Russia-US nuclear pact set to end in 2026 and we won’t see another
After the New START treaty expires in February, there will be no cap on the number of US and Russian nuclear weapons – but some are sceptical about whether the deal actually made the world safer
By Matthew Sparkes, New Scientist, 30 December 2025
In February 2026, for the first time in decades, there will be no active treaty limiting the size of the US and Russian nuclear arsenals. Experts are divided on whether the New START treaty genuinely made the world safer, but there is far more agreement on one thing: a replacement is unlikely.
The US and Russia first agreed to place limits on their nuclear weapons and allow each to inspect the other’s stockpiles with the START I treaty in 1991, and this was succeeded by New START in 2011. In 2021, Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin agreed to extend the treaty by five years. It is now due to expire on 5 February and talks on a replacement have faltered………………….(Subscribers only) https://www.newscientist.com/article/2504635-russia-us-nuclear-pact-set-to-end-in-2026-and-we-wont-see-another/
Israel And Its Supporters Deliberately Foment Hate And Division In Our Society
Caitlin Johnstone, Jan 03, 2026, https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/israel-and-its-supporters-deliberately?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=183299564&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
I’ve noticed a lot of angry comments underneath my posts these past few days which bizarrely mention the words “Islam” and “Muslims” completely out of the blue.
“Why don’t you turn your attention sometimes to the genocidal intent of the radical Muslims, or does that suit your racist narrative?” reads one tweet.
“What can you say about Islamic Jihadists Muslims murdering thousands of Christians in Sudan and other parts of Africa?” reads another.
“The muslims must be irradicated,” reads another.
There are too many examples to quote here, but here’s what’s so funny about all this: I haven’t been saying anything about Islam or Muslims on Twitter — I’ve been tweeting about Israel. Hasbarists just babble about Islam when they can’t defend Israel’s actions.
It is not a coincidence that they’ve been doing this. In September of last year Drop Site News published a leaked polling report that had been commissioned by the Israeli government which found that while Israel’s reputation is crumbling throughout the western world, one way to salvage it would be to foment panic about Muslims.
Drop Site reports the following:
“Israel’s best tactic to combat this, according to the study, is to foment fear of ‘Radical Islam’ and ‘Jihadism,’ which remain high, the research finds. By highlighting Israeli support for women’s rights and gay rights while elevating concerns that Hamas wants to ‘destroy all Jews and spread Jihadism,’ Israeli support rebounded by an average of over 20 points in each country. ‘Especially once the situation in Gaza is resolved, the room for growth in all countries is very significant,’ the report concludes.”
So if you speak critically about Israel online and suddenly find your replies inundated with Zionists shrieking about Islam and Muslims, that’s why. Their research has concluded that convincing westerners to hate Muslims is easier than convincing them to love Israel.
In addition to committing genocide and starting wars and working to stomp out free speech throughout the western world, Israel is also doing everything it can to make our society more racist and hateful. A foreign state is actively fomenting division and discord in western countries, in exactly the way western empire apologists claimed Putin was doing at the height of Russia hysteria. But because it’s a western “ally”, nothing is being done to stop it.
In addition to being evil and disgusting, this tactic is also just sloppy argumentation. Deflection is the lowest form of argument. Even if Islam really was as dangerous as they pretend it is and even if Muslims really did present a threat to our society, pointing this out would not address a single criticism of Israel. Yelling “Muslims bad!” does not magically erase Israel’s abuses or address the grievances of its critics; it just diverts attention to another target and says “Stop looking at Israel’s actions and hate THOSE people instead!”
Mention Israel and you’ll get hasbarists babbling about Islam, but Islam and Israel are not opposites, and the mention of one has no bearing on the other. One is a worldwide religion with nearly two billion adherents, while the other is a genocidal apartheid state. Framing the issue as a conflict between two diametrically opposed parties is a false dichotomy created by propagandists and manipulators.
And that’s exactly the false dichotomy Netanyahu is trying to feed into when he tells Americans that Israel is in an alliance with Christianity against “radical Shiite Islam” and “radical Sunni Islam,” calling it “our common Judeo-Christian civilization’s battle.” He’s working to foment fear of Islam among Americans to boost support for Israel.
All this to manufacture consent for human butchery and apartheid. Israel could improve its support among westerners by simply ending its genocidal atrocities in Gaza and ceasing to try to start a war between the US and Iran, but instead it’s working around the clock to foment racism and division while demanding increased censorship and authoritarianism to stomp out pro-Palestine sentiment throughout western society.
