Genocide in Gaza, Apartheid in the Palestinian West Bank: UN Report.
Juan Cole, 01/08/2026, https://www.juancole.com/2026/01/genocide-apartheid-palestinian.html
Ann Arbor (Informed Comment) – The UN Office of Human Rights, headed by Volker Türk, on Wednesday issued an extensive report on the Israeli military occupation of the Palestinian West Bank in which it for the first time described Israeli policies there as Apartheid. The executive summary says, “The report warns that Israel is violating international law requiring States to prohibit and eradicate racial segregation and apartheid.”
Türk told the UN, “There is a systematic asphyxiation of the rights of Palestinians in the West Bank. Whether accessing water, school, rushing to hospital, visiting family or friends, or harvesting olives – every aspect of life for Palestinians in the West Bank is controlled and curtailed by Israel’s discriminatory laws, policies and practices.”
“This is a particularly severe form of racial discrimination and segregation, that resembles the kind of apartheid system we have seen before.” He is referring to racial discrimination in Apartheid South Africa from the late 1940s through the early 1990s.
He concluded, “Every negative trend documented in the report has not only continued but accelerated. And every day this is allowed to continue, the consequences worsen for Palestinians.”
The report ( PDF here) stresses how drastically the human rights situation for Palestinians in the West Bank has deteriorated since 2022:
* Palestinians in the West bank live under a different and harsher set of laws than do the Israeli squatters who have flooded into the territory
* Palestinians therefore have less access to resources, including land and water, than do the squatters
* The report notes that the International Court of Justice in the Hague found in 2024 that “the systemic discrimination against Palestinians living in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, together with the restrictions of movement imposed on Palestinians through checkpoints, as well as limited access to roads, natural resources, land and basic social facilities, amounted to a situation of racial segregation.” The ICJ noted then that the situation verged on Apartheid and would be properly so characterized if the Israelis did not take immediate ameliorating steps (they did not). The ICJ, indeed, ruled the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian Territories it seized in 1967 to now be illegal, since it had departed so extensively from International Humanitarian Law in its rule of these people. Moreover, IHL had envisioned occupations to be short and to endure only during an active war, not to stretch into decades.
* Palestinians’ land and homes are routinely taken away from them by the Israeli authorities or are arbitrarily and lawlessly encroached on by the Israeli squatters. In Jenin, Tulkarem and Tubas Governorates, some 32,000 people were recently expelled by Israeli troops from the refugee camps in which they had lived. The report adds, “Thousands of Palestinians have also been evicted from their homes across the West Bank, which may amount to unlawful transfer, a war crime.” That is, the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute forbid transferring people in militarily occupied territories out of their homes. When the Nazis occupied Poland they expelled a lot of Poles from it in hopes of replacing them with Germans, and these laws were designed prevent a repeat of such policies. The IHRA people can jump up and down all they like, but the Nazi plan for Poland and the Zionist plan for Gaza and the West Bank are very similar.
* Palestinians face “criminal prosecution in military courts during which their due process and fair trial rights are systematically violated.” This treatment is only accorded Palestinians. Israeli squatters on the West Bank who do get into trouble with the law are tried in Israeli civil courts as though they were living in Israel.
* The UN says, “The report concludes that there are reasonable grounds to believe the separation, segregation and subordination are intended to be permanent, to maintain oppression and domination of Palestinians. ‘Acts committed with the intention to maintain such a policy amount to a violation of Article 3 of ICERD (the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination), which prohibits racial segregation and apartheid,’ it finds.”
* Israeli troops and squatters sometimes just shoot down innocent Palestinians. They don’t treat Israelis that way, an obvious sign of discrimination. The High Commission on Human Rights, the report says,”has consistently documented patterns of unlawful killings of Palestinians, including apparent extra- judicial executions by the ISF [the Israeli military], with almost complete impunity.” Elsewhere the report notes, “ISF [Israeli Security Forces] have killed 2,321 Palestinians (1,760 men, 65 women, 496 children) in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, in the absence of hostilities there, and injured thousands more, in many instances causing life-long injuries and disabilities. In the same period, 205 Israelis (including 148 men, 32 women, 25 children) have been killed in the occupied West Bank,” In the old days, the Israelis maintained a ten to one ration of Palestinians killed to Israelis. The report doesn’t say so, but that ratio has been raised to 100 to one or 1000 to one in some cases.
* The Israelis have demolished the infrastructure of water for the Palestinian West Bank, and then confiscated the water. They make the Palestinians buy back their own water from an Israeli corporation.
Venezuela today. Greenland tomorrow?
9 Jan 26, https://secure.declassifieduk.org/page/email?mid=8c66e2426c734ac1a627c6af5564d142
During the early hours of Saturday morning, US forces bombed Venezuela and kidnapped its president, Nicolás Maduro.
The objective, according to US president Donald Trump, was to secure access to Venezuela’s massive oil reserves and assert US domination over the hemisphere, pushing out geopolitical rivals like China, Russia, and Iran.
Venezuelan authorities will soon be “turning over between 30 and 50 MILLION Barrels of High Quality Oil… to the United States of America”, Trump wrote on social media.
The Trump administration also told Venezuela’s interim president Delcy Rodriguez that “the country must kick out China, Russia, Iran, and Cuba and sever economic ties”, according to ABC News.
Keir Starmer, a former human rights lawyer, has repeatedly refused to be drawn on whether the kidnapping of a foreign head of state was a violation of international law.
“Are we willing to risk damaging our most important economic and national security partnerships as a result [of condemning Trump]?”, the prime minister reportedly asked colleagues.
Yvette Cooper, Britain’s foreign secretary, could only bring herself to say that she had “raised the importance of complying with international law” with her US counterpart, Marco Rubio.
Yet pressure is mounting on Starmer’s government to respond in concrete terms to the attack, with UN human rights chief Volker Turk now spelling out its brazen illegality.
“It is clear that the operation undermined a fundamental principle of international law – that States must not threaten or use force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state”, he said in a statement on Wednesday.
With the dust still settling in Caracas, Trump has now turned his imperial gaze to Greenland, a semi-autonomous Arctic territory of the kingdom of Denmark, which is a member of NATO. The White House says it has been discussing “a range of options” to acquire Greenland, including military force, referring to the issue as a “national security priority”. Greenland might seem quite apart from Venezuela in geographical, political, and cultural terms, but the US government has long folded both regions into its designs for hemispheric domination. After the German invasion of Denmark in April 1940, US secretary of state Cordell Hull declared “Greenland is within the area embraced by the Monroe Doctrine”, an 1823 doctrine which has been repeatedly relied upon to assert US hegemony in the Americas During the Cold War, the US army stationed 48 surface-to-air nuclear weapons and air-to-air missiles at Thule air base on Greenland, while a US army research and development facility was established beneath the territory’s icecap. Washington’s current interest in Greenland, however, has more to do with its location for military purposes, the opening of trade routes in the Arctic Ocean (which will increase in importance amid climate change) and the island’s richness in critical minerals like lithium and cobalt. While Starmer reserved judgment on Trump’s illegal attack on Venezuela, he has signed a joint statement alongside France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, and Denmark, affirming “Greenland belongs to its people”. But will Starmer actually take any meaningful action to stand up to Trump? “Nobody’s going to fight the US over the future of Greenland”, said Trump’s aide Stephen Miller on Tuesday. He might just be right. |
‘Year of bloodshed’: West Bank authorities record nearly 24,000 army, settler attacks on Palestinians in 2025
Around 35,000 trees have been uprooted or destroyed by illegal settlers this year, while 14 Palestinian citizens have been killed
News Desk, JAN 6, 2026, https://thecradle.co/articles-id/35236
Head of Palestine’s Colonization and Wall Resistance Commission (CWRC), Minister Muayyad Shaaban, said in a new report that over 23,000 attacks have been carried out on Palestinians by settlers and the Israeli army in the occupied West Bank this year.
According to the CWRC report, 2025 saw Israeli troops and illegal settlers commit 23,827 attacks across the territory.
“The attacks were categorized as follows: 1,382 targeted land and trees, 16,664 attacks targeted individuals, while 5,398 attacks targeted property,” the report reads.
“The Israeli army was responsible for 18,384 attacks, while colonizers carried out 4,723 attacks, and both parties together were involved in an additional 720 attacks,” Shaaban is quoted as saying during a press conference at CWRC headquarters in Ramallah.
The minister said 2025 was “a year marked by bloodshed.”
“The occupying power did not simply expand colonies; it aimed to redefine the very concept of control. That is, domination is no longer limited to physical land, but rather, it extends to reshaping geography, symbolism, and the entire existence of the Palestinian people,” he added.
As a result of this year’s violence in the occupied West Bank, 14 Palestinian citizens have been killed.
Shaaban went on to say that 35,000 trees have been destroyed this year, and that settlers have caused 434 fires, which impacted Palestinian property and agriculture.
Meanwhile, land confiscation and settlement expansion are surging.
“Israeli occupation authorities effectively control approximately 41 percent of the West Bank, maintain a tight grip on nearly 70 percent of Area C, and control over 90 percent of the Jordan Valley through a comprehensive system of military orders and expropriation measures,” according to CWRC.
The 1993 US-sponsored Oslo Accords established the Palestinian Authority (PA) and its security forces, and gave the Palestinians limited autonomy in some parts of the occupied West Bank. This was said to be in preparation for the eventual establishment of a Palestinian state.
