nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Founders of Deadly Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), ‘Shaping’ New US-Backed Administration for Gaza: Report

  Netanyahu’s top military advisor is among those central to the new executive committee, which is due to operate under Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’

News Desk, JAN 14, 2026, https://thecradle.co/articles/founders-of-deadly-ghf-shaping-new-us-backed-administration-for-gaza-report

Many of the figures emerging as key players in the new US-backed administration for Gaza were central to Washington’s Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), the Financial Times (FT) reported.

The GHF was a deadly US-Israeli aid scheme introduced in May, which was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of starving Palestinian aid seekers. 

According to the FT report, the Gaza executive committee set to be announced soon – which will operate directly under a Trump-led ‘Board of Peace’ – is being “shaped” by several people close to Israel. 

This includes Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s chief military advisor, Roman Gofman, and US-Israeli investor Michael Eisenberg, who has been advising the Israeli premier since the start of the ceasefire. 

Others involved are US-Israeli policymaker Aryeh Lightstone and Israeli cybersecurity entrepreneur Liran Tancman, who is Mossad-linked.

All four of these men were involved in the establishment of GHF. The deadly aid scheme resulted in the killing of around 2,000 Palestinians within half a year.

Under the pretext of humanitarian assistance, Palestinians were crammed into tight spaces and handed limited quantities of aid for months as Israeli troops and US contractors regularly opened fire at unarmed aid seekers.

The announcement of Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’ was meant to take place this week, but has been delayed. According to reports, the executive committee that will operate under the board could be announced as early as Wednesday.

“Eighteen Palestinian officials have received invitations to join the committee that will replace Hamas,” sources told the New Arab. 

Ali Shaath, a former deputy planning minister in the Palestinian Authority (PA), has been designated to head the committee, while retired intelligence official Mohammed Nisman is expected to assume control over security.

According to the sources, the committee is scheduled to hold its meeting in Egypt’s capital on Thursday, the sources said.

The ‘Board of Peace,’ which will be announced later, is expected to include 15 world leaders from countries such as the UK, France, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Egypt.

Hamas has repeatedly vowed that it is ready to hand over governance to an independent body of technocratic Palestinians, as envisioned in the truce.

It rejects disarmament until an independent Palestinian state is formed, but has expressed openness to an initiative that would “freeze” its weapons for a period of time.

The group has stressed that the second phase of the ceasefire deal cannot commence until Israel halts all violations.

Israel has killed at least 442 Palestinians since the US-backed ‘ceasefire’ was reached in October last year, the Gaza Health Ministry reported. Over 1,200 have been injured.

Tel Aviv continues to indiscriminately target civilians, justifying the attacks under the pretext of alleged ‘security threats,’ while persisting in the violent pursuit of resistance leaders with no regard for the terms of the ceasefire agreement. The blockade on Gaza also remains in place, further deepening the humanitarian crisis.

Sources told Times of Israel in a report published on 11 January that the Israeli army has drawn up plans for a new assault in the Gaza Strip – aimed at expanding the areas under Tel Aviv’s control in violation of the ceasefire.

January 19, 2026 Posted by | Gaza, politics | Leave a comment

President Trump Urges Iran Protests To Continue, Says ‘Help Is on Its Way’

The president also said he cut off contact with Iranian officials

by Dave DeCamp | January 13, 2026 , https://news.antiwar.com/2026/01/13/president-trump-urges-iran-protests-to-continue-says-help-is-on-its-way/

President Trump on Tuesday called for the protests in Iran to continue and said “help is on its way,” suggesting he was making another threat of military intervention.

“Iranian Patriots, KEEP PROTESTING – TAKE OVER YOUR INSTITUTIONS!!! Save the names of the killers and abusers. They will pay a big price,” the president wrote on Truth Social.

The president also said he cut off contact with Iranian officials, a comment that came after he suggested he was open to diplomacy with Tehran. “I have cancelled all meetings with Iranian Officials until the senseless killing of protesters STOPS. HELP IS ON ITS WAY. MIGA!!!” Trump added.

“MIGA” refers to “Make Iran Great Again,” a slogan Trump used during the 12-day US-Israeli war against Iran back in June 2025 when he floated the idea of regime change in the country. He also recently posed with a “Make Iran Great Again Hat” alongside Sen. Lindsey Graham, who has said the president is ready to kill Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Ali Larijani, the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, responded to Trump’s post, saying the “names of the main killers of the people of Iran” were the US president and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Also on Tuesday, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claimed it disrupted “Israeli-linked terror teams” and seized US-made weapons.

Iranian officials have warned that the US would face a severe response to any attack. “Come and see what will happen to American ships and military bases in the region,” the speaker of Iran’s parliament, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, said at a pro-government rally over the weekend.

“Come and burn in the fire of the Iranian nation so severely that it becomes a lasting lesson in history for all oppressive US rulers. Come and find out what will happen to you and to the region,” he added.

January 19, 2026 Posted by | Iran, politics, USA | Leave a comment

Reza Pahlavi vows to recognise Israel, end nuclear programme if he led Iran.

15 Jan 2026, https://www.aljazeera.com/video/newsfeed/2026/1/15/reza-pahlavi-vows-to-recognise-israel-end-nuclear-programme-if-he-led-iran

Reza Pahlavi, the son of Iran’s deposed Shah, set out key policies he would put in place if he ever returned to rule the country. Pahlavi said he would recognise Israel and end Iran’s nuclear programme. Pahlavi, who lives in the US, has backed calls to overthrow Iran’s leaders.

January 18, 2026 Posted by | Iran, politics | Leave a comment

Do the Democrats Have the Guts to Outflank Trump on Defense Industry Looting?

Les Leopold, Jan 14, 2026, https://lesleopold.substack.com/p/do-the-democrats-have-the-guts-to

Trump has decided that the government should not give money to defense contractors who then reroute our tax dollars via stock buybacks to stockholders and executives. (A stock buyback is when a corporation repurchases its own shares, thus boosting the share’s price, a legalized form of stock manipulation. CEOs, who are paid mostly in stock incentives, and large investors directly benefit from stock buybacks, and unlike with dividends, don’t have to pay taxes until they sell their shares.)

This isn’t news. Studies show that defense contractors spent three times more on dividends and stock buybacks than on capital investments needed to fulfill their contracts over the last decade. In Europe it was the other way around with defense companies spending twice as much on capital investments than on dividends. (They don’t do stock buybacks.)

The New York Times cited a Department of Defense study during the Biden administration that “found that top U.S. defense contractors spent more on returning cash to shareholders in the form of dividends and stock buybacks between 2010 and 2019 compared to the previous decades, while spending on research and new or upgraded factories had declined.”

You’ve got to wonder why the Biden administration didn’t try to stop this scam. Maybe it feared looking anti-military. Or maybe it thought such an action would be too upsetting to their Wall Street donors who feast on stock buybacks?