Israel is doing this because it cannot exist in its present iteration as a state without nonstop violence and abuse. Under the political ideology known as Zionism, peace, justice, truth and freedom are simply not an option.
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.
DePetris’ Trump foreign policy accomplishments more dubious than prideful
Walt Zlotow… West Suburban Peace Coalition Glen Ellyn IL 3 Jan 26
In his Chicago Tribune foreign policy commentary ‘The foreign policy moves Donald Trump got right this year’, Daniel DePetris largely ignores reality.
He praises Trump for brokering the November 10 ceasefire agreement in Gaza without mentioning that for nearly 10 months Trump provided Israel with billions in weapons to complete the obliteration of Gaza’s 139 square miles. With over 100,000 dead and the remaining 2,200,000 Palestinians facing death from forced starvation and withdrawal of medicine, the world rightly calls Israeli US policy a genocide. So yes, DePetris is correct to call Trump’s slowing down Israel’s ferocious genocide thru ceasefire “preferable” to its continuance. But pretending Trump is simply a neutral peace broker of the US enabled Israeli genocide is deplorable.
DePetris is also correct to praise Trump for seeking to broker an end to the Russo Ukraine war. But in claiming the biggest obstacle with Trump’s diplomacy is Trump’s “wild inconsistency”, DePetris misses a far greater obstacle: Russia and Ukraine’s diametrically opposed and irreconcilable goals to end the war. That makes Trump’s sincere efforts at peace daunting, if not impossible. At this stage, it is nowhere near an accomplishment.
DePetris whiffs on his third claimed Trump foreign policy accomplishment, the overthrow of the Syrian Bashar Assad regime, replaced by former al-Qaeda terrorist Ahmad al-Sharaa.
DePetris, like Trump, rehabilitates a US enemy dedicated to killing Americans in Iraq in his previous life. Why? Because al-Sharaa deposed the hated Assad whom the US sought to oust since the 2011 Syrian civil war to remove one of Israel’s regional enemies. This had nothing to do with uplifting the Syrian people. Indeed, the billions in weapons America poured into the Syrian civil war was responsible for much of the hundreds of thousands of deaths DePetris attributes solely to Assad. With the secular Assad gone, Syria’s Christians, Alawites, and others not part of al Sharaa’s extremist religious base are suffering horribly. Their fate was never a concern of Trump and his champion DePetris who view the destabilization of Syria as a US win for expanded Israeli Middle East hegemony.
Chicago Tribune’s readers deserve more than a sanitized view of Trump’s machinations in Gaza, Ukraine and Syria. They deserve the truth.
Venezuela declares state of emergency, calls for international solidarity
January 4, 2026, https://gpja.org.nz/2026/01/04/venezuela-declares-state-of-emergency-calls-for-international-solidarity/
Editor’s note: The following is the official communiqué issued by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela on January 3, 2026, in response to U.S. military strikes on Caracas and surrounding areas. President Trump announced the operation on social media early Saturday morning, claiming the capture of President Nicolás Maduro. International reactions have been swift, with Russia, Iran, China, Cuba, Colombia, Chile, Mexico, Brazil, and Belarus condemning the strikes. UN special rapporteur Ben Saul called it “illegal aggression” and an “illegal abduction.” Venezuela has requested an emergency UN Security Council meeting.
COMMUNIQUÉ
BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF VENEZUELA
The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela rejects, condemns, and denounces to the international community the grave military aggression perpetrated by the current government of the United States of America against Venezuelan territory and population in civilian and military localities 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, particularly its Articles 1 and 2, which enshrine respect for sovereignty, the legal 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 gravely endangers the lives of millions of people.
The objective of this attack is none other than to seize Venezuela’s strategic resources, in particular its oil and minerals, attempting to forcibly break the political independence of the nation. They shall not succeed. After more than two hundred years of independence, the people and their legitimate government remain steadfast in defense of sovereignty and the inalienable right to decide their own 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 as all previous attempts have.
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 spirit of Bolívar, Miranda, and our liberators, the Venezuelan people rise once again to defend their independence against imperial aggression.
To the Streets, People
The Bolivarian government calls upon all social and political forces of the country to activate mobilization plans and repudiate this imperialist attack. The people of Venezuela and its Bolivarian National Armed Forces, in perfect popular-military-police fusion, are deployed to guarantee sovereignty and peace.