However, the accords did not end Israel’s military occupation and gave the Israeli government time to confiscate more Palestinian land and continue illegally expanding West Bank settlements.
The agreement resulted in the splitting of the West Bank into areas A, B, and C. Area A gave the PA authority over civil and security matters, while Area B gave it control only over civil matters. In Area C, Israel was granted full control.
Since then, illegal settlements have continued to expand, including in Areas A and B.
Since the start of 2025, Israel has been occupying multiple West Bank refugee camps and has been carrying out a systematic campaign of destruction and displacement.
Tens of thousands of Palestinians have been uprooted from their homes in the occupied West Bank since the start of the year, mainly in Jenin, Tulkarem, and Tubas.
As army and settler violence surges, the government also continues to advance plans for illegally annexing the territory.
Bezalel Smotrich, Israel’s finance minister and staunch backer of the illegal settler movement, said on 30 December that Washington has given Tel Aviv “full support” to expand settlements in the occupied West Bank.
Analysts Warn Venezuela Invasion Could Empower Trump to Take Actions Elsewhere.
“The invasion of Venezuela is a blatant violation of international law,” “It is a prelude, potentially, to a long and violent conflict within Venezuela. And it’s a throwback to other times when leaders who had broken democracy, who had exploited their peoples in Haiti in 1915 or in Panama in 1989, became the fodder for further U.S. invasions and occupation.”
“We’re ready to go again if we have to,” Trump said in a press conference after the invasion. And not just against Venezuela. Trump has threatened military action in Colombia, Cuba, and Mexico.
The US’s first unilateral invasion in South America is Trump’s testing ground for military supremacy in the region.
By Michael Fox , Truthout, January 6, 2026
The bombs fell in the early hours of January 3. They cascaded over the city, one and then another. The bright orange explosions rocked Venezuela’s capital, Caracas, shaking people awake.
“The bombs lasted a while,” Caracas resident and community organizer Yanahir Reyes told Truthout. “And you could hear the helicopters, the planes. It was terrifying.”
The U.S. forces rained down fire — focused on the military barracks in the capital and nearby states, but also hitting surrounding neighborhoods.
Videos of the invading forces spiraled quickly onto social media. Countless videos of the bombs falling, people screaming, trying to make sense of it all, while the explosions shook buildings and destroyed homes. And the sound of the arrival of the U.S. forces echoed across the city.
Shock. Fear. Confusion………………………………………
This was the invasion that Donald Trump had vowed for months. An invasion that U.S. administrations had threatened for years and decades, going all the way back to President George W. Bush.
And it marked the U.S. once again deploying direct military action in other countries in the region. A return to President Theodore Roosevelt’s gunboat diplomacy, where the United States pushes its agenda and its interests by force. The Monroe Doctrine on steroids, or what Trump has called it his own “Donroe Doctrine” — Donald plus Monroe.
It is a terrifying precedent. It is the first time the United States has taken unilateral military action against a nation in Latin America in more than 35 years. Many analysts and Latin Americans had hoped this bellicose foreign policy and direct U.S. aggression had been relegated to the history books.
But those playbooks have been dusted off and are being used again, echoing the December 20, 1989, U.S. invasion of Panama. And it was a copy and paste job — give or take some minor alterations.
“The invasion of Venezuela is a blatant violation of international law,” John Lindsay-Poland told Truthout. He’s the author of the book Emperors in the Jungle, about the history of U.S. intervention in Panama and the 1989 invasion. “It is a prelude, potentially, to a long and violent conflict within Venezuela. And it’s a throwback to other times when leaders who had broken democracy, who had exploited their peoples in Haiti in 1915 or in Panama in 1989, became the fodder for further U.S. invasions and occupation.”
As the 1989 invasion of Panama would be considered a training exercise for the ensuing U.S. wars in the Middle East, the Venezuelan invasion on January 3 was Trump’s testing ground for military supremacy in the region.
“We’re ready to go again if we have to,” Trump said in a press conference after the invasion. And not just against Venezuela. Trump has threatened military action in Colombia, Cuba, and Mexico.
“We should be concerned,” says Steve Ellner, an associate managing editor of the journal Latin American Perspectives, who taught for decades at the Universidad de Oriente in Venezuela. “And we should be concerned because this is meant to send a message way beyond Venezuela, not only way beyond Venezuela in the region, but worldwide.”
1989 Panama Invasion
On December 20, 1989, U.S. President George H.W. Bush ordered the U.S. invasion of Panama. Twenty-six thousand U.S. troops invaded the country. They rained down fire and bombs — attacking the barracks of the Panama Defense Forces in the capital of Panama City and other areas.
The U.S.’s goal was to capture President Manuel Noriega on drug trafficking charges.
Neighborhoods like Panama City’s El Chorrillo went up in smoke. Twenty-thousand homes burned. U.S. forces killed hundreds of people. They dumped bodies into mass graves.
When I visited El Chorrillo in late 2023 to report for the episode of my podcast Under the Shadow about the U.S. invasion, I saw the open wounds that still remain. The bullet holes left by U.S. troops. The pain in people’s voices as they remember that night and the subsequent U.S. occupation.
“So many innocent people died,” said resident Omar Gonzalez, who was only 12 at the time and watched fires engulf homes. “Friends of ours. Children we knew. People. Men and women. Some people who were sleeping at that moment. Elderly people who couldn’t stand up or run away because they lived close to the barracks. And this is the history. It’s painful, more than anything else.”
U.S. forces killed more than 500 people. Victims and their families are still demanding justice. Large murals cover walls, like one depicting a U.S. helicopter flying over rubble engulfed in flames. It reads: “Never forget. Never forgive.”
The Panama invasion marked a new era for U.S. foreign policy in the region in a number of ways………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. https://truthout.org/articles/analysts-warn-venezuela-invasion-could-empower-trump-to-take-actions-elsewhere/?utm_source=Truthout&utm_campaign=7f1612e76d-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2026_01_06_10_12&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_bbb541a1db-7f1612e76d-650192793
Babcock to provide dock for new Dreadnought nuclear subs: will they be carrying nuclear weapons?
By Ally McRoberts, Dunfermline Press 6th Jan 2026
PREPARATIONS are underway in Rosyth for a contingent docking facility to accommodate the next generation of nuclear submarines.
Dunfermline and Dollar MP Graeme Downie had asked about the planned timescale for the work which will see the Dreadnought class berth at the yard during sea trials.
Rosyth will “bridge a gap” by offering a temporary home for the new subs, and last month the Ministry of Defence told local councillors they will not reveal if any of the boats that need repairs or maintenance will be carrying nuclear weapons……………………………………………..
“For operational security reasons further details cannot be released as to do so could be used to undermine the security and capability of our Armed Forces.”
……………………The Royal Navy’s new subs, the Dreadnought class, will be launched from Barrow-in-Furness towards the end of this decade.
The vessels will be maintained at Faslane, however the site on the Clyde won’t be ready until the mid 2030s……………………………
At last month’s South and West Fife area committee, Grant Reekie, head of radioactive waste and health physics at Babcock, had explained: “We have been asked to provide a contingent facility by the MoD to bridge a gap of submarines coming into service in late 2020s from 2029 through to mid 2030s when they will no longer be required as it will be done in Faslane.
………………At the same meeting the MoD told councillors they will not reveal if nuclear weapons will be aboard submarines being repaired at the yard.
They also confirmed that local residents would be given potassium iodate tablets to block radiation in the event of an emergency. https://www.dunfermlinepress.com/news/25743485.babcock-provide-dock-new-dreadnought-nuclear-subs/
Fears of Wider War Over Venezuela Oil as US Seizes Russian-Flagged Tanker
“That is a confrontation of Cold War proportions,” warned one observer.
Jake Johnson, January 7, 2026 https://www.commondreams.org/news/venezuela-russia-oil-tanker
US forces have now boarded and seized control of the Russian-flagged oil vessel in the North Atlantic, the Associated Press reported Wednesday.United States military forces on Wednesday attempted to board and seize control of a Venezuela-linked and Russian-flagged oil tanker after a weekslong pursuit across the Atlantic, sparking fears of a broader conflict stemming from US President Donald Trump’s assault on the South American country.
Reuters reported that the US Coast Guard and military are leading the takeover operation, which came “after the tanker, originally known as the Bella-1, slipped through a US maritime ‘blockade’ of sanctioned tankers and rebuffed US Coast Guard efforts to board it.” According to the Wall Street Journal, “Helicopters and at least one Coast Guard vessel were being used to take control of the tanker.”.
The vessel is reportedly being escorted by a Russian submarine, fueling concerns of a direct confrontation between two nuclear powers.
Video footage published Tuesday by RT purports to show US forces pursuing the tanker, whose name was recently changed to the Marinera.
The New York Times reported that US forces first stopped the tanker in the Caribbean on December 21.
According to the Times:
The ship, which started its journey in Iran, had been on its way to pick up oil in Venezuela.
At the time, the United States said it had a seizure warrant on the vessel because it was not flying a valid national flag. But the Bella 1 refused to be boarded and sailed into the Atlantic, with the United States in pursuit.
Then came a series of moves to ward off the United States. The fleeing crew painted a Russian flag on the hull, the tanker was renamed and added to an official Russian ship database, and Russia made a formal diplomatic request that the United States stop its chase.
Observers voiced alarm over the tense and fast-moving situation.
“Don’t wish to be hyperbolic, but if—if—US special forces are intercepting and seeking to board a now Russian-flagged tanker, apparently with submarine escort, then that is a confrontation of Cold War proportions,” warned British journalist Jon Sopel.
