange for tribute (foreign nations’ commitments to spend and invest $ hundreds of billions in the US) is a blunt, stark, and hostile act. That European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen accepted it is a craven act of Europe’s even more desperate submission. The war on Iran with Israel without consultation or preparation with its European and other allies, coupled with demands for massive, risky support for the US war effort, was also a desperate act. Its goal was to reverse the decline of the US empire; its result was the opposite. The decline accelerated.
The decline, still not admissible publicly in most US politicians’ discourses, nonetheless lurks everywhere in widespread feelings of lost national direction and/or impending social doom. Trump bitterly reproaches former allies like Mexico, Canada, South Korea, Japan, and, above all, western Europe. For example, he rewrites post-1945 history as a story of western Europeans, among others, cheating and abusing the US economy because weak US governments failed to resist and fight back. Trump presents his tariffs as the overdue fight back heroically ending the previous weak governments. Trump was so invested in such political theater situating him as “the strong leader,” that his sudden, rushed tariff program was intolerable even to a Supreme Court he otherwise controls.
Abducting Maduro from Venezuela, the 12-day war on Iran with Israel in June, 2025, and their longer one begun in March, 2026: these are also pieces of the same political theater. They are made-for-the-media distractions: not just from the hovering Epstein scandals or the deeply-troubled inequalities of the domestic US economy, but from the deeper threats of a declining empire. Thus a reaction formation type of neo-colonialism inspires many of Trump’s favorite distractions. So far from admitting decline, those distractions construct a US empire as strong and growing, taking over nations like Venezuela, Cuba, and Iran while planning the same for Panama, Canada, Greenland, Mexico and others. When charged with violating international law and the whole United Nations project, Trump proudly rebrands both actions as bold signs of US strength.
Now again, as in 1945, western Europe and the US find themselves at crossroads. The declining empires then were the Europeans’. Now in 2026 it is the decline of the US empire that has become both the US’s and Europe’s problem. In its desperate moves to slow or stop that decline, the US has turned on its subordinated European partners. That problem and that turning derive from the empire decline shaping this historical moment.
In Trump’s second presidency, he withdrew much of the US’s support for Ukraine in its war with Russia. This not only weakened the Ukrainian side in that war but also left a militarily underdeveloped Europe to rely even more on economic sanctions against Russia. Europe thus lost access to cheap Russian oil and gas. High energy prices resulted, drove up European export prices, and thus damaged its competitiveness. Meanwhile, China’s relentless growth miracle (fast-rising productivity and low inflation) continued its many years of outperforming both Germany’s Wirtschaftswunder and European competitiveness generally. China’s GDP growth far exceeded that of the entire West for the last few decades. Volkswagen’s crisis was so severe it seriously considered the US invitation to move its immense company to the US from Germany. Deindustrialization now deeply disturbs all of Europe’s economies.
The global economy looks increasingly like a great contest between China and the US with Europe increasingly out of the picture or merely a footnote to it. Trump’s massive tariffs on or demands for tribute from Europe combine both abandonments and assaults by the US on its former allies. NATO trembles and faces growing forces of dissolution. Trump demands European nations fund their own defenses in part because the declining US empire needs to enlarge its own military as an offset, Trump hopes, to that decline.
The Europeans are stuck in that metaphorical room whose walls are closing in on them. Their subordination is reflected in their passage from junior partners in US led Coalitions of the Willing to the 2026 Iran war that Spain and Italy have refused to join. Trump openly threatens to leave NATO. The employer classes of Europe are most worried about the combination of no more US-funded defense protection via NATO and the compensatory need to fund expanded European military spending. That will likely mean reducing European spending on its social welfare model of capitalism. Employer classes who do that risk triggering massive opposition from the left (labor unions, socialist, communist and anti-capitalist parties increasingly working together).
So far, Europe’s employer classes have tried to cope with this situation by a quasi-hysterical campaign to demonize Russia as a threat to invade and conquer its European neighbors. Europe’s current, mostly low-in-the-polls heads of state position themselves as great bulwarks against the Russian danger. This strategy aims to justify the increased spending on defense that in turn necessitates reduced government welfare spending. The latter is then rationalized as the whole society’s necessary sacrifice for safety from the Russian demon. The employer classes hope that this way of retaining their wealth, income and power will not be opposed by their working classes as the political issue of our times. The employer classes prefer that the great hyped Russian danger be the political issue.
While the Russian danger discourse might secure Europe’s employer classes a few more years of sitting atop Europe’s wealth and power distributions, it fails to address Europe’s long-term decline. That promises to continue and quite possibly accelerate because little is being done in Europe to directly oppose that continuance. Indeed, the disagreements inside Europe on whether to join the US/Israeli war on Iran coupled with fear of being singled out for retaliations by Trump heightened the competitive pandering among Europeans to curry favor with him. Such divisions have always weakened European unity. Rebuilding that unity is surely a necessary, albeit insufficient, component of any imaginable rescue of Europe from its deepening decline.
The long, uneven, and sometimes frustratingly slow historical shift from capitalist colonialism to today’s anti-imperialism undermined first Europe’s and now the US’s empires. A new crossroads beckons. One way leads toward a new Chinese global empire. Another leads toward a multi-national program of mutual accommodation, a kind of socialism with global characteristics.
Authorities in Sevastopol and Crimea have imposed temporary restrictions on gasoline sales after fuel demand exceeded available daily supplies at several filling stations.
Sevastopol Governor Mikhail Razvozhayev announced that all available daily stocks of AI-92 and AI-95 gasoline at TES gas stations were sold out during the morning hours.
As a result, customers can purchase AI-92 and AI-95 fuel on May 31 only through a voucher system.
Russia's Military Transport Aviation (VTA) has received a new batch of Il-76MD-90A transport aircraft, according to Lieutenant General Vladimir Benediktov, commander of the service.
In an interview with Krasnaya Zvezda, Benediktov said the 2025 state defense order was fulfilled in full.
"In 2025, the state defense order for our service was completed in full. We received new Il-76MD-90A aircraft, and two regiments have already re-equipped with these planes,” he said.
Login
by Laura Harris | Natural News The United Kingdom’s Crime and Policing Bill 2025, now at the Committee stage, grants police access to over 50 million driver’s license photos for facial recognition searches. The bill revives a dropped Conservative plan, with Labour justifying it as necessary to combat crime, terrorism and violence against women. Big Brother Watch warns that the bill enables mass biometric surveillance, risking misidentification and unjust tracking of innocent citizens. Russia plans a 2025 rollout of facial recognition payments via 2 million terminals, linked to its state biometric database (UBS). Both systems face criticism for enabling government […]