Now we have Trump doing what the Democrats should have done long ago, announcing he will stop buybacks and cap executive salaries at profligate defense contractors:

  • His Executive Order directs the Secretary of War to take steps to ensure that future contracts prohibit stock buybacks and corporate distributions during periods of underperformance, non-compliance, insufficient prioritization or investment, or insufficient production speed.
  • The Secretary shall further take steps to ensure that future contracts permit the Secretary to, upon determining that a contractor is experiencing such issues, cap executive base salaries at current levels (with inflation adjustments permitted) while scrutinizing executive incentives to ensure they are directly, fairly, and tightly tied to prioritizing the needs of the warfighter.

How about Preventing Mass Layoffs?

If the Democrats wanted to show more concern for working people they would jump all over this executive order and push legislation to expand it to include a prohibition of compulsory layoffs at all defense contractors. If a contractor wants to change staffing levels, they should offer voluntary financial buyout packages. No one should be forced to leave.

This is an easy case to make. Why should taxpayers give money to corporations that then lay off taxpayers so that they can shovel more and more of our tax dollars to the wealthy? If the problem is that these defense contractors fail to deliver products on time they need more workers, not fewer.

Instead of wallowing in the Epstein files, the Democrats should declare again and again that mass layoffs are the weapon of choice to enrich executives and Wall Street. Fight for the damn jobs!

In April, the Labor Institute, in cooperation with the Center for Working Class Politics, produced a YouGov survey of 3,000 voters in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. In it we asked the surveyed voters to evaluate a state ballot initiative we invented that read:

“Corporations with more than 500 employees that receive taxpayer-funded federal contracts are prohibited from conducting involuntary layoffs of American workers. All layoffs during the life of a taxpayer-funded contract must be voluntary, based on employer financial incentives. No one shall be forced to leave.”

Overall, 42 percent supported the proposal, while 26 percent opposed it and 32 percent were not sure. The no-layoff proposal was brand new, unheard of by anyone before the survey was administered, yet it tied for fifth in popularity among 25 economic proposals. Furthermore, we reported that:

“Respondents from key demographic groups that Democrats have struggled to reach in recent electoral cycles showed robust support for the policy, which was tied for fifth among respondents without a four-year college degree and those whose family income was less than $50,000 per year, and tied for sixth among respondents who reported a declining standard of living and those who live in rural areas and small towns.”

This no-layoffs policy would be a big winner for the Democrats leading up to the mid-terms. But it would not be a winner for the financial backers of the party who cherish their stock buybacks.

So here we are again. Trump outflanking the Democrats on a populist economic proposal, like cancelling NAFTA, one that the Democrats failed to address while in power. In this case the Democrats could push Trump even further by tying job stability to federal defense contracts, something that working people would greatly value but would be upsetting to Wall Street.

The Democrats could push Trump, but will they dare to take that leap? One would hope so, but don’t hold your breath.

The failure to rigorously defend working people over the last forty years against needless mass layoffs may be why so many voters right now are willing to consider a new political party, independent of the two billionaire parties.

Much more on that to come.

January 17, 2026 Posted by | politics | Leave a comment

‘Wall of money’ to invest in Scottish nuclear power if Labour win election

Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the SNP were saying Scotland was ‘shut for business’.

Danyel VanReenen, Politics Reporter, Jan 15th, 2026

The Prime Minister said the UK Labour Government is ready and willing to invest in nuclear power in Scotland if Anas Sarwar wins the Holyrood election in May.

The current SNP Government has consistently been against the creation of new nuclear power stations north of the border, with control of planning laws giving ministers an effective veto.

Keir Starmer said there is a “wall of money” Labour wants to invest in Scottish nuclear power, but he said the SNP are saying no “for ideological reasons”.

“If there’s a Labour Government in Scotland, we’ll be back the day after the election to make sure that money is translated into good, well-paying jobs in renewables and nuclear,” Starmer said.

“That can’t happen at the moment because the SNP is basically saying ‘we’re shut for business’.”…………………………………………………………………………………………. https://news.stv.tv/politics/wall-of-money-to-invest-in-scottish-nuclear-power-if-labour-win-election

January 17, 2026 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Sizewell C injects nearly £1bn of tax-payers’ money into East of England as construction hits two-year milestone.

 Sizewell C has awarded almost £1bn worth of contracts to businesses
across the East of England, as the project celebrates two years since
formal construction began on the Suffolk coast. The 3.2GW nuclear power
station – set to deliver 70% of its construction value to UK companies
and support tens of thousands of jobs nationwide – is committed to
investing £4.4bn in the East of England over the course of its build. This
contract milestone caps a hugely successful second year for Sizewell C,
highlighted by its Final Investment Decision last summer, which unlocked
£38bn of funding and made it the first majority British-owned nuclear
power station in more than 30 years.

 Sizewell C 15th Jan 2026,
https://www.sizewellc.com/news-views/sizewell-c-injects-nearly-1bn-into-east-of-england-as-construction-hits-two-year-milestone/

January 17, 2026 Posted by | politics | Leave a comment

Zelensky makes another move to avoid election.

12 Jan 26, https://www.rt.com/russia/630856-zelensky-election-martial-law/

The Ukrainian leader has submitted a bill to extend martial law, which would allow him to remain in power.

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has submitted two draft bills to the parliament to extend martial law and general mobilization for another 90 days, effectively postponing elections once again. The move comes despite pressure from US President Donald Trump and the Ukrainian leader earlier saying he was open to holding an election.

One of the draft laws submitted to the Verhovna Rada on Monday would extend martial law from February 3 to early May, which would effectively bar national elections for this period. Martial law has been renewed repeatedly in three-month increments since 2022. The other bill would prolong the controversial forced mobilization campaign on the same timetable.

Zelensky’s presidential term expired in May 2024. The Ukrainian leader refused to hold a new election, citing the conflict with Russia. Moscow subsequently declared him “illegitimate,” arguing that authority now rests with the Ukrainian parliament. Russian officials also noted that Zelensky’s dubious status is a major legal obstacle to signing a peace agreement.

This comes despite pressure from Trump – who labeled Zelensky “a dictator without elections” last year – to hold an election. In December, Zelensky said he was ready to hold an election within months if the West could provide Kiev with robust security guarantees.

A poll in January by Ipsos suggested that former Ukrainian commander-in-chief Valery Zaluzhny – widely viewed as Zelensky’s main rival – is leading potential presidential candidates with around 23% support, while Zelensky trailed at 20%.

If the second bill passes, Ukraine will prolong its mobilization campaign, which has been marred by numerous violent incidents between draft officers and reluctant recruits. Officials in Kiev have acknowledged a decline in enthusiasm to serve, but insisted that drastic measures are required to replenish growing battlefield losses.

January 16, 2026 Posted by | politics, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Senate Republicans edging toward War Powers Resolution to curb Trump’s crazed Venezuelan war

Walt Zlotow West Suburban Peace Coalition Glen Ellyn IL, 11 Jan 26

In a rare pushback to one of Trump’s many illegal wars, 5 Senate Republicans joined all 47 Democrats to advance a War Powers Resolution to prevent President Trump from launching another attack on Venezuela without congressional authorization.

