Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

In order to persecute rulers deemed inconvenient to imperialism, the ICC overrode its own basic principle: limiting its jurisdiction to countries that ratified the Rome Statute. Yet while Gaddafi’s Libya and Putin’s Russia became targets of the ICC, the United States has remained immune. And it has demonstrated that, even while not being a member of the Court, it is the one truly in command.

When Bensouda sought to investigate war crimes in Afghanistan — not restricting her inquiry to the actions of the Taliban and the Islamic State, but also including what she viewed as the greatest perpetrators of that war (the U.S. military and the CIA) — she came under intense pressure from Washington, pressure that ultimately resulted in government sanctions. Her and her relatives’ bank accounts were frozen, and her husband was subjected to surveillance.

Eventually, Bensouda was replaced by a new prosecutor compliant with the United States. Karim Khan altered the focus of investigations into Afghanistan, declaring that priority would be given to the Taliban and ISIS while the United States would no longer be prioritized, citing a lack of resources for a broader undertaking.

During one of France’s many military interventions in Africa this century (between 2013 and 2016), soldiers raped and sexually abused children in displaced persons camps in the Central African Republic. The UN, although it devoted limited attention to the case, was accused of a “serious institutional failure” by an independent commission for having allowed the atrocities to continue. The ICC — which could have intervened, since France is a State Party and French magistrates failed to convict any soldier due to an alleged lack of evidence — preferred to remain silent on the matter.

During the same period, amid its intervention in the Sahel, French soldiers — including mercenaries from the Foreign Legion — were accused of murdering civilians and training and arming security forces responsible for massacres, summary executions, and rapes. French leaders likewise had little to fear.

On the other hand, the ICC even pretended to examine war crimes committed by the United Kingdom in Iraq, including the torture of prisoners. But it justified closing the case by claiming that British authorities were already conducting domestic investigations — even though the Office of the Prosecutor itself acknowledged there was a “reasonable basis” to believe British troops had committed war crimes.

The United Kingdom punished no officers, even though a later public inquiry concluded that there had been widespread violence and an institutional silence — in other words, responsibility reaching high military ranks. Since the United Kingdom had not truly been capable of concluding the matter, the ICC could have intervened, given that London is party to the Rome Statute. But the ICC once again washed its hands of the issue.

Now, as Bensouda revealed, Israel is also protected — and not only through U.S. sanctions, but also through the actions of an ICC bureaucracy working hand in glove with the Mossad, allowing direct and illegal Israeli interference without taking any action against it.

A Structure Dominated by Imperialist Nations

According to data made available in the ICC’s latest financial report, referring to 2024 and published in July 2025, it is possible to calculate that around 84% of the Court’s total funding comes from imperialist and associated countries (NATO members, Switzerland, Austria, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand). Yet together they account for only 28% of the Court’s States Parties. Meanwhile, the remaining countries (72%) contribute just 16% of the Court’s budget.

There is a clear structural imbalance in the ICC’s financing. Naturally, this is directly related to the Court’s partial conduct. As the saying goes, he who pays the piper calls the tune.

The ICC itself considers that 60% of African countries that belong to it are “non-represented” or “under-represented” in its internal structure. In other words, only 40% have some form of representation. For Latin American and Caribbean countries, this percentage is even lower: only 14% of the Court’s members are adequately represented. For Asia-Pacific countries, the figure is 28%. By contrast, half of the imperialist and associated countries are properly represented, a far higher percentage than in the other regions.

According to a report by the Assembly of States Parties, 56% of ICC staff in 2024 came from the group composed of Western European and related countries. Only 16% were African, 11% came from Eastern Europe, 8% from Asia-Pacific, and 8% from Latin America and the Caribbean.

Among the Court’s current 18 judges, eight belong to imperialist and associated countries, and five maintain academic and/or professional ties with hegemonic institutions in those countries. The others are senior state bureaucrats, generally from countries whose state apparatus is intrinsically dependent on imperialism.

Thus, it is clear that the ICC’s victims will always be leaders who are inconvenient to imperialist powers. While even Putin has had an arrest warrant issued against him by the Court and African governments remain its preferred target, no NATO country has ever been seriously troubled by ICC proceedings.

