European Leaders Condemn Trump’s Military Escalation Against Venezuela.
the escalation that Trump claims is the latest battle in the “War on Drugs” comes two years after he explicitly announced his desire to take control of Venezuela’s oil,
War would deliver “not security but a torrent of bloodshed,” said a letter signed by dozens of political leaders.
By Julia Conley , CommonDreams, November 22, 2025, https://truthout.org/articles/european-leaders-condemn-trumps-military-escalation-against-venezuela/?utm_source=Truthout&utm_campaign=0b29afb75c-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2025_11_22_04_56&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_bbb541a1db-0b29afb75c-650192793
ith thousands of US troops patrolling the Caribbean, at least eight warships deployed in the region, and the BBC reporting that it tracked four US military planes that flew near Venezuela Thursday night, lawmakers and other leaders from across Europe on Friday issued a unified demand for the Trump administration to deescalate the tensions it has ratcheted up in recent weeks.
The administration’s “show of force has already proved lethal,” said the leaders, with more than 80 people — including fishermen and an out-of-work bus driver — having been killed in the US military’s strikes on more than 20 boats, which the administration has insisted were trafficking drugs to the US. The White House has publicized no evidence of the claims.
President Donald Trump has not taken further military action against Venezuela since he was presented with “options” for potential strikes last week by officials including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, nor has he followed through with threats he’s made against Mexico and Colombia.
But the European leaders — including British Members of Parliament Zarah Sultana and Jeremy Corbyn, former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis, and Spanish Member of European Parliament Irene Montero Gil — noted that Trump “severed diplomatic channels with Caracas and approved covert [Central Intelligence Agency] operations in Venezuela” as the military buildup continues in the region.
The Trump administration has insisted it is engaged in a legal “armed conflict” with drug cartels in Venezuela, which it has accused of trafficking fentanyl to the US — though experts say drug boats originating in Venezuela are “are mainly moving cocaine from South America to Europe,” and analysis by both the United Nations and US intelligence agencies have shown the South American country plays virtually no role in the production or transit of fentanyl.
The US Congress has not authorized any military action against drug cartels or Venezuela’s government, and lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have attempted to pass war powers resolutions blocking the US from striking more boats or targets on land in Venezuela, only to have the resolutions voted down.
In his second term, Trump has sought to tie Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro to drug cartels — despite a declassified US intelligence memo showing officials rejected the claim — and designated Cartel de los Soles a foreign terrorist organization last week, giving the White House what Hegseth called “new options” to go after the group.
But the escalation that Trump claims is the latest battle in the “War on Drugs” comes two years after he explicitly announced his desire to take control of Venezuela’s oil, and following years of condemnation of Maduro’s socialist government from Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
The European leaders said the administration’s narrative about the threat Venezuela poses to the US and the escalation is simply the “latest attempt to threaten and undermine the sovereignty of Latin America and the Caribbean nations.”
“Declassified documents have confirmed the CIA’s hand in overthrowing democratically elected governments in Latin America, such as Salvador Allende’s Chile in 1973, João Goulart’s Brazil in 1964, and Jacobo Árbenz’s Guatemala in 1954. The human cost of these regime change operations was catastrophic, and their political legacy endures,” reads the letter, which was organized by Progressive International.
A military intervention by the US in Venezuela “would mark the first interstate war by the United States in South America,” the leaders said, yet “the pretext for intervention is as tired as it is familiar.”
“Under the banner of combating the ‘narco-terrorists,’ Trump celebrates lethal strikes against peaceful fishermen arbitrarily labeled as carrying drugs,” the leaders said.
As in the past, they added, moving the War on Drugs to Venezuela would deliver “not security but a torrent of bloodshed, dispossession, and destabilization.”
Therefore, we condemn in the strongest terms the military escalation against Venezuela,” they said. “Our demand is clear and our resolve is firm: No war on Venezuela.”
As Peoples Dispatch reported Thursday, many European leaders have “subordinated” themselves to Trump and have avoided speaking out against the US escalation with Venezuela, but left-wing political parties have led the way in denouncing the US deployment of soldiers and warships to the region.
The Workers’ Party of Belgium said recently that the world is “witnessing an unprecedented military escalation in 20 years, a multifaceted aggression that threatens not only Venezuela, but any project of sovereignty and social justice in Latin America.”
From Libya to Palestine: The UN’s Betrayal Of Arabs and Muslims
Dimitri Lascaris, Nov 22, 2025, https://reason2resist.substack.com/p/from-libya-to-palestine-the-uns-betrayal?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=2811845&post_id=179602803&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
On November 17, 2025, the UN Security Council betrayed the Palestinian people by adopting a resolution that endorsed Donald Trump’s criminal and fraudulent “peace plan” for Gaza.