Russia Hands US Evidence That It Says Confirms Ukraine Targeted Putin’s Residence in Drone Attack
Ukraine has denied the Russian allegations that it was trying to hit Putin’s residence
by Dave DeCamp | January 1, 2026 , https://news.antiwar.com/2026/01/01/russia-hands-us-evidence-that-it-says-confirms-ukraine-targeted-putins-residence-in-drone-attack/
A senior Russian military official on Thursday handed over to a US official what he said was evidence that Ukrainian drones targeted Russian President Vladimir Putin’s residence in the Novgorod region.
Ukraine has denied the allegations that it was trying to target Putin’s home, and US officials speaking to US media outlets said the CIA assessed that Ukraine was targeting a military facility in the same region that wasn’t close by. But Russian officials insist they have the evidence that Ukraine was attempting to hit the Russian president’s residence.
A video posted by the Russian Defense Ministry on Thursday shows Igor Kostykov, the chief of the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Russian General Staff, meeting with the US defense attache based in Moscow and handing over what he said was a “navigation unit” from one of the drones downed in the Novgorod region.
“The decryption of the content of the memory of the navigation controller of the drones carried out by specialists of Russia’s special services confirms without question that the target of the attack was the complex of buildings of the Russian president’s residence in the Novgorod region,” Kostykov said.
President Trump was informed about the alleged attack by Putin the day it happened, and initially appeared to believe Russia’s account, saying that he “wasn’t happy about it.” But he later shared a New York Post article on Truth Social that cast doubt on the Russian claim and said Moscow “is the one standing in the way of peace.”
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said that Moscow won’t quit peace talks with the US over the alleged attack, but said it would alter its negotiating position and vowed a response, saying that targets have already been picked out. “Such reckless actions will not go unanswered,” he said.
After more than 20 years without sailing, a Russian nuclear giant returned to the sea, and the most disturbing detail is not its size
By ECONEWS, January 2, 2026 , https://www.ecoticias.com/en/after-more-than-20-years-without-sailing-a-russian-nuclear-giant-returned-to-the-sea-and-the-most-disturbing-detail-is-not-its-size/25175/
After spending most of the past 28 years tied up in a northern shipyard, the Russian Navy’s nuclear powered cruiser Admiral Nakhimov has finally returned to sea. Defense outlets report that the deeply modernized warship has begun sailing again in the White Sea after its first outings on contractor and factory sea trials.
JSC PO Sevmash chief executive Mikhail A. Budnichenko said the modernized ship has completed the first stage of its factory sea trials, a key step toward full operational service. Budnichenko added that Admiral Nakhimov is already on its third trial cruise and is due back at its base in Severodvinsk on the 25th of the month, with crew and shipyard staff still checking vital systems. For a vessel that could become Russia’s flagship, these careful first outings are drawing close attention far beyond the White Sea.
From frozen pier to fresh wake
Admiral Nakhimov last sailed in 1997 and then sat laid up at Sevmash in northern Russia while Moscow debated its fate and struggled with funding. A modernization contract arrived years later, real work only gathered speed around 2014, and promised return dates slipped again and again as schedules moved from 2018 into the middle of the 2020s.
Factory sea trials are when the shipyard takes a new or refitted warship to sea to check whether engines, steering, electrical systems and basic navigation work as they should. Each run shows how the reactors behave, how the hull handles waves and ice and whether the ship is safe to operate in normal conditions, long before the navy signs off on the ship as ready for combat duty.
What a nuclear cruiser actually is
A nuclear powered cruiser is a very large surface warship that uses onboard reactors instead of fuel oil to drive its engines. In simple terms, that means Admiral Nakhimov can stay at sea for long stretches without refueling, which matters in remote Arctic waters where bases are scarce and the weather punishes support ships.
The cruiser belongs to the Kirov class, a group of Cold War-era giants originally built for the Soviet Navy to threaten NATO carrier groups. Today Admiral Nakhimov is the last survivor of four hulls, since Admiral Ushakov and Admiral Lazarev are being dismantled and stripped of their nuclear fuel, while sister ship Pyotr Velikiy is widely expected to retire instead of getting a similar deep refit because of cost and wear.
A floating magazine with 174 missile cells
The heart of the modernization sits under the deck in the form of vertical launch systems, armored boxes that hold missiles upright until they are fired into the sky. Russian and foreign defense reports indicate that Admiral Nakhimov is being outfitted with around 174 of these launch cells, including 10 universal launch blocks for roughly 80 long-range cruise and anti-ship missiles such as Kalibr and Oniks.
The remaining cells are intended for surface-to-air missiles that shield the ship and nearby vessels from aircraft, drones and incoming weapons, tied into long range Fort M air defense systems and several Pantsyr M close-in mounts that combine guns and missiles.
The original twin 130-millimeter gun has also been replaced by a modern AK 192 M weapon, and taken together these changes mean Admiral Nakhimov is expected to carry more launch cells than many Western and Chinese cruisers or destroyers now at sea.
Why this refit matters now
All of this is happening as Russia’s surface fleet shrinks and its only aircraft carrier, Admiral Kuznetsov, remains stuck in long repairs with an uncertain future. In that context, Admiral Nakhimov looks less like a museum piece and more like a stopgap centerpiece for future Russian task groups, a single ship that can carry long-range strike weapons and strong air defenses while smaller frigates and corvettes handle coastal patrols.
So why does one old ship draw so much attention? For people outside the defense world it can be hard to see why an aging cruiser matters when daily worries focus on bills or the next heat wave.
Yet a vessel packed with modern missiles can change how close foreign navies dare to sail, and for now the completion of the first phase of sea trials after nearly three decades out of service mainly shows that Russia’s long and costly refit is finally delivering a ship it hopes can still matter on the open ocean.
CIA, with Trump’s blessing, is using Ukrainians to sabotage Russia’s energy infrastructure and oil tankers – NYT
Iona Cleave, The telegraph, Fri, 02 Jan 2026, https://www.sott.net/article/503791-CIA-with-Trumps-blessing-is-using-Ukrainians-to-sabotage-Russias-energy-infrastructure-and-oil-tankers-NYT
Attacks on oil refineries have cost Moscow $75m a day, according to US intelligence
The CIA secretly taught Ukraine how to target crucial components of Russia’s oil refining infrastructure and its sanction-busting shadow fleet, according to officials.
Despite Washington pulling back its support for Kyiv’s war effort under the Trump administration, it has emerged that US intelligence and military officers continued to find new ways to stifle Vladimir Putin’s war machine.
Since June, the CIA, with Donald Trump’s blessing, has been covertly providing specific intelligence to bolster Ukraine’s aerial offensive against oil refineries inside Russia, according to the officials.
The move came amid Mr Trump’s growing frustration with Putin’s unwillingness to negotiate while Russian forces accelerated attacks on Ukrainian cities.
The US has long shared intelligence with Kyiv that helps with attacks on Russian military targets in occupied parts of Ukraine and provides advanced warning of incoming Russian missiles and drones.
Under persuasion by Ukraine sceptics in the White House, led by JD Vance, the vice-president, and his allies, Mr Trump froze military aid in March and intelligence sharing was suspended as a result.
However, The New York Times, citing officials, said the CIA heavily lobbied for the agency to keep sharing intelligence.
Before summer, the impact of the strikes on Russia’s energy infrastructure – which often hit storage depots or structures easily repaired – had been relatively minimal.
Under a new plan, crafted by the CIA and US military, the campaign was concentrated exclusively on oil refineries, targeting a newly found Achilles heel.
A CIA expert had identified a coupler device that is so difficult to replace that it could lead to a facility remaining shut for weeks.
The strikes became so successful that Russian oil refining was reduced by as much as a fifth on certain days, cutting exports and leading to domestic fuel shortages.
It was costing its economy an estimated $75m (£55m) a day, according to US intelligence.
Comment: That’s certainly one way to make your otherwise useless sanctions work: just start blowing up your opponent’s oil business! Uniquely American…
In response, Mr Trump praised the strikes for the leverage and deniability they gave him as Putin continued to stonewall negotiations, according to the sources.
It was first reported in October that Washington was closely involved in the planning of such strikes, but it wasn’t known that the CIA was responsible for the new focus of the campaign and identifying specific weaknesses in its energy infrastructure.
In late November, Ukraine also began a maritime campaign against Moscow’s shadow fleet, a clandestine network of hundreds of vessels carrying sanctioned oil to keep the Russian economy afloat.
Comment: At least we now know how ‘Ukraine’ struck a Russian oil tanker off West Africa.
Kyiv was using its explosive-laden long-range naval drones to blow holes in the ships, opening a new front in the war to cut off Russia’s largest source of funding and strengthen its negotiating position at US-led peace talks.
According to US and Ukrainian officials, the CIA was authorised to assist Kyiv’s military in these efforts, despite the risk of angering Putin’s regime.
It is not clear exactly when such help was approved by the Trump administration.
The New York Times report, citing hundreds of national security officials, military and intelligence officers and US, Ukrainian and European diplomats, charts the unwinding of the US-Ukrainian alliance over the past year.
The officials argued that as Mr Trump attempted to broker peace, factions in the White House and Pentagon pushed the president and his aides to make inconsistent, and at times, erratic decisions that damaged Kyiv’s war effort.
This included how the newly renamed Department of War, led by Pete Hegseth, repeatedly made unannounced decisions to withhold vital munitions from Ukraine that had already been given under the Biden administration, costing lives at the front.
