The MoU Is Not the Final ‘Deal’

Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif announced on Sunday that the U.S. and Iran had reached a “Peace Deal.” Immediately following Sharif’s post on X, President Donald Trump seconded this news:

“The Deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran is now complete. Congratulations to all! I hereby fully authorize the toll free opening of the Strait of Hormuz, and, simultaneously herewith, authorize the immediate removal of the United States Naval blockade. Ships of the World, start your engines. Let the oil flow! President DONALD J. TRUMP”

As the media is reacting to the flurry of updates, there is an air of optimism that I fear is blinding many in the public, and the financial markets, to the truth about this deal. There is a crucial detail that the commentator class seems to be largely missing, outside of a few reliable voices:

This “deal” is a Memorandum of Understanding, not a comprehensive “Iran deal” as Trump keeps claiming.

Based on the details being reported, it essentially saves the most complicated issues for later and would establish a 60-day ceasefire period to discuss these points in greater depth. The main issue, Iran’s nuclear enrichment, has not been discussed in any technical way up to this point.

Despite Trump’s claims that “We will go in and get the Nuclear Dust, buried deep under the powerful sunken granite mountains, thanks to our beautiful B-2 Bombers and their brilliant pilots, and downblend and destroy it, whether in Iran, or the United States,” no such agreement has been reached regarding the details of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile.

Even as this deal was announced, we still have no clarity on the status of the nuclear file in these discussions. Trump told the Wall Street Journal on Sunday:

“‘We’ll get the nuclear dust later on when we’re ready to go in and do it. I’d say over the next month or two, there’s no rush,’ he said. He called it ‘harmless.’”

Besides the fact that this statement contradicts months of propaganda on the “imminent threat” posed by Iran, this signals that details on Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile have not been worked out, despite Trump’s claims to the contrary.

This agreement also doesn’t set terms on Iran’s missile or drone programs, nor does it discuss Iran’s support for their regional proxies. This has led many prominent neoconservative media voices to criticize the deal, saying that it won’t ensure that Iran is sufficiently weakened in the region.

Keep reading

Trump Will Slap French Wines With 100% Tariff Over France’s Digital Services Tax – Macron Is Defiant, But Wine Producers Are VERY Afraid

Tech versus Wine is the geopolitical arm-wrestle.

US President Donald J. Trump is in France for the G7 Summit and to meet French counterpart Emmanuel Macron, as you can read in 

Among the many issues that will be discussed, there is one economic war that is on the outing: Trump is demanding that France drop its tax on American tech firms or face a 100% tariff on its wine.

FOX Business reported:

“The U.S. will ‘have no choice’ but to apply the tariffs if French President Emmanuel Macron does not end its 3% levy on large digital services companies. ‘I asked him not to charge American companies, and if they do, I have no choice but to charge a 100% tariff on all champagnes and all wines coming out of France’, Trump told the New York Post in an interview. ‘All [Macron] has to do is get rid of the sales tax, and he wouldn’t have that kind of pressure’.

[…] ’The president has been unequivocally clear on digital services taxes and other forms of extortion against American tech firms’, a senior White House official told FOX Business on Monday, when reached for comment. ‘The administration is committed to using the many legal authorities at our disposal to defend American workers and businesses’.”

Keep reading

Russia Tells Banks to “Shoot Down Drones Yourself”

The line between civilian society and war is disappearing completely. That is the real story behind Russia now authorizing its central bank and Sberbank to operate anti-drone systems and arm personnel to defend financial infrastructure. A country’s banking system is no longer simply processing transactions or moving money. It is now becoming part of the battlefield itself.

Russia passed a new law allowing the central bank, Sberbank, and the Russian Cash Collection Association to deploy their own drone defense systems after repeated Ukrainian strikes deep inside Russian territory. Staff at these institutions can now reportedly be armed as well.

This is what happens when modern war evolves into economic warfare. I have warned repeatedly that World War III would not resemble World War II where armies simply lined up across borders. The entire economy becomes militarized. Banks, energy grids, payment systems, telecommunications, ports, railways, factories, and data centers all become targets because modern civilization itself depends on interconnected infrastructure.

Ukraine understands this perfectly. Their drone strategy has increasingly focused on striking oil facilities, energy infrastructure, logistics centers, and economic targets deep inside Russia because they know they cannot defeat Russia conventionally in a prolonged war of attrition.

