Elena Panina
Елена Панина (Telegram)

On June 12, the Iranian news outlet Mehr News published a memorandum of understanding between the US and Iran:

1. A permanent and immediate cessation of hostilities on all fronts, including Lebanon.
2. A commitment by the US not to interfere in Iran's internal affairs and to respect the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
3. A complete lifting of the naval blockade within 30 days.
4. A commitment by the US to withdraw its troops from areas surrounding Iran.
5. Reopening the Strait of Hormuz within 30 days in accordance with the Iranian agreements.
6. Suspension of sanctions on the sale of oil, petrochemical products, and derivatives, as well as full access for Iran to its financial resources.
7. The United States and its allies are required to present reconstruction plans for Iran worth at least $300 billion.
8. 60 days of negotiations to reach a final agreement on nuclear issues and the complete lifting of US primary and secondary sanctions, as well as UN Security Council and IAEA Board of Governors resolutions.
9. Reaffirm Iran's commitment under the NPT not to produce nuclear weapons.
10. The United States commits not to build up forces in the region or impose new sanctions during the negotiating period.
11. Release $24 billion in frozen Iranian funds during the 60-day final negotiating period. Half of this amount must be released to Iran before the start of negotiations.
12. Formation of a supervisory mechanism for the implementation of the agreement.
13. The final agreement will be approved by a UN Security Council resolution.
14. Final negotiations will not begin until half of Iran's frozen assets are released, sanctions on Iranian oil are suspended, and the naval blockade is lifted. The final agreement will only cover the fate of enriched materials and enrichment, the lifting of sanctions, and a plan for Iran's economic reconstruction.

Glenn Diesen
Glenn's Substack

[Speech slightly edited for clarity by this editor.]

The following is my speech at a conference organised by General Michael Flynn at the Gold Institute in Banja Luka, Republika Srpska.

My talk will focus to a large extent on Russia, as it has played a central role in shaping the purpose of transatlantic security over the past 80 years. Furthermore, Russia is a key actor in the multipolar world, an independent pole of power, and China's most important strategic partner. The China-Russia strategic partnership is referred to as Kissinger’s worst nightmare, as his key achievement was to keep these two Eurasian giants apart.

Trump recently met with Xi in Beijing, and shortly thereafter, Putin arrived there as well. The two Eurasian leaders agreed upon a common statement on commitment to a multipolar world. Three years earlier, in March 2023, Xi had told Putin that the world is now undergoing changes not seen for 100 years.

In the 1990s and 2000s, Russia prioritised integration with the West to construct an inclusive Europe – a Greater Europe. With this overarching objective, relations with China and Iran were often ignored and even used as a bargaining chip for Russia to negotiate a place in the West. This is no longer the case; Russia now looks to the East, and countries such as China, Iran, and India are key strategic partners in an effort to reduce dependence on the West and construct a multipolar world order.

Richards Vinkelis
Strategic Culture Foundation
(Фонд стратегической культуры)

Latvian-Ukrainian agreement legalizes the presence of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the Baltic republic

Latvian Prime Minister Andris Kulbergs (Joint List) and Volodymyr Zelenskyy signed an agreement on comprehensive defense cooperation between the two countries in Tallinn. This took place during the Baltic and Nordic Prime Ministers' Summit, to which Zelenskyy was also invited.

The main aspect of the Latvian-Ukrainian agreement is the legalization of the Ukrainian Armed Forces' presence in Latvia.

Thus, paragraph 16.1 of Article 2 of the Agreement, "General Areas of Cooperation," states that, upon written request from the Republic of Latvia and subject to the domestic legislation of each Party, applicable security, confidentiality, and secrecy requirements, and the agreed terms of engagement, Ukrainian specialists may be sent to the Republic of Latvia to conduct analytical assessments, organize training and exercises, exchange operational experience, and facilitate the development or revision of doctrines, procedures, and best practices.

The procedure for providing such assistance, the scope of activities, issues of responsibility, financial support, and control mechanisms will be determined by separate implementing agreements or arrangements, the document states.