That resolution, Resolution 2803, is by no means the first time that the UN Security Council has stabbed Arab and Muslim peoples in the back.
Another notorious example of the Security Council’s contempt for the rights and interests of Arab and Muslim peoples is UNSC Resolution 1973.
Adopted on March 17, 2011, Security Council Resolution 1973 approved a no-fly zone over Libya. This led directly to NATO’s destruction of the once-prosperous, African country.
Few people are as knowledgeable about NATO’s destruction of Libya, and the UN Security Council’s complicity in Libya’s destruction, as Canadian researcher and author, Owen Schalk.
A new book by Owen examines the role of Canada – a NATO member – in the destruction of Libya. The book is titled “Targeting Libya – How Canada went from building public works to bombing an oil-rich country and creating chaos for its citizens.”
Russia, Ukraine and the difference between wanting peace, and needing peace.
Ian Proud, The Peacemonger, Nov 21, 2025
I go through Trump’s 28 point plan line by line and talk about the need for negotiations between Russia and Ukraine to start
Ukrainian media has now published what it says is the draft Trump 28-point peace plan for Ukraine. I decided to go through it line by line and offer my thoughts on the prospects for negotitions going forward.
What is clear, first, is that the draft is merely a starting point for negotiations. Ukraine absolutely needs to be engaged bilaterally with Russia in the hard work of the negotiation process, and that depends on Zelensky finally committing to it.
I feel he is in a weaker position to resist US efforts now he is mired in a corruption scandal at home. But I still feel European leaders wants to keep him stuck in the permanent loop, in which Ukraine needs peace but doesn’t want it, whereas for Russia, there is a desire for peace but no urgent need to settle.
I consider the draft document to be a helpful first start but will need a lot of work from both sides. Some of the clauses are specific to Russia and Ukraine, whereas some reach more widely into the international community, which makes for a confusion mish mash. Some conditions, military neutrality for Ukraine in political, will see off Zelensky’s hopes of reelection as President, after the war, in my view, which he will know and understand all too well.
But it is now time to negotiate an end to this bloody war. I hope you find my insights helpful, and feel free to ask me any questions on the issues I cover in this video. https://thepeacemonger.substack.com/p/russia-wants-peace-but-doesnt-need?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=3221990&post_id=179541181&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
China warns of severe consequences if Japan fails to retract its threats of military intervention over Taiwan
Japan, like most of the countries in the world, officially recognizes Taiwan as part of China. Both the countries signed an agreement in 1972 according to which Japan recognizes the one-China policy.
Though Japan recognizes the “one-China policy”, earlier this month its prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, threatened military intervention if China tried to unify Taiwan with the mainland.
November 20, 2025 by Abdul Rahman, https://peoplesdispatch.org/2025/11/20/china-warns-of-severe-consequences-if-japan-fails-to-retract-its-threats-of-military-intervention-over-taiwan/
China reiterated its demand that Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi retract her statement threatening military intervention in the event that China tries to forcefully integrate Taiwan into the mainland. It warned of strong counter measures otherwise.
The “Japanese prime minister’s erroneous remarks on Taiwan have fundamentally eroded the political foundation of China-Japan relations and triggered strong outrage and condemnation from the Chinese people,” said official spokesperson of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Mao Ning, in response to a question on Wednesday, November 19.
“Retract the erroneous remarks, stop making provocations on issues concerning China, take practical steps to admit and correct the wrongdoing, and uphold the political foundation of China-Japan relations,” Mao reiterated.
Speaking in the country’s parliament, newly elected Takaichi had said on November 7 that her country may respond militarily to any “situation threatening Japan’s survival” including an attempt to force the unification of Taiwan with China.
She also added that if a US warship sent to break a possible blockade on Taiwan is attacked it would invite a similar Japanese military response.
Japan hosts the largest contingent of American forces anywhere outside the US territory.
Despite strong Chinese protests and a diplomatic spat last week, Takaichi is still refusing to retract her comments, claiming that they were “hypothetical” in nature. She also said she would not repeat them in future.
However, China has demanded a complete retraction, saying Takaichi’s statement violates the fundamental principle of China-Japan relations and amounts to interference in its domestic affairs, a red line.
Indications of Japanese militarism
Mao also objected to Takaichi’s invocation of phrases such as “survival threatening situation” and “collective self defense” in the case of Taiwan, saying that it is a pretext for “Japanese militarism to launch aggression” in the region.
Takaichi, of Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), is widely seen as an ultra nationalist and a hawk who wants to reverse the demilitarization of Japan imposed post the Second World War.
