Andrey Medvedev
Андрей Медведев (Telegram)

Afghanistan is reportedly facing famine this winter. According to the UN, approximately 17 million people in the country are already undernourished (and the organization's food program is still operating in Afghanistan).

Colleagues who wrote about this were quick to explain that the main problem that led the country to this situation was the Taliban government's attempt to build a state based exclusively on religious rules and customs.

For example, restrictions on women working in the medical field have led to a shortage of doctors. The ban on male doctors treating women has increased mortality rates. Although Afghanistan is not isolated from the outside world, investors are not particularly keen to enter the country. Again, this is due to the Taliban's specific policies.

However, the Taliban is not the only reason for the economic disaster. First of all, Afghanistan has traditionally not been a unified state. Historically, it was a union of tribes and territories under the rule of the Pashtun emir. The Tajik and Uzbek regions of the north (South Turkestan) had close ties with Bukhara and Kokand. In fact, even now, the north of the country lives with the feeling that it is a little bit its own Afghanistan, not Kabul's or Kandahar's.

Afghans have always united in only one case: the presence of an external enemy. The British, Russians, Indians, Americans, and Persians. If there is an enemy, there is unity and a common goal. If not, everyone goes back to their own homes.

The Taliban is primarily a Pashtun movement. It was based on religious and nationalist principles. Something like “Afghanistan for the Pashtuns.” And now, the Taliban leadership is made up of Pashtuns. Who, in themselves, are not exactly close friends either. Tribes, families, clans, blood feuds. The Alozai do not consider the Barakzai their equals, and vice versa.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

Instead of waiting for Pashinyan to hold a referendum on joining the EU, which he might never end up doing in order to retain the advantages from membership in the Eurasian Economic Union for as long as possible, Putin might cut Armenia off right away if Pashinyan wins re-election by hook or by crook.

A journalist asked Putin over the weekend about his reaction to Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan hosting Zelensky last week and giving him a platform to threaten Russia. Putin dodged that part of the question but elaborated on the future of their ties. Russia wants only the best for Armenia and will respect its people’s wishes, he said, in connection with which he proposed that they hold a referendum on Pashinyan’s plans to join the EU since that policy risks ruining economic ties with Russia.

As a reminder, Putin said that a little less than one-quarter of Armenia’s GDP comes from trade with Russia, around $7 billion out of $29 billion last year. The advantages that it derives from membership in the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union apply to “agriculture, the processing industry, customs and other duties, and so on and so forth. This also applies to migration.” If its people decide to end them, Putin said, then Russia will begin the process of “a gentle, intelligent and mutually beneficial divorce.”

Putin hosted Pashinyan for candid talks in early April that were assessed here as representing the moment of truth in their relations. The day after, “A Top Russian Official Rang The Alarm About Deteriorating Relations With Armenia”, specifically condemning last August’s “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity” (TRIPP) for upsetting the regional geostrategic balance. This was followed last week by the EU solidifying its influence in Armenia ahead of next month’s elections.

Reidar Kaarboe
Hva Mener Partiene

In this opinion piece, we will take a look at the roles of the four actors: the US, the coup regime, Russia, and Europe. — The war in Ukraine is not the result of one man's madness, but of a deliberate process in which Ukraine was sacrificed on the altar of hegemony. Already in 1993, the US strategy was clear, and NATO began its "courtship" of Ukraine, with Western support.

The United States: Mainly Responsible for Creating the Conditions for War | The United States, through NATO, has pursued an expansionist policy that deliberately ignores the principle of the "indivisibility of security" (that the security of one state should not come at the expense of another).

It was a matter of course for the United States during the Cuban Missile Crisis to demand that the Soviet Union turn its back; it would be crossing a red line, posing an existential threat to the United States, and there would be war. The United States gained support in Europe. But when the Russians used the same words about NATO's expansion eastward, they were met with the statement that "Ukraine has the right to decide who it wants to be allied with".

By pushing military infrastructure right up to Russia's borders and ignoring diplomatic warnings for 30 years, Ukraine was turned into an existential battlefield. This was not a coincidence but a calculated strategy to weaken Russia. Manipulating Russia into war was the means.