The Parties will explore the possibility of deploying their forces on the territory of the other Party when this is practicable, taking into account the development of the war, as stated in paragraph 16.1 of Article 2 of the Agreement, "General Areas of Cooperation."

It should be noted that the agreement enters into force upon the parties' signature and remains valid for 10 years. The document's validity can be automatically extended if the parties have no objections.

This means that, as of today, the presence of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in Latvia is legalized.

Elena Panina
Елена Панина (Telegram)

The number of plans to strengthen NATO's support for Ukraine is growing. German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul is bringing a German plan, originally titled "The Trap," to the alliance's foreign ministers' meeting in Helsingborg, Sweden.

❖ This plan is intended to ensure "long-term financing of Ukraine's defense efforts," including through monitoring. It appears Germany has decided to identify those shirking their share of joint funding for the battering ram against Russia. Furthermore, Wadephul intends to "attract more funds and expand the financial base." In exchange, he promises NATO partners the benefit of "the impressive achievements of Ukraine's military industry."

It's worth noting that just a week ago, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte announced a proposal to allocate 0.25% of GDP to Ukraine's needs. It's a real competition of plans.

Igor Maltsev
Specially for RT

We live in extraordinary times, when fundamental documents and treaties of national, continental, and global significance are effectively being abolished for the sake of a short-term political agenda. And that agenda is: "Russia is our enemy." No more, no less.

You probably don't remember, in the whirlwind of events, that the first package of EU sanctions against Russia was rolled out a couple of days after February 24, 2022. It was so detailed that it even listed electric guitars over €1,000 and hundreds of cosmetics. Now look at how many EU countries are putting together new sanctions packages (the 21st already)—this process drags on for months. This means all the sanctions were already prepared and were simply awaiting an opportunity. Because Russia has long been designated an enemy. At least by the gentlemen of NATO.

And what does NATO have to do with the EU? That's right – nothing. NATO is a "defensive" alliance, the EU is an economic one.

Just in case, I read the Lisbon Treaty on the EU: banks, customs, nuclear energy, courts, investment, trade, and development support. The only thing that could even remotely be considered a military topic is civil defense. That's all. Nothing about building a military fortress, creating a European army, or joint efforts to destroy an enemy (like Russia) – there's none of that there.

Elena Panina
Елена Панина (Telegram)

Act without a long delay. Prescribe them a Kinzhal, Zircon, or Kalibr pill—and at the same time test these missiles in combat conditions against surface targets.

"We will discuss [Russia's] shadow fleet, talking about freedom of navigation and maritime security. Our [EU naval force] Operation IRINI has changed the rules of engagement and has now begun inspecting ships," said EU Chief Diplomat Kaja Kallas upon arriving in Cyprus for an informal meeting of EU defense ministers.

The goal, Kallas clarified, is to change best practices—what different countries do with these ships—"because this really does pose a danger. And, of course, the goal is to stop Russia from financing this war."

Operation IRINI was launched in the Mediterranean on March 31, 2020, to inspect merchant vessels to prevent the illegal shipment of arms to Libya. However, it was unsuccessful. The operation has been extended until March 31, 2027. It was based on Resolution 2292, adopted by the UN Security Council on June 14, 2016, which specifically addressed Libya and its arms embargo. What implications does this have for the fleet transporting Russian oil?

Clearly, Russia needs to respond to Kallas's statement at the diplomatic level. It must declare that the European Union will not be able to cover up its piracy in the Mediterranean with UN Security Council Resolution 2292. It must also warn of a forceful response to these measures.

Strategic Culture Foundation (Editorial)
Strategic Culture Foundation

The massacre at Starobelsk three weeks ago was yet another example of the BBC and Western media serving as blatant propaganda outlets to distort and prolong the conflict.

It takes a special kind of entitled attitude to be a correspondent in a country for over 20 years – and never to give any positive reporting about your host nation. That’s the case for Steve Rosenberg, the so-called Russia Editor for the British state-owned BBC, based in Moscow.

Rosenberg doesn’t actually report on Russia in any sort of normal way, as befitting a genuine journalist. His assignment is to habitually belittle and bemoan. Continually.