What is extraordinary here is not merely the drone attacks themselves. It is the admission that the Russian state can no longer centrally defend everything. Moscow is effectively decentralizing air defense responsibilities and telling major corporations and financial institutions: defend yourselves. That is a major shift psychologically.

The Guardian even framed it bluntly: Russia is telling its banks to “shoot down drones yourself.”

This is precisely how long wars transform societies historically. Civilian infrastructure slowly merges with military infrastructure until there is barely any distinction left. During the later stages of major conflicts, factories become military targets, railroads become military targets, ports become military targets, and eventually financial institutions themselves become military targets because war is ultimately about resources and economic survival.

Sberbank is not some small regional bank. It is effectively intertwined with the Russian state itself. Sberbank controls roughly a third of Russian banking assets and acts as a pillar of the entire domestic financial system. The Russian central bank likewise sits at the core of wartime financing, sanctions management, currency stabilization, and capital controls.

Russia has pushed aggressively toward cashless payments, digital financial infrastructure, and central bank digital currency experimentation through the digital ruble system. But centralized digital systems become vulnerable during wartime because they create concentrated targets.

The more governments centralize financial systems digitally, the more vulnerable those systems become to cyberwarfare, EMP threats, sabotage, drone attacks, and infrastructure strikes. This is one reason governments are quietly preparing for a wartime financial environment globally.

Keep reading

Barack Obama Trashes Trump’s Iran Deal, Says He Doubts New US-Iran Agreement is Different From His Disastrous 2015 Nuclear Deal (

Former President Barack Obama trashed President Trump’s deal with Iran during an interview with ABC’s Robin Roberts.

The full interview will air on Wednesday on Good Morning America.

President Trump on Saturday confirmed that the Iran deal will be signed on Sunday.

Trump said the Strait of Hormuz will be opened and no money will change hands as he trashed Barack Obama’s disastrous Iran Nuke Deal (JCPOA).

“Barack Hussein Obama’s Deal with Iran, the JCPOA, was an easy, beautiful, smooth road to a Nuclear Weapon, which Iran would have had six years ago, and would have used long before now,” Trump said in a Truth Social post.

“My Agreement with Iran is the exact opposite, A WALL TO NO NUCLEAR WEAPON! In fact, they no longer want a Nuclear Weapon, nor will they have one, either through purchase, development, or any other form of procurement,” Trump said.

“Unlike Obama’s Hundreds of Billions of Dollars in payments to them, including 1.7 Billion Dollars in green, cold cash, no money will exchange hands,” Trump said, savaging the former president.

Bitter Obama trashed Trump just hours before the deal was set to be signed.

“You spent a lot of time wrestling with a nuclear Iran. How do you think things are being handled right now?” Robin Roberts asked Obama.

“It is doubtful that any agreement that arises is going to be significantly different or a significant improvement from the deal that we had in the first place, and had worked for a long stretch of time before we–the United States pulled out,” Obama said.

“I’m hopeful that the bombing stops and ordinary people are no longer suffering as a consequence of the war,” Obama added.

Obama trashed Trump for “bombing” his way to a solution.

Keep reading

Stanford Graduation Descends Into Chaos as Students Stage Mass Walkout on Google CEO Sundar Pichai’s Commencement Speech

More than 100 Stanford University graduates walked out of their commencement ceremony on Sunday to protest Google CEO Sundar Pichai.

Videos posted on social media showed students leaving their seats at Stanford Stadium while chanting “Free, free Palestine.”

Others booed and shouted “shame on you” as Pichai addressed the crowd.

The protest was organized by groups including Students for Justice in Palestine and No Tech for Apartheid.

Pichai, a Stanford alumnus who earned a master’s degree in materials science and engineering in 1995, was selected earlier this year to deliver the keynote address at the university’s 135th commencement ceremony.

Many of the protesting graduates carried Palestinian flags as they exited the stadium, turning what is traditionally one of the university’s most celebratory events into a political demonstration.

The protest centered on Google’s involvement in Project Nimbus, a $1.2 billion cloud computing and artificial intelligence contract jointly held with Amazon that provides services to the Israeli government.

Keep reading

Trump’s Iran War Slowing Global Economic Growth to Lowest Level Since Pandemic: World Bank

The World Bank on Thursday lowered its global growth forecast for the remainder of 2026 as the illegal US-Israeli war of choice on Iran drives up energy prices, inflation, and the cost of debt.