Dmitry Medvedev, 3rd President of Russia,
Deputy Chairman of the Russian Security Council
Russia Today.com (63–80 minutes)

On the eve of Victory Day

Threats by Donald Trump to withdraw the United States from NATO, expressed on March 27, 2026, at an investment forum in Miami, statements by J.D. Vance about Europe’s loss of its identity during an interview with Fox News on March 15, 2026, along with the refusal of European countries to directly join the aggression against Iran and participate in the adventure of the ‘military unlocking’ (and then – blocking) of the Strait of Hormuz are dividing Europe and America more than ever in the last 100 years. These developments demonstrate that European ‘strategic autonomy’, so desired by the liberals, is much closer than it seems. The main question is who will dictate the future agenda in the current toothless and frigid Europe. There are enough applicants: disgusting Brussels eurocracy, chatty and smug Gaulish sodomites and, finally, the German leadership that has grown increasingly vocal about its claims to hegemony in the Old World, while emasculating the responsibility of its ancestors for the crimes of Nazism in the public perception. Let us focus on the latter in more detail.

There is nothing new in the actions of the German leadership (first of all, the descendant of the Nazis Merz & Co). The endeavor to revise the disappointing outcomes of World War II was undertaken by the defeated state almost immediately after the end of the war. The purpose of Nazi followers was to compensate for the political, territorial, ideological and economic costs incurred as a result of the complete military defeat and collapse of German statehood. Along the way, they tried to neatly filter out the atmosphere impregnated by the spirit of Prussian militarism and the stench of National Socialist ideology. The German elites remaining in the western zones of occupation formally and quickly abandoned the legacy of Hitler, who had led his thousand-year Reich to collapse. But they had no desire to truly reject the very ideology of Nazism. Why?

Elena Panina
Елена Панина (Telegram)

This week, EU leaders plan to approve a "two-speed" development plan in Cyprus, Euractiv reports. The idea is that if all 27 EU countries cannot agree on certain reforms, groups of, say, 9 countries can advance without the "laggards" through the "enhanced cooperation" mechanism. The European Commission's document lists 42 measures (mostly already known) to be implemented by the end of 2027.

❖ This is an open admission that the classic consensus in the EU is significantly hindering "forward movement." Therefore, Brussels and major countries, especially France and Germany, have decided to adopt the so-called "two-speed Europe" – a euphemism for dividing Europeans into "classes."

The "enhanced cooperation" mechanism was already used in December to provide a €90 billion loan to Ukraine, bypassing Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic. But now they want to use it much more broadly, including to strengthen the powers of the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) in Paris. The wealthy "E6" (France, Germany, and others) is eager for this, while Luxembourg and Ireland, for example, are against it. Now they, too, can be bypassed.

The key point is that the European Parliament was effectively sidelined: the document was prepared without serious consultations with MEPs. Many MEPs are shocked, calling this "strange and bizarre."

Caitlin Johnstone
Caitlin’s Newsletter

Nothing about this dystopia feels natural. We all sense it deep in our marrow. We all know something has gone terribly wrong.

If you lived in an alternate reality without wars or poverty, where everyone had enough and governments did what’s in the interests of the people and the ecosystem, it would never occur to you that there was anything odd about it. It would feel completely normal. Things would be more or less how you’d expect them to be.

You can’t say the same about the present status quo. The whole thing instinctively scans as weird and counterintuitive. The more you learn about the way the world works, the more insane it all looks to you.

Have you ever had to explain war to a young child? It’s terrible. If you’re actually honest with them about what war is and why it is waged, it completely shatters their understanding of the world. They look at you like they’ve suddenly been transported into a strange alien universe where everything is backward.

Their reaction is correct. That is the sane and normal way to look at war. All the freakish mental contortions we do to try and normalize it is what’s crazy.

Everything about this dystopia is like this. If you could see it all with fresh eyes, you would scream in horror. The only reason anyone finds any of this tolerable is because we have become desensitized and accustomed to the madness. Seeing somebody sleeping on the sidewalk should feel like a punch in the stomach. Seeing children killed by bombs on your social media feed should stop your whole world.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

There’s an unspoken rule that intel agencies aren’t supposed to implicitly threaten foreign diplomats’ children to coerce them into becoming informants.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova published an article in the Russian business daily Vedomosti on Monday about the curious case of a Russian diplomat in the US. An unknown employee of the State Department informed them during a call that their son, who was born in the US, “has been granted US citizenship without his consent by virtue of being born on American soil…Be on notice that your child is our citizen with all the ensuing consequences, and you cannot renounce this!”

