Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

It can simultaneously threaten Russia along the increasingly interconnected Arctic and Baltic fronts.

Russian Ambassador to Norway Nikolai Korchunov gave a brief interview to TASS about bilateral relations. He warned that Norway is integrating new NATO members Sweden and https://korybko.substack.com/p/finland-is-on-track-to-become-one into the bloc’s regional plans. More American military bases and NATO facilities are opening up there too. To make matters worse, 32,500 troops from 14 NATO countries in last March’s “Cold Response” military drills in Norway and Finland’s northern regions, which add to growing NATO threats to Russia from this direction.

NATO’s militarization of the Arctic, which also includes artificially engineered tensions over the demilitarized Svalbard Archipelago, is proceeding in parallel with its militarization of the Baltic. Korchunov believes that this raises the risk of the bloc one day attempting to blockade Russia. He reassured his compatriots that the authorities will defend their country’s interests, however, including through military-technical means in an allusion to new naval escorts of some commercial vessels.

In connection with blockade scenarios, Korchunov was asked about TASS’ report from early April about how “Ukraine readies terrorist attacks on Russian ships off coast of Norway”, which he said caused quite a stir in his host country.

He didn’t elaborate on how exactly Russia plans to deter or defend against potential Ukrainian drone attacks from Norway, but he ominously warned that escalating threats to Russia from Norway “will inevitably lead to a directly proportional increase in risks for Norway itself.”

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.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

The production of NATO-standard shells hints that Kazakhstan plans to follow in Azerbaijan’s footsteps by having its armed forces conform with the bloc’s standards ahead of what its leadership might have been duped by the West to believe will be an inevitable crisis with Russia after the Ukrainian Conflict ends.

Background Briefing | Sputnik reported in early December that Kazakhstan will build four factories that’ll produce Russian- and NATO-standard shells, which prompted First Deputy Chairman of the Duma Defense Committee Alexei Zhuravlev to harshly condemn this development. In his words,

He added that “now they’re switching to NATO ammunition standards, clearly intending to abandon Russian weapons in the future, replacing them with Western ones. Astana may not have been the largest buyer of Russian military-industrial complex equipment, but the move itself is certainly unfriendly and must be responded to accordingly. We all know what such cooperation with NATO has meant for Kiev.” This is the latest manifestation of Kazakhstan’s pro-Western pivot that accelerated in recent months:

Mikhail Ilevich
New Eastern Outlook

The authorities of the United Kingdom are among the main supporters of continuing the war on the territory of Ukraine

The conflict is used as an instrument to achieve the main goal — weakening and militarily neutralizing Russia, which is identified in key strategic documents (National Security Strategy 2025, Strategic Defence Review 2025) as the main threat to the European continent and the United Kingdom in particular. In the UK, officials continue to state that support for the Kyiv regime will last as long as necessary, and in this regard, as noted, it is necessary to be prepared for an open conflict with Russia.

Direct complicity | On December 9, 2025, the UK Ministry of Defence officially confirmed the death of a UK serviceman, allegedly as a result of a “tragic accident” during a weapons test conducted by the Ukrainian military. This incident once again raises questions about the extent of British involvement in the Ukrainian conflict.

In reality, British intelligence agencies have long been present in Ukraine and are actively conducting their activities. Structures such as MI5, MI6, special operations forces, and others provide intelligence, train Ukrainian military personnel, coordinate the preparation and execution of covert operations on Russian territory and against its critical infrastructure.

The Russian public is convinced that British special services were involved in the sabotage of the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines in the Baltic Sea, planned the explosion of the TurkStream pipeline in the Black Sea, and carried out drone sabotage against facilities of the Caspian Pipeline Consortium. No one doubts that British intelligence also supervised the Ukrainian operation “Spiderweb,” aimed at damaging Russia’s strategic aviation.

Imran Salim
Oriental Review

Helsinki’s entry into the Alliance broke the entire system of Russian-Finnish relations that had been built up for decades.

For many years, in Soviet and then in Russian society, Finland was considered exclusively as a small friendly, neutral country – our closest northern neighbor, which, on the rights of broad autonomy, was part of the Russian Empire for 108 years and had broad powers granted by Emperor Alexander I (had its own authorities, monetary unit, post office, customs, and police).

During the Cold War, following the Western model of development, the Finnish leadership managed to maintain a neutral middle ground in the global confrontation in its policy of limited sovereignty, following the Second World War, maintaining even relations with all sides of the geopolitical conflict in the interests of developing the Finnish economy and improving the well-being of the population.

At that time, this concept of “subordinating” a weaker state to a stronger one in order to ensure security received the term “Finlandization” in Western political circles, in which, even in the context of an ideological struggle against capitalism, Moscow did not exclude the possibility of establishing and maintaining mutually beneficial relations with countries with a Western model of a market-oriented economy. During the years of “Finlandization”, the Finnish side adapted to a certain profile of cooperation with the USSR, which exported cheap raw materials (wood, oil, cement), and in return received products with high added value (paper, lumber, petrochemicals).

Kieran McGrath
Oriental Review

A severely malnourished girl in Gaza. Aid teams have
repeatedly called for Israel to allow much more aid to
enter Gaza to prevent the humanitarian catastrophe.

