Tag: perpetual war

Zelensky Pushing For WWIII

The September Duma Elections – Will Putin Face Pressure to Escalate or Moderate?

One of the greatest mistakes analysts make is assuming that international events are driven solely by the decisions of a single leader. They personalize history, reducing complex geopolitical developments to one individual. Netanyahu did that assassinating the Ayatollah assuming instant victory. The world is far more complicated. Political leaders are often reacting to internal pressures that are invisible to outside observers.

The upcoming State Duma elections deserve attention not because they are likely to determine who governs Russia immediately, but because they may reveal how much political room President Vladimir Putin has to maneuver as the war and the broader confrontation with the West continue.

The Western Miscalculation

Since 2022, much of the Western narrative has assumed that economic sanctions would rapidly undermine Putin’s domestic support and eventually force either a change in policy or a change in leadership. This is the standard Neocon playbook which has NEVER worked even once. But they simply feel better punishing someone they hate. That Neocon forecast has repeatedly underestimated Russia’s ability to adapt economically while overestimating the willingness of the Russian political establishment to fragment during an external confrontation. Their sanctions against Iran were first imposed in 1979, triggered by the Iran hostage crisis . This initial action has been followed by several significant expansions over the decades, creating a layered and complex sanctions regime  that has not been successful. The U.S. sanctions on Cuba were imposed in a series of steps, beginning in 1960 and culminating in a comprehensive embargo in February 1962. They are still in place 66 years later proving sanctions make Neocons feel good and powerful but fail to topple governments or achieve goals.

History teaches that sanctions do not produce the political outcome intended by those imposing them. More often they strengthen nationalist sentiment by allowing governments to portray outside pressure as an attack on the nation rather than on the ruling administration. This often strengthens the government they seek to overthrow.

Elections in every country, even where the outcome is largely expected, serve as an important measure of elite cohesion and public confidence. This is often why those in power seek to rig elections to retain power.

There are signs that Ukraine’s deep strikes inside Russia are creating pressure and dilemmas for the Kremlin. However, there is no direct evidence that this has led to explicit calls from Russian hawks for tactical nuclear weapons just yet. Replace Putin, and this can become nuclear faster than anyone realizes. Nuking Kiev would probably save the world not unlike the US did to Japan. It would be a demonstration to the EU that they better think twice about trying to destroy Russia.

Keep reading

How Lockheed Martin, Raytheon & Bae Systems Are Propagandizing Children To Support War Through Stem

Raytheon sponsors the Girl Scouts of America. BAE Systems is reading your toddlers their favorite fairytale stories. And Lockheed Martin funds children’s math and STEM festivals. This is done with great fanfare, supposedly to empower and inspire children to pursue their passion for science. In reality, though, these companies are attempting to launder their images and enlist the next generation to become cogs in the military-industrial complex.

All the while, these organizations’ products are being used across the world by the United States and Israel to commit war crimes – in Iran, Yemen, Palestine, and beyond – to target children.

MintPress explores the murky world of the arms companies training kids to bomb kids.

Normalizing War to Kids

When many Americans think of Raytheon (now officially rebranded as RTX Corporation), they don’t envisage rockets and cruise missiles; they think of math. For decades, the second-largest arms manufacturer on the planet has bankrolled a wide range of organizations aimed at getting children excited about STEM subjects.

Since 2009, Raytheon has been the title sponsor of MATHCOUNTS, a non-profit organization that provides engaging math programs for middle school students in every U.S. state, as well as organizing math competitions to find the brightest children in America.

In 2005, Raytheon launched its MathMovesU program, aimed, in its own words, “to inspire middle school students to get excited about math and science.” In addition to the materials provided, it has also spent millions on scholarships, grants, and study awards to thousands of students, teachers, and volunteers.

And its MathAlive! traveling exhibit promises, in rather outdated branding, to take math “2theXtreme”. MathAlive! Has also traveled to several countries in West Asia, including Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia – all of them among the biggest purchasers of Raytheon weapons technology.