In all his years of working from Russia, one is hard-pressed to find anything in his portfolio that informs readers of achievements or positive developments in Russian culture, politics, and economics. Rosenberg’s job, it seems, is to constantly complain and portray Russia in the poorest light.

Paul Holden
Drop Site News

Starmer’s then-chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney,
arrives at Downing Street on October 6, 2025.

How Secret Pro-Israel Money Flooded the Labour Party and Ended with a Ban of Hasan Piker and Cenk Uygur.

After Hasan Piker and Cenk Uygur were banned from entering the UK earlier this week, reportedly because of their criticism of Israel, Piker commented that he “would never have imagined that a [Labour] government would ban me from entering the UK.” Indeed, millions of UK voters would likely agree.

But Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s government is not really a Labour government; it came to power on the back of a secret project to wrest control of the Labour Party back from an ascendant left wing.

This secret project was resourced by illegally undeclared money from wealthy donors, funneled through a seemingly anodyne think tank called Labour Together. It involved covertly seeding promiscuous claims of antisemitism against political opponents, attempting to silence independent media that threatened to expose its project, and—ultimately—developing the dishonest leadership pitch that allowed Keir Starmer to trick a left-wing membership to elect him leader.

Kotsnews
Kotsnews (Telegram)

Kill, blow up, destroy, beat, and drown. Thoughts on the current moment

Isn't it time to stop being so prissy? We won't win this war wearing white gloves. It's impossible to remain a knight when you're playing against cheaters. Let's remove the restraints and begin:

1. Kill the decision-makers. From Zelenskyy on down, from Magyar on up. Kill them daily and without any moral compunction. Then kill those who take their place. Then the next ones. And the next ones. Until they collapse.

2. Blow up the bridges across the Dnieper. Or create conditions that make them unusable. Just like the Ukrainians did with the Antonovsky Bridge in Kherson back in 2022. There are about 20 of them along the entire Ukrainian stretch of the Dnieper. We need to cut it along the river, then methodically remove the pontoons and ferry crossings; they'll start building.

3. Destroy the cities' sewage and wastewater treatment systems and create unbearable living conditions there. Crowds of refugees heading west will paralyze the enemy's logistics. We're already at the point where we should stop worrying about the inconveniences for civilians on the other side.

Dr. Marwa Osman
Marwa Osman/MidEaStream + Part 2

Washington's so-called ceasefire framework reveals a striking imbalance between what is being demanded of Lebanon and what is being demanded of Israel.

At its core, the proposal conditions a ceasefire on Hezbollah ending military operations and withdrawing from South Lebanon. Yet there appears to be no corresponding requirement for Israel to withdraw from Lebanese territory, no explicit commitment to cease military violations, no mention of the return of displaced civilians, and no reference to Lebanese detainees held by Israel.

The structure of the agreement is particularly revealing. The American and Israeli sections consist primarily of concrete, enforceable measures: disarmament, evacuation, security requirements, and implementation mechanisms. The Lebanese portion, by contrast, largely consists of declaratory language about sovereignty, mutual respect, and internationally recognized borders; principles that sound "reassuring" on paper but lack any meaningful enforcement provisions.

In diplomatic negotiations, this distinction matters. Binding obligations imposed on one side, while the other side receives broad statements of intent, rarely create the perception of a balanced agreement.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

As it’s always done, Russia is expected to ensure its sovereignty, security, and thus its survival through the creative interplay between its political, military, intelligence, diplomatic, expert, and civil society communities.

Russia’s special operation against NATO-backed Ukraine just entered its fifth year. The last three anniversaries were reflected upon here, and keeping with tradition, the present piece will review what happened over the past year and forecast what might be come in the next one.