The bombings using prohibited weapons in Yugoslavia in 1999, the torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo, the massacres in Iraq and Afghanistan, the rapes in Africa, or, more recently, the massacre at the school in Minab and the weekly killings of fishermen in the Caribbean and the Eastern Pacific, do not concern ICC judges.

For this very reason, the majority of sovereign countries that refuse to kneel before imperialism have never joined the ICC. Cuba accused the Court of pursuing a “selective policy against developing countries.” North Korea described its maneuvers as “a product of hostile forces.”

But together with Burundi’s declaration, perhaps the best definition of what the ICC is came from the Deputy Secretary of the Russian Security Council, Alexander Venediktov: “A compliant puppet in the hands of the collective West.”

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The global public is waiting for the NATO Summit to be held in our capital, Ankara, on 7–8 July.

At the summit, of course, imperialist aggression against Iran and the latest developments in the Russia–Ukraine war will likely be the main issues. But the real key headline is the target of member countries spending 5 percent of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on defense.

Except for Spain, all allies have pledged to reach the 5 percent defense spending target by 2035. We had previously written about the burden this would place on countries’ national economies and the possible consequences, especially cuts in social spending. (Source)

However, NATO is, as expected, carrying out its preparations for the so-called ‘big war’—which is now effectively an open secret—through a multi-layered program. The alliance is preparing for the historic summit and the transformation that will take place in the summer through committee and various subcommittee meetings.

Another threshold in this preparation was crossed recently in North Macedonia. This critical development, which did not receive much media coverage, is focused on preparing member states’ health systems as well for the expected ‘big war.’

Who organized the meeting?

The meeting was organized by the NATO Committee of Chiefs of Military Medical Services (COMEDS).

Its origins go back to EUROMED, established in 1970 by the medical services leadership of EUROGROUP, which itself was founded in 1968 for the purpose of logistical coordination among NATO’s European members.

By the 1990s, all EUROGROUP activities except EUROMED were transferred to the Western European Union (WEU)—which would be dissolved in 2011—while EUROMED joined NATO. EUROMED was then institutionalized by the NATO Military Committee in the 1993–1994 period and transformed into today’s COMEDS structure.

Since then, this structure has worked on organizing health services for military personnel, as well as on medical evacuation and related fields. But this structure is also tasked with operating in civilian areas, not only military ones. Epidemics in member countries, natural disasters, emergencies, and the like… In all of these ‘civilian’ events too, this committee is responsible for providing ‘coordination’ on highly sensitive matters such as medical supplies and patient transport.

What was discussed at the meeting?

The meeting, recorded as the NATO COMEDS 65th Plenary Meeting, was held in Skopje, North Macedonia, on 1–4 June.

From the statements made by senior officials speaking at the meeting, it appears that two points were emphasized.

The first of these is accelerating the treatment of the wounded and their return to the front.

In his opening remarks, Belgian Major General Luc Vanbockryck, Director of NATO’s Logistics and Resources Division, said that medical support should be regarded as “a critical capability equivalent to any weapons system.”

Norwegian Brigadier General Petter Iversen, who holds the committee’s chairmanship, also described “a new reality” and stated:

“Military medical services are no longer just a broad support domain; they are becoming a fundamental element just like any weapons system. We must accelerate the process of returning soldiers to the front. This has strategic importance.”

In other words, NATO sees its wounded soldiers not merely as patients, but as resources that need to be “repaired” as quickly as possible. This stance is also an indication that NATO anticipates serious losses in the event of a possible war.

Work on the NATO Medical Action Plan (MAP), which entered into force in January 2025, was also one of the main topics at the meeting. Due to the decision on ‘confidentiality,’ the full text of this action plan has not yet been made public, but we can infer the main trends in the plan from meetings of this kind and from the statements of officials.

And this brings us to the second important point:

Civil-military health integration

According to official documents, NATO explicitly describes the MAP through a “Whole-of-government, whole-of-society” approach. In other words, these plans involve not only the military health system, but also the health capacity of the state and society.

We also learn what this integration looks like in practice from NATO documents open to the public.