“The global economy is facing another major shock,” the World Bank’s latest biannual Global Economic Prospects report states. “The conflict in the Middle East has triggered sharp increases in energy prices, renewed inflationary pressures, and fueled expectations of tighter monetary policy.”

“Global growth is projected to slow to 2.5% in 2026, from 2.9% in 2025 – the lowest rate since the Covid-19 pandemic – amid weaker prospects for economies dependent on energy imports and those directly affected by hostilities,” the report continues. “Activity is expected to firm in 2027-28 as energy supplies recover, monetary easing resumes, and trade strengthens.”

The Iran War has resulted in the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, through which around 30% of the world’s fertilizer and 20% of its oil previously passed. In addition to increasing the risk of a global food crisis, the strait’s closure has sent fuel and fertilizer prices soaring, with US farm diesel costing nearly 50% more than it did on the war’s eve in February and various fertilizer products spiking by between one-quarter and one-half.

The war has affected the economies of countries far removed from Iran, as the World Bank reports forecasts that “growth in emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs) is expected to slow to 3.6% this year.”

“The level of per capita income across EMDEs excluding China and India, relative to advanced economies, is not expected to return to the pre-pandemic level until after 2028, implying nearly a decade of lost income convergence,” the international financial institution predicted.

World Bank Group president Ajay Banga said in a statement Thursday that “developing countries have faced a series of challenges over the last decade.”

“The impact differs by country, but the basic test is the same: Protect people and preserve stability today, without giving up on growth and jobs tomorrow,” Banga added. “In response to the current shock, we are providing liquidity where it is needed now – and we are ready with additional financing, guarantees, and private-sector solutions if pressures deepen. Our job is to help countries steady the ship, keep reforms moving, and emerge stronger on the other side.”

The bank said in April that up to $100 billion would be made available over the next 15 months for nations suffering the most acute economic shocks caused by the war.

Keep reading

Israel And Her Supporters In US Rage Over Peace Deal, Declare Will Not Abide, Enemies Come After Netanyahu

Israeli officials took to social media today to declare they will not abide by President Trump’s ceasefire agreement when it comes specifically to Lebanon. Pro-Israeli influencers and voices in the United States were also upset with the deal.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s critics used the deal to attack him politically.

Comments are below.

Israeli National Security Minister Ben-Gvir:

Trump’s agreement does not bind us. Israel is not subject to the United States, and we are an independent and sovereign nation!

We emphasize: We love the USA and are grateful to President Trump. And yet, the State of Israel is not a banana republic.

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich:

The agreement with Iran is bad for Israel and for the entire free world. Period.

The joint campaign had many achievements in weakening Iran, and they will not go to waste. 

We will have to continue the campaign to topple the regime ourselves and in creative ways, and ensure that Iran will never have nuclear weapons.

Keep reading

With One Strike, Netanyahu Tries To Kill Two Peace Deals

It’s important to understand that, contrary to Donald Trump’s quip to Barak Ravid that Netanyahu has “no f***ing judgment,” the Israeli Prime Minister knows exactly what he is doing: With a set of strikes at the Dahiyeh neighborhood in Beirut, he is trying to kill both the pending US-Iran peace deal and the fragile peace between Israel and Lebanon that would come with it.

There is a further strategic dividend. Netanyahu is also seeking to preempt Iran’s attempt to establish a new regional deterrence equation – one in which attacks on Beirut, and potentially on Lebanon more broadly, would trigger a direct Iranian response against Israel. By striking now, he is not merely targeting an adversary; he is challenging the emergence of a regional order that would constrain Israel’s freedom of military action.

Netanyahu even posted a video on his Twitter bragging about the attack.

The exchange of fire between Israel and Iran last week was about far more than retaliation. After Israel defied President Trump and struck Beirut’s Dahiyeh neighborhood, Iran responded by attacking Israel directly – the first time Tehran had launched strikes on Israel in response to an Israeli attack on Lebanon. Israel defied Trump once more and retaliated against Iran, prompting another Iranian response, after which Israel confined its next strike to southern Lebanon rather than Beirut.

The cycle reflected Iran’s attempt to establish a new regional equation: that attacks on Lebanon would no longer be cost-free for Israel, but would carry the risk of direct Iranian retaliation. For the first time in decades, a major regional power was seeking to place hard-power constraints on Israel’s freedom of military action beyond its borders.