The company also enjoys a longtime partnership with the Girl Scouts of the United States of America (GSUSA). In 2017, for example, it launched the GSUSA’s first national computer science program and cyber challenge for middle and high school girls.“

The progress to diversify the STEM workforce needs to be accelerated… At a time when technology is transforming the way we live and work, we can – and should – show young women a clear path to taking an active role in this transformation,” said Thomas A. Kennedy, then-Raytheon CEO; “Working together, Raytheon and Girl Scouts will help girls build confidence to see themselves as the robotics engineers, data scientists and cybersecurity professionals who will create a better tomorrow.”

Raytheon also spearheaded the GSUSA’s “Think Like a Programmer” project, which encourages girls to explore the world of artificial intelligence and cybersecurity, and developed many of the programming badges available to the scouts.

GSUSA appears proud of this relationship. Its website profiles one former scout who now works at Raytheon as a success story and a model to follow. The article includes a step-by-step guide and a list of tips for those wishing to follow in her footsteps.

Unsurprisingly, Raytheon also works closely with the U.S. military on these matters, establishing four new STEM “centers of innovation” with the Boys & Girls Clubs of America in Michigan, Oklahoma, Colorado, and Washington, D.C., all near military bases.

While some might be surprised by the closeness of the relationship between a children’s organization and an arms manufacturer, it is worth remembering that the scouting movement was originally established by Lieutenant-General Robert Baden-Powell, as a stepping stone towards boys joining the military. Baden-Powell was deeply concerned that English boys would not be physically fit enough to fight for their country in any upcoming wars, and designed an organization that would train them both physically and mentally to do so.

Kirsten Bayes from the Campaign Against the Arms Trade was unimpressed by Raytheon’s attempts to improve their image and to train the next generation of weapons manufacturers. “Our view is that arms companies have no place in schools or colleges, and should certainly not be working with children’s educational charities,” she told MintPress, adding:

“Schools and other places of education should be places where children learn, grow and develop their full potential. They should not be a recruiting ground where arms companies whitewash their activities.”

Keep reading

A Secret Cuban CIA Task Force?

Before I get into this, I just want to say that all of this is coming from anonymous sources. Neither the White House nor the CIA has commented on it, and I can’t independently confirm it. More often than not, anonymously sourced MSM articles on Venezuela and Cuba tend to be false or only have bits of truth sprinkled in, but I felt this topic was worth a mention as we watch the Donald Trump administration work toward a free Cuba. So, take them with a grain of salt. They may or may not be true, but here’s what Politico and the New York Times are reporting this week. 

First up, on Tuesday, Politico reported that the United States has increased its intelligence presence in Cuba in recent months. It claims that it could lead to actions “ranging from a U.S. military operation in Cuba to stepped up efforts to turn Cuban officials or ordinary citizens against the regime.” 

This came from two individuals “familiar with the situation.” Here’s more: 

One of the individuals said the U.S. has recently sent spies and assets to Cuba. The person declined to specify the scope of the increased intelligence collection effort or which U.S. agencies are involved because they didn’t want to risk giving details that could compromise operations. The U.S. has 18 offices and agencies that make up the intelligence community.

The second person described the move as increasing the CIA’s ‘presence’ recently but declined to specify timeframes or who was involved.

Both people were granted anonymity because the topic involves sensitive intelligence.

One person described the move “as a key tactical step that could pave the way for a U.S. military incursion,” but said that nothing is set in stone. The other said that Trump still prefers to work this situation through diplomatically.   

On Wednesday afternoon, the New York Times saw the Politico “increase intelligence presence story” and raised it to a “secret Cuba task force.”    

“The CIA has secretly established a Cuba task force, setting in motion plans for a more concerted campaign to pressure the Cuban government to make the economic, political and leadership changes demanded by President Trump,” the Times reports, according to “people briefed on the action.”