The procedural vote allows passage of the Senate resolution next week by simple majority (no filibuster allowed). Once approved it will go to the House where it’s also likely to pass. Alas, it’s unlikely to receive a veto proof majority, meaning it’s sure to be vetoed by war loving Trump who made Venezuela the seventh country he’s bombed in his first year of term two.

However, it might make Trump pause. In 2019 Congress passed a War Powers Resolution against Trump’s support of Saudi Arabia’s war on Yemen. Tho Trump vetoed it, he did cease refueling Saudi bombers shortly thereafter. We can only hope it may give him pause on further Venezuelan military action.

The vote is significant because it reverses the Venezuelan War Powers Resolution that failed last November when only 2 Senate Republicans joined the 47 Democrats voting in favor of returning the war power responsibility to Congress.

Trump howled in protest, clamoring that all 5 Republicans who vote against unilateral presidential war making should never be reelected to Congress.

Let’s hope more Senate and House Republicans will pivot from giving Trump unchecked war making power. Hopefully, they understand that even their MAGA base is not enamored of endless, senseless warfare while the economy remains gloomy for everyone but the billionaire class

January 15, 2026 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Sanctions, Strategy and Spin: Venezuela Lobbying Soars Under Trump.

People react to the news of the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, after US military actions in Venezuela this morning, in Doral, Florida, near Miami on January 3, 2026. US President Donald Trump said Saturday that the United States will “run” Venezuela and tap its huge oil reserves after snatching leftist leader Nicolas Maduro out of the country during a bombing raid on Caracas. Trump’s announcement came hours after a lightning attack in which special forces grabbed Maduro and his wife, while airstrikes pounded multiple sites, stunning the capital city. (Photo by GIORGIO VIERA / AFP via Getty Images)

 By Emma Sullivan, January 12, 2026, https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2026/01/sanctions-strategy-and-spin-venezuela-lobbying-soars-under-trump

An analysis of lobbying filings shows that U.S. energy companies and organizations linked to the Venezuelan government increased their influence campaigns on issues related to the South American nation in 2025, as the Trump administration intensified military and financial pressure in the run-up to the Jan. 3 capture of President Nicolás Maduro.

After months of U.S. escalation – including strikes on Venezuelan vessels, the seizure of oil tankers, and an expanded military presence off the country’s coast – U.S. forces captured Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, on Saturday. Trump has said the United States would assume control over Venezuela’s vast oil reserves and enlist U.S. companies to invest billions in rebuilding the oil industry. Venezuela holds the world’s largest proven crude oil reserves — about 303 billion barrels, or roughly 17 percent of global reserves.

As U.S. policy toward Venezuela hardened over the course of the year, federal lobbying activity accelerated. Twenty-three organizations reported lobbying on issues related to Venezuela through the third quarter of 2025, according to an OpenSecrets analysis of lobbying disclosure reports. According to data going back to 2008, an average of 11 organizations have lobbied on Venezuela each year, with 2025 having the second highest number of clients (23) after 2019, during which lobbyists reported representing 34 clients on such  issues. (Lobbyists must report their fourth-quarter activities by Jan. 20.)

Energy and oil companies accounted for much of the lobbying, pressing U.S. officials on Treasury licenses, sanctions implementation, and regulatory rules governing Venezuelan oil and gas activity. The 23 that lobbied on Venezuela issues during the first nine months of 2025 are:

  • American Seniors Housing Association
  • Americas Alliance for Liberty & Prosperity
  • Amnesty International USA
  • Blockchain Association
  • CASA de Maryland
  • Chevron Corporation
  • Footwear Distributors & Retailers of America
  • FP Advocacy
  • Friends Committee on National Legislation
  • Human Rights First
  • Mare Finance Investment Holdings
  • Maurel & Prom
  • National Cattlemen’s Beef Association
  • National Pork Producers Council
  • PBF Energy
  • Phillips 66
  • Shell Plc
  • Sisters of Good Shepherd National Advocacy Center
  • Solana Policy Institute
  • Texas Cattle Feeders Association
  • Tiryaki Agro Gida Sanayi Ve Ticaret
  • U.S. Chamber of Commerce
  • Women In Need (New York)

U.S. energy companies ramp up lobbying efforts 

In 2007, then-President Hugo Chávez moved to bring Venezuela’s foreign oil projects under state control, prompting ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips to exit the country while Chevron remained as a minority partner in joint ventures with PDVSA, the state-owned oil company. During Trump’s first term, the United States imposed sweeping sanctions on PDVSA, effectively barring most U.S. firms from dealing in Venezuelan crude without Treasury Department authorization. Chevron is the only major U.S. oil company authorized to operate in Venezuela.

Chevron mentioned Venezuela 12 times in its 2025 lobbying filings, up from eight mentions in both 2023 and 2024, citing “Venezuela energy issues” and “Venezuela sanctions.” The company engaged Washington on sanctions and authorization issues tied to maintaining its joint ventures and ongoing operations under U.S. policy. Chevron’s ability to expand oil exports is limited under U.S. sanctions on PDVSA. With the Trump administration now seeking to redirect Venezuelan crude away from China and instead toward U.S. ports and increase sanctioned sales to U.S. refiners, Chevron may stand to benefit from higher volumes of Venezuelan oil flowing to the U.S. market, according to Reuters. 

Shell USA, the U.S. subsidiary of Shell Plc, also lobbied U.S. officials in 2025 over its role in Dragon, a proposed gas project off the coasts of Venezuela and Trinidad and Tobago, that requires authorization under U.S. sanctions. Earlier in the year, the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control revoked licenses that had allowed Shell to advance the project, halting plans to extract Venezuelan gas and pipe it to Trinidad for processing, before later issuing a narrower authorization reopening limited negotiations and preparatory work. 

Notably, Gulf Coast refiners Phillips 66 and PBF Energy each cited Venezuela in their 2025 lobbying filings after not mentioning it in 2023 or 2024, signaling renewed engagement with U.S. energy and sanctions policy. According to Reuters, refiners are structurally well-positioned to process heavy, high-sulfur Venezuelan crude – the type that dominated U.S. imports before sanctions – and analysts have noted that a resumption or expansion of Venezuelan exports to the United States could lower fuel production costs, allowing refiners to make greater use of existing capacity if sanctions are eased or reconfigured.

But lobbying is not the only form of influence. The oil and gas businesses collectively donated $25.8 million to Trump’s 2024 campaign and outside groups that supported his candidacy, ranking the industry among his biggest supporters. Chevron also donated $2 million to Trump’s second inauguration, and Shell gave $500,000.

Energy Secretary Chris Wright outlined U.S. plans for selling Venezuelan oil on Wednesday. Wright, who founded an oilfield services company in 2011, owned between $500,000 and $1 million worth of stock in Chevron before joining the administration, but he sold those shares in February 2025.

State-linked entities increase foreign agent spending

Oil and financial authorities linked to the Venezuelan government also ramped up spending in recent years to influence U.S. policy on sanctions, control of frozen assets, and which entities are recognized as authorized to manage Venezuela’s oil revenue. 

