The War in Ukraine Arrives at a Crucial Juncture

Though relegated to the sidelines thanks to President Donald Trump’s decision to launch an illegal and unjustified war on Iran at the behest of the Israeli warfare state, the war in Ukraine grows more dangerous with each passing day. In fact, recent reports indicate a perilous increase in attacks on energy and civilian infrastructure from both Moscow and Kiev.

On June 17, Kiev launched the largest aerial attack of the war on Moscow with an estimated 550 drones and missiles. One attack resulted in the spectacular explosion at the Kapotnya refinery southeast of Moscow. It was the third time in a month that the refinery had been targeted by Kiev. Whether the explosion was caused by a Russian MANPAD defending Moscow or by a direct hit from a Ukrainian drone remains unclear. Shortly after the attack, a Ukrainian commander sent a message to the Russian people: “This war has now reached your homes as well. We hope that message helps Russia bring this war to an end.”

Only days later, on June 20, another attack struck the Antipinsky oil refinery in Tyumen in Western Siberia, some 1,200 miles from Ukraine. That same evening, Ukraine struck the oil terminal at Kerch in Crimea. A week later, Ukraine hit Russian refineries in the Krasnodar and Yaroslavl regions.

In response, Russian forces have struck both Dnipropetrovsk and Zaporizhzhia, killing numerous civilians. For his part, Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, noted that “strikes on our infrastructure, wherever they are directed, have absolutely no effect on the situation at the front, on the line of contact.”

For Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky, there would seem to be a number of motives at play — none of which portend an end to the conflict, now in its fifth year. For one thing, Zelensky has seen a dip in the robust support he once had from Washington under Trump II. He seems convinced that such shows of force will shore up what remains of his support among Democratic war hawks, as well as among his European collaborators such as the German Chancellor Frederich Merz and the now-departing British Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

Yet Zelensky’s stepped-up drone war, far from being, as some US analysts suggest, a show of strength, may be the beginning of the end for the budding despot, the desperate last gasp of a wartime leader with an economy in ruins, a shrinking population, and a generation of young men irretrievably lost. Putting Zelensky’s drone war into proper perspective may require recalling how ultimately ineffective the flurry of Nazi Germany’s V2 missile attacks on London and the Japanese Kamikaze attacks on the US Navy were during the final year of the Second World War.

The mood among ‘official’ Moscow has, as might be expected in light of these developments, grown darker than usual. In addition to the unprecedented drone attacks on Moscow, Russia has suffered an estimated 1.2 million war casualties, including approximately 325,000 dead. And while there are growing signs of war weariness and disgust with Putin’s regime among pro-Western elements in Moscow and St. Petersburg, there are voices close to the Kremlin that are, in a manner not terribly dissimilar to our own neoconservatives whenever Israel attacked, baying for blood.

Sergei Karaganov, an academic who heads the Kremlin’s Council for Foreign and Defense Policy, has repeatedly called for Russia to strike Europe with nuclear weapons in order to “restore deterrence.” For his part, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov promised that Russia would retaliate for the refinery attack on a “mass scale.” Lavrov also warned that the current “state of affairs poses serious threats to global security. A direct confrontation between NATO and Russia could rapidly escalate into an exchange of nuclear strikes, with catastrophic consequences.” Lavrov’s comments were originally meant for publication in POLITICO Europe, but the outlet, owned by the shamelessly pro-war Axel Springer group, pulled the piece at the last minute. Heaven forbid we hear from the “enemy” directly.

That said, with Donald Trump distracted by more pressing matters of state such as the deteriorating condition of the Reflecting Pool and his duties as host of the Great American State Fair (his promise to end this war now, as with so many other promises, forgotten) few, if any, remaining world leaders outside of Pope Leo XIV have called for a cessation of hostilities in between Russia and Ukraine and her sponsors in Washington and Brussels.