Keep reading

Report: Ukraine IDs North Korean Missile Unit Active in Russian Invasion

A senior Ukrainian intelligence official told Reuters in a report published on Wednesday that Russia had begun deploying a North Korean missile unit to its war theater against Ukraine, apparently exploiting potential vulnerabilities the invaded country has against ballistic missiles.

According to the report, the North Korean hardware is active in Russia’s Voronezh, which borders the occupied Ukrainian region of Luhansk, one of the two Donbas regions strongman Vladimir Putin “annexed” in the early months of the invasion. The official sharing the information, Andrii Cherniak of Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence, said the new missile unit “could be equipped with 120 ballistic missiles and six launchers for strikes against Ukraine.” He estimated that about 90 North Korean troops are in Voronezh and are expected to help operate the newly arrived missile units.

North Korea has been an active belligerent in the Russian invasion of Ukraine since at least late 2024, when Ukrainian intelligence officials first began observing North Korean troops fighting alongside the Russians. That year, Putin visited Pyongyang for the first time in two decades and signed a “mutual defense treaty” with communist dictator Kim Jong-un, which preceded the Kim regime becoming a much more vocal supporter of the Russian invasion on the world stage and ultimately publicly confirming its participation in the war. Kim has claimed, however, that North Korean troops in Russia were there only to clear landmines placed by Ukrainians, contrary to evidence that Pyongyang has played a larger offensive role in the conflict.

Reuters noted that it could not independently verify the Ukrainian intelligence official’s claims or receive any meaningful response from Pyongyang or Moscow. Ukrainian media has documented the use of North Korean missiles against its targets in the past week, however. Cherniak stated that North Korean ballistic missiles, in particular, had been active against Ukraine since at least August 2025. North Korean KN-23 ballistic missiles were allegedly used to bomb civilian residences in Ukraine last week.

Keep reading

Before Hormuz, There Was Suez: What Trump Can Learn From Eisenhower

Oman and Iran appear close to a temporary arrangement to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, potentially providing both an exit from the current round of fighting and the foundation for a more durable maritime order. Washington should welcome such an agreement – even if it acknowledges a degree of Iranian authority in administering traffic through the strait – because US interest dictates that open and non-discriminatory passage must be given priority over control.

The emerging formula would reportedly divide responsibility for the shipping lanes. Vessels entering the Persian Gulf would travel through waters administered by Iran, while outbound traffic would pass through an Omani-administered route. Iran would be notified of departing vessels and, while this has not yet been discussed, Tehran appears open to also ensuring that Oman would be notified of incoming traffic. Tehran and Muscat may collect and share fees for specified security and environmental services, although this sensitive issue has not yet been settled. The negotiations remain fluid, and any agreement is reportedly linked to the lifting of the American blockade on Iranian ports.

The arrangement would represent a slight climbdown by Tehran. Iran’s earlier position would have required traffic in both directions to pass through some portion of Iranian waters as well as Omani waters. That would have brought even ships already inside the Persian Gulf under an Iranian-administered transit system. The emerging division of lanes would give Oman primary responsibility for outbound shipping and limit the universe of vessels requiring Iranian approval or coordination.

If successful – and if Washington accepts it – the agreement could help end the present fighting. It remains unclear whether that would restore the previous American-Iranian memorandum of understanding or require a new framework. Nor does it in and of itself move the needle on two other major stumbling blocks: Iran’s demand for a regional ceasefire and Washington’s demands on Iran’s nuclear activities.

The Trump administration will likely receive strong pushback from hawkish elements in Washington and Israel who will complain over the arrangement’s de facto acceptance and legitimization of Iran (and Oman’s) management of the Strait.

But this critique is borne out of a confusion of what the US’s actual core interest in the Strait is: The free and predictable flow of commerce or preventing the ability of a hostile power to assert control.