In 2024, government-linked entities reported more than $3.5 million in foreign-agent spending — including $1.1 million from the Banco Central de Venezuela’s ad hoc board, a U.S.-recognized authority created to manage the country’s overseas assets, and $2.5 million from the opposition-appointed of PDVSA, according to OpenSecrets data. Through the first three quarters of 2025, government-linked organizations already exceeded 2024 totals, reportedly spending more than $4.1 million.

U.S. lobbying by Venezuelan entities

Through September, the Venezuelan government and businesses had spent $4.5 million on lobbying in the United States. With final 2025 lobbying reports due Jan. 20, the country is on pace to shatter its previous lobbying record of $4.9 million, set in 2022.

The Foreign Agents Registration Act, a federal law enacted in 1938, requires foreign agents engaged in lobbying in the United States to register with the Department of Justice and disclose information about their relationships, activities and compensation. FARA filings show that U.S. agents conducted direct outreach to Congress on behalf of the opposition-appointed and U.S.-recognized PDVSA board in 2025 and advised on the legislative process. Other filings show that, alongside legal work, U.S. lobbying firms carried out advocacy and public relations efforts aimed at U.S. officials as litigation over control of PDVSA assets intensified in 2024 and 2025, including the creation of U.S.-facing websites and strategic advice on government affairs and sanctions-related legal issues tied to asset disputes.

The surge in lobbying and foreign-agent spending reflects an intensifying scramble by U.S. energy firms and Venezuelan state-linked actors alike to shape U.S. policy before the Trump administration locks in the rules governing sanctions, oil flows and control of Venezuelan assets.

January 15, 2026 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

‘Uninvestable’: Oil execs rebuff Trump’s demands for $100bn investment in Venezuela

The US Energy Secretary denies ‘stealing’ Venezuelan oil, despite a plan to hold revenues in offshore accounts under US control

News Desk, JAN 10, 2026, https://thecradle.co/articles/uninvestable-oil-execs-rebuff-trumps-demands-for-100bn-investment-in-venezuela

At a meeting at the White House on 9 January, the CEOs of major US energy firms expressed skepticism about participating in President Donald Trump’s scheme to invest $100 billion to “revive” Venezuela’s sanctions-battered oil sector.

The meeting took place one week after US Special Forces abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife and transferred them to New York to stand trial on trumped-up “narco-terrorism” charges.

After abducting Maduro, Trump said the US would “take over” Venezuela’s oil reserves, which are considered the largest in the world.

“It’s uninvestable,” ExxonMobil CEO Darren Woods told White House officials after hearing Trump’s proposal to invest in the country.

“There are a number of legal and commercial frameworks that would have to be established to even understand what kind of returns we would get on the investment.”

CNN reported that other executives “expressed similar reluctance,” warning Trump would need to provide extensive security and financial guarantees before beginning a long-term effort to revive an oil sector battered by decades of US sanctions.

ConocoPhillips CEO Ryan Lance and Chevron Vice Chairman Mark Nelson attended. Executives from oil services providers Halliburton, Valero, and Marathon were also present, among others.

Trump wants US oil companies will spend at least $100 billion to rebuild Venezuela’s energy sector, saying that the US military will provide security and protection so “they get their money back and make a very nice return.”

After the CEOs of the major energy firms hesitated to commit to Trump’s plan, he claimed that other smaller oil firms want the opportunity.

“If you don’t want to go in, just let me know, because I’ve got 25 people that aren’t here today that are willing to take your place,” he told the executives.

In addition to security concerns, multiple executives expressed concern that Trump could not guarantee that any deals he strikes with companies will remain in force after he leaves office or in the event of a future regime change in Venezuela.

Trump sought to reassure the group that they would have “total safety, total security,” but did not provide details of how he would do so, or how he would pay for it.

Before the meeting, Trump claimed he would decide which oil companies would be allowed to enter Venezuela, and that the White House would “cut a deal with the companies” within a few days.

“One of the things the United States gets out of this will be even lower energy prices,” Trump claimed.

Venezuela is estimated to have the largest proven crude oil reserves in the world at 303 billion barrels or about 17 percent of the global total.

In the 1990s, Venezuela’s oil production was 3.5 million barrels per day (bpd). However, decades of US sanctions have left its oil industry in poor condition. 

Currently, Venezuela’s output has dropped to about 800,000 bpd, based on data from energy consulting firm Kpler.

Chevron is the only US oil company currently operating in Venezuela through a joint venture with state oil company Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA)

Exxon and Conoco exited the country after former President Hugo Chavez nationalized their assets in 2007.

“We’ve had our assets seized there twice, and so you can imagine, to re-enter a third time would require some pretty significant changes from what we’ve historically seen,” Exxon’s Woods said.

After the meeting, Energy Secretary Chris Wright stated that the US has taken control of Venezuela’s oil exports to pressure the government in Caracas.

He said that Venezuela will ship tens of millions of barrels to the US, which the Trump administration will then sell, holding the proceeds in offshore, but US-controlled, accounts.

The US is not stealing Venezuela’s oil, the energy secretary claimed.

“We need to have that leverage and that control of those oil sales to drive the changes that simply must happen in Venezuela,” Wright said.

Trump said Wednesday that the revenue from the oil will be used to purchase US-made products.

January 15, 2026 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Ralph Nader: Ex-Presidents and Democratic Leaders Silent on the Impeachment of Donald Trump

Events can move very fast. First, Trump is the most powerful contributor to his own Impeachment. Day after day, this illegal closer of long-established social safety nets and services is alienating tens of millions of frightened and angry Americans.

By Ralph Nader, January 9, 2026, https://nader.org/2026/01/09/ex-presidents-and-democratic-leaders-silent-on-the-impeachment-of-donald-trump/

The staggering cowardliness by four ex-Presidents vis-à-vis Tyrant Trump’s wrecking of America cannot escape history’s verdict. However, there is still an opportunity for vigorous redemption by George W. Bush – whose life-saving AIDS Medicine Program in Africa was shut down by Trump – Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden, if they have any self-respect for their patriotic duty.

As of now, these former Presidents are living lives of luxury and personal pursuits. They are at the apex of the ‘contented classes’ (see my column “Trump and the Contented Classes”, November 14, 2025) who have chosen to be bystanders to Trump’s tax cuts for the wRight off, they can upend the public discourse that Trump dominates daily with phony personal accusations, stunningly unrebutted by the feeble Democratic Party leaders. This counterattack with vivid, accurate words will further increase the majority of people who want Trump “Fired.” Just from their own observations of Trump’s vicious, cruel destruction of large parts of our government and civil service, which benefits and protects the populace, should jolt the former presidents into action.ealthy, deregulation, and the doling out of Trump’s corporatist welfare giveaways.

Imagine, if you will, what would happen if these four wealthy politicians, who still have most of their voters liking them, decided to band together and take on Trump full throttle. Privately, they believe and want Trump to be impeached (for the third time in the House) and convicted in the Senate. This time, on many impeachable actions that Trump himself boasts about, claiming, “With Article II, I can do whatever I want as President.”