After assuming power in October she pushed the country’s defense budget up and even talked about revisiting Japan’s long held no-nuclear policy and manufacture of heavy weapons.
Takaichi’s Taiwan statement is based on the country’s military strategy, which provoked widespread popular protests in the country when it was adopted in 2015.
Mao reminded that similar aggressions and excuses had been used by the Japanese to justify its occupation of Chinese territories in the last century and to bring the Second World War into the region.
“In 1931, Japan called its seizure of Manchuria as ‘survival-threatening’, and used that as a pretext to carry out the September 18th incident and invaded and occupied Northeast China,” Mao reminded.
“Japan later claimed that to defend ‘the greater East Asia co-prosperity sphere’ was an existential battle” for it and expanded its war of aggression to the entire Asian region, Mao pointed out, asking “whether to attack Pearl Harbor was also deemed as survival-threatening to Japan, which ignited the Pacific War.”
“As we mark the 80th anniversary of the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War the international community must guard against and firmly thwart any attempt of reviving militarism, jointly uphold the post-WWII international order and safeguard world peace,” she emphasized.
Chinese counter measures
Japan, like most of the countries in the world, officially recognizes Taiwan as part of China. Both the countries signed an agreement in 1972 according to which Japan recognizes the one-China policy.
On November 12, China had underlined that Taiwan is the core of its national interest and a red line which no external force should cross. It asked the Japanese to respect the agreement signed between the two countries, including adherence to the “one-China policy”.
Since Takaichi’s remarks, China has taken several counter measures, including issuing a travel advisory asking its citizens to avoid traveling to Japan and restricting the sale of Japan’s seafood products in the country, among others.
China and Japan had a mutual trade of around USD 300 billion in 2024. Chinese visitors to Japan bring substantial revenue to the Japanese economy, according to one estimate, around USD 14 billion dollars each year.
“If Japan refuses to retract them or even continue to pursue the wrong course, China will have to take strong and resolute countermeasures and all consequences arising therefrom will be borne by Japan,” Mao warned.
US, Russia drafting Gaza-inspired peace plan for Ukraine
Samuel Chamberlain and Caitlin Doornbos, New York Post, Wed, 19 Nov 2025, https://www.sott.net/article/503070-US-Russia-drafting-Gaza-inspired-peace-plan-for-Ukraine
Members of the Trump administration and Russian officials have secretly been hashing out a revised plan to end Moscow’s 45–month-old invasion of Ukraine — but the deal is riddled with unacceptable provisions that would in part force Kyiv to dramatically shrink its military, The Post can reveal.
Comment: Moscow didn’t “invade” Ukraine. After many warnings to the Kiev regime, it took action to protect Donbass Russian speakers who had endured eight years of shelling by their own country, because they wouldn’t bend to the neo-nazi coup in 2014. After all this time, The Post is still following the approved narrative. Sad.
- How the Western Press has for years hidden Ukraine’s neo-nazi war on Donbass
- Neo-Nazi battalion promises not to lay down arms until Donbass, Crimea conquered
The 28-point framework calls for Ukraine to shrink its Army to 2.5 times smaller than it is now; forces Kyiv to turn over long-range missiles “or any kind that can reach Moscow or St. Petersburg”; and bans any international brigades within Ukraine — which has long been considered the best way to ensure a halt to Russia’s assault would remain in place, a source familiar with the plan told The Post.
The proposed plan would also target NATO, requiring Ukraine to ban allied countries from keeping any military aircraft in Ukraine — instead backing them up to at least the Polish border.
The plan would also force Ukraine to fork over the entirety of the Donbas region — including territory Russia has been unable to occupy, according to a report by Financial Times.
Comment: Notice the framing. As Putin patiently explained to Tucker Carlson (and presumably Witkoff and Trump) Donbas had been part of Russia since the 17th century and then part of Ukraine for a measly two decades. There is no ‘forking over’.
Axios reported that the deal was inspired by President Trump’s 20-point road map for ending the war between Israel and Hamas terrorists in the Gaza Strip, citing US and Russian officials.
However, that plan famously calls for an international force to keep the peace in Gaza until a Palestinian state can be established.
Predictably, Moscow appears to be fond of the blueprint, with Kirill Dmitriev — the head of Russia’s sovereign wealth fund who is reportedly drafting the plan with Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff — telling Axios “we feel the Russian position is really being heard.”
Still, the Kremlin on Wednesday denied that there had been any new developments in what Moscow wants to see in a peace deal since Trump met with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin in Alaska in August.
“There has been nothing new in addition to what was discussed in Anchorage,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitri Peskov told reporters on Wednesday, responding to a question about the Axios report.
