Tag: nato

Trump ambassador vows NATO-like reforms to UN after terror scandal: ‘Clean this place up’

President Donald Trump’s ambassador to the United Nations is vowing to force a massive reform at the global agency, pledging to slim it down through privatization and create more accountability in the wake of revelations that one of its relief agencies in Gaza funded employees who participated in the 2023 terrorist attack in Israel.

“The charge from the president is to clean this place up and get it working for the American people,” U.N. Ambassador Mike Waltz said Thursday night in a wide-ranging interview on the Just the News, No Noise television show that focused on ending abuses and fraud in American foreign aid.

“What President Trump has done with NATO, we’re looking to do to the United Nations,” he added.

Waltz sharply criticized the Biden administration for turning a blind eye to fraud across America’s multibillion foreign aid system and specifically for re-funding the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) despite evidence of close ties to the terror group Hamas.

Trump ended funding for UNRWA after taking office in 2025, and the USAID inspector general revealed last month that more than 100 workers funded by UNRWA have been identified as having participated in the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas atrocities in Israel.

Waltz said those revelations are a wakeup call for the world that the U.N. is not serving its charter, and the Trump administration has already forced significant changes in recent months.

“We forced them to take their first budget cut ever in their 80-year history. They are going to fire 3,000 U.N. bureaucrats out of the headquarters building in New York. We’re going to get more of our aid dollars,” he said. “…And then there’s 90,000 U.N. peacekeepers around the world. We’ve cut 25% of them. So we put the U.N. on a diet.”

Waltz said the next round of reforms that the U.S. will force as the largest contributor to the U.N. will be modeled after Trump’s effort to make European allies pick up a greater share of the NATO burden.

“The American people are generous people when it comes to tsunamis or earthquakes, like we just had in Venezuela, or other types of famine. But we need to know that it’s not filtering through a bloated bureaucracy; that it’s actually getting to people in need,” he said. “We’re making it leaner and more focused.”

“I think people rightly ask why we’re even involved at all. I say two things. Number one, you need one place in the world where everyone can talk, and if we just walk out, I don’t want to see the U.N. in Beijing or Brussels or somewhere else, we need to get in there and fight and win for American interests,” Waltz added. “And then number two, there’s a burden sharing component to it. I don’t want to see U.S. troops in places like Gaza or, you know, dealing with the gangs in Haiti when the U.N. is willing to go in there and we can push that agenda. I think that’s something that’s in line with the president’s America First foreign policy.”

Waltz succinctly summarized Trump’s policy toward the U.N.

“So, diplomacy first, words before bullets, and burden sharing are two of the reasons we’re still trying to keep this place up. But ultimately, that’s the charge from President Trump: Help it realize its potential, and the U.N. should be helping him craft these peace deals around the world,” he said.

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer agreed during the show on Thursday that the U.S. should continue to cut funding for the U.N., particularly as it relates to USAID funding, which has already seen cuts under the Trump administration.

Keep reading

‘Everyone Is Afraid’: Serbian President Warns NATO Over Kosovo Bridge, Christian Persecution

President Aleksandar Vucic of Serbia told Breitbart News exclusively that he and everyone in Serbia and Eastern Europe fears what may happen to Christians and Serbs in Kosovo after the removal of troops guarding a bridge, and that he is calling on Washington and NATO to step in to help fix the situation before things spiral out of control.

“I am afraid, and everyone is afraid,” Vucic told Breitbart News on Wednesday. “That is why we will beg and ask. It won’t be hard for me to phone everyone, even if I have to call Washington, to help with this issue… Enough with the persecution of the Serbian and Christian population in Kosovo and Metohija, and I believe that the people in Washington will understand that.”

Vucic previously sat down with Breitbart News for an extended exclusive interview in Belgrade–Serbia’s capital–back in May.

Vucic’s statement comes amid withdrawal of NATO forces guarding a bridge called Ibar Bridge in northern Kosovo that has been closed to vehicular traffic and has been guarded by NATO forces called the Kosovo Force, or KFOR for short. The bridge essentially marks the boundary between the predominantly Albanian Muslim south of the city of Mitrovica and the predominantly Serbian Christian north—and Vucic fears the opening of the bridge to vehicular traffic may end up leading to the Christian population being under attack.