Having reestablished its own deterrence, Tehran was now attempting to establish extended deterrence to its partners as part of a broader effort to rebuild its forward-defense posture. Israel, unsurprisingly, viewed this as a direct challenge to its long-standing freedom of maneuver and moved quickly to prevent the new doctrine from taking hold.

Of course, extended deterrence can not be established through a single exchange of fire. At a minimum, it would require several rounds of action and reaction before either side accepted it as a new reality. And even then, it would never be foolproof. Tehran understands that its purpose cannot simply be to eliminate Israeli strikes on Lebanon, but to force Israeli leaders to think twice before authorizing them by attaching a new and significant cost: the likelihood of direct Iranian retaliation.

It was therefore clear that Netanyahu had not abandoned the fight. Yet for several days, even as Hezbollah and Israel continued to exchange fire, he refrained from striking Beirut’s southern suburbs and testing Iran’s new red line.

Keep reading

How Israel Planned the Gaza Genocide Decades Ago

The truth slowly comes to light: Israel‘s genocide in Gaza was planned decades ago.

Listen to the testimonies of four Israeli soldiers who served in Gaza.

Soldier 1: “Human lives didn’t matter. You could kill, there was no law. No one would say a word to you. But it’s not a good feeling. It mainly kills your humanity.”

Soldier 2: “At first I wasn’t willing to execute Arabs who weren’t resisting [that is, civilians]. Then we came to the conclusion that we had to kill. We went through the process of ceasing to see them as human beings.”

Soldier 3: “We caught guys, lined them up and eliminated them. In retrospect, it looks like murder.”

Soldier 4: “We would roam through refugee camps in Gaza and carry out purges… Every soldier who was there created a ‘concentration camp’, and they didn’t hesitate to kill people who caused a slight disturbance.”

No, these testimonies are not new. The whistleblowers did not serve in Gaza during the current, ongoing genocide there. These accounts are nearly 60 years old, published last week by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz under the headline “We were ordered to kill”.

Israeli soldiers interviewed shortly after the 1967 war – often referred to as the Six-Day War – not only confessed that they and others routinely committed war crimes but they pointed out that they did so under orders from their commanders.

The accounts were compiled into a book, The Seventh Day: Soldiers Talk About the Six-Day War, by Avraham Shapira, though many testimonies were not included because they were too shocking.

None of this should be simply of historical interest. These accounts are a vivid reminder that what Israel has been doing during its current, near three-year destruction of Gaza – levelling all homes, hospitals, schools, universities, bakeries and government offices; murdering tens of thousands, more likely hundreds of thousands, of Palestinian civilians; and blocking aid and starving the population – is part of a decades-old pattern of Israeli military conduct.

Nothing “started” on 7 October 2023, when Hamas broke out for a single day of the Gaza “concentration camp” – the plight of Gaza’s Palestinians noted 59 years ago by Soldier 4.

Rather, Israel found an excuse that day to breathe new life into an old story, one in which it has been slaughtering and expelling Palestinians for decades. The chief difference this time is simply one of scale and duration.

Washington and other western capitals have given Israel the time and space to finish in Gaza what, earlier, it had only been able to achieve in part. Israel’s much greater firepower today, provided by modern munitions supplied by the United States, has allowed Israel to realise what before it could only dream of doing: wiping Gaza off the map.

Keep reading

It’s a Most Confusing Time To Be in the US Military

It’s a most confusing time to be in the U.S. military. Who knows why we fight?

At the top, there’s a lack of principles, a lack of clarity, a lack of care.

There’s no accountability for losses and bad decisions.

The government keeps the people isolated from war’s true costs. There’s no call for sacrifice. No war bonds, no draft, no increase in taxes. Costs are largely kicked into the future as the national debt soars ever higher.

An all-volunteer military is essentially told to follow orders. Never mind about the morality or legality of the same.

The people are encouraged to cheer on or otherwise to support their warriors and warfighters. Basically, to wave the flag but otherwise to go about their business.

A divided Congress has essentially rendered itself powerless over war-making. Meanwhile, Members of Congress fight for their share of an expanding Pentagon pie of money (or pork) for their districts.

The Secretary of State says we went to war with Iran because Israel forced the U.S. government’s hand. So apparently in this case the U.S. military fights for Israel.

So far, the main beneficiaries of the war appear to be defense contractors, fossil fuel companies and banks, so apparently the U.S. military is fighting for them as well.

Clearly, with Iran the U.S. military is not fighting to defend the American people or to support and defend the U.S. Constitution.

Again, who knows why we fight?

Keep reading