The plan is purportedly meant to be a sweeping blueprint that not only ends the war in Ukraine but also hashes out questions about security guarantees for the Kyiv government and the rest of Europe, as well as future ties between Washington and the two warring nations.
However, the main security guarantees that Europe and the US have sketched out for Ukraine has been the international security force, which has been scrapped in the new plan.
Further, the plan would have to be accepted by Ukraine, whose people have been fighting and dying for nearly four years to protect Kyiv’s independence and prevent Russian overreach described in the sketched-out plan.
Comment: The beleaguered citizens of Ukraine have been fighting and dying to preserve the two decade-old elite money-laundering machine that is “country” of Ukraine.
- ‘No fight against corruption in Ukraine, costs country 2% of GDP every year’, says IMF
- The scandal Zelensky can’t escape: Inside Ukraine’s biggest corruption story
- Ukraine must be held accountable for ‘stealing’ US aid – James Durso to The Hill
- The firing of Viktor Shokin: Ex-Ukraine prosecutor told to back off probe of Biden-linked firm
- Tens of billions of dollars were transferred to Ukraine, then laundered through FTX crypto currency back to Democrats in US
- Hear those alarm bells going off? Ukraine scandal leads to the Clinton Foundation
Meanwhile, a Ukrainian official told the outlet that Witkoff discussed the plan with Kyiv’s national security adviser, Rustem Umerov.
Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky was in Turkey on Wednesday to meet with the country’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
“Foremost, we will discuss maximum capabilities to ensure that Ukraine achieves a just peace,” Zelensky told reporters of the plans for his discussion with Erdogan, adding: “We see some positions and signals from the United States, well, let’s see tomorrow.”
Zelensky’s office declined to comment on the reported content of the plan.
For now, the conflict rages on. Overnight, Russian drones and missiles blitzed the western city of Ternopil, striking two nine-story apartment blocks and killing at least 20 people, including two children, and injuring at least 66 others.
The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Trump told a Saudi investor summit on Wednesday afternoon that he was frustrated with Putin for how long it has taken to end the Russia-Ukraine war.
“I have a good relationship with President Putin, but I’m a little disappointed in President Putin right now,” Trump said. “He knows that.”
Comment: Analyst Alexander Mercouris highlights other provisions in the draft document that have received little attention: the enshrining of Russian as a “state language”, thus protecting Russian speakers, and the restoration of the persecuted Russian Orthodox Church to its former status, including the return of all looted properties. These may be minor points to the West, but are immensely important to Russia, as it formed a part of the decision to initiate the SMO.
Press-hating president kisses up to press-murdering crown prince
Nov. 18, 2025 / Freedom of the Press Foundation, https://freedom.press/issues/press-hating-president-kisses-up-to-press-murdering-crown-prince/
President Donald Trump shamefully welcomed Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to the White House today. He brushed aside questions about Prince Mohammed’s role in the gruesome murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, commenting that “things happen” and “You don’t have to embarrass our guest by asking a question like that.”
Freedom of the Press Foundation Director of Advocacy Seth Stern said:
“Somehow calling a female reporter ‘piggy’ was only the second-most offensive anti-press utterance to come out of the president’s mouth in recent days. And somehow Biden’s infamous fist bump is now only the second-most disgusting public display of flattery by a U.S. president to journalist-murderer Mohammed bin Salman.
“Scolding a U.S. reporter for asking questions about MBS ordering a fellow journalist to be bonesawed signals to dictators everywhere that they can murder journalists with impunity — as if Trump hadn’t already sent that message clearly enough by bankrolling and arming Israel while it does just that in Gaza.
“Today’s fiasco felt like the nail in the coffin for whatever was left of the U.S.’s global standing as a leader on press freedom. The next president is going to have their work cut out for them in rebuilding that credibility. In the meantime, judges, lawmakers, and everyone else in a position to slow the backslide need to step up and rise to the moment before more journalists get killed.”
Iran says IAEA vote nullified inspections deal with UN watchdog
Iran’s foreign minister said an accord it reached with the UN nuclear
watchdog is now invalid after the agency’s 35-member Board of Governors
adopted a Western-backed resolution demanding greater transparency from
Tehran. The resolution demanded Iran allow international verification of
its enriched uranium stockpile and access to atomic sites hit in June by US
and Israeli strikes. “Today, in an official letter to the
Director-General of the Agency, it was announced that this understanding is
no longer valid and is considered terminated,” Abbas Araghchi said on
Thursday. He was referring to an interim agreement signed between Tehran
and the International Atomic Energy Agency in Cairo in September aimed at
eventually resuming inspections of sites stricken by the attacks.