A critical error, according to the officials and diplomats, was Mr Trump overestimating his rapport with Putin and ability to get him to meaningfully engage in negotiations.
Despite repeatedly touting his ability to secure an end to the war in “24 hours”, the Republican was forced to admit on Sunday his lack of a breakthrough after a year of on-off negotiations.
As he hosted Volodymyr Zelensky at Mar-a-Lago, he was forced to admit “it is not a one-day process deal. This is very complicated stuff”.
The officials also revealed that Mr Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart bonded over a love of Ukrainian women.
Following their disastrous meeting in February, Mr Zelensky returned six months later to win back Mr Trump’s support.
Sitting in the Oval Office, Mr Trump said “Ukrainian women are beautiful”, to which Mr Zelensky replied, “I know, I married one.”
In an odd sequence of events, Mr Trump rang up an old friend who had married a former Miss Ukraine who was then put on the phone to speak to Mr Zelensky.
“It humanised Zelensky with Trump,” an official who was there told the New York Times. “You could feel the room change.” The meeting, in which the Ukrainian leader was on the charm offensive, proved crucial for their relationship moving forward.
The officials also revealed that Mr Trump had approved a back channel being opened with Moscow before his inauguration, despite the fact that doing so before his first term prompted claims of conspiracy and became part of a long-running Russian investigation.
The Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, reportedly introduced Mr Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff to Kirill Dmitriev, who would later emerge as the lead negotiator in peace talks with the US.
That move reportedly came after Joe Biden rejected a request for a secret letter granting Mr Trump and his team permission to begin talks during the transition, for fear the incoming president would sell out Ukraine in a deal.
Comment: So, apparently ‘an edge on the oil markets’ is more important to ‘the peacemaker’ than actual peace.
As Israel bans aid orgs in Gaza, notorious mercenary firm seeks “Targeter”
the Israeli government is using the absurdly onerous new registration standards as cover to ban virtually every credible international aid organization from entering Gaza.
Max Blumenthal·December 31, 2025, https://thegrayzone.com/2025/12/31/israel-aid-gaza-mercenary-targeter/
Are Israel and the Trump admin planning to revive the dystopian Gaza Humanitarian Foundation scheme that spawned famine and death under cover of humanitarian aid?
In its bid to continue the genocide in Gaza, Israel has banned 37 international aid organizations from entering the decimated, militarily occupied coastal enclave. This leaves only five humanitarian groups still able to operate inside Gaza.
At the same time, one of the US mercenary firms responsible for securing the notorious Gaza Humanitarian Foundation sites which were present during the worst periods of famine in Gaza, when at least 3000 Palestinian civilians were gunned down while seeking aid, has posted an ad soliciting former special forces soldiers for offensive operations.
UG Solutions, the scandal-stained private mercenary firm, announced this December that it was hiring an “experienced Targeter to support intelligence-driven operations through the identification, development, validation, and maintenance of operational targets.” The targeter will be expected to “Develop, validate, and maintain operational target packages in accordance with approved targeting processes.”
Anthony Aguilar, the retired United States Army Lt. Col and former Green Beret who blew the whistle on UG Solutions’ human rights abuses in Gaza, told me he believes that Israel’s ban on the 37 international aid organizations signals the return of UG Solutions as part of a restructured version of the Israeli-controlled Gaza Humanitarian Foundation scheme.
While it’s unclear where the UG Solutions targeter position will be deployed, if they are being hired for upcoming operations in Gaza, Aguilar says “this shows that the US, though paramilitary contractors, is now going to either directly target, or feed target data to the IDF.”
To set the stage for its blanket ban on international aid organizations, Israel’s intel-tied Ministry of Diaspora Affairs has demanded that all staffers of aid NGOs prove they do not support calls to boycott Israel, that they do not support armed struggle or oppose Israel’s existence as an exclusivist Jewish state, and that they do not “actively advance delegitimization activities against the State of Israel.”
Aid staffers must also demonstrate that they have never questioned the established history of the Holocaust or challenged official Israeli narratives about October 7 – including, presumably, that Palestinians committed “mass rape” or beheaded babies.
Israel has also demanded that Doctors Without Borders provide COGAT occupation administrators with the personal data of its staff and donors, an unprecedented move by a belligerent in a conflict which few, if any, aid groups could ever honor.
It seems obvious that the Israeli government is using the absurdly onerous new registration standards as cover to ban virtually every credible international aid organization from entering Gaza. In doing so, the apartheid entity seemingly seeks to deprive Palestinians living inside the yellow occupation line of sustenance, forcing them to leave Gaza, or to move into one of the high-tech, concentration camp-like “smart cities” mapped out in the dystopian new “Project Sunrise” proposal marketed by Trump cronies Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.
And it is there that they would be “secured” by a mercenary outfit like UG Solutions – and targeted if they dared to resist.
Below is a list of all the aid orgs banned by Israel from operating in Gaza:
1. Accion contra el Hambre – Action Against Hunger
2. Action Aid
3. Alianza por la Solidaridad
4. Artsen zonder Grenzen (Medecins Sans Frontieres Nederland)
5. Campaign for the Children of Palestine (CCP Japan)
6. CARE
7. DanChurchAid
8. Danish Refugee Council
9. Handicap International – Humanity and Inclusion
10. Japan International Volunteer center
11. Medecins Du Monde (FRANCE)
12. Medecins du Monde Switzerland
13. Medecins Sans Frontières Belgium
14. Medecins Sans Frontieres France
15. Medicos del Mundo (Spain)
16. Mercy Corps
17. MSF Spain – Doctors Without Borders Spain
18. NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL
19. Oxfam Novib
20. Premiere Urgence Internationale
21. Terre des hommes Lausanne
22. The International Rescue Committee (IRC)
23. WeWorld-GVC
24. World Vision International
25. Relief International
26. Fondazione AVSI
27. Movement for Peace – MPDL
28. American Friends Service Committee (AFSC)
29. Medico International
30. PSAS – The Palestine Solidarity Association in Sweden
31. Defense for Children International
32. Medical Aid for Palestinians – UK
33. Caritas Internationalis
34. Caritas Jerusalem
35. Near East council churches
36. OXFAM Quebec
37. War Child holland
Venezuelan leader Maduro lands in New York after capture by US troops – live
Donald Trump says the US will ‘run’ Venezuela and put Maduro on trial after audacious military operation in Caracas
- Full report: Trump says US will ‘run’ Venezuela
- Explained: Is there legal justification for the US attack on Venezuela?
- Reaction: Global outcry after US strikes Venezuela
4 Jan 26, https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2026/jan/03/caracas-explosions-venezuela-maduro-latest-news-updates-live?page=with:block-69599f418f085ed25e9e3394
Nicolás Maduro ‘has arrived in New York’
A plane believed to be carrying Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, has landed near Stewart Air National Guard Base in New York.
Maduro is expected to be taken by helicopter to the city where he will be processed and transported to the Metropolitan Detention Center prison, officials told NBC News.
They added the Venezuela president is set to appear in court by Monday evening.
The New York Times has reported that at least 40 people, including civilians and soldiers, were killed in Saturday’s US attack on Venezuela. The estimate comes from a senior Venezuelan official who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
The victims reportedly include a woman called Rosa González, who was killed when her three-story apartment complex was hit by a strike. Another resident was reportedly severely injured.
US oil giants have so far remained silent on Donald Trump’s claim that they are primed to spend “billions and billions of dollars” rebuilding the Venezuelan oil industry following the ouster of Nicolás Maduro.
Chevron, the only US oil company still operating in Venezuela, committed only to following “relevant laws and regulations” after the US president suggested American energy multinationals would be central to his plans for the country.
Venezuela’s vast oil reserves – reputedly the world’s largest – will be modernized and exploited, Trump claimed in interviews and a press conference at his Mar-a-Lago estate. US oil firms will invest heavily to reconstruct “rotted” infrastructure, ramp up production and sell “large amounts … to other countries”, he told reporters, adding: “We’re in the oil business.”
“We’re going to have our very large United States oil companies – the biggest anywhere in the world – go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure and start making money for the country,” the president said. The firms would be “reimbursed”, he added, without providing more detail.
ExxonMobil, the biggest US oil company, and ConocoPhillips, another major player, did not respond to requests for comment.
A spokesperson for Chevron said: “Chevron remains focused on the safety and wellbeing of our employees, as well as the integrity of our assets. We continue to operate in full compliance with all relevant laws and regulations.”
In response to today’s events, Canada’s PM, Mark Carney, wrote on X: “One of the first actions taken by Canada’s new government in March 2025 was to impose additional sanctions on Nicolás Maduro’s brutally oppressive and criminal regime – unequivocally condemning his grave breaches of international peace and security, gross and systematic human rights violations, and corruption. Canada has not recognised the illegitimate regime of Maduro since it stole the 2018 election. The Canadian government therefore welcomes the opportunity for freedom, democracy, peace, and prosperity for the Venezuelan people.
“Canada has long supported a peaceful, negotiated, and Venezuelan-led transition process that respects the democratic will of the Venezuelan people. In keeping with our long-standing commitment to upholding the rule of law, sovereignty, and human rights, Canada calls on all parties to respect international law. We stand by the Venezuelan people’s sovereign right to decide and build their own future in a peaceful and democratic society.
“Canada attaches great importance to resolution of crises through multilateral engagement and is in close contact with international partners about ongoing developments. We are first and foremost ready to assist Canadians through our consular officials and our embassy in Bogotá, Colombia, and will continue to support Venezuelan refugees.”