The bridge is open to pedestrian traffic so people can cross it if they want to, but vehicular traffic reopening might quickly intensify interactions between people on the two sides. KFOR forces announced earlier in August that they would be beginning a gradual transition of its permanent presence from the Ibar Bridge and instead that is handing over day-to-day security responsibilities to the local Kosovo Police—although KFOR has said it is going to retain a visible presence in northern Kosovo.

Vucic has been sounding the alarm worldwide, calling everyone from NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte to European Union leaders and other European officials to leaders in Washington, as well asking for this decision to be paused and reversed and to keep KFOR in charge of the bridge to protect the Serbian Christians on the other side of it.

Serbia has snap elections coming up in mid to late October, and there are still some major decisions on the horizon regarding Kosovo’s future, as well as the region awaits a judgement coming down in mid-September from the Hague on the crimes-against-humanity case against former Kosovo President Hashim Thaci. Many people believe Thaci was wrongly targeted—by the very same Jack Smith who later came directly after American President Donald Trump—because Thaci had agreed to work with Trump in Trump’s first term to find a longterm solution to the issues between Serbia and Kosovo.

Kosovo’s caretaker Prime Minister Albin Kurti—who endorsed Democrat Joe Biden over Trump in the 2020 election here in the United States—has been so controversial that everyone from even the Biden administration to the Trump administration to NATO and more have condemned him. Ric Grenell, who was acting Director of National Intelligence (DNI) in Trump’s first term and also oversaw the Serbia-Kosovo talks back then, told Breitbart News on Wednesday that Kurti cannot be trusted.

“Albin Kurti has been condemned by NATO, the Europeans and both the Biden and Trump Administrations because he unilaterally creates chaos and instability,” Grenell told Breitbart News in a statement on Wednesday. “America has never seen Kosovo with such a fascist leader. I’ve regularly been to the northern part of Kosovo where many Serbs make their homes and I’m concerned, once again, by the current situation unfolding. People who believe differently should be able to live next to each in peace, but they also deserve politicians who don’t work to destabilize delicate situations.”

It is unclear what Washington or Brussels may do here moving forward. Breitbart News reached out to U.S. Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker and his team at the U.S. mission to NATO for comment on the matter but has not received a response by press time.

Keep reading

Trump Stuns By Outright Dismissing Notion Putin Preparing To Attack A NATO State

President Trump has added fuel to the fire of controversy and speculation over the question of why CIA Director John Ratcliffe made a surprise and highly rare trip to Moscow on Tuesday.

Media accounts which seek to explain the nature of his meeting with top Kremlin intelligence officials, while apparently being snubbed by Putin in terms of a direct interaction, have shifted in days since the visit. The early ‘consensus’ was that he delivered a stern warning for Russia not to attack any NATO state. But President Trump has poured cold water on this explanation, appearing to dismiss it outright in his latest comments. 

“I’ve had good talks with him. He’s not going to be attacking a NATO territory,” Trump said of Putin on Thursday while talking to reporters in the Oval Office.

Trump didn’t answer specifically when pressed on if the president directed Ratcliffe to deliver a warning to Putin to not attack NATO. “I don’t want to comment on that but they’re not going to attack,” Trump said.

While many times over the course of the Ukraine war, European heads of state have claimed that Russia is expansionist and seeks to attack countries in Europe beyond Ukraine, this has not ever been a public allegation of Trump, who has tended to downplay it as a possibility. 

Trump did deny the reports centered on Ratcliffe in an interview with Axios Thursday, saying “Ratcliffe sees his Russian counterpart once every six months or once every year. They have a very good relationship. There was no message and there was nothing unusual.”

And when asked over whether he’s concerned that Putin might attack NATO or deeper inside Europe, Trump replied, “I am not concerned … at all. There is no problem.” According to more:

The president called Ratcliffe’s trip “standard business” and expressed puzzlement over the media accounts of it.

But the reality is that no CIA director has made such a trip in well over four years. The prior time was November 2021, when then-CIA Director William Burns traveled to Moscow to meet with senior Russian officials and issued a stark warning against invading Ukraine.