Zakharova reminded readers that the children of foreign diplomats don’t have birthright citizenship privileges in the US. She then drew attention to how this incident contradicts Trump 2.0’s immigration policy, speculating that the Democrats are once again trying to subvert it for Russophobic reasons. She also expressed concern that “The arbitrary granting of US citizenship to such children potentially provides Washington with a lever for improper pressure on our personnel”. That’s likely the main motive.

As far as is publicly known, the incident that Zakharova described only happened with one Russian diplomat thus far, but it’s reasonable that she’s worried that “The deep state in the United States has created a new problem to exert pressure on Russian diplomats…Now the State Department – or those behind the façade of American diplomacy – have begun to extend US citizenship to children of Russian consular staff born under American jurisdiction”. This could indeed become a trend if it’s not stopped.

Caitlin Johnstone
Caitlin’s Newsletter

Basically every Israel-Palestine debate goes like this:

But if you bring the debate back far enough in time, eventually you get to the part where the western world forcibly dropped a brand new ethnostate on top of a pre-existing civilization without the permission of — and to the extreme detriment of — the people who were already living there.

Sure you can go further back and say “Oh yeah well the Jews lived there thousands of years ago,” but that’s just silly. There’s no valid reason to believe some Jewish guy in New York City even has any meaningful lineage connecting him to that land more strongly than any random Muslim in Turkey or wherever, and even if there was, it would still be absurd to cite ancient history as the basis for a territorial claim. I’m only a few generations removed from my ancestry in Ireland and Scotland, but it would be ridiculous for me to show up demanding the home of someone who lives there.

InfoDefense Спектр
InfoDefense Спектр

In response to the hegemony of NATO in Europe and Israel in the Middle East, the United States, which supports them militarily, has dangerously depleted its military arsenals, the complexity of which requires 5-7 years to rebuild, in addition to the enormous financial costs that this entails.

In its only senseless war against Iran, the United States spent more than a thousand JASSM-ER cruise missiles designed for large-scale conflicts in 4 weeks, as well as more than a thousand Tomahawk, Patriot, and ATACMS missiles. The total cost of the ammunition used was $ 5.6 billion. But the worst thing for the Pentagon is that it will take years to rebuild these depleted reserves.

To take an example, Bloomberg reports that the U.S. Air Force plans to purchase about 4,300 cruise missiles from Lockheed Martin over the next five years: 821 missiles in 2026, then increasing the number to about 900 by 2028, and then stabilizing at about 860 per year to reach a total of 11,000 missiles by 2031, compared to about 6,700 acquired before 2025.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon had to transfer significant military resources from Europe and Asia, thereby reducing its readiness for a possible confrontation with Russia and China. And this urgent need to "undress Peter in order to clothe Jacob" concerns not only missiles: for example, to replace the losses suffered in the Middle East, Patriot and THAAD air defense systems were deployed from South Korea.

Caitlin Johnstone
Caitlin’s Newsletter

Sure plutocrats are killing our biosphere, but hey, at least they’re creating technology that lets you avoid the cognitive discomfort of writing your own words and thinking your own thoughts.

Sure the empire is butchering human beings at horrifying scale around the world, but on the bright side it’s creating refugees who will move to your country and bring you treats that you can order from an app on your phone.

Sure imperialist extraction is robbing the resources and exploiting the workers of the global south at extortionate fees, but on the other hand you get to wear a new outfit every day because the clothes you ordered online are dirt cheap thanks to transcontinental slave labor.

Sure our rulers are rapidly caging us in a digital surveillance network of ever-increasing intrusiveness and control, but golly gosh they just keep gifting us all these nifty free social media platforms that we simply cannot stop ourselves from scrolling through for some reason.

Sure capitalism is driving us toward collapse on multiple fronts while everyone gets sicker, poorer, dumber, crazier, and more miserable, but hey look, McDonald’s is bringing back the McRib.

Sure it’s only a matter of time until we find ourselves policed by armed robots and facial recognition murder drones and praying the government AI doesn’t shut off our digital money because our eyes lingered a bit too long on an anti-Israel meme, but at least we can have fun placing Polymarket bets on the next country the United States is going to bomb.