Keep reading

Ukraine’s Desperate Propaganda Campaign While Russia Advances Along The Entire Front

Volodymyr Zelensky and his Western backers have launched a desperate 40-day “campaign of terrors” — which includes a mix of military escalations and a massive information/psyops operation designed to portray Russia as collapsing and Putin as facing an imminent uprising or coup. The goal is to force Russia into a ceasefire. Western audiences are being flooded with social media and regular media articles that paint a dire picture of Russia’s military campaign, while touting Ukraine’s incredible accomplishments. It is all a load of crap, but that is all the West has left in its quiver as Russia’s campaign of attrition continues to pulverize Ukraine.

The Western-led propaganda campaign consists of the following elements:

  • Information Warfare — Heavy push of 24/7 propaganda about Putin’s “imminent downfall,” including staged videos of supposed Russian soldiers announcing a mutiny.
  • Fake Psyops — Coordinated attempts to stoke panic in Russia (e.g., false claims of fuel/gas shortages, which were partly caused by panic buying triggered by the rumors).
  • Symbolic Actions — Staged drone flag-drops (e.g., on the Kinburn Spit near Crimea) meant to symbolize Russian retreat and collapse — quickly debunked and mocked.
  • Broader Objective — Combine these narratives with actual strikes on Russian infrastructure to create the impression of regime instability, pressuring Putin politically.

Now for the reality. Yes, Ukraine has hit some Russian refineries and created some spectacular visuals of billowing smoke and fire. However, this is nothing more than military political theater that is intended to distract from Ukraine’s setbacks all along the front. As a side note, Russian oil exports have increased during this same period, putting to bed the narrative that Russia’s oil industry in suffering catastrophic losses.

Keep reading

Time To Shed Light on Canadian Military Mission to Congo

Canadian media and politicians have all but ignored Congo’s recent World Court case against Rwanda. It’s unsurprising since Canada has enabled three decades of aggression, including by leading a bizarre, little known, UN mission to the region on behalf of Washington.

On Friday the Democratic Republic of Congo filed a case to the International Court of Justice against Rwanda for repeated invasions and support for armed groups on its territory since 1996. Congolese Justice Minister Guillaume Andali said his country is seeking redress for Rwanda’s breaches of conventions covering genocide prevention, racial discrimination, women’s rights and torture.

In 1996 Rwandan forces marched 1,500 km to topple the regime in Kinshasa and then re-invaded after the Congolese government it installed expelled Rwandan troops. This led to an eight-country war between 1998 and 2003, which left millions dead. Since that time Rwanda and its proxies have repeatedly invaded eastern Congo and continue to occupy the east of the country. Some six million remain displaced.

The Rwanda government in Kigali justified its 1996 intervention into the Congo as an effort to protect the Banyamulenge (Congolese Tutsi) living in eastern Congo from the Hutus who fled the country when the RPF took power after the 1994 genocide.

The US military increased its assistance to Rwanda in the months leading up to its fall 1996 invasion of Zaire. In The Great African War: Congo and Regional Geopolitics, 1996-2006 Filip Reyntjens explains: “The United States was aware of the intentions of Kagame to attack the refugee camps and probably assisted him in doing so. In addition, they deliberately lied about the number and fate of the refugees remaining in Zaire, in order to avoid the deployment of an international humanitarian force, which could have saved tens of thousands of human lives, but which was resented by Kigali and AFDL [a Rwandan backed rebel force led by Laurent-Désiré Kabila].”

In the just released Rwanda’s 30-Year Assault on Congo: The Crimes, the Criminals, and the Cover-Up (Baraka Books) Judi Rever documents Washington’s central role in a war to topple aging kleptocrat Mobutu Sese Seko, who lost his use after the end of the Cold War. According to a review, Rever documents how “the US provided satellite tracking data to locate Hutu refugees in the jungle. It deployed AC-130 gunships, P-3 Orion surveillance planes, and a national intelligence support team drawing on the CIA, the NSA, and the Defense Intelligence Agency. It sent Special Forces from Fort Bragg to train Rwandan troops in counter-insurgency.”

Ottawa played an important, if somewhat bizarre, part in this sordid affair. In late 1996, Canada led a short-lived UN force into eastern Zaire, meant to bring food and protection to Hutu refugees. The official story is that Prime Minister Jean Chrétien organized a humanitarian mission into eastern Zaire after his wife saw images of exiled Rwandan refugees on CNN. In fact, Washington proposed that Ottawa, with many French speakers at its disposal, lead the UN mission. The US didn’t want pro-Joseph Mobutu Sese Seko France to gain control of the UN force.