It was also highly unexpected in terms of timing, given the stalemated nature of the Ukraine conflict, and the fact that zero peace negotiations are happening. There has not even so much as been any efforts at achieving a short-term ceasefire, akin to last year’s Christmas truce.

Keep reading

US Officials Reveal Reason For CIA Chief’s Surprise Moscow Visit

The Wall Street Journal has late in the day Wednesday revealed the reason for CIA John Ratcliffe’s surprise visit to Moscow yesterday where he met with top Kremlin intelligence leaders, citing officials. It was to warn against attacking NATO countries, says the Journal:

The surprise visit by the director of the Central Intelligence Agency to Moscow this week was to deliver a warning to Russia not to attack NATO countries, according to people briefed on the visit.

The trip was spy-agency chief John Ratcliffe’s first publicly known visit to the Russian capital. It followed new U.S. intelligence assessments, reported earlier by The Wall Street Journal, that Russian President Vladimir Putin could try to test the resolve of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization with a limited assault on an allied country in the next few years.

U.S. officials are concerned that Putin, squeezed in Ukraine and under pressure at home, could launch an assault ranging from a cyberattack to a small-scale land incursion, likely on a Baltic nation, the Journal reported. 

Some pundits have suggested a weaker Baltic nation like Estonia, which has long issued provocative anti-Moscow statements of its own, could come under some kind of limited attack.

The report further suggests Putin could be ready to seize on NATO’s munitions supply weakness – given the drain amid the Iran war and after over four years of constantly supplying Ukraine.

“A shortfall in critical Western munitions, driven by expenditures in the Iran war, also could factor into Putin’s thinking,“ the report continues. “The U.S. has degraded its stockpile of certain weapons because of transfers to Ukraine after Russia’s 2022 invasion, as well as the Iran conflict.”

Keep reading

Beyond the Ukraine War, NATO and Europe Are Still Dependent on the US

The Ukraine war has underscored NATO and Europe’s continued reliance on the United States for defense. Ukraine’s air defense is running short of Patriot interceptors, and Europe has not been able to close the gap on its own. President Volodymyr Zelensky told reporters that Ukraine has only about a tenth of the interceptors it needs from the United States.

The Chatham House reports that the Ukraine Contact Group of European states pledged $4 billion for Ukrainian air defense in June 2026, including more than $1 billion earmarked for Patriots, but notes that it remains doubtful the United States will supply the missiles. Europe does not build the Patriot system itself, and Ukrainian-made Patriots are not a near-term solution. Analysts cited by Chatham House estimate it would take 18 to 24 months just to establish a pilot production line domestically.

European governments have responded by purchasing American-made systems for Ukraine rather than replacing them with European production. Germany pledged more than $2 billion in military aid, including Patriot interceptors, while Estonia, Finland, Lithuania, and Sweden joined the fast-track purchasing program. However, the arrangement still relies on American manufacturing capacity rather than an independent European supply.

Four years into the war, Europe has not built the domestic capacity to cover its own air defense needs, let alone Ukraine’s, leaving Kyiv’s interceptor stocks dependent on U.S.-made weapons.

Beneath the missile shortfall sits a deeper dependency: NATO lacks sufficient independent capacity in satellite intelligence and reconnaissance, strategic airlift, air-to-air refueling, command-and-control infrastructure, and nuclear deterrence, relying heavily on the United States for all five. The NATO Intelligence Fusion Centre, based at RAF Molesworth in the UK, brings together NATO and partner-nation analysts to produce shared intelligence assessments on military threats and terrorism for the alliance as a whole.

Though housed in Britain, the Fusion Centre was established with the United States as the “framework nation,” meaning American intelligence architecture and staffing underpin an institution that operates as a multinational NATO body. The Supreme Allied Commander Europe, who oversees NATO’s intelligence and surveillance forces, has by convention always been an American general.

A Kiel Institute report, produced with Bruegel, states that Europe depends heavily on the US not only for deployable troops but also for ‘strategic enablers,’ pointing to continued reliance on American systems for critical modern military capabilities even as European defense budgets have surged. Sven Biscop of the Egmont Royal Institute told Defense News that Europe is “almost completely dependent” on U.S. intelligence for satellite capability and everything that goes with it, adding that closing the gap will take time. The United States operated 246 military satellites as of 2023, compared with 49 for all of European NATO combined, led by France with 15, according to the same reporting.