The Trump administration has increasingly framed the objective as preventing Iran from “controlling” the strait. Yet the central American interest in strategic waterways has historically been less about who administers them than about whether ships can pass through them freely, predictably and without discrimination. Preventing a hostile state from acquiring coercive leverage has generally been a means of preserving passage, not an end that supersedes passage itself.

That hierarchy of interests matters. If reopening the strait requires acknowledging that Iran possesses some capacity to regulate traffic in waters along its coast, Washington should not reject an agreement merely because it fails to preserve the appearance of unqualified American dominance.

The Suez crisis provides the clearest example. In 1956, Egypt’s president, Gamal Abdel Nasser, nationalized the Suez Canal Company, displacing the British- and French-controlled corporation that had operated one of the world’s most important commercial arteries. Britain and France regarded nationalization not merely as an economic injury but as a strategic humiliation and, together with Israel, invaded Egypt.

President Dwight Eisenhower refused to support them. After rejecting the Anglo-French invasion, Eisenhower’s administration did not make restoration of British or international ownership a condition for accepting Egypt’s continued administration of the canal. Instead, Washington opposed the invasion and pressed for a diplomatic arrangement that would preserve international access. The applicable legal regime emphasized the canal’s free use by ships of all countries on equal terms, while leaving Egypt responsible for administering and defending the waterway.

Egyptian control was not the same as unrestricted Egyptian discretion. The distinction was crucial. Washington could accept Egyptian sovereignty over the canal while insisting that sovereignty be exercised within rules guaranteeing nondiscriminatory passage. The overriding American interest was not which flag flew over the canal authority, but whether the canal remained open under internationally accepted rules.

Keep reading

Dear America, We Do Not Beat China in the AI Race if We Become China in the AI Race

America is in an AI arms race. That’s the official story, anyway — a convenient narrative blasted from the teleprompters of corporate media and the podiums of bought-off politicians. We’re told that to question the wholesale surrender of our power grids, our water aquifers, and now our public lands to the data center boom is not just naive, but unpatriotic. This is the oldest trick in the book of statecraft: wrap a corporate giveaway in the flag and dare anyone to question it. The moment dissent gets reframed as disloyalty, you know you’re being scammed.

This was the raw, unfiltered message from Donald Trump at his Ratepayer Protection Pledge event, where he looked at his own constituents and told them, regarding the industrialization of their communities, “You can’t fight it. You have to go with it.” There is no clearer definition of tyranny than that. It’s the voice of an apparatus that has stopped asking for consent and started issuing commands.

Before we go further, let’s be crystal clear about what a free market actually is, and how it relates to the building of these data centers, because the term has been so grotesquely twisted it’s nearly lost its meaning. A free market is what happens when private individuals or companies make consensual deals. It is the opposite of the centrally planned, state-subsidized, resource-commandeering binge we are currently watching unfold.

And the most damning evidence that this AI boom has nothing to do with free enterprise is the simple fact that they are building it on your land. This isn’t private companies buying private property from willing sellers. This is the state acting as a real estate agent for the corporate elite, handing over vast tracts of public and military land in negotiated deals that the communities sitting next to them never got a real vote on.

Consider the facts. In Nevada, the federal Bureau of Land Management just approved the first commercial AI data center ever authorized on public land, waving aside desert tortoise habitat and the already-drought-stricken Colorado River. The agency did it, according to the conservation groups now suing to stop it, by reusing an old environmental review written for an entirely different solar project — meaning no new review and no public comment period were ever required, and the city of Boulder City itself says it was never consulted. The Department of Energy is running the same play with the wreckage of the Cold War: it has tapped SoftBank to build a 10-gigawatt AI campus at the former Portsmouth uranium enrichment plant in Ohio, selected Brookfield and NextEra for a $100 billion complex at the former Paducah uranium plant in Kentucky, and picked Amentum and DC Blox to develop a gigawatt-scale campus at the Savannah River nuclear-weapons site in South Carolina.