Keep reading

Marco Rubio Helps Israel Pursue Goal of Civil War in Lebanon

After President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance committed the United States to a deconfliction cell with Iran in Switzerland – a mechanism enforcing a ceasefire in Lebanon as well as Iran – Israel and its powerful lobby moved instantly to sabotage it. And in a preview of the sorts of foreign policy fissures that will likely define the 2028 GOP primary, the lobby has deployed Secretary of State Marco Rubio as the man to pursue Israel’s interests and pave the way for Israel’s further occupation of Lebanon.

The first article of the 60-day interim agreement signed by the U.S. and Iran conditions an end to the conflict on the “immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon” and on “ensuring the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon.” That second clause, more than any other, appears to be the one Israel is most reluctant to accept.

Despite Israeli withdrawal now required to end a war that now threatens to destabilize the entire global economy, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently said that Israel would occupy southern Lebanon indefinitely, stating that “we dominate southern Lebanon, from the summit of the Beaufort, and we will remain as long as required,” adding that “we do not intend to withdraw from it.” Defense Minister Israel Katz meanwhile said there was “no American demand for Israel to withdraw from Lebanon,” and that Israel would not withdraw even if there were one, later telling reporters that southern Lebanon was Israel’s “playground.”

That Iran has set out to secure the complete “territorial integrity” of Lebanon is unacceptable to Israel, which seeks to ethnically cleanse southern Lebanon and possibly further north, with the goal of seizing the land for the Greater Israel Project.

In order to sabotage a deconfliction track outlined in Switzerland and continue their endless project to secure more lebensraum, the Israelis have turned to the U.S. State Department and the Israel Lobby’s man in charge, Marco Rubio, whose spearheaded deconfliction framework was signed by the governments of Israel and Lebanon in Washington on Friday.

Intended to supplant the one announced by Vance – which the Times of Israel reported “infuriated Israel” – Rubio’s agreement strips out the guarantee of Lebanese territorial integrity that Iran insists is necessary to end the war and replaces it with an Israeli wishlist that includes permissions for continued Israeli occupation of a “security zone” and a plan to deputize Lebanese forces to accomplish the likely-impossible objective of “disarming” Hezbollah.

Such an agreement is unacceptable to Hezbollah, which has vowed to keep fighting until Israeli forces leave Lebanon. That is why Israel and Marco Rubio deliberately excluded the group from the deal, producing a “peace deal” between two warring parties to which only one of them agreed.

Indeed, although the deal was pitched by Marco Rubio as “a framework for lasting peace and security,” statements made by Israelis and Hezbollah in recent days reveal that narrative to be nothing more than propaganda designed exclusively for Western audiences. On Israel’s Channel 13 after the signing of the Rubio deal, an Israeli analyst remarked how “it seems we’re leading the state of Lebanon into civil war,” adding “maybe it’s not so bad for us, let the Lebanese government fight Hezbollah.” That was “the goal from the start,” replied his co-host. Lebanese lawmaker Hassan Fadlallah, who is close to Hezbollah, agreed with the Israeli assessment, telling Al-Mayadeen on Friday that Lebanese ​authorities would not be able to enforce the agreement signed ‌in ‌Washington ​on ‌Friday ⁠unless, with ​U.S. backing, “they go ⁠to civil war.”

As John Mearsheimer foresaw in April, “what I think Netanyahu wants to do is to foment civil war in Lebanon, a war with the government on one side and Hezbollah on the other,” describing the strategy as a way of weakening them both. “The Israelis can’t disarm Hezbollah, so they want the Lebanese government to do it.”

In response to questions about the apparent divergence between the Lebanon frameworks pursued by JD Vance and Marco Rubio, the White House has denied that any divisions exist at all. Israel Katz has essentially said the same, admitting that even after Trump linked the Iran and Lebanon tracks and demanded that Israel stop “bringing down buildings in Beirut,” the IDF expanded ground operations north of the Litani River and enlarged its occupation of southern Lebanon, all of it, Katz said, “carried out with U.S. approval.”