Keep reading

NATO whines it cannot fight simultaneous wars against Russia, China and Iran

NATO war planners rarely discuss their “nightmare scenarios” in public and appear even less prepared for real-life confrontations on that scale. This is particularly true when it comes to simultaneous or near-simultaneous wars in which the most aggressive racketeering cartel in recorded history has to fight in Eastern Europe, the Middle East and East Asia. As the pillar of NATO, the United States would be forced to manage wars against Russia, Iran and China at once. One of the most infamous mainstream propaganda machine outlets, The Atlantic, explored this possibility, calling it “NATO’s nightmare”. The analysis largely focuses on “a coordinated assault by Beijing and Moscow” and how difficult it would be to “muster a viable defense” (obviously implying that NATO wouldn’t attack first, which is beyond laughable given its history).

The author, Simon Shuster, warns that “about a year ago, General Alexus Grynkewich, NATO’s top commander in Europe, publicly warned of the risk of a two-front war involving Russia and China and urged European allies to help the US prepare”. He quotes Florence Gaub, director of research at the NATO Defense College, who described it as “the scenario we’re currently not ready for”. She warns that “NATO strategists know the gap exists, but have not closed it” and that “despite growing military cooperation between Russia and China, Western governments have conducted only a handful of low-profile exercises examining what a joint attack might look like”. Although there weren’t any publicly acknowledged drills with this specific scenario in mind, Western-led military exercises in different areas of the world certainly focused on such a possibility.

However, The Atlantic admits that even when such scenarios were conducted as part of war games, the results were “less than optimistic”. The report quotes Mark Montgomery, a retired US Navy rear admiral who participated in major war games and stated that he last studied such a scenario roughly 15 years ago. Montgomery recalled that “it didn’t go well” because “even then, the US lacked the weapons stockpiles and industrial capacity to sustain a prolonged multifront war”. Even when numerous US allies, vassals and satellite states are added to the mix, “it made no difference at all”. What’s more, Montgomery warns that “those metrics have worsened, even as some NATO countries have increased defense spending”. To prove this is truly the case, one simply needs to look at the US aggression against Iran, which demonstrated remarkable resilience.

Worse yet (for America), Tehran also uncovered the Pentagon’s woeful incompetence in fighting a remotely capable opponent. A single country that the US promised to “defeat in three days to two weeks tops” has not only withstood all attacks in the last six months, but has also successfully retaliated against US occupation forces across the Middle East. It should be noted that Iran has been under Western sanctions for nearly half a century at this point. Now imagine how a direct confrontation with Russia or China would unfold, even separately, much less simultaneously. The Atlantic fears that “Moscow and Beijing have actually improved their positions”. The report points to the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict, which “pushed Russia’s massive industrial base onto a war footing and sharpened its use of drones”.

It also warns that “while China has not fought a major war in decades, it now surpasses the US in warships and long-range missiles”. Obviously, the Asian giant hasn’t fought a major war in nearly half a century because it has refused to do so. Nothing prevents Beijing from fully restoring its sovereignty over Taiwan by force. However, it seeks to resolve the dispute through peaceful means, just like it did when restoring sovereignty over Hong Kong and Macao back in 1997 and 1999, respectively. This is precisely what the US fears the most, as a non-violent transition would only strengthen China and effectively break US dominance in the Asia-Pacific without firing a single shot. Washington DC would much rather see Taiwan destroyed than give up its influence there peacefully. This is why the US maintains tight control over local military forces.

However, directing “controlled chaos” is not enough for the Pentagon to “feel safe”. Namely, growing Sino-Russian ties are what really makes the political West “shiver” (or should we say, suffer panic attacks). The Atlantic is particularly concerned by the “no-limits partnership” Presidents Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping announced back in February 2022. NATO simply has no mechanisms to prevent Moscow and Beijing from building their alliance. On the contrary, its truly unprovoked aggression against the entire world has only strengthened their strategic partnership. The Atlantic thinks that “from Russia’s and China’s perspective, the timing may look favorable”, primarily because “the US is stretched by conflict in the Middle East, has shifted ships and aircraft away from Europe and Asia, and has depleted much of its advanced air-defense missile stockpile”.