Iran International 20th Nov 2025,
https://www.iranintl.com/en/202511205237
US Reaches Initial Deal With Saudi Arabia on Nuclear Sharing.
The absence of a 123 Agreement — designed to prevent countries from manufacturing fuel which could be diverted to weapons — has implications across the region. Should Saudi Arabia win access to the full nuclear fuel cycle, other Middle Eastern countries including Iran and the United Arab Emirates may demand the same conditions.
By Ari Natter and Jonathan Tirone, November 20, 2025
Takeaways by Bloomberg AI
- US negotiations with Saudi Arabia on a nuclear technology-sharing deal have been completed, potentially allowing American companies to build reactors in the kingdom.
- A formal 123 Atomic Energy Act agreement, which includes non-proliferation requirements, has yet to be signed, according to a US Energy Department spokesman.
- The prospect of a deal has alarmed non-proliferation experts and some members of Congress who have raised concerns over weapons-grade material and the potential for Saudi Arabia to gain access to the full nuclear fuel cycle.
US negotiations with Saudi Arabia on a long-sought nuclear technology-sharing deal have been completed, potentially opening the door for American companies to build reactors in the kingdom.
Energy Secretary Chris Wright and his Saudi Arabian counterpart signed a joint declaration signifying the talks were finished, the Trump administration said Tuesday following a White House visit by the kingdom’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. A formal 123 Atomic Energy Act agreement, which customarily includes non-proliferation requirements, has yet to be signed, a US Energy Department spokesman confirmed.
If finalized, such an agreement between the two nations could inject new life into America’s atomic energy sector and provide a boost to Westinghouse Electric Co. and other US companies that want to construct plants or sell reactor technology to Saudi Arabia. Still, the prospect has alarmed non-proliferation experts and some members of Congress who have raised concerns over weapons-grade material.
The absence of a 123 Agreement — designed to prevent countries from manufacturing fuel which could be diverted to weapons — has implications across the region. Should Saudi Arabia win access to the full nuclear fuel cycle, other Middle Eastern countries including Iran and the United Arab Emirates may demand the same conditions.
“It does include fuel cycle activities,” International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi told journalists after speaking by phone with Saudi Arabia’s Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman early Wednesday. The IAEA hasn’t been notified about whether or not there will be a 123 Agreement attached to the deal, Grossi said.
Both the Energy Department and the White House didn’t immediately respond to questions seeking clarity over whether the deal would include the so-called “gold standard,” barring the enrichment and reprocessing of spent uranium that Saudi Arabia has been reluctant to agree to in the past
………………..The declaration signed Tuesday “builds the legal foundation for a decades-long, multi-billion-dollar nuclear energy partnership with the Kingdom; confirms that the United States and American companies will be the Kingdom’s civil nuclear cooperation partners of choice; and ensures that all cooperation will be conducted in a manner consistent with strong nonproliferation standards,” the White House said in a fact sheet.
On Nov. 17, ahead of the Saudi crown prince’s visit to the White House, Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen told Channel 14 TV that he’s skeptical of an agreement.
“I think Israel should be opposed, because it would bring about a situation where there will constantly have to be monitoring and oversight, to check whether the nuclear civilian project is sliding toward the military side,” Cohen said “This will constantly have to be checked.”
Non-proliferation watch dog groups pointed to the fact that the formal agreement, known as 123 for the section of the US Atomic Energy Act that discusses transfers of nuclear equipment and material to other nations, wasn’t announced…………. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-11-19/us-reaches-intitial-deal-with-saudi-arabia-on-nuclear-sharing
China to reimpose ban on Japanese seafood imports amid row over Taiwan, reports say
Japan Times, By Jesse Johnson, STAFF WRITER, Nov 19, 2025
China will reimpose a ban on imports of Japanese seafood products, media reports said Wednesday, as the diplomatic row over Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s recent comments on Taiwan escalated and officials girded for a prolonged dispute.
The ban would effectively be a return to one put in place in August 2023, following Japan’s release of treated wastewater from the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant. Tokyo and Beijing reached an agreement in September last year to resume imports, with Japan confirming the first shipment of seafood to China less than two weeks ago.
NHK said China had explained that the ban was necessary in order to monitor the wastewater being released from the No. 1 plant, with the import halt lasting “for the foreseeable future.”…………………………………………… https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2025/11/19/japan/politics/japan-china-relations-marine-products/
UN Security Council Gives US ‘Mandate’ Over Palestine
The council endorsed Donald Trump’s neo-colonial governing board over a territory that he said should be depopulated to make way for his resort fantasy to be built on the bones of the victims of Israel’s genocide, reports Joe Lauria.