Whether the intra-administration split is real or kayfabe, the status quo in Lebanon and its spoiling effect for a peace deal remain the same.

Harrison Berger is a correspondent at The American Conservative. He has contributed to Drop Site News, The Nation, and Responsible Statecraft. Previously, he was a researcher and producer for System Update with Glenn Greenwald. His work focuses on civil liberties and U.S. foreign policy. He studied Political Science and Russian Studies at Union College (NY).

Keep reading

Israeli authorities arrest 20-year-old American citizen in Jerusalem on suspicion of conducting espionage missions for Iranian intelligence

In a major joint counterintelligence operation, the Israel Police and the Shin Bet security agency announced the arrest of a 20-year-old American citizen residing in the Jerusalem area on suspicion of conducting espionage missions for Iranian intelligence.

The suspect, whose identity remains withheld under court-authorized restrictions, was taken into custody following critical intelligence provided by a number of undisclosed security agencies.

A prosecutor’s statement was formally filed in court, a mandatory legal precursor signaling that a formal indictment and a request to hold the individual without bail until the conclusion of legal proceedings will be submitted.

According to security officials, the investigation revealed that the suspect had been actively maintaining contact with operatives acting on behalf of Iranian intelligence agencies over the course of several months.

During this period, the American reportedly accepted and executed numerous assignments that primarily involved documenting and photographing sensitive strategic sites across Israel. In exchange for the surveillance data and media, the suspect allegedly received financial compensation “ranging from dozens to hundreds of U.S. dollars per completed task.”

The arrest comes amid a sharp spike in Iranian-directed espionage operations inside Israel, which have increasingly relied on recruiting local residents and foreign nationals through digital platforms.

Chief Inspector Amichai Panta, an investigations officer with the Jerusalem District’s Major Crimes Unit, emphasized the gravity of the case, noting that multiple espionage operations have been dismantled recently, with some suspects operating directly during active wartime to aid hostile foreign plots.

Keep reading

Europe to Assist Zelensky’s Conscription Effort

Europe welcomed millions of Ukrainians with open arms. Governments competed with one another to prove who could be the most compassionate. Nobody wanted to ask the uncomfortable question. What happens when the war drags on for years? Eventually, someone has to fight it.

Now the European Commission is proposing that newly arriving Ukrainian men of military age who are not authorized to leave Ukraine should no longer qualify for temporary protection. Existing refugees would remain protected, but the message is changing. According to the Commission, the proposal came at Ukraine’s request because Kyiv needs to preserve its ability to defend itself. Sweden’s Migration Minister Johan Forssell said the quiet part out loud: “It is essential for us to provide Ukrainians with protection, but at the same time the war needs to be fought and won. For that to happen, it is essential that more men stay in Ukraine and fight.”

Europe is beginning to acknowledge something politicians have carefully avoided saying for years. Wars consume people. Ammunition can be manufactured, but young men cannot. Zelensky has banned military-aged men from leaving the nation.

Zelensky is forcing a generation to perish in this endless war with Russia and NATO. Recent reports indicate that 200,000 soldiers have gone AWOL (absent without leave), and for perspective, that is more soldiers than the entire UK military. Ukraine’s new Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov warned that the government is hunting down two million Ukrainians who are wanted for evading mobilization.

“Today, we cannot fight with new technologies, with an old organizational structure,” Fedorov said in a televised warning. “Our goal is to change the system, carry out army reforms, improve the infrastructure on the front, to eradicate lies and corruption, to instill leadership, and a new culture of trust.”

The age of conscription was lowered from 27 to 25 back in April 2024. Zelensky has demanded that men from 25 up to 60 years of age join mobilization efforts. Ukraine has a population of 40 million, and 2 million evaders represent a significant portion of men, but only six months ago, reports indicated that 6 million men were wanted for evading the draft. The EU is now considering preventing men aged 24 to 60 from entering the bloc as the war requires ample cannon fodder. Europe is not fighting in this battle for the good or Ukraine or its people.