The UK’s prime minister, Keir Starmer, has backed a transition of power in Venezuela.
He said his Labour administration would “shed no tears” over the end of Nicolás Maduro’s regime and said Britain would discuss the “evolving situation” with American counterparts over the coming days.
Starmer said in a statement: “The UK has long supported a transition of power in Venezuela.
“We regarded Maduro as an illegitimate president and we shed no tears about the end of his regime.
“I reiterated my support for international law this morning.
“The UK government will discuss the evolving situation with US counterparts in the days ahead as we seek a safe and peaceful transition to a legitimate government that reflects the will of the Venezuelan people.”
Starmer earlier refused to be drawn on whether the US military action broke international law, saying he wanted to talk to president Donald Trump, with whom he had not spoken on Saturday morning, and allies to “establish the facts”.
About 500 UK nationals are in Venezuela and work is continuing to “safeguard” them, the prime minister said, while the UK’s Foreign Office advised against all travel to the country.
“As you know, I always say and believe we should all uphold international law, but I think at this stage, fast-moving situation, let’s establish the facts and take it from there,” Starmer told broadcasters.
Share
Updated at 08.49 AEDT
08.21 AEDT
Summary: the day so far
It’s been an incredibly dramatic day so far but a confusing one, in the US and Venezuela, as the world watches the aftermath of a lightning military strike overnight that resulted in Nicolás Maduro being captured by US forces and taken to an American aircraft carrier in handcuffs. The toppled Venezuelan president was en route to New York early on Saturday, where the Trump administration has promised to bring him up in court, indicted on drug trafficking and other federal criminal offenses. He could arrive later the same day, even. Donald Trump claims the US is now running Venezuela, with the remaining regime’s cooperation – a claim sharply contrast
The United Nations security council is due to hold an emergency meeting on Monday as a result of the United States attacking Venezuela early on Saturday and snatching up its president, Nicolás Maduro, holding him en route to New York where it will confront him with federal criminal charges related to drug trafficking and weapons.
Nicolás Maduro’s vice-president in Venezuela, Delcy Rodríguez, a loyalist, has appeared on television and radio there, from the capital Caracas, contradicting Donald Trump’s description of her now being president and cooperating with the US. She said Maduro was Venezuela’s “only” president and that Venezuela would not be colonized.
Rodríguez appears to be in Caracas. This followed hours of rumors that she might have been in Russia or parts unknown, but not in Venezuela.
Donald Trump called Cuba a failing nation, and US secretary of state Marco Rubio called the communist-run island, from which his parents fled to the US in the 1950s, a “disaster”. Both hinted that they could reprise their action in Venezuela in Cuba, but made no direct threats.
Trump was asked about his current thoughts on Russian president Vladimir Putin and the ongoing war perpetrated by that country in Ukraine. Trump said he was “not thrilled” with Putin and called the war a bloodbath.
Donald Trump said he and his administration have not talked to Venezuela’s exiled opposition leader María Corina Machado since the capture of Maduro. He took on a dismissive tone and said she would not run Venezuela as she did not have the necessary support or respect in the country. It was unclear whether he was talking about the Venezuelan regime or the general population. Machado won the latest Nobel Peace prize.
United Nations secretary general António Guterres said the Trump administration was setting a “dangerous precedent” with its unilateral action inside Venezuela. He later said he thought the US had probably breached the founding charter of the UN.
At a press conference in Florida, Trump said that US oil companies will take control of Venezuela’s state oil operation. There has been no confirmation of anything like this from US oil companies, nor how such an arrangement would work.
Donald Trump claimed at his press conference earlier that the United States is “going to run” Venezuela for the time being. He gave no specific details about how that might happen, later implying the remains of the Maduro regime were cooperating with US leadership – something soon after contradicted by Venezuela’s vice president, Delcy Rodríguez.
Trump posted a picture on his Truth Social platform that he states is “Nicolas Maduro on board the USS Iwo Jima”, which appeared to show the captured Venezuelan president in handcuffs, black goggles and headphones, clutching a water bottle, expressionless.
The US Department of Justice unsealed a fresh version of a federal criminal indictment of Nicolás Maduro. He was indicted by the US in 2020. The superseding indictment now includes his wife and son.
Trump confirmed that the Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, were heading to New York. Trump told Fox News on Saturday that Maduro and his wife were taken to a ship after their capture by US forces and were headed to the US city.
US attorney general Pam Bondi said the deposed Venezuelan leader and his wife would face criminal charges after an indictment in New York. Bondi vowed in a social media post that the couple will “soon face the full wrath of American justice on American soil in American courts”.
The United States is going to be “very strongly involved” in Venezuela’s oil industry after the operation to capture Maduro, Trump told Fox News on Saturday. He said: “We have the greatest oil companies in the world, the biggest, the greatest, and we’re going to be very much involved in it.”
The US vice-president JD Vance hailed what he called a “truly impressive operation” in Venezuela that culminated in the capture of Maduro. Posting on social media as he reshared Trump’s post about the action, Vance wrote: “The president offered multiple off-ramps, but was very clear throughout this process: the drug trafficking must stop, and the stolen oil must be returned to the United States.”
The US secretary of state Marco Rubio said in a post on X that Maduro is “under indictment for pushing drugs in the United States”. The Republican US senator Mike Lee said on Saturday that Rubio had told him that he “anticipates no further action in Venezuela now that Maduro is in US custody”.
Venezuela’s government urged citizens to rise up against the US assault and said Washington risked plunging Latin America into chaos with “an extremely serious” act of “military aggression”. “The entire country must mobilise to defeat this imperialist aggression,” it added. It accused the US of launching a series of attacks against civilian and military targets in the South American country, after explosions rocked its capital, Caracas, before dawn on Saturday.
Explosions and low-flying aircraft were heard in Caracas in the early hours of Saturday. In its statement, Venezuela’s government confirmed that the city had come under attack, as had three other states: Miranda, La Guaira and Aragua.
Venezuela has accused the US of trying to “seize control” of the country’s resources, in particular its oil and minerals. The country has called on the international community to denounce what it called a flagrant violation of international law that put millions of lives at risk.
The president of neighbouring Colombia, Gustavo Petro, called for an immediate emergency session of the UN security council, saying on social media that Venezuela had come under attack.
UK prime minister Keir Starmer has reacted to Donald Trump’s military action in Venezuela saying: “The UK was not involved in any way in this operation.” He added that “we should all uphold international law”. France said the US military operation that resulted in the capture of Maduro went against the principles of international law.
Russia has demanded “immediate” clarification about the circumstances of the capture of Maduro during an attack ordered by Trump. Earlier, Venezuela’s vice-president, Delcy Rodríguez, said the US needed to provide “proof of life” for Maduro.
Venezuelan allies Russia, Cuba and Iran were quick to condemn the strikes as a violation of sovereignty. Tehran urged the UN security council to stop the “unlawful aggression”. Among major Latin American nations, Argentina’s president Javier Milei lauded Venezuela’s new “freedom” while Mexico condemned the intervention and Brazil’s president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva said it crossed “an unacceptable line”.
Share
World
Europe
US news
Americas
Asia
Australia
Middle East
Africa
Inequality
Global development
News
Opinion
Sport
Culture
Lifestyle
Original reporting and incisive analysis, direct from the Guardian every morning
Sign up for our email
About us
Information
Help
Complaints & corrections
Contact us
Tip us off
SecureDrop
Privacy policy
Cookie policy
Tax strategy
Terms & conditions
All topics
All writers
Newsletters
Digital newspaper archive
Bluesky
Facebook
Instagram
LinkedIn
Threads
TikTok
YouTube
Advertise with us
Guardian Labs
Work for us
Accessibility settings
Guardian Australia acknowledges the traditional owners and custodians of Country throughout Australia and their connections to land, waters and community. We pay respect by giving voice to social justice, acknowledging our shared history and valuing the cultures of First Nations.
Back to top
© 2026 Guardian News & Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. (dcr)
New Imperial War: The U.S. Assault on Venezuela Exposes a Desperate Empire
January 3, 2026, By Joshua Scheer, https://scheerpost.com/2026/01/03/new-imperial-war-the-u-s-assault-on-venezuela-exposes-a-desperate-empire/
Multiple blasts were reported in Venezuela’s capital early Saturday after President Trump authorized U.S. airstrikes targeting military installations and other sites.
Residents of Caracas saw plumes of smoke and reported hearing aircraft flying at low altitude around 2 a.m. local time, according to the Associated Press and Reuters. Power outages were reported in the southern part of the city near a military base.
Videos shared on social media appeared to show several explosions across the capital. CBS News cited U.S. officials as confirming that the strikes were ordered by Trump.
The United States carried out a series of military strikes on Venezuela early Saturday, targeting key military installations in and around Caracas, as President Donald Trump claimed that Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro had been captured and flown out of the country.
Explosions were reported around 2 a.m. local time in the Venezuelan capital and neighboring states, with smoke visible over parts of Caracas and power outages reported near major military facilities. Among the targets cited in multiple reports were La Carlota Air Base, Fuerte Tiuna, and other strategic sites. Social media videos showed aircraft overhead and active air defenses, while witnesses described low-flying helicopters across the city.