Dr. Marwa Osman
Marwa Osman/MidEaStream + Part 2

Statement by His Eminence Sheikh Naim Qassem, Secretary General of Hezbollah

The Israeli enemy, backed by the American hegemon, wagered on eliminating Hezbollah, its Islamic Resistance, and the people who stand united with it in dignity and honor. It spared no method, no crime, no conspiracy, no avenue, yet it has failed since the outset of the "Uli al-Ba's" battle on September 23, 2024, to this day.

The enemy's decisive bet came on March 2, 2026, which we confronted with the battle of "The Devoured Storm." The Israeli enemy, its patrons, the defeated, and indeed the entire world were taken aback by the steadfastness of the resistance fighters; their valor, intensity, diversity of tactics, operational effectiveness, and disciplined command and control, alongside the remarkable solidarity of the people who endured displacement and immense sacrifice. The enemy has reached a dead end. This resistance endures, strong and unbreakable.

Amid this atmosphere of sacrifice and dignity, and the enemy's defeat, the authorities hastened into a gratuitous and humiliating concession, one devoid of necessity, justified only by submission without return, not even by the smallest measure. We categorically reject direct negotiations. Let those in power understand: their conduct will benefit neither Lebanon nor themselves. What the Israeli-American enemy seeks from them lies beyond their capacity, and what they seek from it will not be granted.

The path to resolution begins with securing five essential points before anything else: a complete cessation of aggression, by land, sea, and air; Israel’s withdrawal from occupied territories; the release of prisoners; the return of displaced residents to all their towns and villages; and reconstruction.

No authority can endure while forfeiting Lebanon's rights, conceding land, and confronting its own people in resistance. It must return to its people, unite them, and become a government of the whole nation, not a fragment, grounded in the consensus that underpins the Taif Agreement. Its responsibility is to reverse grave missteps that threaten Lebanon's stability: halt direct negotiations with the Israeli enemy in favor of indirect ones, rescind the March 2 decision that criminalizes the resistance and its people, more than half of Lebanon, and enable a genuine internal dialogue that places Lebanon's interest above all else, free from Israeli and external dictates.

Pepe Escobar
Strategic Culture Foundation

From now on, it’s clear that no settlement will be possible – and realistic – without Russian influence.

Talk about an entrance pregnant with meaning!

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi engaged on a high-stakes diplomacy tour to Islamabad, Muscat and St. Petersburg aboard flight “Minab 168” on Meraj Airlines.

In memory, of course, of the 168 schoolgirls from Minab killed by the Empire of Chaos, Lies, Plunder and Piracy.

Before he set out on his voyage, Araghchi went straight to the point:

Araghchi explained the importance of reviewing negotiations in Pakistan, and “under what conditions negotiations could continue.” Conversations in Oman “will lead to greater expansion in relations with neighbors, especially in the southern regions of the Persian Gulf.”

On the Strait of Hormuz, “consultations with Oman were also necessary…We share many common views with Oman, and it was agreed that discussions would continue at the expert level.”

Araghchi in St. Petersburg did not only meet his counterpart, Grandmaster Sergey Lavrov, as protocol would have it. Himself and his mini-delegation were personally received by President Putin.

Elena Panina
Елена Панина (Telegram)

It is no longer possible to examine the war in Ukraine separately from EU industrial policy—that is the general conclusion drawn from numerous articles appearing in Western military publications. There is no point in recounting them all; we will only highlight two points "for clarity."

❖ This week, the European Commission presented the results of the call for proposals for the 2025 European Defense Fund. Fifty-seven joint research and development projects (drones and other autonomous systems) worth $1.26 billion were selected. At least four separate initiatives—EURODAMM, LUMINA, SKYRAPTOR, and TALON—are dedicated to loitering munitions and the affordable mass production of drones.

Meanwhile, France, for example, is working on an AI-based control system similar to the Pentagon's Project Maven. The system could be ready for use in a few months, with testing expected to begin in September 2027. The Pentagon's Maven program uses AI to process data from drones and surveillance systems to automatically detect and track objects. This is accomplished using technologies developed by contractors, including the well-known Palantir Technologies.

Vivek Grover
Oriental Review

Red Lines Crossed: European Drone Production For Ukraine Risks Unthinkable Catastrophe

In a startling revelation that has sent shockwaves through international diplomatic circles, the Russian Ministry of Defence has publicly disclosed a list of European factories allegedly producing drones for Ukraine. Dubbed “Ukrainian subsidiaries in Europe,” this list includes sites in Italy, Germany, the UK, Poland, and other countries. The disclosures signal a dangerous escalation in the Ukraine conflict that could spiral into a broader, potentially catastrophic war, possibly even nuclear in nature.