The Gaza Strip, once a densely populated and culturally rich region, has been transformed into a landscape of devastation and despair, with over 62,000 individuals reported dead and more than 159,000 wounded due to ongoing Israeli military operations. This staggering toll underscores the dire humanitarian crisis unfolding in the region.

On August 25, 2025, a double-tap missile strike targeted the Nasser Hospital in Khan Yunis, southern Gaza. The initial strike was followed by a second, more powerful attack, which is considered a potential violation of international law due to its indiscriminate nature and the targeting of a medical facility.

The assault resulted in the deaths of at least 22 individuals, including five journalists and several medical staff members. Among the journalists killed were Hussam al-Masri (Reuters), Mohammad Salama (Al Jazeera), Mariam Abu Daqqa (freelance), Ahmed Abu Aziz (Middle East Eye), and Moaz Abu Taha (freelance). UN Human Rights spokesperson Thameen Al-Kheetan said:

💬 “The killing of journalists in Gaza should stop, should shock the world. Not into stunned silence, but into action, demanding accountability and justice.”

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) confirmed that they had struck the area around Nasser Hospital and stated that the chief of the General Staff has ordered an official inquiry.

Leonid Savin
Oriental Review

The signing of the peace deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan, which took place in Washington on August 8, 2025 in the presence of US President Donald Trump, marks the victory of the globalist forces in Eurasia. Despite the moderately positive tone of statements from the Russian leadership about the importance of the agreement, which had been expected for many years, it should be noted that Moscow had previously imagined a completely different scenario.

Firstly, there was the OSCE Minsk Group, which was a mediator and observer of the settlement between the Caucasian republics. Secondly, there was Lavrov’s Plan, which provided for the return of a number of settlements to Azerbaijan, after which a peace treaty was to be signed and borders were to be demarcated. Baku was ready for this option, while Soros’s henchman Nikola Pashinyan sabotaged this process.

As a result, Ilham Aliyev, taking into account Russia’s Special Military Operation in Ukraine, as well as Russia’s military involvement in Syria, decided to carry out a military campaign against Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia, which turned out a success. Russian peacekeepers were withdrawn from the region (having previously suffered losses as a result of fire from the Azerbaijani military).

Arina Korshunova
Oriental Review

Economic consequences of sanctions policy | The EU sanctions against Russia, which began in 2022 and reached the 18th package by June 2025, have led to significant economic difficulties for Europe itself. As von der Leyen notes, sanctions have reduced Russia’s oil and gas revenues by almost 80% compared to pre-war levels, and inflation in Russia exceeds 10%. However, Russia has adapted by redirecting its trade toward China, with bilateral trade reaching $240 billion in 2024, and other BRICS partners, such as India, which increased its imports of Russian oil from 2% to 20% since 2022.

At the same time, the sanctions have boomeranged on Europe. The energy crisis caused by the refusal of Russian supplies (previously accounting for 45% of the EU’s gas and 50% of coal) has led to a 40% increase in energy prices since 2022. This has undermined the competitiveness of European industry, especially in Germany, where jobs have been lost. Inflation in the EU in 2025 reached 5%, increasing pressure on households and businesses. According to the World Bank, EU GDP growth remains sluggish (1-2% per year), while Russia’s economy, despite sanctions, is growing at 3.2%.

Leonid Savin
Oriental Review

Behind all the talks about a combination of ecology and politics there are always the interests of certain oligarchic groups.

The concept of sustainable development has been advertised on international platforms for many years, primarily in the United Nations.. At the Summit of this Organization in 2015, 193 countries signed 17 Sustainable Development Goals, where, in general, everyone agreed that the world needs a certain model that takes into account both political and economic, as well as social and environmental, aspects.

Even earlier, at the 1992 ‘Earth Summit’ in Rio de Janeiro, the concept of sustainability was adopted as the blueprint for economic and environmental programs under the auspices of the same UN. The UN Millennium Development Goals were also directly related to this theory.

Although no one denies the need for careful management of natural resources and for the environmental protection, it is alarming that issues of sustainable development are actively promoted by typically globalist projects such as the Davos Forum, founded by Klaus Schwab. Similarly, George Soros and Bill Gates, with their projects also related to the UN through WHO and other initiatives, regularly advocate for sustainable development. Therefore, it is necessary to consider in more detail what kind of theory and methodology it is. And also who is, in particular, promoting it and why.

Eldin Latich
Oriental Review

Trump has literally turned the playing board upside down! Allied relations do not guarantee economic cooperation

Trump is a businessman. Based on this evidence, we should expect that his words (of which there are actually too many, and if you read his Twitter (X), it is unlikely that you will be able to keep track of everything) may turn out to be reality to some extent. And if the promise to “resolve the Ukrainian conflict in 24 hours” was initially perceived as loud bravado, then the sworn promises to arrange a “new golden age” for the United States and “return production” to the country from the very beginning looked like a logical and logical continuation of Trump’s protectionism of the last term. The world has not forgotten the US trade war with China. It is unlikely that anyone would be surprised by the new duties of the current American administration on Chinese products. But experts and politicians hardly expected that Mr. Trump’s talk about tariffs on Canadian and Mexican imports would turn out to be true – especially so quickly.

Trump has literally turned the playing board upside down! Allied relations do not guarantee economic cooperation, and at the same time, WTO membership can no longer promise it. The “most favored nation” regime should now be understood as “equal duties for all,” because American protectionism is gaining momentum!