Simultaneously, Bolivarian Peace Diplomacy will submit the corresponding denunciations before the United Nations Security Council, the Secretary-General of said organization, CELAC, and the NAM, demanding condemnation and accountability from the United States government.
President Nicolás Maduro has directed all national defense plans to be implemented at the appropriate time and under appropriate 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 on 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 activate to defeat this imperialist aggression.
Likewise, he has ordered the immediate deployment of the Command for the Comprehensive Defense of the Nation and the Comprehensive Defense Directional Organs 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 upon 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, however great they may be, the response of all patriots… is unity, struggle, battle, and victory.”
Caracas, January 3, 2026
WE’LL CONTROL THE OIL! — TRUMP BOASTS AFTER SECRET RAID AS WASHINGTON POST CHEERS ARREST.
“we went from the world cop to the world bully in less than one year. There is no reason for us to be at war with Venezuela.”
January 3, 2026 , By Joshua Scheer, https://scheerpost.com/2026/01/03/well-control-the-oil-trump-boasts-after-secret-raid-as-washington-post-cheers-arrest/
In a reprehensible editorial, The Washington Post praised the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, calling the U.S.-led operation as “Justice in Venezuela” saying it was “one of the boldest moves by a president in recent years” and a tactical success. According to reports, the mission in Caracas involved airstrikes followed by a Delta Force operation that apprehended Maduro and his wife, who have been extradited to the U.S. to face charges including narcoterrorism, weapons violations, and drug crimes—all with no American casualties. The editorial argued that removing Maduro would weaken the influence of authoritarian allies such as Russia, China, Cuba, and Iran in the region and send a strong message to other dictators.
The piece also noted that the next challenge is ensuring stability and a democratic transition in Venezuela, highlighting opposition leader María Corina Machado and her “Freedom Manifesto” as a potential path forward. At the same time, the editorial acknowledged the uncertainty of outcomes, warning that a power vacuum or a new authoritarian leader could emerge if a clear transition plan is not implemented.
Machado was quoted as saying the opposition is “prepared to take power,” though no specifics regarding a transition plan have been released.
Nobel Peace Prize laureate Machado, who has been in hiding since Maduro’s disputed reelection in July 2024, said in a post on X that opposition candidate Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia, whom the opposition says won the vote, “must immediately assume his constitutional mandate” as president. and that “Venezuelans, the hour of freedom has arrived.”
Not everyone welcomed the operation. Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, a Democratic member of the House Intelligence Committee, criticized the attack and said Secretary of State Marco Rubio had “repeatedly denied to Congress” that the administration intended to “force regime change in Venezuela.” Himes added, “Maduro is an illegitimate ruler, but I have seen no evidence that his presidency poses a threat that would justify military action without Congressional authorization, nor have I heard a strategy for the day after and how we will prevent Venezuela from descending into chaos.”
Others highlight the split between the GOP and the Democrats.
“Nicolás Maduro wasn’t just an illegitimate dictator; he also ran a vast drug‑trafficking operation,” tweeted Sen. Tom Cotton, defending the mission and saying he commends Trump and U.S. forces.
The split was evident at first with Utah Senator Mike Lee. Notably, the Republican initially seemed critical of the action being taken without congressional authorization.
“I look forward to learning what, if anything, might constitutionally justify this action in the absence of a declaration of war or authorization for the use of military force,” Lee posted on X.
However, Lee later followed up, saying he had spoken by phone with Rubio and was now comfortable with the administration’s authority to take action. Because the administration is framing this not as a war but as a police action to arrest a fugitive, Lee said he believes it would be permissible under the president’s current authority. I wonder we have heard that term police action before?
From the Democratic side, the sentiment was nearly unanimous.
“Without authorization from Congress … Trump just launched an unjustified, illegal strike on Venezuela,” Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern wrote on social media, highlighting a lack of legislative approval.
“Second unjustified war in my life time,” Arizona Democratic Sen. Ruben Gallego, on X shortly after 3 a.m. Saturday. “This war is illegal, it’s embarrassing that we went from the world cop to the world bully in less than one year. There is no reason for us to be at war with Venezuela.”
Sen Andy Kim writing on X: “Secretaries Rubio and Hegseth looked every Senator in the eye a few weeks ago and said this wasn’t about regime change. I didn’t trust them then and we see now that they blatantly lied to Congress.”