The Department of Defense has gotten in on it too, conditionally selecting Carlyle and CyrusOne to build hyperscale data centers on Army land at Fort Bliss, Texas, and Dugway Proving Ground, Utah, while the Air Force has offered up nearly 4,700 acres across three bases in Alaska for the same purpose. It has even trickled down to city hall: back in 2023, the Manassas, Virginia city council voted unanimously to sell 21 acres of city-owned airport land directly to Amazon for a new data center, with no ballot, no referendum, and barely a public hearing.

When the state is auctioning off the very land it supposedly holds in trust for the public, this is not capitalism. This is corporatism. It is a direct transfer of public assets into private, politically connected hands, and it makes a complete mockery of any claim to a “free market.”

With every one of these backroom deals comes the same tired promise: jobs. But the state’s own numbers expose the fraud. At a cost of roughly $13 million in investment per permanent job in Virginia, or $11 million per job in a recent New York deal, these are not job-creation programs. They are handouts to automate human labor. You’re being asked to celebrate a system where your own tax dollars subsidize the very automation that renders you obsolete.

The real costs — the ones that never make it onto the glossy brochures — are being socialized and dumped on an unwilling public. Residential electricity prices have shot up more than 36 percent since 2020, with data centers a primary driver. Dominion Energy in Virginia pushed through its first base-rate hike since 1992, and Baltimore residents saw their bills climb by more than $17 a month after a record power auction. The grid is being strained toward the breaking point, and the cost of every upgrade flows directly to ratepayers who never consented to any of it. It’s a textbook case of privatized profit and socialized loss: politically connected corporations reap the rewards, and you get handed the bill.

These facilities are also vampires, and they are draining the aquifers dry. U.S. data centers consumed more than 200 billion gallons of water last year, with roughly 93 percent of that footprint hidden inside off-site power plants where nobody’s looking. In drought-stricken Texas, consumption is projected to explode 714 percent by 2030, yet a state legislative hearing revealed that a staggering 83 percent of the state’s data centers simply refused to comply with mandatory water reporting. This stops being a negotiation and becomes the outright seizure of a shared public resource, with the state acting as armed lookout for the plunder.

It becomes something far more sinister when you remember what a lot of this infrastructure is actually for. Data centers themselves are neutral, but their deployment by the state is not. When the Department of Defense leases military land to build data centers, it isn’t for hosting cat videos. It is the physical construction of a turnkey surveillance apparatus, built on the one category of American ground that is already unambiguously controlled by the government, with none of the normal local checks that even a private developer would face. We are being told to subsidize the very infrastructure that is increasingly being used to watch our every move — and to do it on land we collectively own.

Keep reading

Report: U.S. expands CIA presence and intelligence operations in Cuba

The United States has increased its intelligence assets in Cuba in recent months, including deploying additional spies and expanding the Central Intelligence Agency’s presence on the island, according to a report published by POLITICO.

Citing “two people familiar” with the Trump administration’s plans, the move is allegedly part of a broader effort to pressure Cuba’s communist government to reform or collapse and could support options ranging from stepped-up efforts to recruit Cuban officials or citizens to a potential U.S. military operation.

The intelligence expansion follows a rare high-level visit to Havana in mid-May 2026 by CIA Director John Ratcliffe.

During the trip, Ratcliffe reportedly met with Raúl Guillermo Rodríguez Castro, the grandson of former Cuban leader Raúl Castro, Interior Minister Lázaro Álvarez Casas and the head of Cuban intelligence services.

He personally delivered President Donald Trump’s message that the United States is prepared to engage seriously on economic and security issues only if Cuba makes fundamental changes. The discussions also covered intelligence cooperation, economic stability and security concerns, with emphasis that Cuba can no longer serve as a safe haven for U.S. adversaries such as Russia and China in the Western Hemisphere.