November 17, 2025, By Joe Lauria, Consortium News, https://consortiumnews.com/2025/11/17/un-security-council-gives-us-mandate-over-palestine/
The United Nations Security Council on Monday adopted a resolution that gives the world body’s imprimatur to Donald Trump’s plan for Gaza, a territory he said publicly should be ethnically cleansed to develop a Mediterranean resort.
The council voted 13 nations in favor with two abstentions from China and Russia, which could have vetoed Trump’s plans.
The resolution essentially revives the colonial mandate system of the League of Nations after the First World War, and the United Nations’ trusteeship system after the Second World War, both schemes in which colonial powers remained in charge of a colonized territory while it was supposed to wean it towards independence.
The resolution that passed on Monday says “conditions may finally be in place for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood.”
The resolution “welcomes” the establishment of a Board of Peace (BoP) “as a transitional administration” in Gaza to coordinate reconstruction. The resolution authorizes the board to set up a temporary International Stabilization Force (ISF) in Gaza “to deploy under unified command acceptable to the BoP.” Though the resolution does not say who will head the BoP, Trump has made it clear that he would be running it himself.
Nations will contribute troops to the force “in close consultation and cooperation” with Egypt and Israel. But it will be Donald Trump who ultimately gets to call the shots of this international military force.
[See: Jeffery Sachs: Trump’s UN Ploy]
Among the Trump-run forces’ tasks is to demilitarize Gaza by decommissioning weapons and destroying military infrastructure. In a statement reacting to the resolution, Hamas said: “The resolution imposes an international guardianship mechanism on the Gaza Strip, which our people and their factions reject.” Hamas says it has a legal right under international law, which it does, to resist Israel’s occupation with force if necessary.
If the stabilization force actually tries to disarm Hamas we could be looking at armed combat between them. The U.N.-approved force would in essence then be taking up the unfinished job of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to defeat Hamas.
In step with Hamas’ disarmament, the IDF is supposed to withdraw from Gaza, according to the measure. An annex to the resolution says Palestinians cannot be forcibly expelled from Gaza and Israel can neither annex nor continue to occupy Gaza, according to the remarks to the council by Algeria’s ambassador.
An expert Arab committee with take part with Trump’s board in running Gaza until the Palestinian Authority takes full control. Israel took part in the meeting as a guest but did not have a vote.
Why Russia Abstained
The U.S. draft resolution initially did not mention possible future, Palestinian sovereignty, but it was added after opposition from Arab states and other countries. That addition allowed the Arabs, and importantly the Palestinian Authority, to back the resolution. That led Russia, which had opposed the initial draft, to drop the threat of its veto and China joined in abstaining.
In explaining his abstention to the Council, Russian Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said Russia “has taken note of Ramallah’s position, as well as that of many Arab-Muslim States that spoke in favor of the American draft so as to avoid renewed bloodshed in the enclave. In this regard, we chose not to submit our own draft, which was aimed at amending the US concept to bring it in conformity with long-standing UN resolutions agreed previously.”
Bur he also complained that the stabilization force would not coordinate with the Palestinian Authority
“This may entrench the separation of the Gaza Strip from the West Bank, and it is reminiscent of colonial practices and the British mandate for Palestine granted by the League of Nations, when the opinions of the Palestinians themselves were not taken into account whatsoever,” he said.
Nebenzia also raised an alarm about the force become engaged in the war. “The resolution … confers on the ISF such extensive peace enforcement mandate that the Mission may actually transform into a party to the conflict going beyond the confines of peacekeeping,” he said. The Russian envoy blamed the U.S. for “arm-twisting in capitals or pressuring delegations here in New York,” which he said can “hardly be called working in good faith.”
Nebenzia said:
“In essence, the Council is giving its blessing to the US initiative relying exclusively on Washington’s honor, we leave the Gaza Strip at the mercy of the Board of Peace and the ISF, whose working methods are still unknown to us.
The most important thing here is making sure that this document does not become a smokescreen for unbridled experiments by the US and Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory (OPT) nor turn into a death sentence for the two-state solution.” … There is no cause for celebration: today is a sorrowful day for the Security Council. Besides the wishes of the parties concerned, there is also such notion as the integrity of the Security Council. And today, with the adoption of this resolution, that integrity and the prerogatives of the Council have been undermined. …
Regrettably, we’ve already had the unfortunate experience when decisions on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which were pushed through by the US, led to the opposite to what was intended. Don’t say we didn’t warn you.
PA & Arabs Agree
The PA has long collaborated with Israel in its occupation of the West Bank. Its long-standing opposition to Hamas’ resistance makes it amenable to the United States taking control of Gaza to run it with Israel if the Authority is given a seat at the table.