Keep reading

Empire At 250: Can The Principles Of 1776 Survive The American Police State?

“The people are the only legitimate fountain of power.”

– James Madison

This is a year of strange anniversaries.

Two hundred and fifty years ago, a band of revolutionaries declared their independence from a king.

America’s founders rejected concentrated power. They denounced standing armies. They distrusted government secrecy. They risked their lives to escape a ruler who could tax without consent, wage war without accountability, and govern without meaningful restraint.

Twenty-five years ago, after the attacks of September 11, 2001, America embarked on a very different journey.

The federal government claimed extraordinary emergency powers. Surveillance expanded. Wars multiplied. Executive authority grew. Constitutional safeguards were weakened in the name of security.

One anniversary marked a revolt against empire. The other marked the normalization of it.

Now, as America prepares to celebrate 250 years of independence, we are confronted with a bitter irony: the republic born in rebellion against empire has become an empire in everything but name.

Worse, the U.S. government is violating the very principles that justified the American Revolution.

Graft, grift and corruption. Endless wars. Profiteering. Trillions squandered abroad while the nation sinks deeper into debt at home.

A government that governs increasingly by executive order and emergency decree. A government that wastes taxpayer money with impunity, rewards political loyalty over constitutional fidelity, installs loyalists in positions meant to serve the public, dismantles safeguards against corruption, shields insiders from scrutiny, and treats accountability as an inconvenience.

National states of emergency that never seem to end. Efforts to nullify constitutional guarantees such as birthright citizenship. Expanded death penalty powers. A growing willingness to bypass Congress, sidestep constitutional restraints and rule by fiat.

Surveillance programs that track where we go, what we buy, who we know, what we say and what we believe. Fusion centers, facial recognition, license plate readers, AI-assisted monitoring, financial tracking, intelligence-sharing agreements and a sprawling security apparatus that treats privacy as a loophole and dissent as a threat.

Keep reading

Americans Want Peace, Israel Wants War

America wants peace. Israel wants war. The great majority of Americans want an end to the war against Iran. The great majority in Congress just want more contributions from the Israel Lobby and its supporters.

Now, most members of Congress are really squirming. They know that most of their constituents are fed up with foreign wars and want this stupid war in Iran over, the sooner the better.

But they are afraid to criticize Israel’s war for fear of the Israel Lobby steering big campaign contributions against them. Their silence is deafening.

Most members are trying to keep quiet. Almost no one other than Mark Levin, Ben Shapiro, and the Israel First crowd are enthusiastic about this war.

The only ones speaking out strongly in favor of it are members who have received and/or who hope to receive millions in campaign contributions from the Lobby like Senators Ted Cruz, Lindsay Graham, Tom Cotton and others.

They didn’t even criticize Israel when it was starving and killing more than 20,000 children in Gaza. Congress would have rushed to pass a resolution of condemnation if it had been done in any other country than Israel.

But the killing goes on, even during so-called ceasefires. Thousands have been killed over this past year by Israeli forces in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran.

We don’t hear and see as much about all this killing because Israel was losing the public relations battle, and pro-Israel billionaires bought up significant parts of the national media that they did not already own.  Lesser-known conservative “influencers” and podcasters were given money, and 1,000 ministers were given free trips to Israel. Even TikTok was bought because its coverage was supposedly causing too many teenagers to have anti-Israel opinions.

However, all the pro-Israel propaganda has not worked so far. Even President Trump has apparently gotten angry at times with Netanyahu, telling him at one point that he shouldn’t blow up an entire apartment building to get at one person.

And Vice President Vance told the world in a press conference that Israel’s cabinet should realize that President Trump was the only world leader still supporting  Netanyahu and that two-thirds of all the military equipment and ammunition used by the IDF in these latest wars had been paid for by U.S. taxpayers.

The very few members of Congress and commentators who are criticizing President Trump for giving into Iran in the Memorandum he signed need to be asked what their alternative is.