Senior officials accompanied Ratcliffe, with a subsequent report revealing that the delegation included a paramilitary operator involved in the earlier U.S. capture of former Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro.

In tandem with the intelligence expansion, Washington significantly intensified aerial surveillance around Cuba starting early this year — flooding the surrounding airspace with P-8 Poseidon maritime patrols, RC-135 Rivet Joint reconnaissance planes and high-altitude MQ-4 drones.

Cuban officials have since criticized the heightened U.S. intelligence and related pressure as “unlawful attempts to destabilize the island.” Nonetheless, Trump administration officials maintain that a stronger intelligence posture is necessary to protect American national security, track foreign adversaries operating in Cuba and maintain leverage as economic conditions deteriorate and diplomatic talks remain stalled.

Keep reading

The Militarized Insanity of This American Moment

There’s so much militarized crazy in America today that it’s entirely overwhelming. Here’s a “top ten” list:

1. The illegal and unconstitutional war against Iran.

Remember when Trump told us he wouldn’t start wars? Remember when attacks on Iran began, the Trump administration told us they’d be over in a matter of days, perhaps a few weeks, ending in Iran’s total defeat? Instead, the U.S. government and military is engaged in yet another disastrous losing undeclared war that is unsupported by most Americans. As if our opinions matter!

2. The continued blanket support of Israel’s genocide against Gaza, pogroms in the West Bank, and demolition/seizure of land in Lebanon.

The Trump administration remains 100% committed to the project of a “Greater Israel,” no matter how many Palestinians suffer and die in the process.

3. The obscene $500 billion increase in military spending in FY2027.

The U.S. military hasn’t won a major war since 1945. It’s failed eight audits in a row. The “punishment” is a vast increase in military spending in the next fiscal year.

4. The escalatory and nearly impossible Golden Dome proposal.

The golden dome missile defense system is a golden boondoggle for weapons makers. It’s unlikely to work, and if it does, if only partially, it may make nuclear war more likely.

5. The unnecessary “modernization” of the nuclear triad at a projected cost of $2 trillion.

U.S. militarists still believe the nuclear triad is the Holy Trinity. It isn’t. Land-based ICBMs and nuclear bombers should be scrapped as obsolete. The Navy’s Trident-missile-firing submarines are all the U.S. needs for nuclear deterrence.

6. The continued headlong pursuit of artificial intelligence (AI) and the ongoing empowerment and enlargement of the surveillance state.

AI combined with ever-more intrusive cameras and digital monitoring is creating a dystopic “Big Brother” state. Imagine sweeping AI with a steroidal Homeland Security; now imagine the total disappearance of privacy.

7. The war against the ICC and UN and indeed any legal check on U.S./Israeli aggression.

As the U.S. and Israel engage in global aggression, they attack institutions such as the International Criminal Court and the United Nations that attempt to limit and stop that aggression.

8. Related to (7), the proposal to merge the U.S. military with Israel’s for research and development, intelligence sharing, and the like.

Incredibly, the Trump administration is proposing a merger between the U.S. and Israeli militaries that would compromise U.S. national security at the highest levels of classification. Obedient to Aipac and Israeli imperatives, Congress seems prepared ultimately to support it.

9. Continued environmental damage due to war and military operations and the complete disregard of climate change.

Rarely in the U.S. do you hear any talk of how war and global military actions accelerate global warming and aggravate environmental damage. Check out the documentary by Abby Martin, “Earth’s Greatest Enemy,” and her interview with Chris Hedges.

Keep reading

America’s Middle East Bases: An Imperial Burden

By all conventional measures, America is losing the war with Iran. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has survived the U.S.-Israeli regime change effort, and it seems as though the hardline factions in Iran have been empowered. They also maintain their stockpiles of drones and missiles, while the U.S. is running dangerously low on crucial munitions.