Others Democrats, including Rep. Yvette Clarke and Rep. Rashida Tlaib, called the operation “unconstitutional,” “un‑American,” and a “direct threat to our democracy,” arguing that the administration bypassed Congress.
The president spoke about a great many things, including taking over the country, which again would fall in line with the concept of the historic police action that took place in Southeast Asia. As Gallego said, this may be the second illegal war in our lifetime; it is certainly not the only two that the United States has been involved in.
As Trump said, he’s not afraid of putting boots on the ground.
Trump had the gall to say today that his administration will make the people of Venezuela “rich, independent, and safe.” But he doesn’t mean most people—the poor and working-class citizens whom the socialist government represents. He means the oligarchs: the wealthy and powerful few. Trump is clearly the leader of the oligarchs, so this isn’t surprising—yet it is still deeply sickening.
Of course, this feels a lot like George W. Bush’s horrific war in Iraq, which was more about the pride of a leader whose father couldn’t topple Saddam Hussein. In this case, it seems driven by Rubio’s long-standing fantasy of a life in Cuba, surrounded by the wealth of oligarchs—something his family could have aspired to. Now, he is helping push a new Monroe Doctrine and supporting the rise of right-wing forces in Latin America.
Regarding oil, many in 2003 foolishly claimed that oil profits would cover the costs of the Iraq War. In the lead-up to the invasion, U.S. officials expressed strong confidence that Iraq could finance its own reconstruction, largely through its vast oil reserves and other national assets. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld emphasized that American taxpayers would not be the primary source of funding, pointing instead to Iraq’s own resources and potential international contributions. Similarly, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz assured Congress that Iraq could fund its recovery “relatively soon,” citing the wealth of the Iraqi people. Kenneth Pollack, a former National Security Council official, dismissed the idea of massive U.S. expenditures as “unimaginable,” suggesting that even tens of billions of dollars in spending would be “highly unlikely.” These statements collectively painted a picture of Iraq as a “very wealthy country,” with officials expressing little doubt that it could largely finance the reconstruction of its own nation.
On the parallels between Iraq and Venezuela, I’ll leave this to former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, as quoted in Ron Suskind’s book about Paul O’Neill. Advocating “going after Saddam” during the January 30 meeting, Rumsfeld said, according to O’Neill:
“Imagine what the region would look like without Saddam and with a regime that’s aligned with U.S. interests. It would change everything in the region and beyond. It would demonstrate what U.S. policy is all about”
Exactly, Donald—the empire was always the goal. The idea of democracy was just a shield to make us seem less evil than those who came before, especially our original colonial parent the English. But now the veil is off: we are brazenly invading countries and claiming what belongs to them as our own. I’ve written before—may the empire end, hopefully peacefully, though most likely it will not.
However, in another display of both war talk and regime change, the president said he’s not afraid of boots on the ground, since they have already been there. So if the people of Venezuela resist, as they have promised, and your justification for a fugitive is now gone, what will you do? Ironically, this is from The Washington Post, but as a member of Congress once told me, you need to read the paper daily to know what the CIA and the policy establishment think.
About oil, the war, and the current situation. As of now Chevron is currently the only global oil company with access to Venezuela’s vast reserves.
As Bloomberg’s Kevin Crowley noted last month, the company occupies a unique position: it has faced criticism in the U.S. for continuing to operate in the country, while some members of Venezuela’s ruling party view it as a symbol of American imperialism. Chevron has been able to maintain its presence thanks to special licenses that allow it to operate despite U.S. sanctions.
Venezuela once played a central role in global oil markets, supplying the U.S. with large volumes of crude and standing as an oil powerhouse. Today, however, it accounts for less than 1% of global oil supplies—less than fellow OPEC member Libya.
However, don’t expect a rapid recovery in Venezuelan oil production—whether or not the U.S. is heavily involved. History shows that violent regime changes rarely encourage inward investment. Fourteen years after Muammar Qaddafi’s removal, Libya’s oil production remains about 25% below its pre-war level. In Iraq, where the U.S. had a major administrative role after toppling Saddam Hussein, it took 12 years for oil production to return to pre-war levels—and much of the new production came from Chinese companies rather than U.S. firms.
Trump said today that “we will control those Venezuelan oil fields.” Let’s see, sir. It’s not nearly as easy as you think. Based on the history of wars that involve oil.