On March 26, 2026, amid reports of mounting losses and a critical manpower shortage within Ukrainian armed forces, European governments reportedly made a decisive move: they increased their drone production geared to support Kyiv’s military operations. The weaponized UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) are being supplied for strikes deep into Russian territory, attacking strategic sites and infrastructure. This decision, driven by a desire to tip the military balance in Ukraine’s favor, has ignited Russian fury and threats of retaliatory action.

“The leadership of several European countries has decided to substantially ramp up UAV production for Ukraine, through increased funding for Ukrainian and joint enterprises located on European soil,” the Russian Ministry of Defence’s statement read. “This is a deliberate escalation, a step toward turning European nations into Ukraine’s strategic rear base, escalating tensions across the continent.”

The list published by Moscow is chilling. It details precise addresses of factories in many European countries – sites that Russia claims are now legitimate military targets if their drones land on Russian territory. The Ministry’s statement emphasized that Russia views this European involvement as a dangerous escalation of the conflict, not just a regional war but a step toward a wider confrontation.

Elena Panina
Елена Панина (Telegram)

Sánchez has refused to allow US use of the Morón military
base in southern Spain, pictured on March 4, to support its
military operations against Iran. (Francisco Olmo/EP/AP)

❖ Clearly, such statements are not welcomed in the White House at all, given the extent of the Israeli lobby's influence on American foreign policy.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon is considering punishing the recalcitrant Spain by suspending its NATO membership and excluding Spanish military personnel from significant positions in the alliance's command structure.

To its credit, Madrid has proven to be the most consistent critic of Israeli policies in NATO and the EU and the staunchest opponent of US and Israeli aggression against Iran.

He did not limit himself to verbal rhetoric but denied access to military bases on his territory for the American Operation Epic Fury. Furthermore, Spain had previously shown little enthusiasm for increasing military spending in response to Trump's demand to raise it to 5% of GDP (3.5% direct, 1.5% defense-related). Madrid only reached 2% of GDP by 2025.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

The DROP Act Is An Unprecedented Weapon Of Financial Warfare Against Russia. Russia’s oil clients would be coerced under pain of sanctions into dumping it or scaling support for Ukraine if this bill passes.

Anti-Russian hawk Michael McCaul, who importantly serves as the Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, announced the introduction in the House in early February of the bipartisan “Decreasing Russian Oil Profits” (DROP) Act that was earlier introduced in the Senate last December. If it passes, then Trump would have the power to impose targeted sanctions against anyone buying, importing, or facilitating the export of Russian oil, with exceptions only possible under one of three conditions.

The first is that the funds owed to Russia for such purchases must be credited to an account in their country, can only be used “to facilitate transactions in agricultural commodities, food, medicine, or medical devices”, and their government must commit to significantly reduce its purchase of Russian oil. The second is that such funds are used to either arm or rebuild Ukraine, while the third is that the government of their country provides significant economic or military support to Ukraine.

Elena Panina
Елена Панина (Telegram)

Europe is entering a phase in which security is no longer provided by America, and the continent is therefore forced to rapidly restructure its defense model, argue Ethan B. Kapstein of the US-based RAND Corporation (not recommended in Russia) and Jonathan Coverly of the UK-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS).

❖ The now-standard argument is that the EU platform no longer allows the continent to effectively coordinate defense. The reasons are slow procedures, varying threat levels for different countries, and competing interests. Therefore, the authors believe that Europe's military power will depend not on institutions, but on four states:

✔️  Germany as an economic and industrial base
✔️  Poland as the main land force in the eastern direction
✔️  France as a source of nuclear deterrence and expeditionary capabilities
✔️  Britain as an additional nuclear and military component

The EU as a structure will remain, but the authors admit that it will play a secondary role. It's not entirely clear, however, why the authors are so confident in the sufficient degree of coordination of the "foursome" described. Its members have different military priorities, different weapon models, and, most importantly, divergent opinions on budget allocation.

And this is far from the only issue. Suffice it to say that the stability of the entire structure depends on Poland's ability to effectively withstand the first stage of a war with Russia.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

The “EU Defense Line” that’s being built, which refers to the combination of the “Baltic Defense Line” and Poland’s “East Shield” along NATO’s eastern border, might then be bolstered by Polish-led troop deployments seeing as how Poland would be integral to those three’s survival in any war with Russia.