In a statement posted to social media, Trump said the United States had “successfully carried out a large scale strike against Venezuela” and that Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores had been taken into U.S. custody. The White House said the operation was conducted in coordination with U.S. law enforcement and confirmed that no American casualties had been reported. Trump later described the mission as “brilliant,” asserting it was carried out under his Article II constitutional powers.
Following U.S. strikes in Venezuela and the reported seizure of President Nicolás Maduro and first lady Cilia Flores, several senior members of the government appeared to remain active. Vice President Delcy Rodríguez, next in the line of succession, issued statements after the attacks, though her location was unclear amid reports she may have been in Russia. Other key allies, including Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino López and Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello, also appeared to have survived. Their continued presence suggests that despite the removal of Maduro, the Venezuelan government was still functioning, albeit under significant strain, in the immediate aftermath.
According to Venezuelanalysis and other outlets, Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodríguez said the government had not been provided proof of life for Maduro and demanded clarification from Washington. Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino López confirmed that U.S. bombings had occurred in Caracas and surrounding areas, stating that authorities were assessing damage and casualties. Venezuelan officials reported civilian and military deaths but did not provide specific figures.
The Venezuelan government declared a nationwide state of emergency, referred to as a state of “External Commotion,” activated national defense plans, and ordered the deployment of armed forces across the country. In an official communiqué, Caracas accused the United States of a “flagrant violation” of the United Nations Charter and described the strikes as an act of aggression threatening regional peace. The government said it would file formal complaints with the United Nations, CELAC, and the Non-Aligned Movement, while reserving the right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter.
International reaction was swift. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva condemned the strikes and the reported capture of Maduro, calling the action “an unacceptable affront to Venezuela’s sovereignty” and warning it set a dangerous precedent for the international community. Tweeting this: -[on original]
Colombian President Gustavo Petro described the operation as an act of aggression against Latin America and announced that Colombian forces were being deployed to the Venezuelan border amid concerns over potential refugee flows. He underscored the stakes of the crisis, saying, “Without sovereignty, there is no nation. Peace is the way, and dialogue between peoples is fundamental for national unity. Dialogue and more dialogue is our proposal.”
This should also be the standard for how foreign policy is conducted more broadly. War should not be the default response — especially in cases like this, where there appears to be a clear disregard for factual accuracy.
Petro, also tweeting about his role on the UN security council, stated “Colombia since yesterday is a member of the United Nations Security Council and [it] must be convened immediately. Establish the international legality of the aggression against Venezuela.”
We might not hold our breath, however, since two of the five permanent members of the Security Council are currently involved in questionable wars. Yet we can only hope that Petro and more world leaders take up the mantle of ending wars and allowing diplomacy and sovereignty to be the norm. If the royal “we” could stay out of other countries’ internal affairs, certainly we would not have wars in Ukraine or, now, in Venezuela — just to name a few. But empire is going to empire, and like a cockroach, the neocon agenda seems never to die.
This 1984-level war justification comes as the Trump administration has repeatedly accused Nicolás Maduro of narco-terrorism and questioned his legitimacy as Venezuela’s leader. In a post on X from July 2025, Marco Rubio reiterated the administration’s position on Maduro’s authority, stating that “his regime is NOT the legitimate government.” adding that “Maduro is the head of the Cartel de Los Soles, a narco-terror organization which has taken possession of a country. And he is under indictment for pushing drugs into the United States,” Rubio wrote.
Today Rubio continues to repeat this rhetoric, his first post was a re-tweet of the July post.
The neocon war on drugs justification rings hollow as Trump’s often contradictory framing or barefaced lying. Much of the available reporting points out that major drug-trafficking flows have long been linked to countries such as Honduras, including the case of its former president, Juan Orlando Hernández, sentenced in 2024 to 45 years in prison for conspiring to distribute more than 400 tons of cocaine and related firearms offenses; he was pardoned by Trump on Dec. 1. Against that backdrop, it becomes increasingly difficult to sustain the pretense that this action is about narcotics enforcement rather than a colonial-style power grab.
With responses from other leaders across the Americas came swiftly. Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel wrote: “This is state terrorism against the brave Venezuelan people and against Our America,” and is rightfully demanding urgent action from the international community in response to the “criminal attack.”
Bolivia’s former leftist president, Evo Morales, also condemned the U.S. action, saying he “strongly and unequivocally” repudiated the attack on Venezuela. “It is brutal imperialist aggression that violates its sovereignty,” Morales said, expressing “full solidarity with the Venezuelan people in resistance.”
Across the region, governments warned that the escalation risked destabilizing Latin America and undermining long-standing efforts to preserve the region as a zone of peace.
In the United States, antiwar organizations quickly mobilized. The ANSWER Coalition issued a call for nationwide protests on Saturday, Jan. 3, arguing that the operation was driven by geopolitical and economic interests rather than security concerns. Within hours, demonstrations were announced in multiple cities, including a protest outside the White House. The listing is available at https://answercoalition.org/venezuela
As of Saturday morning, the situation in Venezuela remained fluid, with conflicting accounts over Maduro’s status and mounting international pressure for clarification. The United Nations had not yet issued a formal response, though several world leaders called for an emergency international review of the U.S. action.
This is a developing story. More will come.
We have become the worst version of a desperate empire: taking over countries, attacking them under false pretenses, lying about our reasons, and stealing natural resources we claim are “ours.” This is an affront to any reasonable person — an act of cowardice and moral failure that reveals clear colonial intent.
Our so-called leadership, through threats directed at remaining Venezuelan politicians, reminds us of classic warmonger tactics. Trump suggested on Fox News that his administration would continue targeting Venezuelan government officials if they sided with Maduro. “If they stay loyal, the future is really bad — really bad for them,” he said. “I’d say most of them have converted.”
Trump’s first term was marked by the implied repudiation of “forever wars,” and now, with the influence of figures like Marco Rubio and Stephen Miller, the United States has bombed more than nine countries and is engaging in yet another unprovoked conflict. There is no easy way to say this, but it makes more sense now why the president has avoided seriously confronting Putin — he is following the same playbook. Of course, it is also the same approach we have used since the beginning of this dying empire, with figures such as JFK, LBJ, and GW Bush — just to name a few.
Here is the full response of the Venezuelan government, in an English translation by Ben Norton.
Read more: New Imperial War: The U.S. Assault on Venezuela Exposes a Desperate EmpireCOMMUNIQUÉ BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF VENEZUELA The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela rejects, repudiates, and denounces before the international community the extremely grave military aggression perpetrated by the current Government of the United States of America against Venezuela’s territory and population in civilian and military sites of the city of Caracas, capital of the Republic, and the states of Miranda, Aragua, and La Guaira. This act constitutes a flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter, especially its articles 1 and 2, which enshrine respect for sovereignty, the juridical equality of States and the prohibition of the use of force. Such aggression threatens international peace and stability, specifically in Latin America and the Caribbean, and places the lives of millions of people at grave risk. The objective of this attack is none other than to take control of Venezuela’s strategic resources, particularly its oil and minerals, attempting to forcibly break the Nation’s political independence. They will not succeed. After more than 200 years of independence, the people and their legitimate Government stand firm in defense of sovereignty and the inalienable right to decide their destiny. The attempt to impose a colonial war to destroy the republican form of government and force a “regime change”, in alliance with the fascist oligarchy, will fail like all previous attempts. Since 1811, Venezuela has confronted and defeated empires. When in 1902 foreign powers bombarded our coasts, President Cipriano Castro proclaimed: “The insolent foot of the foreigner has profaned the sacred soil of the Homeland”. Today, with the moral authority of Bolívar, Miranda, and our liberators, the Venezuelan people rise once again to defend their independence against imperial aggression. People to the streets The Bolivarian Government calls on all social and political forces of the country to activate mobilization plans and repudiate this imperialist attack. The people of Venezuela and their National Bolivarian Armed Forces, in perfect popular-military-police fusion, are deployed to guarantee sovereignty and peace. Simultaneously, Bolivarian Peace Diplomacy will file corresponding complaints before the UN Security Council, the Secretary General of said organization, CELAC, and the Non-Aligned Movement, demanding condemnation of and accountability for the US Government. President Nicolás Maduro has ordered all national defense plans to be implemented at the appropriate time and circumstances, in strict adherence to the provisions of the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, the Organic Law on States of Exception, and the Organic Law of National Security. In this regard, President Nicolás Maduro has signed and ordered the implementation of the Decree declaring a state of External Commotion throughout the national territory, to protect the rights of the population, the full functioning of republican institutions, and to immediately transition to armed struggle. The entire country must be activated to defeat this imperialist aggression. Likewise, he has ordered the immediate deployment of the Command for the Integral Defense of the Nation and the Directional Bodies for Integral Defense in all states and municipalities of the country. In strict adherence to article 51 of the United Nations Charter, Venezuela reserves the right to exercise legitimate defense to protect its people, its territory, and its independence. We call on the peoples and governments of Latin America, the Caribbean, and the world to mobilize in active solidarity against this imperial aggression. As Supreme Commander Hugo Chávez Frías stated, “In the face of any circumstance of new difficulties, whatever their magnitude, the response of all patriots… is unity, struggle, battle, and victory”. Caracas, 3 January 2025
WAS RUSSIA’S SPECIAL MILITARY OPERATION “UNPROVOKED”?
AI is a tool that many use to research the historical facts behind contentious issues. What does it say about Russia’s claims it was endlessly provoked into its conflict with the Ukrainian regime?
Aearnur, Jan 03, 2026, https://aearnur.substack.com/p/was-russias-special-military-operation?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=312403&post_id=183250361&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ln98x&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
AI Overview.