More notes from the presidents speech
Rubio discussed today why Congress was not informed, claiming that this was not a war but rather a Justice Department arrest, and that the individual in question is a fugitive of American justice.
He described the situation as a “president of action,” saying, “I don’t know how we haven’t figured this out. Marco, we have figured it out. The president is a man of action, and he—and this neocon-aligned regime—need to go. Sadly with The Washington Post pushing its editorial agenda, alternative media is essential, because the mainstream press is controlled by you and your oligarch allies. Of course so is social media and almost everything else, I would hope—but not hold my breath—that the same Democrats who are criticizing today’s events would also ensure we have a free and fair media. Yet many in this Congress supported President Biden when he pushed for the forced sale of TikTok to Larry Ellison, so…
Keep hope alive
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.
How are geological repository projects progressing?
COMMENT. This story is from the nuclear industry’s online publication “World Nuclear News”, so important to recognize that there is a bias throughout. And errors. For example, it erroneously describes the Nuclear Waste Management Organization as a government agency.
By Alex Hunt, World Nuclear News, in Vienna, Sunday, 28 December 2025
A growing number of countries are planning a permanent solution to the issue of radioactive waste by burying it deep underground. Schemes take many years to plan, and many more years to build, but progress is being made.
Setting the scene: Why deep geological repository projects matter
A deep geological repository comprises a network of highly-engineered underground vaults and tunnels built to permanently dispose of higher activity radioactive waste so that no harmful levels of radiation ever reach the surface environment. They need to be located deep enough, and in suitable geological conditions, to ensure they will be safely secured for thousands of centuries.
The disposal of used nuclear fuel and other high-level waste has long been a pressing issue in terms of the perceived sustainability of nuclear energy programmes. For many decades this material has been stored [?]safely in pools or special containers and facilities at surface, or near-surface, locations, often close by nuclear power plants. These are seen as interim storage measures pending a permanent solution.
Hildegarde Vandenhove, Director of the IAEA Division of Radiation Safety, Transport and Waste Safety…………..” developing these facilities is a long and a complex process. It requires rigorous studies and extensive safety demonstrations. These are all first-of-a-kind facilities, and their construction takes time.“
The process of selecting a site, and getting approval for it, takes decades, with Anna Clark, head of the Waste and Environmental Safety Section in the Division of Radiation Transport and Waste Safety at the IAEA, saying that “before operations can begin, there’s a lengthy pre-operational phase with conceptual design, the planning, the surveys, the site investigations, site selection, narrowing down the number of sites, doing detailed characterisation of your preferred site, it’s a long process before you even begin with the licensing of construction. And throughout that period, the safety case evolves and the role of the regulator also evolves, and the regulators have to adapt their expertise and knowledge as they go”.
Canada
Colin Moses, Vice-President, Regulatory Affairs, and Chief Communications Officer at the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, outlined the status of the country’s deep geological repository which, he noted, started being discussed in the 1970s. It is being taken forward by the Nuclear Waste Management Organization, a government agency fully funded by the producers of waste with a mandate to determine and find and build and operate a long-term solution for disposal of used fuel in Canada.
Its concept is for a “geosphere which forms a natural barrier of rock to protect the waste from disruptive natural events, water flow and human intrusion”.
The current status is that Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation and the Township of Ignace were selected in November 2024 as the host communities for the proposed repository, following a consent-based siting process that had begun some 14 years earlier. Pre-licensing activities, including stakeholder engagement, pre-environmental assessment and technical reviews, have been taking place.
Construction of the facility will only begin once the deep geological repository has successfully completed the federal government’s multi-year regulatory process and the Indigenous-led Regulatory Assessment and Approval Process, a sovereign regulatory process that will be developed and implemented by Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation.
The Nuclear Waste Management Organization explored more than 20 different potential locations in Canada looking for local communities to raise their hand and express an interest in potentially hosting the repository, with the last decade spent refining that list down to the one preferred site.
Moses said he was expecting the formal regulatory process to begin this year and “will play out over several years, looking to give an initial decision in 2030. That will allow them to advance construction in 2032, move into operation in 2042 and ultimately to operate that facility for many decades, expecting a current closure date of 2092”.
and ultimately to operate that facility for many decades, expecting a current closure date of 2092″.
“So this is a project that’s playing out over multiple decades and has spent multiple decades getting ready.”