That, however is not a sure thing as the extremists in Israel’s cabinet blew a fuse when it saw that a mere mention — a throwaway line — about some distant possibility of recognizing Palestine was added to the resolution. Netanyahu himself on Sunday reiterated his opposition to the Palestinian state and vowed that it would never come to pass.
How his government will proceed with U.S. administration of Gaza will be of the greatest interest. As Netanyahu is loudly insisting that Hamas will disarm the “easy way or the hard way,” it will bear watching whether the IDF, which occupies half of Gaza, and the international force, with the Palestinian Authority’s blessings, join arms to fight Hamas to crush the last of the violent resistance to Israeli dominance over Palestine.
Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former U.N. correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe, and other newspapers, including The Montreal Gazette, the London Daily Mail and The Star of Johannesburg. He was an investigative reporter for the Sunday Times of London, a financial reporter for Bloomberg News and began his professional work as a 19-year old stringer for The New York Times. He is the author of two books, A Political Odyssey, with Sen. Mike Gravel, foreword by Daniel Ellsberg; and How I Lost By Hillary Clinton, foreword by Julian Assange.
US to Own Nuclear Reactors Stemming From Japan’s $550 Billion Pledge.
The US government plans to buy and own as many as 10 new, large nuclear reactors that could be paid for using Japan’s $550 billion funding
pledge, part of a push to meet surging demand for electricity. The new
details of the unusual arrangement were outlined Wednesday by Carl Coe, the Energy Department’s chief of staff, about the non-binding commitment made by Japan in October to fund $550 billion in US projects, including as much as $80 billion for the construction of new reactors made by Westinghouse Electric Co.
Bloomberg 19th Nov 2025,
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-11-19/us-to-own-reactors-stemming-from-japan-s-550-billion-pledge
UN Security Council Resolution On Gaza Is An ‘Atrocity’
On Monday, November 17, the UN Security Council adopted a resolution endorsing Donald Trump’s so-called ‘peace plan’ for Gaza.
The resolution approves the creation of a Trump-led “peace board” to supervise the Gaza Strip, calls for the ‘demilitarization’ of Gaza without imposing any restrictions on the arming of Israel, and authorizes an “international stabilization force” to police and disarm Palestinian resistance groups.
Worst of all, the resolution does not provide for the creation of a Palestinian state. It merely expresses a hallucinatory aspiration that Palestinians might one day have a fireside chat with the genocidal Israeli entity about the two-state delusion.
The UNSC members that voted in favour of this travesty were: the U.S., U.K., France, Algeria, Denmark, Greece, Guyana, South Korea, Pakistan, Panama, Sierra Leone, Slovenia and Somalia.
To their discredit, Russia and China refrained from exercising their veto and abstained.
In this episode of R2R, I analyze the UNSC resolution with fellow attorney, Craig Mokhiber. Craig is an American former UN human rights official who resigned from the UN in late 2023 over its failure to stop what he described (with complete justification) as a “textbook genocide” in Gaza.
According to Craig, the Security Council’s resolution is an “atrocity”.
Big Loss for US Empire: Ecuador Votes To Reject Foreign Military Bases
Geopolitical Economy, By Ben Norton, November 19, 2025
Ecuador’s Trump-backed right-wing oligarch President Daniel Noboa tried to rewrite the constitution to allow US military bases in the country’s territory. 61% of Ecuadorians voted against it.
The Donald Trump administration is trying to expand the presence of the US military across Latin America, in an attempt to forcibly impose Washington’s hegemony in the region.
The people of Ecuador just delivered a major blow to Trump’s aggressive Latin America strategy.
More than three-fifths of Ecuadorians voted to reject a change to their progressive constitution, which would have allowed the Pentagon to establish US military bases in their territory……………………………. https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2025/11/18/noboa-ecuador-vote-foreign-military-bases/
Greenpeace claims French resumption of nuclear trade with Russia
Environmental campaign group Greenpeace hit out at the resumption of nuclear trade between France and Russia during its war with Ukraine after activists observed the loading of a tanker in northern France with reprocessed uranium bound for Russia.
RFI 18/11/2025
Greenpeace published video that it said its activists shot on Saturday of around 10 containers with radioactive labels going onto a cargo ship in Dunkirk.
The Panamanian-registered ship, the Mikhail Dudin, is regularly used to carry enriched or natural uranium from France to St Petersburg, according to Greenpeace.
Saturday’s consignment was the first of reprocessed uranium to be observed for three years, it added.
“The resumption of this trade once again shows France’s dependence on Russia,” Pauline Boyer, the head of Greenpeace France’s nuclear campaign, told RFI.