Archival material declassified by the US National Security Archive and other Western institutions has established that multiple Western leaders gave Mikhail Gorbachev a “cascade of assurances” in 1990 and 1991 that NATO would not expand eastward beyond a reunified Germany.
The declassified records, which include contemporaneous memoranda of conversation (memcons) and telegrams (telcons), show that these discussions were not limited to East Germany but addressed Central and Eastern European security as a whole.
Key Documents and Assurances
Secretary James Baker’s “Not One Inch” (Feb 1990): US archival transcripts confirm that on February 9, 1990, Secretary of State James Baker told Gorbachev that if the US maintained a presence in a unified Germany within NATO, there would be “no extension of NATO’s jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east”. Baker repeated this formula three times during the meeting.
The Bush-Gorbachev Malta Summit (Dec 1989): Records show President George H.W. Bush assured Gorbachev that the US would not seek “unilateral advantage” from the rapid changes in Eastern Europe.
Chancellor Helmut Kohl (Feb 1990): Declassified West German records show Chancellor Kohl told Gorbachev on February 10, 1990, that “NATO should not enlarge the sphere of its activity”.
British and French Leaders: Declassified documents show British Prime Minister John Major told Soviet Defense Minister Yazov in March 1991 that he did not foresee circumstances where Eastern European countries would join NATO. French President François Mitterrand also expressed support for dismantling military blocs and ensuring Soviet security.
AI Overview.
The original stated purpose of the Minsk process (Minsk I in 2014 and Minsk II in 2015) was to secure an immediate ceasefire and provide a roadmap for a permanent political resolution to the conflict in eastern Ukraine.
According to the official 12-point and 13-point “packages of measures,” the primary goals included:
Military De-escalation: An unconditional ceasefire, withdrawal of heavy weaponry to create a security zone, and the pullout of all foreign armed formations and mercenaries.
Political Reintegration: Decentralization of power in Ukraine through constitutional reform, granting a “special status” to the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, and holding local elections under Ukrainian law.
Sovereignty Restoration: The return of full control over the state border to the Ukrainian government, contingent upon the completion of the political settlement.
The Russian Understanding of the Process
For Russia, the Minsk process was understood as a vehicle to achieve several strategic objectives that differed from Ukraine’s interpretation of sovereignty:
Institutional Influence (the “Trojan Horse”): Russia understood “special status” as granting the Donbas regions comprehensive autonomy, including their own legal systems and the right to cross-border cooperation with Russia. This was intended to give these regions a de facto veto over Ukraine’s national foreign policy, specifically to prevent Ukraine fromjoining NATO or the EU.
Legitimacy for Proxies: Russia insisted on the inclusion of the self-proclaimed “People’s Republics” (DPR/LPR) in the negotiations. Moscow viewed this as a step toward their formal recognition and a way to frame the conflict as a “civil war” rather than a Russo-Ukrainian war.
Sequencing of Control: A fundamental part of Russia’s understanding was that political concessions (elections and autonomy) must occur before Ukraine regained control of its border with Russia, effectively securing the separatist enclaves while they were still under Russian influence.
“Freezing” the Conflict: Western analysts noted that for Russia, the accords served to consolidate control over captured territories and “freeze” the conflict at a level that favored Moscow’s interests while avoiding further international sanctions.
Following the 2022 invasion, Russian officials asserted that the true purpose of the West was to use the accords as a “ruse” to buy time for Ukraine to rearm, while they maintain their original stated goal was a genuine political settlement for the Donbas.
AI Overview.
In a series of interviews following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel clarified that the primary purpose of the
Minsk Accords (2014–2015) was to buy time for Ukraine to strengthen itself against future Russian aggression.
In a December 2022 interview with The Kyiv Independent, former French President François Hollande stated that the Minsk Accords were successful in providing Ukraine with the “precious time” needed to strengthen its military.
His comments corroborated earlier revelations by former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, confirming that the agreements served as a temporary respite to prevent further Russian territorial gains while the Ukrainian army underwent a total transformation.
Key Revelations by Hollande
Buying Time for Rearmament: Hollande agreed with Merkel’s assessment that the primary merit of the Minsk agreements was giving the Ukrainian army the opportunity to become “completely different” from what it was in 2014. He noted that by 2022, the army was better trained and equipped, which he directly attributed to the diplomatic respite provided by the accords.
In 2022 and 2023, former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko made several public statements revealing that the primary purpose of the Minsk Accords from his perspective was to buy time for Ukraine to rebuild its military and avoid a total collapse of the state.
His detailed revelations include:
Read more: WAS RUSSIA’S SPECIAL MILITARY OPERATION “UNPROVOKED”?Buying Time for Rearmament: Poroshenko stated that when he signed the agreements in 2014 and 2015, Ukraine effectively “did not have armed forces at all”. He revealed that the truce provided a “precious” window of several years to invite NATO instructors, purchase weapons, and transform the Ukrainian military into a modern fighting force capable of resisting a large-scale invasion.
Strategic Deception: Poroshenko described the agreements as a “forced position” but a “success for diplomats”. He admitted that the goal was to “buy time” and “slow down Russia’s advance” while stalling on the most unacceptable political obligations of the deal, such as granting constitutional autonomy to the Donbas republics.
Preventing Immediate Defeat: He recalled that the 2015 Minsk II agreement was signed under extreme duress, specifically when thousands of Ukrainian soldiers were surrounded by regular Russian forces at the battle of Debaltseve. The primary goal at that moment was to stop the Russian offensive and prevent the “annihilation” of his forces.
International Legitimacy: Poroshenko revealed that another goal of the accords was to demonstrate to the world that Russia was the aggressor. By signing a peace plan, Ukraine gained the international solidarity needed to implement and maintain Western sanctions against Russia for its non-compliance with the deal.
These admissions, similar to those made by Angela Merkel and François Hollande, have been used by the Russian government to argue that the West and Ukraine negotiated the peace process in bad faith to prepare for eventual war.
AI Overview.
As of January 2, 2026, Russia continues to frame its invasion of Ukraine as a defensive and corrective measure necessitated by Western aggression and humanitarian crises. These justifications have evolved throughout the conflict, combining long-standing grievances with recent allegations of “state terrorism” by the Ukrainian government.
1. Security Architecture and NATO Expansion
Russia’s primary long-term justification is the perceived threat from NATO’s eastward expansion.
“Red Lines” and Broken Promises: Russian officials cite declassified 1990 archival records as proof that Western leaders promised NATO would not move “one inch eastward.” Russia argues that by 2021, Ukraine’s “de facto” integration into NATO through military training and infrastructure had reached an existential threat level.
The 2021 Security Proposals: In December 2021, Russia requested formal treaties with NATO and the US to halt expansion and return to 1997 troop positions. The Kremlin justifies the 2022 invasion as a result of the West’s dismissal of these proposals.
Buffer Zones (2026 Update): In early 2026, the Kremlin emphasized the need for an expanded “buffer zone” in the Sumy and Kharkiv regions to protect Russian territory from cross-border shelling and drone strikes.
2. Humanitarian Protection and “Genocide”
Russia claims its intervention was a legal necessity to protect ethnic Russians and Russian speakers.
Protecting the Donbas: Putin asserted that the 2022 “Special Military Operation” was launched to end eight years of “humiliation and genocide” by the “Kyiv regime” against people in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions.
Independence Recognition: Russia argues that because it recognized the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics as independent states just before the invasion, its military action was a lawful request for assistance under Article 51 of the UN Charter.
3. “Denazification” and “Demilitarization”
The Kremlin uses these terms to frame the Ukrainian government as illegitimate and a threat to European peace.
Regime Change: Russia claims the 2014 Euromaidan revolution was a Western-backed “unconstitutional coup” that installed a “neo-Nazi” leadership.
Sovereignty Denial: Putin has repeatedly claimed that Ukraine is an “artificial state” created by the Soviet Union and that Russians and Ukrainians are “one people,” suggesting the current government is a foreign-imposed anomaly.
4. Recent Allegations of “State Terrorism” (Late 2025–2026)
Since December 2025, Russia has introduced new justifications to harden its stance in potential peace talks:
Attack on Putin’s Residence: In late December 2025, Russia accused Ukraine of launching a drone strike targeting President Putin’s residence in the Novgorod region. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov characterized this as “state terrorism,” using it to justify retaliatory strikes and a “more rigorous” negotiating position.
For official updates and historical documents, the National Security Archive provides records of 1990 assurances, while current statements are often published by the Russian Foreign Ministry.
AI Overview.
In January and February 2022, the Donbas region in south-eastern Ukraine experienced a massive and rapid escalation in shelling and ceasefire violations. Reports from the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) indicated that after a period of relatively low activity in early January, violations surged by over 340% in the week leading up to the full-scale Russian invasion on February 24.
Trump Praises Putin, Promises Peace—Kyiv Still Under Fire
As Russian missiles continued to strike Ukrainian cities, the contrast between diplomatic rhetoric and battlefield reality remained stark. While Trump projected confidence that peace may be within reach, Kyiv once again faced burning apartments, shattered infrastructure, and a winter night without heat—underscoring how far any deal may still be from the ground truth of the war.
December 29, 2025, By Joshua Scheer, https://scheerpost.com/2025/12/29/trump-praises-putin-promises-peace-kyiv-still-under-fire/
Trump’s Peace Optimism Collides With Russia’s Intensifying Assault on Kyiv
Another morning has arrived with no peace between Ukraine and Russia, despite President Trump repeatedly suggesting that an agreement is either incredibly close—or may never happen at all.