Right off, they can upend the public discourse that Trump dominates daily with phony personal accusations, stunningly unrebutted by the feeble Democratic Party leaders. This counterattack with vivid, accurate words will further increase the majority of people who want Trump “Fired.” Just from their own observations of Trump’s vicious, cruel destruction of large parts of our government and civil service, which benefits and protects the populace, should jolt the former presidents into action.

Next, the bipartisan Band of Four can raise tens of millions of dollars instantly to form “Save Our Republic” advocacy groups in every Congressional District. The heat on both Parties in Congress would immediately rise to make them start the Impeachment Drive. Congressional Republicans’ fear of losing big in the 2026 elections, as their polls are plummeting, will motivate some to support impeachment. Congressional Republicans abandoned President Richard Nixon in 1974, forcing his resignation with Impeachment on his political horizon.

Events can move very fast. First, Trump is the most powerful contributor to his own Impeachment. Day after day, this illegal closer of long-established social safety nets and services is alienating tens of millions of frightened and angry Americans.

Daily, Trump is breaking his many campaign promises. His exaggerated predictions are wrong. Remember his frequent promise to stop “these endless wars,” his assurance that he would not impair government health insurance programs (tell that to the millions soon to lose, due to Trump, their Medicaid coverage), his promise of lifting people into prosperity (he opposes any increase in the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour) and he has signed GOP legislation to strip tens of millions of Americans from the SNAP food support and take away the Obama subsidies for Obamacare. Many Trump voters are among the vast number of people experiencing his treachery, where they live and raise their families, will lose out here. The catalytic opportunities of these four ex-presidents and their skilled operating teams are endless.

Further, this Band of Presidents, discovering their patriotic duty, will recharge the Democratic Party leaders or lead to the immediate replacement of those who simply do not want or know how to throw back the English language against this Bully-in-Chief, this abuser of women, this stunning racist, this chronic liar about serious matters, this inciter of violence including violence against members of Congress, this invader of cities with increasingly violent, law breaking storm-troopers turning a former Border Patrol force into a vast recruitment program for police state operators.

Trump uses the word “Impeachment” frequently against judges who rule against him, and even mentions it in relation to it being applied to him. Tragically, Democratic Party leaders Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries have made talk of Impeachment a taboo, arguing the time is not yet ripe. How many more abuses of power do they need to galvanize the Democrats in the House and Senate against the most blatantly impeachable president by far in American history? He keeps adding to his list – recently, he has become a Pirate and killer on the High Seas, an unconstitutional war maker on Iran and Venezuela, openly threatening to illegally seize the Panama Canal, Greenland, and the overthrow of the Cuban government.

Constitutional scholar Obama can ask dozens of constitutional law professors the question: “Would any of the 56 delegates who signed our U.S. Declaration of Independence in 1776 and the 39 drafters who signed our U.S. Constitution in 1787, being told about Monarch King Donald Trump, oppose his immediate Impeachment and Removal – the only tool left he doesn’t control?” Not one, would be their studied response.

Trump, a serial draft dodger, pushes through another $150 billion to the Pentagon above what the Generals requested while starving well-being programs of nutrition for our children and elderly, and cutting services, by staff reductions, for American veterans, and stripmining our preparedness for climate violence and likely pandemics.

He promised law and order during the election and then betrayed it right after his inauguration, pardoning 1,500 convicted, imprisoned criminals, 600 of them violent, emptying their prison cells and calling them “patriots” for what they did to Congress on Jan. 6, 2021.

MR. EX-PRESIDENTS, JUST WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR? WHAT ARE YOUR ESCAPIST EXCUSES? Call your friends who are ranking members of the GOP controlled Committees of Congress and tell them to hold prompt SHADOW HEARINGS to educate the public through witnesses about the TRUMP DUMP, impeachable, illegal, and unconstitutional government. The media would welcome the opportunity to cover such hearings. Congressman Jamie Raskin thought this was “a good idea” before being admonished by his frightened Democratic leaders to bide his time and remain silent.

As more of Trump’s iron boots drop on people’s livelihoods, their freedoms, their worry for their children and grandchildren, their antipathy to more aggressive wars against non-threatening countries, and their demands at town meetings and mass marches for action against Trump’s self-enriching despotism, the disgraceful, craven cowardliness of our former presidential leaders will intensify. Unless they wake up to the challenge. With the mainstream media attacked regularly and being sued by Trump’s coercive, illegal extortion, the action by the Band of Four will bolster press freedom, press coverage, and their own redemption.

Send these four politicians, who are friendly with one another, petitions, letters, emails, satiric cartoons, or whatever communications that might redeem them from the further condemnation of history.

Rest assured, with Trump in the disgraced White House, THINGS ARE ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE, MUCH WORSE! For that is the predictable behavior from the past year and from his dangerously unstable, arrogant, vengeful, and egomaniacal personality

January 14, 2026 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Spend­ing big on nuc­lear

Ontario is invest­ing bil­lions into react­ors — even as the rest of the world turns to solar and wind. Is this the wrong bet?

Toronto Star, MARCO CHOWN OVED, 11 Jan 2026, https://www.pressreader.com/article/281865829856772

In the race to pre­pare for an elec­tri­fied future of AI, data centres, EVs and heat pumps, Ontario has placed a big bet on nuc­lear.

With more than $73 bil­lion com­mit­ted to build­ing new and refur­bish­ing old react­ors — and two more plants in the pipeline that could add tens of bil­lions more — Ontario tax­pay­ers are count­ing on nuc­lear energy to pay off for dec­ades to come.

Widely hailed for its abil­ity to provide massive amounts of stable, emis­sions­free power that the province will need to elec­trify the eco­nomy, nuc­lear has emerged as a solu­tion advoc­ates say is cru­cial to avoid the worst effects of cli­mate change — all while sup­port­ing a well­estab­lished local industry. A single nuc­lear plant can provide the same amount of power as tens of thou­sands of solar pan­els and wind tur­bines — even when the wind isn’t blow­ing, and the sun isn’t shin­ing.

“Nuc­lear brings a set of attrib­utes and char­ac­ter­ist­ics that you really can’t find with any other gen­er­at­ing source,” said Brendan Frank, Dir­ector of Policy and Strategy at Clean Prosper­ity, a cli­mate policy think tank. It’s large scale, [?] clean and reli­able with a small land foot­print, he says. “There’s a lot to like about nuc­lear.”

But the prom­ise of nuc­lear power is tempered by the poten­tial for peril.

Crit­ics say nuc­lear pro­ponents have never been able to address exist­ing react­ors’ sig­ni­fic­ant short­com­ings, includ­ing dec­ade­long con­struc­tion timelines, con­sist­ently large cost over­runs, and the tiny but nonzero risk of cata­strophic acci­dents. The cost con­sid­er­a­tions alone risk under­min­ing the fight against cli­mate change by mak­ing clean power more expens­ive than burn­ing fossil fuels.

“Baked right into the nuc­lear option is cent­ral­iz­a­tion, a reli­ance on tech­nical elites, the need for long­term stew­ard­ship and para­mil­it­ary secur­ity, a low tol­er­ance for fail­ure, and the accept­ance of unin­sur­able risks,” said Ralph Tor­rie, the head of research with Cor­por­ate Knights and a vet­eran energy ana­lyst.