Generally speaking, Russia now faces five geostrategic challenges that are expected to shape its approach towards the US-mediated peace talks with Ukraine and its grand strategy overall, namely:

❖ NATO Influence Is Poised To Expand Along Russia’s Entire Southern Periphery | Last August’s “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity” (TRIPP) along Armenia’s southern Syunik Province has the dual function of a NATO military-logistics corridor through the South Caucasus to Central Asia. Spearheaded by member state Turkiye with allied Azerbaijan serving as the launchpad across the Caspian, TRIPP threatens to revolutionize Russia’s regional security situation for the worse if these threats aren’t contained, especially if it emboldens Kazakhstan to follow in Ukraine’s footsteps.

❖ The US Supports The Revival Of Poland’s Long-Lost Great Power Status | “September 2025 Was The Most Eventful Month For Poland Since The End Of Communism” for the 18 reasons enumerated in the preceding hyperlinked analysis, which set Poland up to play a central role in the US’ National Security Strategy for containing Russia after the Ukrainian Conflict ends.

Elena Panina
Елена Панина (Telegram)

The unprovoked US-Israeli attack on Iran by the Zionist-
controlled U.S.: Events were based on a pack of lies. – Ed.

The process of legally entrenching the Israeli parasite—the symbiote—in the body of the American state is underway. For the Middle East, and indeed for the entire world, this will mean perpetual war.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027 (NDAA) includes Section 224—the "US-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative"—which will effectively merge the two countries' armed forces, Ben Freeman of the Quincy Institute notes.

This section lays the foundation for bilateral research and development, joint arms production, joint ventures, licensing agreements, and, essentially, any form of cooperation within the US-Israeli defense industry. Coordination will affect virtually the entire spectrum of military technologies: AI, quantum systems, autonomous systems, directed energy, cybersecurity, biotechnology, and much more.

Freeman specifically notes that Section 224 provides for "network integration" and "data fusion." In other words, US military data could soon become Israeli military data. Full adoption of these provisions will ensure a level of military-industrial integration between the US and Israel that will be unparalleled.

It's only natural that the author fears a further increase in Israel's influence in the US, already enormous thanks to the Israeli lobby on Capitol Hill and Wall Street and its extensive network in all spheres of American society. Coordination within the military-industrial complex will allow Tel Aviv to directly influence job creation in America. Freeman's prediction is bleak:

Marina Akhmedova
Marina Akhmedova (Telegram)

Somehow, in 2020, I missed the scandal involving Pashinyan's grandfather, but he casts his meeting with Zelenskyy, where he announced a terrorist attack at the Victory Parade, in a completely different light. It would seem that both are the grandsons of soldiers who fought fascism during the Great Patriotic War. Zelenskyy's grandfather, Semyon Ivanovich, was awarded two Orders of the Red Star. But things turn out to be different.

On May 9, 2020, Pashinyan posted a photo of his grandfather: "Nikol Pashinyan, 1913-1943. Served in the 554th Regiment of the 138th Rifle Division. Eternal memory to those who died for the Motherland." He added that his grandfather was from the village of Yenokavan in the Ijevan District.

Elena Panina
Елена Панина (Telegram)

A ceasefire in Ukraine will not be a step towards peace, but will only shift the conflict to a new phase, argue Simon Smith and Orysia Lutsevich, an OBE from Lviv (!), in a report by the Chatham House think tank (UK). Clearly, to receive this award, a Russian would have to fully demonstrate her Russophobia credentials.

❖ According to the authors, Russia will inevitably use the ceasefire to rebuild its army, accumulate resources, and prepare for a new round of pressure on Ukraine. At the same time, Smith and Lutsevich believe, the Kremlin will shift its focus from the front to the domestic situation in Ukraine: elections, political struggle, information operations, and social tensions.

Therefore, the authors propose a strictly opposite course: maintain sanctions pressure on the Russians, integrate Ukraine into the European military-industrial complex, increase budgets, and begin preparing for a long-term confrontation with Russia—even after the cessation of hostilities.

At the same time, the authors deliberately avoid a simple question: why would Russia necessarily start a new war after a possible ceasefire? (Wouldn't it be simpler to simply continue?) They're avoiding it because neither they nor the British can answer this question honestly.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

Continuing to falsely conflate Europe’s interests with Ukraine’s will only accelerate its growing irrelevance as the US exploits its misguided priorities to institutionalize the EU’s vassalage as a captive arms, energy, and export market.