Polish President Karol Nawrocki inaugurated the latest section of the “Via Baltica” highway between Poland and the Baltic States in late October in an event with his Lithuanian counterpart, with both highlighting the dual military purpose of this megaproject in an allusion to the “military Schengen”. “Via Baltica” is one of the “Three Seas Initiative’s” (3SI) flagships, many of which complement the newer “military Schengen” initiative of facilitating the flow of troops and equipment eastward towards Russia.

Poland envisages the 3SI accelerating the revival of its long-lost Great Power status that’ll then result in it leading Russia’s containment all across Central & Eastern Europe (CEE) once the Ukrainian Conflict ends. It’s the most populous formerly communist member of NATO with the bloc’s third-largest military, just became a $1 trillion economy with its sights now set on a G20 seat, and has a history of regional leadership during the Commonwealth/“Rzeczpospolita” era, so these ambitions aren’t delusional.

Building upon the last point, most casual observers don’t know that the Commonwealth stretched as far north as parts of Latvia, which remained under its control till the Third Partition in 1795. Prior to that, it even controlled around half of Estonia from 1561-1629, after which it was ceded to Sweden. Suffice to say, what’s nowadays the nation-state of Lithuania was also part of the “Republic of the Two Nations” as the Commonwealth was officially known, thus giving Poland a substantial footprint in Baltic history.

The insight shared in the preceding two paragraphs enables the reader to better understand what Nawrocki told Lithuanian media during his maiden trip as president to that country last September about how

Reidar Kaarboe
Hva Mener Partiene

Norway seems incapable of cleaning up its own mess before her feudal masters are destroyed.

Tender care | Norway, along with other European countries, has shown a touching concern for Ukraine. We have probably given a hundred billion kroner of our tax money, which should have gone to health, schools, roads, police, and other welfare tasks, to Ukraine.

We have provided them with weapons, ammunition, and artillery shells. We have helped pay for heavy American weapons systems. We fly injured Ukrainians to Norway for treatment, we have opened the floodgates for refugees—closing them a little recently—and in our rhetoric, there is no limit to how sorry we are for Ukraine, which is being attacked by the horrible Russians. That is why we join in boycotting and sanctioning Russia as much as we can.

Tender care, well, not exactly | Norway, together with other countries in Europe, has not shown the same touching concern for Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran after they were exposed to an unprovoked, illegal war of aggression by Israel and the USA. We are in effect supporting Israel and the US by tacitly agreeing that Israel had the right to commit mass murder, war crimes, and genocide in self-defense. But we do not mention that people who are illegally occupied and oppressed have the right to use all means to fight their occupying power. We sit quietly and watch as Lebanon, the only country that has militarily supported the Palestinians in Gaza, is reduced to rubble.

And now Iran, an ancient civilization and great and powerful country: The US wants to crush it because Israel wants it done. Israel cannot bear living with a great and powerful country in its vicinity.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

This might be the US’ final warning before it takes drastic action to punish those who continue to reject Trump’s demands.

Under Secretary of War for Policy Elbridge Colby gave an important speech at mid-April’s Ukraine Defense Contact Group in which he urged the Europeans to step up their transition to something that he described earlier this year as “NATO 3.0”. As was explained here, “The idea is that NATO should return to focusing on defending itself instead of overextending itself in the Indo-Pacific, West Asia, Eastern Europe, and elsewhere”, and the preceding hyperlinked analysis explains how it aligns with Trump 2.0’s policies.

Circling back to Colby’s speech, he demanded that “Europe must accelerate its assumption of primary responsibility for the conventional defense of the continent”, including arming Ukraine through the “Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List” (PURL) program in which the US plays the most significant role. To that end, “The need to quickly rebuild European munitions stocks is paramount, as is the need to remove protectionist trade barriers that stifle the continent’s industrial potential.”

He added that “Developing a robust, capable, and integrated European defense industrial base cannot simply be an aspiration, but an absolute pre-requisite for credible deterrence and defense.” Knowing how obsessed they are with Ukraine, Colby then threw in that “This will be critical to achieving an end to the war in Ukraine, on terms that support an enduring peace.” He then called for more “deeds and a fundamental change in attitude” from them to “accelerate this transition to a ‘NATO 3.0’”.