At NATO’s first joint military-civilian health meeting, held on 7 December 2023, the issues discussed with COMEDS were striking:

National health authorities; mass casualty planning, supply security for blood and blood products and medical countermeasures, patient evacuation and transfer…

The following year, in discussions between COMEDS and NATO’s Joint Health Group, the main topic was again civil-military cooperation.

The most striking aspect of this meeting was NATO’s assessment that “civilian authorities’ civilian health systems need to be able to function for longer in a conflict environment.” In other words, NATO is not aiming to expand the military system in the health field; it is aiming to make civilian health capacity directly resilient to war conditions.

The guidelines contained in the alliance’s health manuals point exactly to the place we are highlighting:

Strategic stocks, shared access arrangements in civilian/military medicine, joint disease/health surveillance, communication lines, and more…

What does all this mean?

The best way to understand the effect of all these regulations and proposed regulations on the public is through a kind of written simulation.

Based entirely on NATO documents, let us imagine that NATO, led by the United States, together with member countries, has started a hot war against a “great enemy,” and that our country is also involved in this war with its military power.

In such a scenario, what will happen in the field of medicine can be summarized as follows:

When our country is involved in any total war of NATO, the first break occurs first in the supply chain, transport, and communications; all of these sectors come under intense pressure. In other words, the war moves from the front to the cities very rapidly, and public services are instantly paralyzed.

The expected picture in Turkey in such a war would be, in addition to injuries and deaths, a contraction in access to health services, shortages of medicines and medical supplies, psychological trauma, migration and internal displacement, price increases, disruptions in transport and communication, and the diversion of public resources to the war.

Turkey’s health infrastructure is redesigned at great speed according to the tempo of war, not according to the needs of the public. City hospitals, state hospitals, military hospitals, university hospitals, and private health chains learn whom they will serve and how not according to the country, but according to the alliance and the laws of the war it is in.

From this point on, the matter is no longer merely a question of medical capacity; it becomes directly a question of sovereignty. Because in wartime, health is not just about “saving the wounded,” but about deciding who will be treated, which wounded person will be moved first, which medicine will be given to whom, and which hospital will operate according to military priorities.

For example, in its medical situation assessment prepared at the center in the first moments of war, COMEDS determines in which countries the health system is under strain, in which regions patient transfer is possible, and in which areas civil-military coordination is needed.

According to the plan to be created under the MAP, some allied countries will take on advanced surgery and intensive care capacity, while others will assume the role of evacuation, rehabilitation, blood products, medicine delivery, or logistics hub. So who will distribute these roles? The answer is again in NATO documents: “Lead nations,” that is, leading countries…

The question not answered in NATO documents is this: On what basis will the division of tasks be made? On military power? On political power? On a country’s place within the alliance? Or according to the Atlantic-centered strategic reflexes that give the alliance its true character?

Let us continue with NATO documents… If military medical services are insufficient on their own—which is expected to be the case—COMEDS begins cooperation with civilian health authorities. This cooperation, which NATO explains through seemingly “health-focused” concepts such as supply security and patient referral and transfer, has one more frightening requirement: the use of national and regional stockpiles.

In other words, when NATO deems it necessary, it can, for example, use the blood stock held by civilian health services for military personnel. This is actually a law applicable in every country. But it is much more than a state’s ability to use its own stock within the country for the sake of its own army and its own interests in war.

In short, let us think about health services, which are at the center of human life…

When health services, militarized by officials who consider them equivalent in importance to weapons systems, are quickly transformed from “burden sharing” into “resource sharing” in wartime due to NATO membership, how much of them will reach whom?

And let us imagine a country…

A country that is not among the “upper ranks” of the imperialist-capitalist system, yet is kept within the alliance by governments at any cost; whose economy is extremely fragile; whose public services, especially health, already run sluggishly; but which has a large military/civilian population. In such a scenario, how many years—not years, but months—could it hold on, and which of its “allies” would have the courage to shoulder the burden of rescuing such a wreck?