Perhaps the most tangible sign of strategic defeat for the U.S. comes in the form of destroyed bases. Throughout the conflict, Iran has dealt severe blows to U.S. bases across the region, resulting in 18 troops having been killed and over 600 sustaining injuries.

A predictable outcome

Iran’s ability to touch American bases across the Middle East was not surprising to many of those advocating against this war. In fact, it was one of the foremost reasons to show restraint. In August 2025, Dr. Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, warned that in the case of a renewed conflict, Iran would likely act with much less restraint than they did during the 12-day War.

“It’s not going to be like last time,” Dr. Parsi explained, “the Iranians may this time around strike at U.S. bases in a manner that they didn’t last time. Last time, as one Pentagon official said, it was a polite response because it was all about ending the war. This time around, it’s likely going to be much worse.”

Dr. Parsi also expressed concern about American defensive systems, saying “we know now that the Iranians have missile capabilities that can penetrate all layers of Israeli and American air defense systems and can lead to a large number of American deaths. So we will once again have Americans coming home from the Middle East in coffins.”

Tragically, these predictions have proven entirely correct.

From the early days of this war, the damage became apparent. The New York Times reported in late March that many American bases in the region had been rendered “all but uninhabitable.” The Iranians attacks have been effective at knocking out key defensive and communications infrastructure as well. All of this information has been intentionally underdiscussed by the Trump administration, in the hopes that Americans will buy their narrative that an easy U.S. victory has occurred.

Despite their decision to not inform the public of this troubling data, the risks are very real for troops still positioned in the region. Since the collapse of the Memorandum of Understanding, four U.S. soldiers have been killed, and roughly 100 have been injured by Iranian attacks.

Many of America’s bases in the Middle East simply weren’t prepared to face Iranian retaliation at the scale we’ve witnessed. During the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the fighting occurred predominantly within the borders of the respective countries, so many U.S. military facilities weren’t designed to withstand extensive enemy fire.

Iran, however, is a much different story.

Keep reading

US Expands Strategic Foothold On Somalia’s Coast As Yemen Conflict Simmers

A US military delegation visited the local government in Somalia’s northeastern Puntland region on Sunday and signed a deal to expand the US military presence in Bosaso, a port city on the Gulf of Aden, according to the Puntland government.

Saeed Abdullahi Deni, the president of Puntland State, held talks with a delegation led by Maj. Gen. Claude Tudor, the commander of US Special Operations Command Africa.

“Puntland and the United States also signed a new agreement to expand their cooperation. Under the agreement, the United States will expand its military base in Bosaso to improve operations against terrorism and to help protect maritime security,” the Puntland government said in a statement on the meeting.

The US has been operating from a UAE-built airbase in Bosaso, which the UAE has reportedly used to arm the RSF in Sudan.

An expanded US military presence in Bosaso could be used as a launchpad for operations against Yemen’s Ansar Allah, also known as the Houthis, and the deal comes as Ansar Allah is enforcing a new maritime blockade on Saudi Arabia’s Red Sea ports, which began after Saudi strikes on Yemen’s Sanaa International Airpoirt, attacks that reignited the conflict that was in a state of ceasefire since 2022.

Tudor visited Puntland a day after meeting with officials in Somaliland, a de facto independent state within Somalia’s internationally recognized borders.

It’s unclear if any deals were signed in that meeting, but Israel recently became the first country to recognize Somaliland as an independent country and is seeking to establish a military and intelligence presence for operations against Yemen.

According to the Somali Guardian, the US-Puntland deal bypassed the US-backed federal government in Mogadishu, which has been at odds with Puntland amid a political crisis sparked by changes to the constitution made by Somali President Hassan Sheik Mohamud. Puntland withdrew from the federal system in 2024, and this year clashes have occurred between forces loyal to the federal government and Puntland security forces.

The US has continued to back the federal government with airstrikes against al-Shabaab, and it has also been engaged in an air campaign against an ISIS affiliate in Puntland, where it backs local Puntland forces.

Keep reading