The images released by Greenpeace came two days ahead of a meeting in Paris between the French president, Emmanuel Macron and his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky, to discuss Ukraine’s air defence systems.
“Despite the French government’s commitments to support Ukraine — which is, fortunately, the case — on the other hand, there is ongoing collaboration with Rosatom, the Russian nuclear company, which is indirectly contributing to the financing of the war.”
…………………………..”It is outrageous that French nuclear companies — EDF, Orano, Framatome — continue to collaborate with Rosatom.”
French state-controlled energy giant Electricité de France (EDF) signed a 600-million-euro deal in 2018 with a Rosatom subsidiary, Tenex, for the recycling of reprocessed uranium.
These operations have not been affected by international sanctions over the Ukraine war.
Rosatom has the only facility in the world – at Seversk in Siberia – capable of carrying out key parts of the conversion of reprocessed uranium to enriched reprocessed uranium……………..
Only about 10 percent of the reenriched uranium sent back to France by Russia is used at its Cruas nuclear power plant, in southern France, the only one in the country that can use enriched reprocessed uranium, according to Greenpeace.
France’s energy ministry and EDF have yet to respond publicly to questions on the consignment or trade.
Top politicians in France ordered EDF chiefs to halt uranium trade with Rosatom in 2022 when Greenpeace France revealed the contracts in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine……
https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/20251118-greenpeace-claims-french-resumption-of-nuclear-trade-with-russia
The Guardian view on a new nuclear age: great powers should not restock a house of dynamite
Donald Trump’s remarks on resuming nuclear testing have highlighted the risks. Proliferation must not be considered inevitable.
When Eisaku Satō, a former prime minister of Japan, received the Nobel peace prize in 1974 after committing his country to not making nuclear bombs, owning them or allowing them on its territory, he assured the audience: “I have no doubt that this policy will be pursued by all future governments.”
Yet last week, Sanae Takaichi, Japan’s new prime minister, declined to say whether the country that understands the cost of nuclear war better than any other would stand by its commitment – reflecting the bleak broader outlook. Eighty years after the US dropped Little Boy on Hiroshima, incinerating tens of thousands of people, and almost 40 after Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan seriously discussed nuclear abolition in Reykjavik, the spectre looms once more. Last month, Donald Trump ordered the US military to match other countries’ nuclear weapons testing.
Vipin Narang and Pranay Vaddi, who worked on nuclear strategy in the Biden administration, warn that arms control has essentially broken down and that the growing risks amount to a “Category 5 hurricane”. Ankit Panda, another noted expert in the field, has published The New Nuclear Age: At the Precipice of Armageddon. Tellingly, the subject has returned to pop culture. Kathryn Bigelow’s new movie A House of Dynamite shows a nuclear attack targeting Chicago.
The last nuclear arms control treaty between Russia and the US, New Start, is due to expire in February. For decades the main fear was of terrorists or rogue states such as North Korea; now there is a new great power rivalry. In place of the old standoff between two hegemons comes a more complicated contest, with China massively expanding its capabilities, and broader proliferation. For unsettled US allies such as South Korea and Poland, acquiring their own arsenals is no longer out of the question. The nuclear taboo is wearing thin. The Biden administration believed Vladimir Putin could well follow through on his nuclear threats in Ukraine.
Donald Trump pulled out of the intermediate-range nuclear forces treaty, which Russia had been violating, in his first term. In withdrawing from the JCPOA nuclear deal with Iran in 2018, and bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities this year, though it did not have an active weapons programme, he told potential adversaries that the best strategy is North Korea’s: arm yourself as soon as you can. China was content with a relatively modest arsenal for decades after it acquired the bomb; its breakneck expansion reflects its growing global might, but its efforts ramped up after Mr Trump was first elected.
Mr Trump’s confusing comments on nuclear tests (prompting counter-threats from Mr Putin) appear to reflect his misunderstanding of Russian systems tests which, though alarming, do not breach the de facto moratorium. A resumption – the US last detonated a warhead in 1992 – would probably be more useful to adversaries than to the US itself. It would also strengthen suspicions that non-proliferation is window dressing for the maintenance of the nuclear monopoly of a few states, rather than a serious commitment for the sake of humanity.
Mr Trump, said to truly fear nuclear war, should instead challenge Mr Putin to make good on his proposal of a one-year extension of New Start treaty limits and revive non-proliferation endeavours by championing the comprehensive test ban treaty. The US and China have not ratified it; Russia withdrew ratification. A president aspiring to a Nobel peace prize could set an example that is sorely needed.
1 This Month
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- September 2026 (194)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (375)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 