Se da un lato ha visto sfumare l’occasione di esibirsi nel nostro Paese in seguito alla cancellazione dei concerti previsti a Campovolo, Kanye West (più noto come Ye) ieri, 8 giugno, era raggiante per il suo 49esimo compleanno ma anche per il regalo di compleanno che gli ha fatto la compagna Bianca Censori.

“Gemini Season” (la stagione dei Gemelli, nel senso del segno zodiacale, ndr) del video interpretato e diretto niente di meno che da dalla stessa Censori. Lei appare con un bianco, corsetto e lingerie piumata. Le premesse sexy ci sono tutte, ma non è finita. Censori inizia a mungere una mucca, tra montagne nuvole, poi beve del latte che cade sul petto. Insomma un video ad alto tasso sensuale.

West, dopo i festeggiamenti, si esibirà ancora con dei concerti, tra il 12 giugno in Georgia e poi al Raymond James Stadium il 26 e il 28 giugno, a Tampa Bay mentre il 19 giugno dovrebbe l’edizione deluxe di “Bully”.

L'articolo Bianca Censori e il video hard per Kanye West: munge una mucca, si cosparge di latte e ammicca sensuale. Le immagini di “Gemini Season” proviene da Il Fatto Quotidiano.

Nulla da fare per i concerti di luglio previsti alla Rcf Arena di Reggio Emilia. “Avendo dovuto constatare che non sussistono le condizioni necessarie per lo svolgimento dei concerti del 4, 5 e 11 luglio 2026, si comunica l’annullamento delle date. I biglietti acquistati in prevendita verranno rimborsati secondo le modalità previste”.

Così in una nota gli organizzatori comunicano l’annullamento dei concerti della Rcf Arena, nota anche come Campovolo, la più grande venue per concerti all’aperto d’Europa. Dopo il divieto da parte del prefetto ai concerti di Travis Scott, previsto per il 17 luglio, e Ye/Kanye West, in programma il 18 luglio, i due eventi di punta del “Pulse of Gaia Festival”, gli organizzatori hanno deciso di annullare anche gli eventi previsti nelle altre tre giornate, quelli del 4, 5 e 11 luglio.

Il 4 luglio erano in cartellone Martin Garrix, Lost Frequencies, Offset, Ice Spice, Ty Dolla $ign, Wiz Khalifa, Poison Beatz e Baby Gang; il 5 luglio The Chainsmokers, Rita Ora, Ozuna, Nicky Jam, Lolita, Afrojack, Dimitri Vegas e Like Mike, DJ Snake, mentre l’11 luglio si sarebbero dovuti esibire invece Swedish House Mafia, Alok, Benny Benassi e Clean Bandit.

“Siamo profondamente dispiaciuti per la decisione che abbiamo dovuto prendere – dichiara Andrea Cattini, Presidente C.Volo S.p.A. – Il nostro obiettivo è sempre stato quello di creare degli eventi di qualità per il pubblico e fino all’ultimo abbiamo cercato una soluzione che ci permettesse di confermare i concerti di queste tre giornate ma, a seguito di una serie di valutazioni complesse, non possiamo procedere. Confidiamo nella comprensione di questa decisione, alla quale siamo giunti spinti da circostanze al di fuori del nostro controllo. Ringraziamo tutti i professionisti coinvolti per il sostegno e l’impegno dimostrati in questi mesi”.

L'articolo Stop ai concerti di Kanye West e Travis Scott e annullati gli show previsti il 4, 5 e 11 luglio alla RCF Arena di Reggio Emilia. Le modalità di rimborso dei biglietti proviene da Il Fatto Quotidiano.

Campanha de desinformação anti-russa se intensificou devido ao Fórum.

Junte-se a nós no Telegram , Twitter e VK.

Escreva para nós: info@strategic-culture.su

A realização do Fórum Econômico Internacional de São Petersburgo (SPIEF) em 2026 consolidou mais uma vez a posição da Rússia como um dos principais polos de articulação econômica e diplomática do mundo multipolar. Apesar das previsões reiteradas de setores políticos e midiáticos ocidentais sobre um suposto isolamento internacional de Moscou, o evento reuniu delegações de mais de uma centena de países, além de representantes de governos, empresas e instituições financeiras interessados em ampliar sua participação nos novos fluxos econômicos da Eurásia.