Well, nobody forced Washington DC to wage yet another war of aggression. Neither Moscow nor Beijing forced the Trump administration to foolishly attack Iran. However, even the Middle East pales in comparison to how Western forces would fare in a fight against adversaries such as Russia and China, particularly now that the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict has turned the Russian military into the deadliest fighting force on the planet. The Atlantic concludes that “in a two-front war, the side most likely to prevail may be the one that acts with common purpose and stays united”. It would seem NATO didn’t learn from the strategic mistakes of its Axis predecessors, because that’s precisely what’s going to happen if it continues with its aggression against the entire world, which will have no other choice but to unite.

Keep reading

Courage for Peace, Not for War

In September of 2025, during a Saturday vigil in Stockholm’s Odenplan Square, Isak Hernández, age nine, asked if he could recite a poem he wrote. Deeply troubled by images he saw, day and night, from Gaza, he resolved not to be silent. “Their lives are not numbers,” Isak declared. “Their dreams are not ashes.” His refrain repeated: “I won’t be silent,” and he begged the world, “Listen to me.”

Isabella Lundgren, a Swedish jazz vocalist, heard Isak deliver his poem. She felt his words had reverberated throughout Sweden. No one could possibly turn away. Everyone, she said, bore the responsibility of witnessing. She and Isak collaborated to turn his poem into a song entitled “Their dreams are not ashes.”

Their witness is crucial for counteracting decisions on the part of countries which have newly decided to enter NATO.

We should acknowledge that NATO has done nothing to stop the U.S. provisioned Israeli genocide or to restrain Israel.

On the contrary, NATO seeks fuller integration of Israel’s “security” into NATO strategies. What’s more, trade between Israel and European countries continues.

The Swedish government ought to argue that NATO must force Israel to end their genocide of Palestinian people.

We should note that Israel possesses at least ninety-one thermonuclear weapons which it refuses to declare. Each of these weapons would cause the death of at least six million people – a Holocaust – in a can, waiting to be opened on human civilization’s last day. A planetary omnicide comprising every conceivable genocide, military analysts agree, is almost certain to occur days, hours, or even minutes after any of these weapons are ever again used.

Sadly, Sweden’s hurried entry into NATO in 2024, alongside the rise of armaments industries and even support for nuclear weapons acquisition, compromises Sweden’s historic capacity to resist the rush into unimaginable genocides.

What are the major threats we all face? Surely, the list must begin with the possibility of nuclear annihilation. Next, we must reckon with possible ecological collapse. Following this, we must prepare for outbreaks of new pandemics. And, achingly, we must oppose genocide. War is not the answer. Militarism exacerbates each of these threats.

Now, as corrupt political leaders extract the hard-earned resources of people throughout Europe and pour those resources into bulging coffers of, primarily, U.S. military contractors, it’s crucial to hear Isak Hernández’s pledge not to be silent. We also can learn from the legacy of Sweden’s heroic diplomat, Count Folke Bernadotte.

As Vice President of Sweden’s Red Cross, during World War II, he witnessed first-hand how prisoners in concentration camps suffered. He resolved to negotiate with SS leader Heinrich Himmler for the release of prisoners. Bernadotte collaborated with Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian relief groups to create the White Buses campaign. Ultimately, they managed to free over 17,000 thousand prisoners from concentration camps.

Keep reading

Why Has Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart Consistently Aligned With Morocco? Questions Grow Over Family Lobbying Ties and Spain Policy

For decades, Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart (R-Fla.) built his reputation as one of Congress’s strongest anti-communist voices and a champion of freedom for Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua.

Today, however, many Spaniards—particularly conservatives and defenders of Spain’s territorial integrity—are asking a different question: Why has one of America’s most influential Hispanic Republicans repeatedly advanced positions that closely align with Morocco’s claims against a NATO ally?

The controversy intensified after Díaz-Balart publicly stated that the Spanish cities of Ceuta and Melilla are “in Moroccan territory,” with language reflecting that position later appearing in a House Appropriations Committee report associated with legislation under his jurisdiction.