Finland
Progress is furthest advanced with Finland’s Onkalo project. Petteri Tiippana, Director General of the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority of Finland (STUK) outlined the concept, which is a repository in crystalline rock with used fuel in copper canisters surrounded by a bentonite buffer at a depth of 400-430 metres.
For Finland, which is currently in the process of commissioning the deep geological repository, the process began in the 1980s with the then government setting a target for operation in the 2020s. Pre-licensing activities started almost immediately, Tiippana said, in terms of research and design and for the concept, with actual licensing steps beginning in the early 2000s with a site selection. A construction licence was issued in 2015.
Currently the encapsulation plant has been commissioned and tested the dummy fuel elements in five canisters and transported them to the underground facility. The next phase will be to “test the underground facility and the final disposal of those five copper cases”. He said that the reviewing of safety documentation is approaching its final stages and the aim is for a decision next year, with operations then starting.
See how Finland’s project will work:
France
France plans to construct the Centre Industriel de Stockage Géologique (Cigéo) repository – an underground system of disposal tunnels – in a natural layer of clay near Bure, to the east of Paris in the Meuse/Haute Marne area. The plan is to dispose of 10,000 cubic metres of high level waste and 75,000 cubic metres of intermediate-level waste.
Jean-Luc Lachaume, Commissioner of the French Authority for Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection (ASNR), said that, as with other countries, there had been decades of work already on developing the repository, with parliamentary debates about it beginning in the 1980s, before a decision 20 years ago to go ahead with a deep geological repository.
The milestone of the construction licence application being submitted happened in 2023, since when it has been under review. A technical review was completed in June and ASNR issued a favourable opinion on the application earlier this month.
This will be followed by the consultation phase and public inquiry in 2026 and a potential licence granting in 2027 or 2028, with a target first operation of the pilot phase in 2035.
Sweden
A site has been selected at Fosmark, 150 kilometres north of Stockholm. Surface works have been taking place and the application to start underground excavation was submitted in January 2025 and is currently being considered. The concept for Sweden is the repository to be at a depth of 500 metres, in crystalline rock, with copper canisters each surrounded by bentonite clay to keep groundwater away from the canister and to provide a barrier to any potential leakage of radioactive material.
As with all countries, there has been decades of preparation and discussion, with regulatory licensing reviews and court hearings from 2011 to 2018 prior to government approval being issued in 2022……………………………..
Switzerland
Switzerland is in the final stage of the site selection process, which began in 2008, with national and international participation. The plan is for a combined repository for high- low- and Intermediate-level waste, with a general licence application submitted and due to be considered by 2027 with a government decision targeted for 2029.
Marc Kenzelmann, Director General of the Swiss Federal Nuclear Safety Inspectorate, outlined the background to the site selection, noting that Switzerland was a country about 7% the size of Texas, with two thirds of its area covered in mountains, so unusable for a high-level waste repository because the Alps could rise by a kilometre over the next million years, which is “the time frame that we have set for a safe, deep geological repository. So the Alps have an active geology, but what we need is a boring geology”.
This has meant that the location search was focused on the area near to the German border, so “we have involved Germany from the very start of the selection process”. He said that one issue was making sure to take the time and effort to build up stakeholder trust. In their case there have also been some unique differences of public opinion, with “Swiss people generally less concerned than German people” about the issue.
In November 2024 Switzerland’s national radioactive waste disposal cooperative Nagra applied to the Swiss Federal Office of Energy for a general permit for the construction of the planned deep geological repository for radioactive waste at Nördlich Lägern in northern Switzerland, and a used nuclear fuel encapsulation plant at the existing Zwilag interim storage facility in Würenlingen in the canton of Aargau.
According to current planning, the Federal Council will decide on the application in 2029 and Parliament in 2030. A national referendum is expected to take place in 2031.
Once the general authorisation for the repository comes into force, geological studies will be carried out underground in the area of implantation (through the creation of an underground laboratory), with the aim of acquiring more in-depth knowledge with a view to the construction of the repository. The application for a building permit, then later the application for an operating permit, can then be submitted. According to current planning, the repository could come into operation and the first radioactive waste could be stored there from 2050.
The USA
Yucca Mountain has since 1987 been named in the US Nuclear Waste Policy Act as the sole initial repository for disposal of the country’s used nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive wastes. The DOE submitted a construction licence application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2008, but the Obama Administration subsequently decided to abort the project and there have been various twists and turns since then, with the upshot that it has not been built.