Keep reading

Israel-Lebanon Deal On Life Support: Israel Won’t Withdraw, And Lebanon’s Christians Are Split On Whether It’s A Lifeline Or A Trap

The US-brokered “Trilateral Framework” signed in Washington on June 26 — sold as a “first step toward peace” — is fraying within days. The 14-point deal ties any Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon to the “verified disarmament of non-state armed groups,” a plain reference to Hezbollah. A now-public security annex states: further IDF pullbacks are conditioned on “results, not time” — on “successful completion of agreed upon and verifiable disarmament,” with no withdrawal timeline at all. Israel can therefore stay indefinitely and call it legal.

Netanyahu, visiting troops in the self-declared “security zone” alongside Defense Minister Israel Katz, said Israel “will not leave southern Lebanon until the threat has disappeared”; Katz added they “will not withdraw a millimeter” until Hezbollah is disarmed. Since disarmament is the precondition for a withdrawal Israel refuses to start, the sequencing seems circular by design. Israeli strikes have continued across the south, the Bekaa, and Beirut’s southern suburbs. Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem branded the deal “null and void,” a “humiliation,” and vowed to keep fighting until Israel leaves — a rejection driven by the Iran-backed militia’s determination to keep its weapons and its war, not by any concern for the Lebanese state.

The Christian angle is where Western coverage flattens a real divide — and it’s worth getting right, because Israel has a documented history of cultivating Lebanese politicians.

On one side, Samir Geagea’s Lebanese Forces cheered the pact as “the most significant political step taken by the Lebanese state in half a century.” But Geagea is the most Israel-friendly voice in Lebanese politics — so his enthusiasm should be weighed accordingly, not taken as the Christian consensus.

The Free Patriotic Movement, Lebanon’s second largest Christian party, founded by former President Michel Aoun and led by Gebran Bassil, did not celebrate but seems open to finding a way forward. Bassil’s verdict: the agreement “is beneficial if we regain all our rights, and dangerous if it is a recipe for strife,” demanding “responsible engagement.” The party said it backs “a comprehensive and lasting peace” but that peace “cannot be achieved through surrendering to Israeli demands or sacrificing Lebanese rights,” warning the framework “lacks guarantees for Israeli withdrawal” and that its use of “redeployment” instead of withdrawal leaves “the door open for the continuation of the occupation.”

Keep reading

Chilling Report Finds Israel Deliberately Targeting Children As Genocide In Gaza Continues

Tension over Israel continues to grow within US political discourse. From both sides of the aisle, people’s attitudes towards the Zionist settler-colonial project are souring. Israel is the most disliked it has ever been, with a recent survey from the Pew Research Center finding that the majority of people across 36 countries hold unfavorable views of Israel and Netanyahu, with the number as high as 60% among Americans.

Support for Israeli war crimes continues to drive a rift between both parties. Just this week, opposition to Israel played a key role in the outcomes of New York’s congressional primaries, with anti-Zionist candidates receiving sweeping victories over candidates backed by establishment Democrats. Meanwhile, on the right, conservative firebrand Tucker Carlson officially announced he was leaving the Republican Party specifically due to its continued support for Israel.

These sentiments will likely only continue to grow in light of a new report recently released by the United Nations Human Rights Council’s Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory. From the very beginning, the report is unambiguous in its findings with the headline reading “the essence of childhood has been destroyed.” In it, the inquiry found conclusive evidence that Israeli forces have consistently and deliberately targeted children in Gaza, as well as the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and including within protected refugee camps, resulting in the death of at least 20,179 and injury of 44,143 since October 7th, 2023.

According to the report, among those killed, 5,031 were under the age of five, while more than 1,000 were under one year of age. Most disheartning, the inquiry found that approximately 420 of those killed were newborn babies.

The commission noted the actual number of child casualties is “certainly higher”, due to the amount of unaccounted child victims who are missing or buried under rubble, estimated to be roughly an additional 5,160.

The commission interviewed 17 medical professionals who had worked at hospitals across Gaza. Among them, one doctor attested that many of the injuries they documented were akin to “a game of target practice”, with Israeli snipers targeting different body parts of teenage boys on different days. With other doctors documenting similar acts of deliberate depravity.

Keep reading