Spain’s government immediately rejected the characterization, reaffirming that Ceuta and Melilla are integral parts of Spain.

Those statements did not emerge in a vacuum.

Public records show that the late Lincoln Díaz-Balart—Mario’s brother and a former member of Congress—received approximately $1.2 million through his consulting firm from the Moroccan American Center for Policy, an organization registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) to represent Moroccan interests in Washington.

The contract specifically prohibited lobbying Mario Díaz-Balart or his congressional staff, and no public evidence shows that Mario himself received Moroccan funds or violated any lobbying laws.

Nevertheless, the overlap between the family’s documented lobbying ties, Mario Díaz-Balart’s longstanding advocacy for Morocco in Congress, and his repeated engagement with Catalan separatist leaders has fueled criticism in both Spain and the United States.

Spanish media, political commentators, and citizens have increasingly criticized Díaz-Balart’s position, arguing that it undermines the territorial integrity of one of America’s oldest allies while closely tracking Morocco’s diplomatic narrative.

His remarks have generated widespread backlash across Spain’s political spectrum and become a flashpoint in U.S.-Spain relations.

The underlying facts are no longer in dispute: a documented family lobbying relationship with Moroccan interests, a congressional record consistently favorable to Rabat, repeated meetings with Catalan independence leaders, and public statements questioning Spain’s sovereignty over Ceuta and Melilla have placed Mario Díaz-Balart at the center of one of the most contentious foreign-policy debates affecting America’s relationship with Spain.

Keep reading

Baltic Republics Foment Crises With Russia

Historically, one of the greatest dangers to a major power in the international system is letting smaller allies and clients drag that power into an unwise war. Both the United States and leading European powers seem inclined to make that blunder with respect to the Baltic republics. Too many U.S. policymakers have not only tolerated but also facilitated the obsession those “allies” (i.e. protectorates) have exhibited with defeating Russia in Ukraine and weakening their arch adversary overall.

The belligerent behavior of some of NATO’s smallest members creates the prospect of disastrous results in Europe and beyond. A crucial policymaker, Kaja Kallas, is a former prime minister of Estonia and now serves as the European Union’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice‑President of the European Commission. That does not help matters. Kallas is not only one of Ukraine’s most avid supporters, but is also an outspoken Russophobe on a wide range of issues. Kallas has received strong, vocal support from Dutch-born Ursula von der Leyen, an influential German politician and currently President of the European Commission.

Kallas has repeatedly pressed her EU colleagues as well as NATO officials and policymakers in other European governments to make no concessions to Russia with respect to territorial or other issues involving Ukraine. Any compromises, she contends, would reward Moscow’s aggression, and increase the risk of a much larger war.

The former Estonian leader combines such policy rigidity with an alarming degree of arrogance and overconfidence about Europe’s power. In one speech, Kallas asserted that if NATO simply stayed united on policy, Russia stood no chance of prevailing in Ukraine or of achieving any of its other objectives. Horrific wars have emerged throughout history from far less hubris than she routinely displays with respect to the democratic West’s policy toward Russia.

The centerpiece of the current effort by leaders of the Baltic states to exacerbate tensions with Moscow is a propaganda campaign asserting that the Kremlin is plotting to launch military attacks on vulnerable NATO members in the near future. In mid-July, the presidents of Lithuania and Latvia warned that Russia “may be preparing ‘limited kinetic operations’ against NATO’s eastern-flank infrastructure to test Article 5” – the provision in the North Atlantic Treaty proclaiming that an attack on any Alliance member will be considered an attack on all. Latvian President Edgars Rinkēvičs asserted that “The next few months, or even the next 12 months, will be crucial for Baltic security.”

Predictably, Russian officials dismissed the warnings as cynical cover for NATO’s own military buildup in the Baltic region. There is no question that such a provocative campaign by the Western powers has taken place and continues to do so. Indeed, a sizable buildup of NATO air, naval, and ground forces has been occurring for years. One important move was the re-deployment of U.S. F-22 fighter planes to Estonia from Poland in the spring of 2023. The most significant Russian provocations have been repeated spy plane incursions into the airspace of the Baltic republics and Russia’s other neighbors. Similar maritime incidents have taken place involving Russian naval and civilian vessels. Although Moscow’s moves are foolish and needlessly antagonistic, they are hardly in the same category as the major NATO buildups of troops, warplanes, and naval vessels.