And unlike nuc­lear oppon­ents of the 1980s, today’s crit­ics have a ready altern­at­ive in renew­able energy, which is being built at an unpre­ced­en­ted speed and scale all over the world. Last year, more than 90 per cent of new power brought online glob­ally has been wind and solar. Mean­while, the nuc­lear industry has been mired in a 25­year decline with more react­ors decom­mis­sioned than built, accord­ing to the Inter­na­tional Atomic Energy Agency.

Nuc­lear power is yes­ter­day’s tech­no­logy, the crit­ics say.


“Every dol­lar we spend on new nuc­lear plants or recon­di­tion­ing 20th­cen­tury nuc­lear steam gen­er­at­ors drives up the cost of build­ing a sus­tain­able energy sys­tem in Ontario and puts us fur­ther behind in the energy trans­ition that is a defin­ing fea­ture of suc­cess­ful 21st­cen­tury eco­nom­ies,” Tor­rie said.

In the search for cli­mate solu­tions, the debate over nuc­lear power is par­tic­u­larly acute. For pro­ponents, global warm­ing can­not be addressed without a nuc­lear renais­sance. For oppon­ents, nuc­lear is a trap that diverts resources from bet­ter solu­tions while com­mit­ting us for dec­ades to a tech­no­logy that has never lived up to its prom­ises.

And Ontario has already picked its side.

“We’re doub­ling down on nuc­lear,” Energy Min­is­ter Stephen Lecce told the Star in an inter­view.

“If you care about jobs for Cana­dians, if you care about an eth­ical sup­ply chain using a clean grid, not a coal­fired grid, if you care about human rights, the rule of law, fun­da­mental Cana­dian val­ues, and the eco­nomic advant­ages for the work­ers, for the women and men who work in this province, then you will unapo­lo­get­ic­ally defend and pro­mote Ontario’s nuc­lear advant­age, which is now an envy of the world.”

Why nuc­lear is con­sidered a `very expens­ive’ option

This June, the province laid out a 25­year road map for the elec­tri­city sys­tem that relies over­whelm­ingly on nuc­lear. It projects a massive 75 per cent increase in demand for power, the equi­val­ent of adding four­and­a­half Toron­tos to the grid. While there have been some invest­ments in bat­tery stor­age and hydro, most of this energy will come from refur­bish­ing the exist­ing fleet of react­ors and build­ing new ones, includ­ing one in Wes­leyville — on the shore of Lake Ontario to the east of the exist­ing Pick­er­ing and Dar­ling­ton plants — that would be the world’s biggest nuc­lear plant. In doing so, the province would triple its nuc­lear gen­er­a­tion, exceed­ing the entire elec­tri­city sys­tem’s out­put today.

“Ontario is put­ting a lot of eggs in a very expens­ive bas­ket,” said David Pickup, an energy ana­lyst at the Pem­bina Insti­tute and the author of a report high­light­ing the risks of the province’s nuc­lear build out……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. https://www.pressreader.com/article/281865829856772

January 14, 2026 Posted by | Canada, politics | Leave a comment

Zelensky Names Canada’s Chrystia Freeland, Notable Anti-Russia Hawk As Top Advisor

Zero Hedge Tuesday, Jan 06, 2026 

Apparently Zelensky is simply skipping his own people and going straight to appointing officials within foreign governments to top advisory positions. 

Ukraine has named former Canadian Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland as an economic advisor amid a broader reshuffle of senior government positions, also coming on the heels of the massive energy ministry related corruption scandal which has unleashed chaos within his administration. 

It should also be noted that Canada is a founding member of NATO – so handing Freeland a position in the Ukrainian presidential office won’t go down well at the Kremlin, which will see this as yet more justification for its vehement condemnation of NATO expansion.

Chrystia is a professional… and has significant experience in attracting investments and conducting economic transformations,” President Zelensky announced on Telegram Monday.

Freeland was Canada’s deputy prime minister from 2019 to 2024 under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and was appointed Canada’s special representative for Ukraine’s reconstruction in 2025………. https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/zelensky-names-canadas-chrystia-freeland-anti-russia-hawk-top-advisor

January 13, 2026 Posted by | politics, Ukraine | Leave a comment

The New German Warfare State

a leading sector of the political and economic elites in Germany and the EU view the project of rampant militarization as a means to counter the massive upheavals that are threatening their power on a geopolitical, domestic, and economic level. And for this purpose, the maintenance of a major threat, of a terrifying enemy that will not go away quickly, is indispensable. If the Russian threat, in contrast, turned out to be not as serious as it is portrayed, and if Russia could be accommodated with a peace deal that includes Ukrainian neutrality, the complete system of justification for the military build-up would crumble.

Fabian Scheidler, Substack, Jan 06, 2026

How boundless militarization has become the key project of Germany and the European Union in the unfolding polycrisis.

The European Union, Britain and other European NATO members have embarked on a path of massive militarization, which in its speed and ambition is unprecedented since World War II. While most NATO members had previously been unwilling or unable to meet the goal of spending two percent of their GDP for the military, a target set in 2014, they suddenly jumped to a commitment of five per cent per year at the 2025 NATO summit, bowing to Donald Trump’s pressure. Only the Spanish government refused to comply.

What NATO, its member states and major media are not communicating is the fact that five per cent of GDP corresponds to around 50 per cent of national budgets. If states were indeed to implement their commitments, they would have to drastically reduce spending on welfare, including education and healthcare, while simultaneously swelling their national deficits. The Financial Times summed up the agenda in a March 2025 headline: ‘Europe Must Trim its Welfare State to Build a Warfare State’. In other words, the planned militarization is class war from above. Although governments have somewhat watered down their commitments, stating that only 3.5 per cent will go directly to the military while 1.5 per cent is meant to revamp infrastructures for military use, even 35 per cent of national budgets would still be a major blow for what is left of the European welfare model.

Massive cuts to public spending in order to channel the funds into the military-industrial complex are on the agenda in most European countries. The German government is among the most zealous in this respect. Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil from the Social Democratic Party (SPD) pledged to triple the military budget from 52 billion € in 2024 to an unprecedented 153 billion in 2029, while chancellor Friedrich Merz (CDU) has already announced drastic cuts in unemployment benefits to fill some of the gap. Resistance within the Bundestag is eerily feeble. The Greens have long been among the most ardent advocates of rearmament and in March 2025 they voted in favour of a constitutional amendment that has removed all budget constraints for the military and intelligence services while maintaining austerity for all other types of spending. The right-wing Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), which has been leading in some recent polls, is equally devoted to the military build-up and a cutback of the welfare state. While Die LINKE officially opposes this agenda, their representatives in the second federal chamber, the Bundesrat, have voted for the constitutional amendment, causing unrest within the party. For some observers, the lack of parliamentary opposition has brought back sinister memories of the war credits in 1914, which were unanimously approved in the Reichstag – with the votes of the SPD.