O sucesso do fórum, entretanto, não foi recebido com entusiasmo em determinados círculos políticos do Ocidente. Pelo contrário, a crescente relevância do SPIEF parece ter sido acompanhada por uma intensa campanha midiática destinada a minimizar seus resultados e questionar sua legitimidade. O fenômeno não é novo. Desde o início da crise ucraniana, importantes veículos de comunicação ocidentais passaram a desempenhar um papel cada vez mais próximo dos objetivos estratégicos de seus respectivos governos, abandonando frequentemente a separação tradicional entre jornalismo e interesses de Estado.

Nesse contexto, chamou atenção a publicação coordenada de análises e reportagens em veículos britânicos que procuraram apresentar o fórum como um evento enfraquecido ou incapaz de gerar resultados concretos. O padrão narrativo adotado seguiu uma fórmula conhecida: destacar ausências específicas, ignorar a dimensão geral da participação internacional e sugerir que qualquer dificuldade logística ou financeira decorrente do regime de sanções representaria uma prova do fracasso russo.

O problema dessa abordagem é que ela entra em choque com os fatos observáveis. Os números apresentados durante o SPIEF demonstraram continuidade nos investimentos, expansão de parcerias comerciais e aprofundamento dos mecanismos de cooperação entre a Rússia e diversos países da Ásia, Oriente Médio, África e América Latina. Em vez de isolamento, o que se observou foi uma crescente diversificação das relações internacionais russas.

Particularmente relevante foi o fortalecimento dos eixos estratégicos entre Rússia e grandes potências emergentes. A cooperação com a China continuou avançando em áreas como energia, infraestrutura e tecnologia. As relações com a Índia mantiveram trajetória positiva, apesar dos desafios inerentes à adaptação dos sistemas financeiros internacionais ao novo cenário geopolítico. Da mesma forma, os vínculos com a Turquia permaneceram fundamentais para a estabilidade econômica regional e para a construção de corredores logísticos alternativos.

Essas parcerias representam um desafio direto ao paradigma geopolítico que dominou o sistema internacional após o fim da Guerra Fria. Durante décadas, as principais potências ocidentais desfrutaram de uma posição privilegiada na definição das regras econômicas globais. O surgimento de mecanismos alternativos de cooperação reduz gradualmente essa capacidade de influência, tornando compreensível a preocupação demonstrada por setores comprometidos com a preservação da ordem unipolar.

A guerra informacional tornou-se, portanto, uma das principais ferramentas utilizadas para tentar (inutilmente) conter esse processo. Em vez de confrontar diretamente a expansão das redes de cooperação eurasiáticas por meio de argumentos econômicos consistentes, parte da mídia ocidental opta por enquadramentos seletivos, interpretações tendenciosas e narrativas destinadas a moldar percepções públicas. O objetivo não é informar, mas influenciar.

O SPIEF 2026 demonstrou que tais esforços possuem eficácia limitada. A presença expressiva de países do Sul Global evidenciou que grande parte da comunidade internacional já não enxerga o mundo através das mesmas lentes geopolíticas predominantes em Washington ou Londres. Estados soberanos buscam oportunidades econômicas concretas e tendem a priorizar interesses nacionais em vez de aderir automaticamente a agendas formuladas por potências externas.

Em última análise, o verdadeiro significado do fórum não está apenas nos contratos assinados ou nos investimentos anunciados. Seu valor simbólico reside na confirmação de uma tendência histórica mais ampla: a transição gradual para uma ordem internacional mais plural, na qual diferentes centros de poder coexistem e competem. As tentativas de deslegitimar esse processo por meio de campanhas midiáticas dificilmente alterarão uma realidade que se torna cada vez mais visível. O mundo multipolar deixou de ser uma projeção teórica e passou a ser um fato político em construção.

Former Sen. Bob Packwood (R-Oregon), who resigned from the Senate in 1995 after the Senate Ethics Committee voted to expel him for sexual and official misconduct, has died, according to multiple reports. The Oregonian reported Saturday that Packwood, 93, died that day. A family friend said that he died in California, according to the outlet. …