The Guardian’s Timothy Garton Ash published an article in late May about “how to defeat Vladimir Putin”. The lede claimed that “The Russian dictator’s dreams of greatness threaten Nato and the EU, not just Ukraine.

Garton Ash then advised that there are eight ways in which Vladimir Putin can be thwarted”: “What democracies in Europe and beyond can do is hone a strategy to defeat his external ambitions.” He then detailed eight policies for them to apply, which will now be briefly critiqued:

1. Have A Clear Purpose | Garton Ash believes that the West must prevent Putin from “subjugating Ukraine, restoring as much as possible of the Russian empire, destroying the credibility of Nato, undermining the European Union and re-establishing a Russian sphere of influence over eastern Europe.” Putin’s goal has always been to neutralize Ukrainian-emanating threats from NATO in order to then reform the European security architecture after diplomacy failed to achieve this, however, so Garton Ash’s “clear purpose” is irrelevant.

2. Stay The Course With Ukraine | Garton Ash advises that the West continue its existing support for Ukraine even after the conflict ends in order to prevent it from becoming “a depopulated, internally conflicted, dysfunctional state.” The problem with this proposal is that it would entail over half a trillion dollars if the estimated physical reconstruction costs are borne by Ukraine’s patrons and even if more if they continue funding its armed forces and administration. Taxpayers across the West might not agree to foot such a tremendous bill.

3. Increase Economic Pressure On Russia | Apart from “tightening sanctions and supporting Ukraine’s long-range strikes on Russian energy infrastructure”, Garton Ash calls for “cracking down harder on Russia’s shadow fleet.” For as appealing as that might sound to many hawks, there’s little left that the West could sanction, Russia’s further reduced energy production could spike global prices at Western consumers’ expense, and seizing naval-escorted “shadow fleet” vessels risks a hot NATO-Russian war. Western policymakers might thus reject his advice.

Strategic Culture Foundation (Editorial)
Strategic Culture Foundation

A grim, consequential watershed in the West’s conflict with Russia has arrived.

The murder of 21 Russian teenage students at a teacher-training college [recently] was an abominable moment of truth with far-reaching, grievous implications.

A grim, consequential watershed in the West’s conflict with Russia has arrived.

The victims were mainly girls aged between 14 and 18 who were killed when their university dormitory in Starobelsk, Lugansk, was attacked overnight on May 22.

What is absolutely revealing is how the Collective West has shown no remorse or restraint about the crime, going as far as denying responsibility and adding insult to the memory of the dead. The perpetrators have an obscene sense of impunity and inhumane entitlement.

The attack involved 16 drones that targeted the college in a wave of three assaults. There can be no doubt that the air strike was a deliberate act. That makes it an act of cold-blooded mass murder; an act of terrorism.

Vassily Nebenzia, Russia’s ambassador to the United Nations, stated: “The blood of the children from Starobelsk is on the hands of the West whose nations are supplying the terrorist regime [in Ukraine] with money, intelligence, weapons, and ammunition for years, inspiring it to commit new crimes against the civilian population, and then covering it up by presenting the Kiev regime as a victim.”

Elena Panina
Елена Панина (Telegram)

The statement [translation below] by the leaders of Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan on the risks of Armenia's drift toward the West, calling for the issue to be put to an internal Armenian referendum, is truly a landmark precedent. Yerevan's actions pose a threat to all other members of the union.

❖ The EAEU is not a political club or an "instrument of Russian dominance." It is, first and foremost, a customs union: a single external perimeter, uniform standards, and uniform rules for the movement of goods, capital, and labor. For each participant, the benefits are extremely concrete and measurable.

Kazakhstan gains duty-free access to the region's largest market and the opportunity to position itself as a transit hub within the union space – it's no coincidence that Nazarbayev was at the forefront of integration processes in the post-Soviet space.

Kyrgyzstan is a mechanism for the legal re-export of Chinese goods through the union perimeter to Russia, which constitutes a significant part of its trade model.