Alarmist warnings from the Baltic governments also are nothing new, so cynical American observers might be tempted to respond to the latest flurry with indifference. However, Poland – a much more significant political and military player than the tiny Baltic countries–has been outlining similar alarming scenarios. There have been numerous warnings in recent weeks by Polish politicians, following multiple media reports that Russia could carry out a limited military or hybrid provocation against Poland in the near future. In late June 2026, a leading Polish outlet called onet.pl reported that U.S. intelligence had alerted its Polish counterparts about the possibility of a Russian attack. Prime Minister Donald Tusk said on July 3 that the warnings should be taken seriously and noted that he had been issuing similar alerts for weeks. “Poland is preparing very intensively for various scenarios,” Tusk said.

Keep reading

Belgium Arrests Canadian NATO Intern on Charges of Spying for China

Belgian prosecutors this week announced the arrest of a Canadian intern for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) who was accused of espionage.

Media investigations soon revealed the suspect is a Chinese-born Canadian national who was allegedly spying for China.

The Belgian Federal Prosecutor’s Office said it made the arrest based on a tip from NATO security services, who warned the female suspect was spending an excessive amount of time at sensitive NATO facilities and asking too many questions.

The suspect was employed as an intern at NATO’s Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE), which is located in the city of Mons, Belgium. SHAPE handles planning and execution for all NATO operations.

“She is suspected of spying on behalf of a third country and of being a member of a criminal organization,” prosecutors said in a statement released Saturday.

The suspect’s home and workspace in SHAPE’s information technology department were raided when she was taken into custody. On Tuesday, prosecutors extended her pretrial detention by one month and the suspect immediately filed an appeal.

Canada’s CBC News on Wednesday identified the suspect as Biwei Zhang, a systems engineer who previously worked for the Canadian Space Agency and Statistics Canada. She has also used the names Claire Zhang and Catina Zhang.

CBC said Zhang’s personal and professional profiles matched the limited information provided by Belgian prosecutors, as do numerous posts she made on Facebook and LinkedIn. A group of European news outlets reached the same conclusion about her identity.

Zhang appears to be 32 or 33 years old and holds a master’s degree from the University of Ottawa, class of 2022. She reportedly worked as an economist for Statistics Canada from 2018 to 2022, then took a job as a systems engineer for the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) in May 2022. Her resume also includes work as a policy analyst for the European Space Agency (ESA) and a researcher for the World Trade Organization (WTO).

To date, there have been no details of the allegations against Zhang from Belgium, Canada, or NATO, beyond the vague description of her alarming behavior and assurances from SHAPE that her questionable activities did not interfere with operational readiness. The week since her arrest was announced has included some awkward excuses about who was supposed to vet her for a security clearance and how thorough a job they did.

The ESA told Reuters on Thursday that Zhang’s position with the agency did not require a security clearance, but she was subjected to “standard human resources screening procedures.” The WTO declined a request for comment about her work history.

NATO officials said responsibility for security clearances lay with contributing member nations, which in this case would mean Canada. Canadian Minister of Public Safety Gary Anandasangaree said on Monday that national screening procedures would be reviewed to “get to the bottom of what happened.”

According to CBC News, there was a rather large red flag in Zhang’s background: the Public Service Commission of Canada in 2023 found that she “committed fraud in an application for a position at the Canada Border Services Agency by applying under two different names and emails and failing to later clarify whether she had submitted multiple applications.”

Canada’s Globe and Mail explained that Zhang “submitted applications from two e-mail addresses, one from York University and the other from the University of Montreal and twice wrote the same standardized exams in an effort, the commission found, ‘to increase her chances of being appointed.’”

Zhang requested a judicial review of this finding in February 2024, but it was dismissed by a federal court judge.

“I think the concern level would be very high in government. Everybody wants to know what happened. There are a lot of questions to be asked,” former Canadian national security adviser Jody Thomas told the Globe and Mail.

Keep reading