It is a familiar refrain, delivered as Russian forces continue to bombard Kyiv and while President Vladimir Putin remains absent from the negotiations. Yet Trump has positioned himself as vouching for Putin, a stance that produced an awkward moment during his meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
According to The Daily Beast, Trump told reporters, “Russia wants to see Ukraine succeed,” prompting Zelenskyy to visibly raise an eyebrow. Trump then added, “It sounds a little strange,” as Zelenskyy grinned, nodded, and replied dryly, “Yeah.”
The exchange followed comments Trump made Sunday, when he said he had told Zelenskyy that “President Putin was very generous in his feeling toward Ukraine succeeding.”
Yet as of yesterday at least two people were killed in Kyiv during a 10-hour Russian aerial assault that unfolded as diplomatic optimism surrounding a potential U.S.-brokered peace deal briefly surged. Forty-four others—including two children—were injured, according to Ukrainian officials, while hundreds of thousands of residents were left without heat or electricity amid near-freezing temperatures.
With Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy saying Russia launched nearly 500 drones overnight—many of them Iranian-designed Shahed drones—along with around 40 missiles, including hypersonic Kinzhals. The primary targets were Kyiv’s energy facilities and civilian infrastructure.
“Regrettably, there have been hits, and ordinary residential buildings have been damaged,” Zelenskyy said in a statement posted on X. Rescuers were still searching for at least one person believed to be trapped under rubble. In several districts of the capital and surrounding region, electricity and heating remained unavailable as emergency crews worked under ongoing air-raid alerts.
Zelenskyy framed the assault as Russia’s answer to recent international peace overtures.
“There have been many questions over the past few days—so where is Russia’s response to the proposals to end the war offered by the United States and the world?” he said. “Russian representatives engage in lengthy talks, but in reality, Kinzhals and ‘Shaheds’ speak for them.”
The Ukrainian president accused Russian President Vladimir Putin and his inner circle of having no genuine interest in ending the war, arguing that Moscow is instead using diplomacy as cover while escalating attacks designed to inflict maximum suffering.
“If Russia turns even the Christmas and New Year period into a time of destroyed homes and ruined power plants, then this sick activity can only be responded to with truly strong steps,” Zelenskyy said, calling on the United States, Europe, and allies to intensify pressure and accelerate air-defense support.
Yet just hours later, Zelenskyy struck a noticeably different tone following meetings with U.S. President Donald Trump, thanking him and his team for what he described as constructive negotiations.
“I thank President Trump and his team for the negotiations,” Zelenskyy wrote. “Together, we must—and can—implement our vision for the sequencing of steps toward peace.”
Also saying “Thank you to President Trump for the wonderful meeting. We had a meaningful discussion on all issues and highly appreciate the progress achieved by the Ukrainian and American teams over the past weeks. Special thanks to Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner for their engagement and full commitment to the cause, as well as to our team, primarily Rustem Umerov and Andriy Hnatov.”
Trump, speaking after meetings at Mar-a-Lago, offered an upbeat assessment of the talks, saying a deal was “maybe very close.” He said he had spoken with Putin for more than two hours prior to meeting Zelenskyy and claimed the Russian leader expressed a strong desire to reach an agreement.
“He told me very strongly,” Trump said of Putin. “I believe him.”
However, the optimism appeared premature. Reports indicated that a joint U.S.-Ukraine framework remained incomplete, with Russia rejecting several core proposals. Trump himself acknowledged lingering obstacles, echoing familiar language he has used throughout the conflict.
“There are one or two very thorny issues,” Trump said. “Very tough issues. But I think we’re doing very well.”
He added that clarity would emerge soon—another timeline critics say has repeatedly failed to materialize.
“In a few weeks, we’ll know one way or another,” Trump said. “It’s possible it doesn’t happen.”
One of the most contentious unresolved issues remains the territory. Asked directly what stood in the way of an agreement, Trump pointed to land occupied by Russian forces. With CNBC reporting,
“Some of that land has been taken,” he said. “Some of that land is maybe up for grabs, but it may be taken over the next period of a number of months, and you are better off making a deal now.”
That issue is one Zelenskyy has consistently refused to bend on, often stating that he has no authority to do so under Ukraine’s constitution. The Ukrainian president has repeatedly ruled out surrendering territory, saying he has “no right” to give up land under either Ukrainian or international law. Kyiv has instead said it is prepared to propose alternative arrangements.
Zelenskyy’s stance comes as Ukraine continues to grapple with internal challenges, including ongoing corruption concerns, even as the war drags on with no clear end in sight. While territorial concessions remain a red line, Zelenskyy has previously floated ideas aimed at reducing hostilities without formally ceding land.
As part of his current peace plan,Zelenskyy has suggested the creation of a demilitarized free economic zone in contested areas. Speaking to reporters earlier this week, he said such a zone could require the withdrawal of heavy forces by an agreed distance.
“If we establish a free economic zone here, and it envisages a virtually demilitarized zone—meaning heavy forces are removed from this area—and the distance, for example, is 40 kilometers, it could be five, 10, or 40 kilometers,” Zelenskyy said. “Then if these two cities, Kramatorsk and Sloviansk, are our free economic zone, the Russians would have to pull back their troops accordingly.”
Zelenskyy, meanwhile, said he requested security guarantees lasting up to 50 years, describing discussions on that front as “100% agreed.” Trump offered a more cautious assessment, suggesting the guarantees were still under negotiation.
As Russian missiles continued to strike Ukrainian cities, the contrast between diplomatic rhetoric and battlefield reality remained stark. While Trump projected confidence that peace may be within reach, Kyiv once again faced burning apartments, shattered infrastructure, and a winter night without heat—underscoring how far any deal may still be from the ground truth of the war.
So much for a president who boasted about ending wars—specifically claiming he would end the Ukraine conflict within 24 hours, before taking office, or on “day one.” When President Donald Trump was reminded of those promises in an April interview with Time magazine, he said the remark was never meant to be taken literally. And CNN found 53 other times that president stated this as a fact.
“Well, I said that figuratively, and I said that as an exaggeration, because to make a point,” Trump said, according to Time’s transcript. He added that the comment was “said in jest,” while maintaining that the war would still ultimately be ended. Heres hoping that the war will end soon, but with the three leaders seemingly entrenched in their positions, that hope may prove fleeting.
Here is the wrap-up from the two leaders, with Donald Trump praising those in the audience possible war criminal Pete Hegseth and Marco Rubio, who is leading the neocon push back into “forever wars” and supporting Trump’s aggressive foreign policy. The same man Rubio once called a “peacemaker” is now actively bombing nine countries. I wrote about this the other day. Here is their press conference—believe what you want—but with this president, the approach can change day to day. At least, for now, the war has not gone nuclear.
Why talk of a Japanese nuclear option is resurfacing – and why it alarms critics
Conservatives are calling for a rethink of nuclear taboos, while critics warn of risks to the global non-proliferation regime
Julian Ryall, SCMP,3 Jan 2026
An editorial in the Sankei Shimbun has reopened a long-taboo debate in Japan over whether the country should even discuss acquiring nuclear weapons, after off-the-record remarks by a senior security official arguing the country should have them sparked domestic and regional backlash.
The conservative daily argued that growing threats from Japan’s neighbours mean no option for protecting the public should be beyond discussion, a stance that has drawn praise from some on the right and alarm from critics who warn that even signalling such intent could destabilise the global non-proliferation system.
The editorial, published on Monday, was accompanied by a graphic comparing regional nuclear forces, stating that Russia has an estimated 5,580 nuclear warheads, North Korea around 50 and China about 500, with the latter figure projected to rise to more than 1,000 by 2030.
It appeared 10 days after the senior national security official in the Prime Minister’s Office said – in an off-the-record remark reported by Japanese media during a background briefing – that he personally believed Japan should possess nuclear weapons.
The remarks prompted a fierce reaction at home and abroad, including from Beijing, where Guo Jiakun, a spokesperson for China’s foreign ministry, told reporters the situation was a “serious issue that exposes the dangerous attempts by some in Japan to breach international law and possess nuclear weapons”.
“China and the rest of the international community must stay on high alert and express grave concern,” he added.
Japan has for decades adhered to its three non-nuclear principles – not possessing, producing or permitting the introduction of nuclear weapons – while relying on the United States for extended deterrence and is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which commits non-nuclear states to forgo developing or acquiring nuclear arms.
The Sankei editorial urged Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi not to “give in” to calls for the aide to be dismissed, arguing that doing so would “stifle free debate on how best to protect the Japanese people”.
It dismissed objections from China and North Korea as “ludicrous” and “hypocritical”, noting that both possessed nuclear weapons and were strengthening their arsenals.
“For Japan, the point of the debate is how to safeguard the public, not merely whether or not to actually possess nuclear weapons,” it added. “From that standpoint, making it taboo to merely mention the nuclear weapons option is the worst possible stance to adopt.”………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3338570/why-talk-japanese-nuclear-option-resurfacing-and-why-it-alarms-critics
1 This Month
Tell the Ukrainian Government to Drop Prosecution of Peace Activist Yurii Sheliazhenko
Petition to revoke the licensing of the Near Surface Nuclear Disposal Facility (NSDF) at Chalk River. https://www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-7247
of the week – STOP SMALL MODULAR REACTORS IN CANADA
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- March 2026 (204)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
-
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 