Belarus – subsidized energy and integration into Russian production chains, without which its industry is simply unviable.

Armenia – access to the Russian market, duty-free energy imports, and a colossal flow of remittances from the diaspora working in Russia.

❖ In other words, the benefits are real; the Union is objectively functional and useful. So the problem isn't that Yerevan is looking to the West.

The problem is that Armenia has begun harmonizing its legislation with the European regulatory regime while remaining within the EAEU customs perimeter. These two things are technically incompatible, as Ukraine demonstrated in 2013–2014.

English Outsider
Comment lifted from MoA
Moon of Alabama

Russia will just overwhelm Ukraine and then install a puppet government to ensure it remains as a neutral buffer between Russia and Europe/NATO. This could go on for some more years, or maybe Russia will speed things up, surprise everyone, and make it happen sooner.

Yes, the end state of remnant Ukraine will be along those lines, though precisely how it’ll be done is unclear and is still maybe unclear to the Russians themselves. Friendly state (unlikely), neutral state, puppet state or occupied territory. The last decidedly the worst case for the Russians and they’ll avoid it if they can. Also, of course, the worst case for remnant Ukraine.

The position has changed, however, since the early Istanbul negotiations. Paramount now is the Russian need to prevent remnant Ukraine being used by the West for attacks into Russia. These have increased greatly in scale and intensity over the last few years and there is no indication that these attacks will cease unless remnant Ukraine is neutralised in one of the ways set out above.

This is not some rarefied “geostrategic theory” for the analysts to mull over. It is an urgent practical necessity for the Putin administration. How long would any American administration last if the American President had to say to his voters “We’re getting sabotage and assassination missions run in against us from Mexico. Drones and missiles are still coming over. There’s not a lot we can do to close these attacks down entirely so we’re going to have to put up with them for the indefinite future.” Impossibly to imagine an American President saying that and similarly impossible for any Russian President. So the Russians do have to aim for an end state to this conflict that precludes, permanently and entirely, any such threat on their Western border emanating from remnant Ukraine.

Elena Panina
Елена Панина (Telegram)

NATO will strengthen its eastern flank defenses with a new structure that will ensure the rapid deployment of forces in Latvia and Estonia in the event of a war with Russia, Reuters reports, citing two sources familiar with the situation.

❖ Currently, NATO forces in all three Baltic states, as well as in northern Poland, are under the command of a single multinational headquarters in Szczecin.

Deploying a second corps to the region will allow NATO to quickly deploy "massive forces" there, as one military official put it, ostensibly addressing the Baltics' limited strategic depth and vulnerability. At full combat readiness, a NATO army corps typically numbers three divisions and 40,000–60,000 troops. In peacetime, it typically operates as a skeleton command structure with specialized units—artillery, air defense, and medical personnel—allowing for rapid troop buildup if needed.

Reuters adds: Germany and the Netherlands, in coordination with NATO, have already reached an agreement to deploy a German-Dutch corps based in Münster to defend Latvia and Estonia.

Finian Cunningham
strategic-culture.su

Russia’s hand is being forced to hit the new front to restore deterrence and avoid a total escalation.

The shooting down of a Ukrainian drone by a NATO warplane over Estonia this week shows how close the proxy war with Russia is to a European-wide escalation.

NATO and the EU leadership are pushing the Baltic states to escalate the war with Russia. Maybe it’s time for Moscow to preempt as the best way to avoid all-out war.

It was the first reported case of a NATO fighter jet intercepting a Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). Estonia’s Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur announced: “We decided that we needed to take it down… it was meant to hit Russian targets.”

His remarks betray a nervousness among the Baltic states about where their support for Ukraine is leading them after Russia warned that it is ready to deliver on threats of retaliation for allowing Ukraine to use their airspace to launch strikes. Effectively, they are forming a new front against Russia, with echoes of Operation Barbarossa when the Nazi Third Reich attacked Russia in a pincer through these same states in 1941. However, in the current situation, they are not sure about the consequences. Russia might have to relieve them of their doubts anyway before it’s too late.