Mike King, Executive Director for Operations at the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said the current status of its high-level waste disposal programme is that NRC staff had reviewed the US Department of Energy’s application for a repository at Yucca Mountain and staff completed its Safety Evaluation Report more than a decade ago and concluded it met safety standards “however there were two remaining environmental and programmatic pull points that prevented the final authorisation” and since 2016 funding has been halted and there are no activities taking place on it other than record-keeping, and the licensing process is currently suspended.
The general thrust of the discussion was that there needs to be a clear delineation of responsibilities for the project, with long-term planning and clear public consultation and decision-making processes to ensure there is community trust in the decision making process……………………………………………https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/how-are-geological-repository-projects-progressing
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
Three things ICAN is looking forward to in 2026
3 Jan 2026, https://www.icanw.org/2026_3_things_anticipating
As 2026 begins, nuclear risks and the false myths about nuclear deterrence on the rise. ICAN, working with countries and partners across continents, are challenging nuclear weapons and taking our work to the next level. Here are three things we’re looking forward to this year:
Celebrating five years of the nuclear ban treaty
On 22 January, we’ll mark five years since nuclear weapons officially became illegal under international law. That’s not symbolic — it’s transformative.
ICAN and partners around the world will commemorate the moment that nuclear weapons finally became illegal. With celebrations, seminars, screenings, actions and activism across the globe. This anniversary is a chance to reflect on how far we’ve come — and to build momentum for the work ahead. The ban treaty has changed the global conversation. Now we’re making sure it changes reality.
Evidence for action: exposing the myths of nuclear deterrence
Nuclear deterrence is built on theory. Our campaign is built on facts.
Throughout the year, we’ll be working with our partners, scientists, health experts, economists and governments to make one truth unavoidable: any use of nuclear weapons would be catastrophic.
The evidence is clear. Nuclear weapons:
- threaten public health
- destabilise societies
- devastate ecosystems and undermine food systems
- have consequences that would last for decades.
We’ll use this evidence to challenge decision-makers, dismantle dangerous deterrence myths, and demand an end to the billions spent on weapons that put all life on Earth at risk.
Diplomacy that protects people, not power
Real security doesn’t come from weapons of mass destruction. It comes from negotiation and cooperation.
ICAN is working closely with governments that support the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) to ensure diplomacy in 2026 reduces nuclear risks and advances disarmament. With two major nuclear weapons treaties under review, we’ll seize opportunities to:
- strengthen global norms against nuclear weapons
- hold governments accountable to their commitments
- push disarmament from words into action
Alongside these milestones, we’ll also publish impactful and informative reports, amplify survivor voices, engage media worldwide and support our partners.
The risks around nuclear weapons are growing, making our work to educate, empower and act together more urgent than ever.
WHAT CHAOS WILL TRUMP UNLEASH IN 2026?
The evidence of 2025 suggests a president who is alternately reckless and bored
Seymour Hersh, Jan 03, 2026
One of my favorite anecdotes occurred sometime after 9/11 when Tony Blair, the prime minister of Great Britain, joined in with America’s declaration of war against terrorism. The brilliant playwright Harold Pinter, who would be a bitter and prolific critic of the ensuing war, was invited to respond before the House of Commons. He began his talk with a tale from British history during a wave of terror in Ireland.
“There’s an old story about Oliver Cromwell. After he had taken the town of Drogheda, the citizens were brought to the main square. Cromwell announced to his lieutenants: ‘Right! Kill all the women and rape all the men.’ One of his aides said: ‘Excuse me, General. Isn’t it the other way around?’ A voice from the crowd called out: ‘Mr. Cromwell knows what he is doing!’”
In Pinter’s telling, the voice of support from the crowd was Blair’s. Today it could and would come from the lips of Vance, Bondi, Hegseth, or Noem. Never has a modern American president been surrounded by such self-important sycophants and a Republican-led Congress with little gumption. Trump’s lack of interest in nonmilitary briefing papers and his obsession with social and political gossip has moved from information known by a few to standard operating procedure………………….(Subscribers only) https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/what-chaos-will-trump-unleash-in?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1377040&post_id=183249150&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ln98x&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
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.
1 This Month
Website of the Week
New book – https://www.amazon.com/dp/1923372157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- January 2026 (106)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
-
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 