In other European countries, however, more resistance has emerged. In the UK, Keir Starmer met fierce opposition to his plans to cut welfare benefits, even within his own Labour Party, and was forced to backtrack. In France, prime minister François Bayrou was toppled by a motion of no confidence over a € 44 billion budget cut plan. In Spain, mass demonstrations against rearmament have put significant pressure on prime minister Sanchez to limit military spending.

While it remains unclear to what extent European governments will be able to push through their ‘all guns, no butter’ agenda, the onslaught on public services and the working class is ongoing and pervasive. Unbound militarization has become the key project of the European Union, which is trying to mend its fractured foundations by forging a military union.

The militarization of German society

In Germany, a wave of militarization that would have been unthinkable a few years ago is sweeping through the country, affecting schools, universities, the media, and public spaces. Tramways are painted in military camouflage. Huge advertisements for the army depict war as a great adventure that strengthens team spirit. The Bundeswehr is aggressively recruiting young people in the streets, at school, and at universities. Even minors under 18 are being recruited, in violation of the principles of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, as organizations such as Terre des Hommes point out. Youth officers are sent into classrooms where they are advertising the army in front of students who are sometimes barely 13 years old. Rather than encouraging debates about the military at school, the army is being given free rein. The administration is also planning to introduce regular civil defense drills in schools, with the explicit intention of preparing the students mentally for war.


In the media, the German public broadcaster ARD has started to promote the army and its preparations for war in its children’s program ‘9 ½’, with recommendations on how to get involved. The program does not ask any critical questions about the army, nor does it mention the fact that deployment to war zones can result in death and trauma. The same is true of the second public broadcaster, which advertises the army as a cute and charitable force of peace in its children’s program ZDFtivi.

Universities are increasingly being forced to cooperate with the military. While a few federal states still prohibit military research in public universities and around 70 universities have voluntarily committed to engage exclusively in  civil research, Robert Habeck (The Greens) declared in early 2025, when he was vice chancellor, that we ‘need to rethink the strict separation of military and civilian use and development’ in academia. In Bavaria, the administration has already banned any ‘civil clauses’ in universities, eliminating the option of declining military research. Furthermore, the German Army has developed a comprehensive classified ‘Operation Plan Germany’ to subordinate civil institutions to military objectives.

These concerted efforts to create a Warfare State are not least intended to transform the attitudes of the German population, which in its majority has been skeptical of the military, and of foreign involvements in particular, for decades……………………………………………………………………………………………

The ‘rules-based international order’ and the Gaza genocide

The project of the Warfare State, and the sacrifices that the population is supposed to make for its creation, is portrayed by political leaders both in Germany and the EU as being without alternative. The argument justifying this position is based on two pillars. The first one is the claim that massive rearmament is required to defend democracy, ‘Western values’, and international law against a despotic rogue state that is willing to dismantle the ‘rules-based international order’. ……………………………………………………………………………………………….

Within Europe, German governments have particularly excelled in trampling on international law when it comes to Palestine. After the Israeli onslaught began, the German government increased its arms exports to Israel tenfold, to a total 326 million euros in 2023 alone, making it the world’s second-largest supplier of arms to Israel, behind only the US. In November 2023, when overwhelming evidence of systematic Israeli war crimes had long been available, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) declared that Israel ‘is committed to human rights and international law and acts accordingly’. Even after the International Court of Justice deemed South Africa’s genocide lawsuit against Israel to be ‘plausible’ in January 2024, the German government did not alter its stance. …………………………………

…………………. Germany has been the main force in the EU blocking all initiatives to sanction Israel for its behavior, for example by suspending the EU-Israel Association Agreement. German authorities and institutions have also engaged in suppressing freedom of speech on a scale unprecedented in recent German history, including attempts to prevent the UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Territories, Francesca Albanese, from speaking in Berlin……………………………………………………………………

The Russian threat

While the argument that the new arms race is about defending a rules-based international order and the inviolability of borders (which Israel violates on a daily basis) has lost credibility, and with Ukraine’s chances of winning back their territories dwindling, another narrative has emerged to justify the military build-up: the threat of a Russian invasion of NATO countries. In June 2024, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius stated that Germany must become ‘fit for war’ because Russia will be able to invade NATO by 2029.

However, there is no indication that Russia has any intention of attacking NATO countries, let alone Germany. Even the annual US intelligence report clearly states that the Kremlin ‘is almost certainly not interested in a direct military conflict with US and NATO forces’.[10] Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, Commander-in-Chief of the British Armed Forces and anything but a Russian stooge, confirmed: ‘Vladimir Putin does not want a direct war with NATO.’ In fact, there are no plausible motives for an attack on NATO, which would plunge Russia into a devastating conflict with the most powerful military alliance in human history. Even if the Russian leadership were utterly insane and suicidal (for which there is no evidence), they would lack the means to undertake such an endeavor. For years, Russia has made only slow advances against an exhausted Ukrainian army. NATO’s military budget is still ten times larger than Russia’s, and European NATO states alone spend more than three times as much and are overwhelmingly superior to Russia militarily.

Given that the Russian threat to NATO is clearly greatly exaggerated, even in the eyes of Western intelligence, the question arises as to why the German government, along with other European leaders, continues to circulate the narrative of an impending invasion. The question becomes even more pertinent given that the EU and its most powerful member states are actively undermining serious peace negotiations, thus increasing the risk of a major confrontation with Russia. The proposal to send NATO troops to Ukraine in the wake of a possible ceasefire, for example, increases the incentives for Russia to continue fighting, since preventing NATO troops from being deployed to Ukraine was a key motive for starting the war in the first place. While the EU should have a clear interest in extinguishing the fire on its doorstep, it continues to pour more oil on it, compromising its own security interests as well as Ukraine’s. What is driving this seemingly irrational behavior?

The geopolitical upheaval and the ‘international division of humanity’

A possible answer to this puzzle is that a leading sector of the political and economic elites in Germany and the EU view the project of rampant militarization as a means to counter the massive upheavals that are threatening their power on a geopolitical, domestic, and economic level. And for this purpose, the maintenance of a major threat, of a terrifying enemy that will not go away quickly, is indispensable. If the Russian threat, in contrast, turned out to be not as serious as it is portrayed, and if Russia could be accommodated with a peace deal that includes Ukrainian neutrality, the complete system of justification for the military build-up would crumble.

To consider this argument more carefully, we need to take a closer look at the historical context. Geopolitically, the West is losing its dominant position in the world-system that it has occupied for centuries, a process that has triggered severe turbulence and fractures within the Western bloc. The US is deploying all possible strategies to regain its once hegemonic position, not hesitating to throw the EU under the bus if necessary. . After the Biden administration’s strategy of weakening Russia through the Ukraine war failed, driving Russia in the arms of Beijing, the Trump administration has been desperately trying to pull out of Ukraine in order to pivot to Asia and contain its main rival China. For this reason, the US is attempting to shift the financial burden of the war to Europe.

For European governments, and the German administration in particular, which have been following US instructions to the letter while subordinating their own interests, this U-turn has provoked considerable chaos and confusion. First of all, they had bowed to US pressure to cut all ties with Russia. While this did nothing to end the Ukraine war, it caused severe economic pain, especially to Germany. …………………………………………………………………………………………………

Despite the rivalry and in-fighting among Western nations, the new wave of militarization has at least one common geopolitical denominator: the maintenance of what Vijay Prashad has called the ‘international division of humanity’. The capitalist world-system has been based for centuries on the dominance of white Western nations over the peoples of the Global South through colonization and neocolonial rule. This order is threatened by the rise of the Global South and the BRICS, and Germany, much like other European powers, is not willing to let the ‘darker nations’ have an equal say in world affairs and give up its own privileged position among the top predators of the food chain. Given that the economic leverage and the soft power of Germany are in decline, its leaders seem to believe that they can reverse trends by increased militarization.

Economic decay and remilitarization

On the economic and domestic level, Germany has become, like many other Western countries, a society in decline. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

If the program was indeed about restarting the national economy by creating domestic demand the question arises as to why German governments, as in other Western countries, have been and still are so unwilling to spend more money on education, healthcare, and other public services, which would create domestic demand much more effectively. The March 2025 constitutional amendment gets to the heart of this paradox: While maintaining austerity for society at large, it has enabled limitless spending and borrowing for the military and the deep state.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..  With ideological coherence in the West crumbling, the War State can provide a sense of direction and unity among the governing elites. Moreover, the threat of an overwhelming enemy, whether real or fictitious, allows the imposition of a state of exception on society as a whole.

……………………………………. the latent or manifest state of war is a perfect means of distracting an increasingly skeptical population from considering the systemic root causes of the deepening polycrisis. Whether it is inequality or climate chaos, the logic of war calls on us to put these issues aside in order to defend Western civilization against the Saurons and Voldemorts of the barbaric East. 

………………………. war seems to be the only remaining option for a body politic that has no answers for anything, whether it is mass poverty, climate chaos, popular anger, or geopolitical challenges. While it is often said that politics is about the solution of problems, the War State project is about distracting from all real problems by hypnotizing the public and focusing its attention on an external threat.

………………………………………………………………………………………………… Welfare, not warfare

The convergence of movements around the issue of peace will play a key role in determining whether the race to the abyss can be stopped. The attacks on welfare in order to finance the arms build-up have already incited mass popular resistance in countries like Britain, Spain, France, and Italy. While the German peace movements are still historically weak due to internal splits, a series of major demonstrations this autumn, both on the issues of Gaza and Ukraine, might indicate a turning point. Stopping the military build-up and the new bloc confrontation is a key issue for the left in Europe, as all possible progressive achievements in terms of workers’ rights, democracy, and environmental justice would be wiped out if EU leaders get their way with the War State agenda. After all, it’s about welfare, not warfare, today more than ever. https://fabianscheidler.substack.com/p/the-new-german-warfare-state

January 12, 2026 Posted by | Germany, politics | Leave a comment

Marco Rubio, Senate Complicity, and the Open Return of Empire.

 SCHEERPOST, January 8, 2026, By Joshua Scheer

The Oil Belongs to the United States?

Let’s begin—and end—with the thought that says everything about this moment: the oil belongs to the United States. It is a sentence so brazen, so logically bankrupt, that it barely disguises what U.S. policy toward Venezuela has become—a naked assertion of imperial entitlement dressed up as democracy promotion.

That logic was laid bare in a briefing delivered by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who reportedly told senators: “We are going to take between 30 and 50 million barrels of oil. We’re going to sell it in the marketplace at market rates, not at the discounts Venezuela was getting.”

There it is.
Not liberation.
Not humanitarian concern.
Not international law.
Oil.

The Washington Post, in what can only be described as a puff piece for a war manager, crowned Rubio with a new title: “Viceroy of Venezuela.” The paper framed his role as his “most challenging yet,” admiring his command of details and his long-standing obsession with regime change in Caracas. What it did not seriously grapple with is the obvious question: since when does the United States appoint viceroys over sovereign nations in the 21st century?

An Insane Plan, Stated Out Loud

Democrats who attended classified briefings were far less impressed. Common Dreams captured the mood bluntly with its headline: “‘This Is an Insane Plan’: Democrats Fume After Briefing on Trump Plot to Steal Venezuela’s Oil.” After the session, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) told reporters, “We learned a lot. I’m glad we had the briefing. But this is going to be a very rough ride for the United States.”

A rough ride—for whom? Venezuelans already crushed by sanctions? U.S. soldiers deployed without debate? Or lawmakers forced to defend the indefensible?

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) put it plainly: “We are four months into a sustained military operation. More than 200 ‘enemies’ have been killed. American troops have been injured. We have U.S. forces arranged around Venezuela. Yet neither the House nor the Senate have been willing to hold a single public hearing.”…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The question is why the president believes he has the authority to invade another country in the first place……………………..

Meanwhile, the answers—when they come—are evasive. Trump officials insist there are “no troops in Venezuela,” even as lawmakers describe sustained military operations and U.S. forces encircling the country. The contradictions pile up. The machine keeps moving.

Let’s be honest about what this is. The United States has run countless coups—successful and failed—across Latin America, including in Venezuela. What makes this moment different is not its morality, but its openness. This is not covert. This is not deniable. This is empire, stated plainly.

The Election Myth

Much is made—by Rubio and his allies—of a coming “transition” leading to free and fair elections, possibly headed by opposition figure María Corina Machado. But this talking point deserves scrutiny. Free elections are invoked ritualistically, even as economic strangulation, military pressure, and foreign interference define the political terrain.

Around the world, elections are shaped—often decisively—by outside investment, coercion, and information warfare. Venezuela is no exception. To pretend otherwise is political theater, not analysis.

A Viceroy, With Bipartisan Applause

Perhaps most disturbing is that Rubio’s ascent has not been rejected across party lines……………………

Ending Where We Began

The oil belongs to the United States. That is the assumption driving this policy. Strip away the rhetoric, the briefings, the editorials, and the bipartisan niceties, and what remains is an imperial presidency asserting control over another nation’s resources.

If democracy means anything, it cannot coexist with viceroys, resource seizures, and wars conducted without public consent. The question is no longer what is happening in Venezuela. It is whether anyone in Washington is willing to stop it.

There will be no shortage of briefings, no shortage of troubled statements, no shortage of bipartisan praise offered while the machinery of empire grinds forward. What is missing is friction—public, sustained, and impossible to ignore. Strikes, protests, calls to Congress—whatever it takes to break the insulation that allows empire to operate without consequence.

Empires do not end because their administrators lose confidence. They end when wars become politically unmanageable, when secrecy is shattered by demand, when hearings are forced, funding is contested, and silence is withdrawn.

History will not ask whether Marco Rubio was well briefed or whether senators expressed concern in private. It will ask who normalized this—and who refused to. On that question, quiet complicity will count as an answer. https://scheerpost.com/2026/01/08/marco-rubio-senate-complicity-and-the-open-return-of-empire/

January 12, 2026 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »