Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

When readiness is tested, ⚡ speed matters. #SteadfastDart26 puts NATO’s ability to deploy, move, and reinforce forces at speed to the test strengthening deterrence where and when it is needed. Led by NATO Joint Force Command Brunssum, the exercise demonstrates how the Alliance turns plans into action in a...

NATOJFCBS's profile picture

NATO Allied Joint Force Command Brunssum - JFCBS

73,703 subscribers

25,775 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & PolitikWissenschaft & Technologie#SteadfastDart26
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Ready to Adapt. Ready to Respond. Ready Together.💪 NATO’s Agile Combat Employment (ACE) helps Allied air forces✈️ stay ready and effective in contested environments by allowing aircraft and personnel to operate from multiple forward and challenging locations. By dispersing forces, strengthening cooperation between Allies and maintaining operational tempo, ACE enables rapid, survivable and sustained air operations.🛩️ Readiness is about the ability to adapt quickly, operate together and deliver effects when and where they are needed. #WeAreNATO #StrongerTogether SHAPE - NATO Allied Command Operations NATO Air Command NATO Allied Joint Force Command Naples - JFCNP NATO Allied Joint Force Command Brunssum - JFCBS
0:25

Ready to Adapt. Ready to Respond. Ready Together.💪 NATO’s Agile Combat Employment (ACE) helps Allied air forces✈️ stay ready and effective in contested environments by allowing aircraft and personnel to operate from multiple forward and challenging locations. By dispersing forces, strengthening cooperation between Allies and maintaining operational tempo, ACE enables rapid, survivable and sustained air operations.🛩️ Readiness is about the ability to adapt quickly, operate together and deliver effects when and where they are needed. #WeAreNATO #StrongerTogether SHAPE - NATO Allied Command Operations NATO Air Command NATO Allied Joint Force Command Naples - JFCNP NATO Allied Joint Force Command Brunssum - JFCBS

NATO Allied Joint Force Command Norfolk - JFCNF

33,059 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Did you know the 🇫🇷 French Navy contributed carrier-based air power to #SteadfastDart26⁉️ Two Rafale M fighters launched from the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle took part in the exercise as part of the French Carrier Strike Group, a unique and strategic capability in Europe. ⚓ Acting as a floating air base ✈️ Enabling sustained air operations at sea 🤝 Strengthening Allied interoperability & cohesion ➡️ As operations continue, the strike group sails onward toward Exercise #ORION26, sustaining readiness and Allied cooperation. 📹 Watch the video to see how powerful this capability truly is. 👀 #WeAreNATO #StrongerTogether #CharlesDeGaulle #FrenchCSG Armée française - Opérations militaires Marine nationale French Carrier Strike Group Naval News Ministère des Armées et des Anciens combattants Force et Opérations Terrestres Chef d'état-major de l'armée de Terre Commandement Terre Europe La France à l'OTAN SHAPE - NATO Allied Command Operations NATO Maritime Command
1:17

Did you know the 🇫🇷 French Navy contributed carrier-based air power to #SteadfastDart26⁉️ Two Rafale M fighters launched from the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle took part in the exercise as part of the French Carrier Strike Group, a unique and strategic capability in Europe. ⚓ Acting as a floating air base ✈️ Enabling sustained air operations at sea 🤝 Strengthening Allied interoperability & cohesion ➡️ As operations continue, the strike group sails onward toward Exercise #ORION26, sustaining readiness and Allied cooperation. 📹 Watch the video to see how powerful this capability truly is. 👀 #WeAreNATO #StrongerTogether #CharlesDeGaulle #FrenchCSG Armée française - Opérations militaires Marine nationale French Carrier Strike Group Naval News Ministère des Armées et des Anciens combattants Force et Opérations Terrestres Chef d'état-major de l'armée de Terre Commandement Terre Europe La France à l'OTAN SHAPE - NATO Allied Command Operations NATO Maritime Command

NATO Allied Joint Force Command Brunssum - JFCBS

32,561 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

New on the SDF-Damascus integration agreement: • Yesterday and today, a sizable number of Damascus-linked Syrian Interior and Defence Ministry personnel entered Hasakah city in preparation for taking over the city's security affairs. We reported five days ago, citing reliable sources, that additional Damascus-appointed security personnel were set to enter Hasakah in the coming days. • Based on this change on the ground, we are recolouring two areas within Hasakah and the Qamishli countryside to green, denoting Syrian government forces. The entire SDF pocket is now nominally under Damascus control, but outside these areas that control remains nominal, which is why we are keeping the rest yellow, where the SDF holds real power on the ground. • Two indicators that security control of the city is being taken over: yesterday, a convoy of around 100 military police, a Defence Ministry force, was stationed in the northwest of the city, and today, some 300 to 350 personnel from the Special Tasks Forces were stationed on the eastern and east-northeastern edge of the city. • Today's deployment is especially large because the role of the Special Tasks Forces is rapid intervention and dealing with exceptional security incidents, including serious disturbances, hostage situations and other sudden security threats. It is a strong sign that they are there in preparation for a further deployment of Syrian government forces into the city. According to a reliable source embedded with the deployed security force, the task forces are one of the first operational components of a phased takeover, providing an early high-readiness security capability while the rest of the state security institutions are deployed sequentially. • In the coming days, civil police, road security, further military police and other security agencies are set to enter the city to take over their respective functions across it. These forces also include the integrated SDF-linked Asayish personnel, who will form part of the broader security structure under Damascus command. This is important because it shows that while the personnel are being absorbed, as Damascus has previously stated, the command sits with Damascus. • Two other points are worth noting. The three key security appointments in Hasakah province have now been made, and all three are Damascus-appointed, with none coming from the SDF. This matters because the key goal is command. • Marwan al-Ali was already appointed head of Internal Security in the province, which oversees and coordinates the Interior Ministry's security presence, including civilian policing, public security, criminal security operations and civilian checkpoints. Imad Fawaz al-Ayash has been appointed head of military police, which enforces military law and discipline, deals with violations by military personnel, carries out military arrests and maintains military order. • This is significant because while three brigades in Hasakah province are populated by former SDF personnel, the discipline side is handled directly by Damascus, which means they will not function autonomously, and in cases of violation the Damascus-controlled military police structure may intervene. • The third post went to Thaer Obeid al-Bilal, appointed head of military security, which broadly concerns the security of the military establishment itself: force protection, security oversight, vetting, counter-intelligence functions and the security of installations, although the precise formal remit of the reorganised Military Security structure has not been publicly detailed. Both his appointment and that of al-Ayash were publicly confirmed during the latest integration meetings. • Today, importantly, the executive office of Hasakah province held its first meeting. We have reported on the appointments to the executive office, which is numerically dominated by SDF-linked figures. As we argued at the time, this executive office is more civilian-facing, and Damascus appears to have compromised by allowing the SDF a stronger civilian-facing role in the province while retaining tighter control over the coercive institutions. That is what is now happening on the ground. • Aside from that, in the coming weeks more Interior Ministry personnel are expected to enter Qamishli as part of the deployment of Internal Security from Qamishli towards Derik/al-Malkiyah. Damascus-linked Internal Security forces are also expected to be deployed to the Semalka border crossing. • This is significant because Semalka has already been administratively integrated under the Syrian central government, while the security side has been integrated only on paper, with almost all personnel on the ground being former SDF or Autonomous Administration-linked figures. • It is now likely that Damascus will deploy its own forces and absorb some of the remaining SDF and Asayish personnel as part of this broader mixed force. The distinction matters, because absorption into a mixed force leaves these personnel without exclusive control of these areas. • How extensive the deployment will be is unclear. In Qamishli, for instance, no final arrangement appears to have been reached, but the outcome is likely to be a mixed force of integrated SDF Asayish and Damascus-linked security. • For now, we have changed the colour only of the Hasakah pocket and the triangle towards Qamishli, because the security environment there has already changed to a degree that warrants it. The rest are expected to follow. More details and a more detailed interactive map:
0:52

New on the SDF-Damascus integration agreement: • Yesterday and today, a sizable number of Damascus-linked Syrian Interior and Defence Ministry personnel entered Hasakah city in preparation for taking over the city's security affairs. We reported five days ago, citing reliable sources, that additional Damascus-appointed security personnel were set to enter Hasakah in the coming days. • Based on this change on the ground, we are recolouring two areas within Hasakah and the Qamishli countryside to green, denoting Syrian government forces. The entire SDF pocket is now nominally under Damascus control, but outside these areas that control remains nominal, which is why we are keeping the rest yellow, where the SDF holds real power on the ground. • Two indicators that security control of the city is being taken over: yesterday, a convoy of around 100 military police, a Defence Ministry force, was stationed in the northwest of the city, and today, some 300 to 350 personnel from the Special Tasks Forces were stationed on the eastern and east-northeastern edge of the city. • Today's deployment is especially large because the role of the Special Tasks Forces is rapid intervention and dealing with exceptional security incidents, including serious disturbances, hostage situations and other sudden security threats. It is a strong sign that they are there in preparation for a further deployment of Syrian government forces into the city. According to a reliable source embedded with the deployed security force, the task forces are one of the first operational components of a phased takeover, providing an early high-readiness security capability while the rest of the state security institutions are deployed sequentially. • In the coming days, civil police, road security, further military police and other security agencies are set to enter the city to take over their respective functions across it. These forces also include the integrated SDF-linked Asayish personnel, who will form part of the broader security structure under Damascus command. This is important because it shows that while the personnel are being absorbed, as Damascus has previously stated, the command sits with Damascus. • Two other points are worth noting. The three key security appointments in Hasakah province have now been made, and all three are Damascus-appointed, with none coming from the SDF. This matters because the key goal is command. • Marwan al-Ali was already appointed head of Internal Security in the province, which oversees and coordinates the Interior Ministry's security presence, including civilian policing, public security, criminal security operations and civilian checkpoints. Imad Fawaz al-Ayash has been appointed head of military police, which enforces military law and discipline, deals with violations by military personnel, carries out military arrests and maintains military order. • This is significant because while three brigades in Hasakah province are populated by former SDF personnel, the discipline side is handled directly by Damascus, which means they will not function autonomously, and in cases of violation the Damascus-controlled military police structure may intervene. • The third post went to Thaer Obeid al-Bilal, appointed head of military security, which broadly concerns the security of the military establishment itself: force protection, security oversight, vetting, counter-intelligence functions and the security of installations, although the precise formal remit of the reorganised Military Security structure has not been publicly detailed. Both his appointment and that of al-Ayash were publicly confirmed during the latest integration meetings. • Today, importantly, the executive office of Hasakah province held its first meeting. We have reported on the appointments to the executive office, which is numerically dominated by SDF-linked figures. As we argued at the time, this executive office is more civilian-facing, and Damascus appears to have compromised by allowing the SDF a stronger civilian-facing role in the province while retaining tighter control over the coercive institutions. That is what is now happening on the ground. • Aside from that, in the coming weeks more Interior Ministry personnel are expected to enter Qamishli as part of the deployment of Internal Security from Qamishli towards Derik/al-Malkiyah. Damascus-linked Internal Security forces are also expected to be deployed to the Semalka border crossing. • This is significant because Semalka has already been administratively integrated under the Syrian central government, while the security side has been integrated only on paper, with almost all personnel on the ground being former SDF or Autonomous Administration-linked figures. • It is now likely that Damascus will deploy its own forces and absorb some of the remaining SDF and Asayish personnel as part of this broader mixed force. The distinction matters, because absorption into a mixed force leaves these personnel without exclusive control of these areas. • How extensive the deployment will be is unclear. In Qamishli, for instance, no final arrangement appears to have been reached, but the outcome is likely to be a mixed force of integrated SDF Asayish and Damascus-linked security. • For now, we have changed the colour only of the Hasakah pocket and the triangle towards Qamishli, because the security environment there has already changed to a degree that warrants it. The rest are expected to follow. More details and a more detailed interactive map:

The National Context

28,304 Aufrufe • vor 11 Tagen

🚨🚨🚨Defending Ukraine's Skies🚨🚨🚨 🚨A More Cost Effective Way For Comprehensive Coverage For Ukraine’s Air Defence🚨 Ukraine’s skies have become one of the most heated contested battlegrounds in Europe. With relentless missile and drone attacks targeting cities, infrastructure, and civilians, effective air defence has become nothing short of a lifeline. Currently, Ukraine relies heavily on a limited number of high-end Western systems, including just six Patriot missile defence systems out of the promised 25.... For an example to the issue, Patriot air defence, while extremely capable, come at an extraordinary cost. Each Patriot system costing $1.1 Billion USD!. And an insane cost of $3 million and $5 million per missile, making their sustained use a massive financial burden, even with allied support. Additionally, other advanced systems, like the British Sky Sabre, have been deployed to provide valuable coverage. The SAMP/T system, which combines high-end radars and Aster missiles, has also contributed to Ukraine's defence. However, despite these critical contributions, Ukraine still lacks the scale of air defence needed to blanket its most vulnerable regions and protect all critical infrastructure effectively. If we want to protect Ukraine, we need something thats sustainable. Enter Gravehawk: A Game-Changing, Affordable Solution Purpose-Built for Ukraine. The British-developed Gravehawk air defence system which is quite literally 1,100 times cheaper that a Patriot air defence system. The Gravehawk air defense system has been specifically designed for Ukraine, prioritising both mobility and flexibility. Housed in a standard freight container, it can be effortlessly transported on the back of a truck, enabling rapid deployment or continuous mobility as required. A key advantage of the system is its separate control module, allowing operators to stay mobile and secure while overseeing its operations. The entire Gravehawk setup can be efficiently managed by a small, five-person team, with two members dedicated to reloading the system. While the potential Sky Shield Initiative could see a coalition of willing nations deploy 120 fighter jets over Ukraine, an effort supported by the hashtag #SkyShieldNow, there remains a critical need for reliable air defense as a last line of protection. This is especially true when these jets are deployed, as they will need to cover not only key Ukrainian cities and civilian infrastructure but also important areas for the coalition of willing, such as troop encampments and air bases. Ukraine already has two operational Gravehawk units on the ground, with an additional 15 systems scheduled to arrive before the end of 2025, thanks to a joint UK-Denmark initiative. Gravehawk’s strength lies in its simplicity and strategic brilliance, it repurposes Soviet-era R-73 (AA-11 Archer) air-to-air missiles, of which Ukraine already possesses in massive stockpiles. Alternatively the Gravehawk System can also use NATO AIM-9 Sidewinder Missiles which could also be supplied. These missiles are short-range, infrared-guided, and capable of taking down fighter jets, helicopters, drones, and even low-flying cruise missiles. When combined with the Gravehawk’s modern sensors and ground-based launch systems, they become a potent tool for defending Ukrainian cities and front lines whilst making easy work of incoming Shahed drones. But perhaps the most critical advantage is cost. Each Gravehawk system per-unit cost of approximately £933,333, a fraction of the price of most NATO-standard systems and under 1 Million pounds, which in military defence terms is next to nothing. To put this in perspective: one Patriot battery costs upwards of $1.1 billion, 1,100 times more expensive, with each launcher and radar component adding millions more on top of this cost. Simply put, the Gravehawk provides massive defensive value for a tiny fraction of the cost with incredible capabilities. This should be a wake-up call. An air defence system in which we could purchase more than 1,100 of for the same price as 1 Patriot system... It's insanity for the Patriot to be one of the main considerations. If the UK and its allies are serious about helping Ukraine build an integrated air defence shield, then scaling up Gravehawk deployment should be a top priority in line with other western air defence systems available. It’s fast to deploy, low-cost, uses existing Ukrainian munitions, and is battle-tested in real-time. This is the fastest and cheapest route to widespread air defence coverage, not only to protect lives today but to lay the groundwork for a secure and sovereign Ukraine in the years ahead. I respectfully urge the British government, including the Prime Minister and all relevant officials, to expand and scale up the Gravehawk program. By increasing the number of systems available, we can provide Ukraine with the critical air defense capabilities it needs to protect its people and secure its future. 🚨If you are reading this, and this is something you would support and believe is in Ukraine's best interest, I would appreciate it very much if you could like, repost, comment or bookmark this post so it creates traction to be seen. I am trying to save Ukrainian lives with this request🚨 I would like bring this to the attention of or to request support of this proposal from the following. Prime Minister of the UK Keir Starmer 10 Downing Street UK Prime Minister UK Ministry of Defence MOD Ministry of Defence 🇬🇧 UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy David Lammy UK Defence Secretary John Healey John Healey UK Parliament House of Commons UK House of Commons UK Ministry of Defence Press Office Ministry of Defence 🇬🇧Press Ukraine’s Ambassador to the UK Valerii Zaluzhnyi Valerii Zaluzhnyi Ukraine Embassy In London Embassy of Ukraine to the UK EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Kaja Kallas NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte Political Anaylst And Strategic Advisor Jessica Berlin You can find more information on the Gravehawk Air defence System in the video here.
2:16

🚨🚨🚨Defending Ukraine's Skies🚨🚨🚨 🚨A More Cost Effective Way For Comprehensive Coverage For Ukraine’s Air Defence🚨 Ukraine’s skies have become one of the most heated contested battlegrounds in Europe. With relentless missile and drone attacks targeting cities, infrastructure, and civilians, effective air defence has become nothing short of a lifeline. Currently, Ukraine relies heavily on a limited number of high-end Western systems, including just six Patriot missile defence systems out of the promised 25.... For an example to the issue, Patriot air defence, while extremely capable, come at an extraordinary cost. Each Patriot system costing $1.1 Billion USD!. And an insane cost of $3 million and $5 million per missile, making their sustained use a massive financial burden, even with allied support. Additionally, other advanced systems, like the British Sky Sabre, have been deployed to provide valuable coverage. The SAMP/T system, which combines high-end radars and Aster missiles, has also contributed to Ukraine's defence. However, despite these critical contributions, Ukraine still lacks the scale of air defence needed to blanket its most vulnerable regions and protect all critical infrastructure effectively. If we want to protect Ukraine, we need something thats sustainable. Enter Gravehawk: A Game-Changing, Affordable Solution Purpose-Built for Ukraine. The British-developed Gravehawk air defence system which is quite literally 1,100 times cheaper that a Patriot air defence system. The Gravehawk air defense system has been specifically designed for Ukraine, prioritising both mobility and flexibility. Housed in a standard freight container, it can be effortlessly transported on the back of a truck, enabling rapid deployment or continuous mobility as required. A key advantage of the system is its separate control module, allowing operators to stay mobile and secure while overseeing its operations. The entire Gravehawk setup can be efficiently managed by a small, five-person team, with two members dedicated to reloading the system. While the potential Sky Shield Initiative could see a coalition of willing nations deploy 120 fighter jets over Ukraine, an effort supported by the hashtag #SkyShieldNow, there remains a critical need for reliable air defense as a last line of protection. This is especially true when these jets are deployed, as they will need to cover not only key Ukrainian cities and civilian infrastructure but also important areas for the coalition of willing, such as troop encampments and air bases. Ukraine already has two operational Gravehawk units on the ground, with an additional 15 systems scheduled to arrive before the end of 2025, thanks to a joint UK-Denmark initiative. Gravehawk’s strength lies in its simplicity and strategic brilliance, it repurposes Soviet-era R-73 (AA-11 Archer) air-to-air missiles, of which Ukraine already possesses in massive stockpiles. Alternatively the Gravehawk System can also use NATO AIM-9 Sidewinder Missiles which could also be supplied. These missiles are short-range, infrared-guided, and capable of taking down fighter jets, helicopters, drones, and even low-flying cruise missiles. When combined with the Gravehawk’s modern sensors and ground-based launch systems, they become a potent tool for defending Ukrainian cities and front lines whilst making easy work of incoming Shahed drones. But perhaps the most critical advantage is cost. Each Gravehawk system per-unit cost of approximately £933,333, a fraction of the price of most NATO-standard systems and under 1 Million pounds, which in military defence terms is next to nothing. To put this in perspective: one Patriot battery costs upwards of $1.1 billion, 1,100 times more expensive, with each launcher and radar component adding millions more on top of this cost. Simply put, the Gravehawk provides massive defensive value for a tiny fraction of the cost with incredible capabilities. This should be a wake-up call. An air defence system in which we could purchase more than 1,100 of for the same price as 1 Patriot system... It's insanity for the Patriot to be one of the main considerations. If the UK and its allies are serious about helping Ukraine build an integrated air defence shield, then scaling up Gravehawk deployment should be a top priority in line with other western air defence systems available. It’s fast to deploy, low-cost, uses existing Ukrainian munitions, and is battle-tested in real-time. This is the fastest and cheapest route to widespread air defence coverage, not only to protect lives today but to lay the groundwork for a secure and sovereign Ukraine in the years ahead. I respectfully urge the British government, including the Prime Minister and all relevant officials, to expand and scale up the Gravehawk program. By increasing the number of systems available, we can provide Ukraine with the critical air defense capabilities it needs to protect its people and secure its future. 🚨If you are reading this, and this is something you would support and believe is in Ukraine's best interest, I would appreciate it very much if you could like, repost, comment or bookmark this post so it creates traction to be seen. I am trying to save Ukrainian lives with this request🚨 I would like bring this to the attention of or to request support of this proposal from the following. Prime Minister of the UK Keir Starmer 10 Downing Street UK Prime Minister UK Ministry of Defence MOD Ministry of Defence 🇬🇧 UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy David Lammy UK Defence Secretary John Healey John Healey UK Parliament House of Commons UK House of Commons UK Ministry of Defence Press Office Ministry of Defence 🇬🇧Press Ukraine’s Ambassador to the UK Valerii Zaluzhnyi Valerii Zaluzhnyi Ukraine Embassy In London Embassy of Ukraine to the UK EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Kaja Kallas NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte Political Anaylst And Strategic Advisor Jessica Berlin You can find more information on the Gravehawk Air defence System in the video here.

Bricktop_NAFO

28,016 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

If you're new to $EOS.AX, here's everything that matters. I think this is a prime in the making. Here's why. What they actually do Electro Optic Systems is an Australian defence technology company with four decades of experience in lasers, optics, and weapons systems. They build remote weapon stations, high-energy lasers, counter-drone systems, and space domain awareness infrastructure; and now the AI command-and-control layer to connect all of it. Land EOS has sold over 2,500 remote weapon stations globally. Their R400 Slinger is battle-proven in Ukraine; 160 systems deployed, with the Ukrainian Ambassador visiting EOS headquarters this week and publicly confirming the Slinger is receiving positive operational feedback from the battlefield. General Dynamics selected EOS as sole partner to integrate the R400 autonomously onto the M1 Abrams tank. Thousands of platforms, $3B addressable market over 15 years. Counter-drone Apollo is their 100kW high-energy laser. The Netherlands signed the world's first 100kW HELW export contract at €71.4M, and it's running six months ahead of schedule. Their Slinger cannon system is the kinetic layer. EOS has recently acquired MARSS, bringing NiDAR; an AI-enabled command and control system with 60+ fielded systems globally as the brain connecting everything. EOS can now sell a full integrated kill chain - detect, decide, engage. Sea EOS doesn't build ships. What it does is provide the weapon layer on unmanned surface vessels. R400 RWS demonstrated on BlackSea Technologies' USV at Sea-Air-Space in April alongside Lockheed Martin. A €31M order for Slinger counter-drone systems configured for naval deployment; EOS's largest ever naval RWS contract, funded by a Western European government. Space This is the part most people miss. EOS has been tracking objects in orbit from Mount Stromlo for four decades. Atlas Space Control - unveiled at IAC 2025 - weaponises that capability. Ground-based high-energy lasers, fixed or mobile, scalable from surveillance through to active engagement. As Russia parks military satellites 500 metres from commercial imaging assets supplying Ukraine, this stops being a niche product. They just appointed Air Vice-Marshal (Ret'd) Catherine Roberts to the board; inaugural Commander of Defence Space Command in Australia, 40 years of aerospace engineering, and oversight of $16B in major programmes. They're stacking the deck to own the space domain. C2 - the connective tissue Without command and control, EOS is a components vendor, but MARSS NiDAR changes that. It fuses sensors and orchestrates effectors across all domains at machine speed. The integrated EOS-MARSS stack has already defeated Iranian Shahed drones defending Gulf infrastructure in active conflict. Netherlands World's first export contract for a 100kW high-energy laser weapon @ €71.4M and running ahead of schedule. The Dutch client is already signalling readiness for serial production orders before first delivery. This is NATO reference architecture. Germany Defence Minister Pistorius visited Mount Stromlo in March 2026. CEO Schwer presented binding offers for 10 Apollo 100kW systems (€380M) plus Atlas. EOS pitch - twice the power, half the price, half the time. A German CEO with Rheinmetall executive pedigree doesn't walk into those rooms by accident. Middle East 500+ EOS remote weapon stations already in Emirati service. Calidus - Abu Dhabi's major defence integrator - took a A$40M strategic stake in EOS and is co-producing systems in a UAE manufacturing hub. Their joint system DAMITA is the UAE's first indigenous integrated counter-drone platform; EOS laser, EOS turret, MARSS NiDAR brain. This is the Gulf reference architecture, with a clear replication path into Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrain. Africa MARSS is finalising a >US$190M C4I programme with Nigeria's Ministry of Defence; NiDAR as a national command architecture, regional hubs, ISR UAVs. One of the largest defence programmes ever commissioned in Africa, with both sides publicly confirming they're moving toward contract signature. When it converts, it pushes the combined order book toward A$1B. The ITAR advantage US laser and defence companies are world class but export restricted, whereas EOS is ITAR free. They can sell to Europe, the Middle East, and Asia without years of Washington approval. That's not a minor detail; it's the entire competitive moat in a market where every NATO ally is scrambling to rearm. The numbers Order backlog - A$700M+ and growing. Gross margins - 76%. Net cash: ~A$235M post capital raise. A$190M institutional raise just completed with Calidus as strategic anchor investor. The setup The market is still pricing this like a small Australian manufacturer. The order book, the partnerships, the product depth, the combat validation, and the geopolitical tailwinds say something else entirely. Air, land, sea, space, and the brain to run them. That's the company EOS is becoming.
3:45

If you're new to $EOS.AX, here's everything that matters. I think this is a prime in the making. Here's why. What they actually do Electro Optic Systems is an Australian defence technology company with four decades of experience in lasers, optics, and weapons systems. They build remote weapon stations, high-energy lasers, counter-drone systems, and space domain awareness infrastructure; and now the AI command-and-control layer to connect all of it. Land EOS has sold over 2,500 remote weapon stations globally. Their R400 Slinger is battle-proven in Ukraine; 160 systems deployed, with the Ukrainian Ambassador visiting EOS headquarters this week and publicly confirming the Slinger is receiving positive operational feedback from the battlefield. General Dynamics selected EOS as sole partner to integrate the R400 autonomously onto the M1 Abrams tank. Thousands of platforms, $3B addressable market over 15 years. Counter-drone Apollo is their 100kW high-energy laser. The Netherlands signed the world's first 100kW HELW export contract at €71.4M, and it's running six months ahead of schedule. Their Slinger cannon system is the kinetic layer. EOS has recently acquired MARSS, bringing NiDAR; an AI-enabled command and control system with 60+ fielded systems globally as the brain connecting everything. EOS can now sell a full integrated kill chain - detect, decide, engage. Sea EOS doesn't build ships. What it does is provide the weapon layer on unmanned surface vessels. R400 RWS demonstrated on BlackSea Technologies' USV at Sea-Air-Space in April alongside Lockheed Martin. A €31M order for Slinger counter-drone systems configured for naval deployment; EOS's largest ever naval RWS contract, funded by a Western European government. Space This is the part most people miss. EOS has been tracking objects in orbit from Mount Stromlo for four decades. Atlas Space Control - unveiled at IAC 2025 - weaponises that capability. Ground-based high-energy lasers, fixed or mobile, scalable from surveillance through to active engagement. As Russia parks military satellites 500 metres from commercial imaging assets supplying Ukraine, this stops being a niche product. They just appointed Air Vice-Marshal (Ret'd) Catherine Roberts to the board; inaugural Commander of Defence Space Command in Australia, 40 years of aerospace engineering, and oversight of $16B in major programmes. They're stacking the deck to own the space domain. C2 - the connective tissue Without command and control, EOS is a components vendor, but MARSS NiDAR changes that. It fuses sensors and orchestrates effectors across all domains at machine speed. The integrated EOS-MARSS stack has already defeated Iranian Shahed drones defending Gulf infrastructure in active conflict. Netherlands World's first export contract for a 100kW high-energy laser weapon @ €71.4M and running ahead of schedule. The Dutch client is already signalling readiness for serial production orders before first delivery. This is NATO reference architecture. Germany Defence Minister Pistorius visited Mount Stromlo in March 2026. CEO Schwer presented binding offers for 10 Apollo 100kW systems (€380M) plus Atlas. EOS pitch - twice the power, half the price, half the time. A German CEO with Rheinmetall executive pedigree doesn't walk into those rooms by accident. Middle East 500+ EOS remote weapon stations already in Emirati service. Calidus - Abu Dhabi's major defence integrator - took a A$40M strategic stake in EOS and is co-producing systems in a UAE manufacturing hub. Their joint system DAMITA is the UAE's first indigenous integrated counter-drone platform; EOS laser, EOS turret, MARSS NiDAR brain. This is the Gulf reference architecture, with a clear replication path into Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrain. Africa MARSS is finalising a >US$190M C4I programme with Nigeria's Ministry of Defence; NiDAR as a national command architecture, regional hubs, ISR UAVs. One of the largest defence programmes ever commissioned in Africa, with both sides publicly confirming they're moving toward contract signature. When it converts, it pushes the combined order book toward A$1B. The ITAR advantage US laser and defence companies are world class but export restricted, whereas EOS is ITAR free. They can sell to Europe, the Middle East, and Asia without years of Washington approval. That's not a minor detail; it's the entire competitive moat in a market where every NATO ally is scrambling to rearm. The numbers Order backlog - A$700M+ and growing. Gross margins - 76%. Net cash: ~A$235M post capital raise. A$190M institutional raise just completed with Calidus as strategic anchor investor. The setup The market is still pricing this like a small Australian manufacturer. The order book, the partnerships, the product depth, the combat validation, and the geopolitical tailwinds say something else entirely. Air, land, sea, space, and the brain to run them. That's the company EOS is becoming.

OptimusDelta

226,487 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

🇳🇴🇰🇷 Norway’s parliament has approved a roughly $2 billion plan to buy long-range rocket artillery, choosing South Korea’s K239 Chunmoo system over the US-made HIMARS. The move is intended to strengthen Norway’s deterrence posture against Russia, particularly in the High North and the Arctic, where Norway shares a strategically sensitive border with Russia. The decision is seen as a major breakthrough for Hanwha Aerospace in the European defence market, and a setback for Lockheed Martin, which produces HIMARS. Industry sources cited by Yonhap News Agency said a formal contract signing is expected on Friday in Oslo, and that South Korea’s presidential chief of staff, Kang Hoon-sik, is expected to attend. Why Norway picked Chunmoo Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten reported that the Chunmoo system met all of Norway’s operational requirements for ground-based long-range fires, including the ability to strike targets at ranges of up to 500 kilometres. It also reportedly offered the fastest delivery schedule among the competing options, a factor that has become increasingly important as European countries try to close capability gaps quickly. During Tuesday’s parliamentary session, Peter Frölich, defence spokesman for Norway’s Conservative Party, emphasised the importance of deep-strike capability in contemporary warfare, describing the munitions as able to reach far into enemy territory. What the deal includes The procurement covers 16 launch systems, along with an unspecified number of rockets, with a total value estimated at 19.5 billion Norwegian kroner. Under Norway’s defence procurement rules, the contract also includes an offset requirement. This means the foreign supplier must provide industrial cooperation equal to 100 percent of the contract’s value, typically through technology transfer and partnerships with Norwegian companies. Part of a wider European rearmament push The purchase comes as European countries accelerate defence investment amid the ongoing war in Ukraine and heightened concern about Russia’s military intentions. Some Norwegian lawmakers had pushed for a European missile alternative, but officials reportedly concluded that developing a new system would take too long and cost too much given the immediate security situation. Hanwha’s expanding presence in Europe The agreement further strengthens Hanwha Aerospace’s position in Northern Europe. The company has already won Nordic business, including contracts to supply K9 Vidar self-propelled howitzers to Norway signed in September 2025. Hanwha has also partnered with Poland’s WB Electronics to produce Chunmoo missiles in Poland, supporting European-based manufacturing and supply chains. Taken together, the deal highlights how quickly South Korea’s defence industry has become a serious contender in Europe, especially when speed of delivery and industrial cooperation are decisive factors. Stay connected, Follow Gandalv Gandalv
1:06

🇳🇴🇰🇷 Norway’s parliament has approved a roughly $2 billion plan to buy long-range rocket artillery, choosing South Korea’s K239 Chunmoo system over the US-made HIMARS. The move is intended to strengthen Norway’s deterrence posture against Russia, particularly in the High North and the Arctic, where Norway shares a strategically sensitive border with Russia. The decision is seen as a major breakthrough for Hanwha Aerospace in the European defence market, and a setback for Lockheed Martin, which produces HIMARS. Industry sources cited by Yonhap News Agency said a formal contract signing is expected on Friday in Oslo, and that South Korea’s presidential chief of staff, Kang Hoon-sik, is expected to attend. Why Norway picked Chunmoo Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten reported that the Chunmoo system met all of Norway’s operational requirements for ground-based long-range fires, including the ability to strike targets at ranges of up to 500 kilometres. It also reportedly offered the fastest delivery schedule among the competing options, a factor that has become increasingly important as European countries try to close capability gaps quickly. During Tuesday’s parliamentary session, Peter Frölich, defence spokesman for Norway’s Conservative Party, emphasised the importance of deep-strike capability in contemporary warfare, describing the munitions as able to reach far into enemy territory. What the deal includes The procurement covers 16 launch systems, along with an unspecified number of rockets, with a total value estimated at 19.5 billion Norwegian kroner. Under Norway’s defence procurement rules, the contract also includes an offset requirement. This means the foreign supplier must provide industrial cooperation equal to 100 percent of the contract’s value, typically through technology transfer and partnerships with Norwegian companies. Part of a wider European rearmament push The purchase comes as European countries accelerate defence investment amid the ongoing war in Ukraine and heightened concern about Russia’s military intentions. Some Norwegian lawmakers had pushed for a European missile alternative, but officials reportedly concluded that developing a new system would take too long and cost too much given the immediate security situation. Hanwha’s expanding presence in Europe The agreement further strengthens Hanwha Aerospace’s position in Northern Europe. The company has already won Nordic business, including contracts to supply K9 Vidar self-propelled howitzers to Norway signed in September 2025. Hanwha has also partnered with Poland’s WB Electronics to produce Chunmoo missiles in Poland, supporting European-based manufacturing and supply chains. Taken together, the deal highlights how quickly South Korea’s defence industry has become a serious contender in Europe, especially when speed of delivery and industrial cooperation are decisive factors. Stay connected, Follow Gandalv Gandalv

Gandalv

173,440 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

The latest on the SDF’s integration into the Syrian state: Just hours after SDF commander Mazloum Abdi’s meeting with Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa, the full US withdrawal from Syria was announced as complete. One notable detail is that Qasrak airbase, the site vacated by the final American forces, lies on the strategic M4 highway and inside the Hasakah zone that remained under SDF control after the final integration agreement was sealed. Yet based on videos that emerged after the US withdrawal, the base appears to have been handed over to HTS-led elements of the Syrian Army’s 60th Division, which the SDF is set to join. The footage shows dozens of Turkish-made BMC vehicles entering the base to deploy there. More importantly, when the US left, the SDF’s anti-terror unit, known as YAT, appeared to be waiting to hand the base over to the Syrian Army, indicating clear coordination and suggesting that implementation of the integration deal is progressing relatively smoothly. It is also notable that both Qasrak and, a month earlier, Rmelan airbase appear to have been handed over to HTS-led brigades known to operate Turkish-made weaponry. These two bases matter because Qasrak overlooks the M4, while Rmelan sits beside the strategically important Rmelan oilfields. Both are located inside the zone that remained under SDF control after the cessation of hostilities at the end of January. The Syrian government is also set to take over all prisons in Hasakah, while the courts are to be transferred to Damascus-linked institutions. Damascus-linked officials involved in the integration process have said this could happen as soon as next week. At the same time, the SDF appears to be receiving more positions within the Syrian government than initially expected, with the SDF bloc emerging as an important pillar of governance. Its role is set to extend beyond the defence and interior ministries to the foreign ministry, justice ministry, and other state institutions. Meanwhile, the SDF is transitioning into politics following its formal dissolution as a separate armed entity, with strong indications that Mazloum Abdi himself may move into a political role. This also appears to fit into the PKK’s broader rebranding across the Middle East and its effort to better align its political entities across the region, from Turkey to Syria and beyond. That process now appears to include a push for new cross-border media platforms aimed at strengthening coordination as these movements become more embedded in governance in Syria and, potentially, Turkey, while also aligning more closely with the PUK sphere in Iraq’s Kurdistan Region. The broader direction points toward a reconfigured cross-border political force emerging from the PKK’s transition in Turkey, where it has moved toward laying down arms and repositioning itself as a political actor. More:
0:38

The latest on the SDF’s integration into the Syrian state: Just hours after SDF commander Mazloum Abdi’s meeting with Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa, the full US withdrawal from Syria was announced as complete. One notable detail is that Qasrak airbase, the site vacated by the final American forces, lies on the strategic M4 highway and inside the Hasakah zone that remained under SDF control after the final integration agreement was sealed. Yet based on videos that emerged after the US withdrawal, the base appears to have been handed over to HTS-led elements of the Syrian Army’s 60th Division, which the SDF is set to join. The footage shows dozens of Turkish-made BMC vehicles entering the base to deploy there. More importantly, when the US left, the SDF’s anti-terror unit, known as YAT, appeared to be waiting to hand the base over to the Syrian Army, indicating clear coordination and suggesting that implementation of the integration deal is progressing relatively smoothly. It is also notable that both Qasrak and, a month earlier, Rmelan airbase appear to have been handed over to HTS-led brigades known to operate Turkish-made weaponry. These two bases matter because Qasrak overlooks the M4, while Rmelan sits beside the strategically important Rmelan oilfields. Both are located inside the zone that remained under SDF control after the cessation of hostilities at the end of January. The Syrian government is also set to take over all prisons in Hasakah, while the courts are to be transferred to Damascus-linked institutions. Damascus-linked officials involved in the integration process have said this could happen as soon as next week. At the same time, the SDF appears to be receiving more positions within the Syrian government than initially expected, with the SDF bloc emerging as an important pillar of governance. Its role is set to extend beyond the defence and interior ministries to the foreign ministry, justice ministry, and other state institutions. Meanwhile, the SDF is transitioning into politics following its formal dissolution as a separate armed entity, with strong indications that Mazloum Abdi himself may move into a political role. This also appears to fit into the PKK’s broader rebranding across the Middle East and its effort to better align its political entities across the region, from Turkey to Syria and beyond. That process now appears to include a push for new cross-border media platforms aimed at strengthening coordination as these movements become more embedded in governance in Syria and, potentially, Turkey, while also aligning more closely with the PUK sphere in Iraq’s Kurdistan Region. The broader direction points toward a reconfigured cross-border political force emerging from the PKK’s transition in Turkey, where it has moved toward laying down arms and repositioning itself as a political actor. More:

The National Context

26,879 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Pastor Adeboye Did Not Protest Against President Goodluck Jonathan’s Government A false narrative has been circulating online, accompanied by a photograph of Pastor E.A. Adeboye holding a placard during a public walk. The image has repeatedly been misrepresented as evidence that Pastor Adeboye led or participated in a protest against the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan. This claim is FALSE. The photograph in question was taken during a peaceful nationwide walk held in response to a directive issued by the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) during the administration of the late President Muhammadu Buhari. Churches across Nigeria were instructed to hold peaceful walks after service, calling attention to the persistent killings of Christians and urging the government to take decisive action to protect lives. The walk in Ebute Metta, where Pastor Adeboye participated, was part of that nationwide exercise. It was neither organized against President Goodluck Jonathan nor connected in any way to his administration. Ironically, despite the significant media presence at the event when it took place, some of the same photographs have years later been recycled and falsely presented as evidence of a protest against a completely different government. It is important to note that Pastor Adeboye’s message during the walk was clear: all lives matter to God. His placard emphasized the value of every human life, regardless of religious affiliation. The call was for the protection of innocent Nigerians, both Christians and Muslims. Yes, Nigeria is facing enormous challenges, and citizens have every right to desire solutions. However, the growing demand that Pastor Adeboye should “command” the President or the First Lady on how to run the affairs of the nation is both unrealistic and unreasonable. Pastor Adeboye is a clergyman, not the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. Nevertheless, he has not remained silent. During the November 2025 Holy Ghost Service, Pastor Adeboye publicly offered counsel to the President of Nigeria regarding the worsening security situation and the continued killing of innocent citizens by terrorists. He warned that urgent action was necessary before foreign powers found justification to intervene in Nigeria under the guise of combating terrorism. He further advised that security chiefs should be given a clear ultimatum to decisively address the menace or vacate their positions. In his words: “When they eliminate the terrorists, ask them to eliminate their sponsors too.” At 84 years old, Pastor Adeboye continues to provide spiritual leadership, moral counsel, and national guidance within the limits of his office as a minister of the Gospel. For the avoidance of doubt: • Pastor Adeboye cannot command the President or the First Lady on how to govern Nigeria. • Pastor Adeboye and RCCG are not responsible for the current challenges facing the nation. • RCCG is not a political party. • Pastor Adeboye does not hold political office and was not elected into government. • RCCG is not the religious arm of any political party in Nigeria. Facts matter. Context matters. Truth matters. Before sharing claims about Pastor E.A. Adeboye or The Redeemed Christian Church of God, verify them through RCCG’s official communication channels. Follow RCCG PUBLIC RELATIONS for accurate information and official statements.
32:24

Pastor Adeboye Did Not Protest Against President Goodluck Jonathan’s Government A false narrative has been circulating online, accompanied by a photograph of Pastor E.A. Adeboye holding a placard during a public walk. The image has repeatedly been misrepresented as evidence that Pastor Adeboye led or participated in a protest against the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan. This claim is FALSE. The photograph in question was taken during a peaceful nationwide walk held in response to a directive issued by the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) during the administration of the late President Muhammadu Buhari. Churches across Nigeria were instructed to hold peaceful walks after service, calling attention to the persistent killings of Christians and urging the government to take decisive action to protect lives. The walk in Ebute Metta, where Pastor Adeboye participated, was part of that nationwide exercise. It was neither organized against President Goodluck Jonathan nor connected in any way to his administration. Ironically, despite the significant media presence at the event when it took place, some of the same photographs have years later been recycled and falsely presented as evidence of a protest against a completely different government. It is important to note that Pastor Adeboye’s message during the walk was clear: all lives matter to God. His placard emphasized the value of every human life, regardless of religious affiliation. The call was for the protection of innocent Nigerians, both Christians and Muslims. Yes, Nigeria is facing enormous challenges, and citizens have every right to desire solutions. However, the growing demand that Pastor Adeboye should “command” the President or the First Lady on how to run the affairs of the nation is both unrealistic and unreasonable. Pastor Adeboye is a clergyman, not the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. Nevertheless, he has not remained silent. During the November 2025 Holy Ghost Service, Pastor Adeboye publicly offered counsel to the President of Nigeria regarding the worsening security situation and the continued killing of innocent citizens by terrorists. He warned that urgent action was necessary before foreign powers found justification to intervene in Nigeria under the guise of combating terrorism. He further advised that security chiefs should be given a clear ultimatum to decisively address the menace or vacate their positions. In his words: “When they eliminate the terrorists, ask them to eliminate their sponsors too.” At 84 years old, Pastor Adeboye continues to provide spiritual leadership, moral counsel, and national guidance within the limits of his office as a minister of the Gospel. For the avoidance of doubt: • Pastor Adeboye cannot command the President or the First Lady on how to govern Nigeria. • Pastor Adeboye and RCCG are not responsible for the current challenges facing the nation. • RCCG is not a political party. • Pastor Adeboye does not hold political office and was not elected into government. • RCCG is not the religious arm of any political party in Nigeria. Facts matter. Context matters. Truth matters. Before sharing claims about Pastor E.A. Adeboye or The Redeemed Christian Church of God, verify them through RCCG’s official communication channels. Follow RCCG PUBLIC RELATIONS for accurate information and official statements.

RCCG PUBLIC RELATIONS

813,547 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

🇪🇸|#Spain | This is not a migration crisis. It is a multi-front war orchestrated by the Mossad and the CIA and executed by Morocco against a nation that refuses to become an imperial vassal. This is not a wave of migration, it is a carefully orchestrated geopolitical attack. The people flooding the Ceuta border are not refugees; they are being used as human battering rams to punish a government that refused to bow to Washington. When Spain refused to serve as a launchpad for the U.S. war on Iran, Washington, Tel Aviv, and Rabat joined forces to weaponize the North African border. 🎯 The Real Target is Spain not Migrants On July 30, 2026, thousands of migrants predominantly young men flooded into Ceuta, Spain’s enclave in North Africa. Between 1,500 and 2,000 migrants arrived in just a few days, representing roughly 2% of Ceuta’s population. At least nine people died while attempting to swim across. But why now? Why Ceuta? Because Spain said "No." Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez refused to allow the U.S. to use two military bases in southern Spain; #Morón and #Rota to attack #Iran. Spain also refused to let ships carrying weapons to Israel dock at its ports. Spain recalled its ambassador to Israel. Spain recognized the State of Palestine. In short, Spain refused to act as a submissive puppet of the empire. The punishment - Morocco opened the floodgates. 🗺️ Who Opened the Floodgates? An Invisible Hand at Work The same thing happened in 2021. At that time, Morocco retaliated against Spain by relaxing border controls, allowing about 8,000 people to pour into Ceuta. Now, the script is playing out again but on a larger scale and with more sophisticated tools. On the Moroccan side, the auxiliary forces responsible for border security voluntarily withdrew as the crowds passed through. This was coordination not loss of control. And the timing is no coincidence too. Spain is approaching an election. A migration crisis is the perfect weapon to undermine the incumbent government, a classic tactic of the Mossad and the CIA. 🔪 The Bigger Game is the Struggle for the Strait of Gibraltar This migration crisis is merely one move in a much larger game. The real prize is the Strait of Gibraltar, a chokepoint through which approximately 10% of global maritime trade and around 100,000 vessels pass annually. In January 2026, Israel and Morocco signed a joint military action plan. Israel now supplies at least 51% of Morocco's missiles. With Israeli support, Morocco is massively expanding its drone production; it has deployed the Israeli "Spyder" air defense system and is locally manufacturing the Israeli SpyX loitering munition (kamikaze drone). A joint maritime surveillance center is currently being established on Morocco's northern coast. A U.S. report identifies the Israel-Morocco arms deal as a turning point in the balance of power within the Strait of Gibraltar. Morocco even proposed to Trump that the U.S. bases at Morón and Rota be relocated from Spain to Morocco. A Spanish general admitted: "Morón Air Base will sooner or later be moved to Morocco." Washington, Tel Aviv, and Rabat are acting in concert to push Spain out of the Strait of Gibraltar and replace it with a compliant Morocco. 💀 The "Multinational Force" in Gaza: Morocco's Ultimate Role Meanwhile, Morocco is emerging as a key implementer of Israel's post-war plans for Gaza. For the first time, Morocco will host training exercises for a multinational force expected to number around 20,000 troops. Approximately 30 Moroccan military officers have already entered Gaza to conduct on-the-ground reconnaissance. Morocco is expected to deploy around 500 soldiers to Gaza. Israeli officials now describe Morocco as Israel's most important security partner on the African continent. A nation that uses "support for Palestine" as its diplomatic calling card is now becoming an instrument of military enforcement for Israeli control over Gaza. ⚡ The Complete Chain of the Plot Here is the full picture: 1. Spain says "No": Refusing U.S. bases, Israeli arms shipments, and unconditional support for Israel. 2. Morocco opens the floodgates: Thousands of migrants pour into Ceuta, creating a crisis to punish Spain. 3. Israel supplies weapons: Missiles, drones, and air defense systems transforming Morocco into a regional military power. 4. The US provides cover: Washington supports Israel-Morocco military cooperation and tacitly condones the weaponization of migration. 5. The Strait of Gibraltar is the prize: a strategic waterway controlling 10% of global maritime trade. 6. Gaza is the ultimate goal: Morocco playing a "peacekeeping" role in Israeli-occupied Gaza.
0:36

🇪🇸|#Spain | This is not a migration crisis. It is a multi-front war orchestrated by the Mossad and the CIA and executed by Morocco against a nation that refuses to become an imperial vassal. This is not a wave of migration, it is a carefully orchestrated geopolitical attack. The people flooding the Ceuta border are not refugees; they are being used as human battering rams to punish a government that refused to bow to Washington. When Spain refused to serve as a launchpad for the U.S. war on Iran, Washington, Tel Aviv, and Rabat joined forces to weaponize the North African border. 🎯 The Real Target is Spain not Migrants On July 30, 2026, thousands of migrants predominantly young men flooded into Ceuta, Spain’s enclave in North Africa. Between 1,500 and 2,000 migrants arrived in just a few days, representing roughly 2% of Ceuta’s population. At least nine people died while attempting to swim across. But why now? Why Ceuta? Because Spain said "No." Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez refused to allow the U.S. to use two military bases in southern Spain; #Morón and #Rota to attack #Iran. Spain also refused to let ships carrying weapons to Israel dock at its ports. Spain recalled its ambassador to Israel. Spain recognized the State of Palestine. In short, Spain refused to act as a submissive puppet of the empire. The punishment - Morocco opened the floodgates. 🗺️ Who Opened the Floodgates? An Invisible Hand at Work The same thing happened in 2021. At that time, Morocco retaliated against Spain by relaxing border controls, allowing about 8,000 people to pour into Ceuta. Now, the script is playing out again but on a larger scale and with more sophisticated tools. On the Moroccan side, the auxiliary forces responsible for border security voluntarily withdrew as the crowds passed through. This was coordination not loss of control. And the timing is no coincidence too. Spain is approaching an election. A migration crisis is the perfect weapon to undermine the incumbent government, a classic tactic of the Mossad and the CIA. 🔪 The Bigger Game is the Struggle for the Strait of Gibraltar This migration crisis is merely one move in a much larger game. The real prize is the Strait of Gibraltar, a chokepoint through which approximately 10% of global maritime trade and around 100,000 vessels pass annually. In January 2026, Israel and Morocco signed a joint military action plan. Israel now supplies at least 51% of Morocco's missiles. With Israeli support, Morocco is massively expanding its drone production; it has deployed the Israeli "Spyder" air defense system and is locally manufacturing the Israeli SpyX loitering munition (kamikaze drone). A joint maritime surveillance center is currently being established on Morocco's northern coast. A U.S. report identifies the Israel-Morocco arms deal as a turning point in the balance of power within the Strait of Gibraltar. Morocco even proposed to Trump that the U.S. bases at Morón and Rota be relocated from Spain to Morocco. A Spanish general admitted: "Morón Air Base will sooner or later be moved to Morocco." Washington, Tel Aviv, and Rabat are acting in concert to push Spain out of the Strait of Gibraltar and replace it with a compliant Morocco. 💀 The "Multinational Force" in Gaza: Morocco's Ultimate Role Meanwhile, Morocco is emerging as a key implementer of Israel's post-war plans for Gaza. For the first time, Morocco will host training exercises for a multinational force expected to number around 20,000 troops. Approximately 30 Moroccan military officers have already entered Gaza to conduct on-the-ground reconnaissance. Morocco is expected to deploy around 500 soldiers to Gaza. Israeli officials now describe Morocco as Israel's most important security partner on the African continent. A nation that uses "support for Palestine" as its diplomatic calling card is now becoming an instrument of military enforcement for Israeli control over Gaza. ⚡ The Complete Chain of the Plot Here is the full picture: 1. Spain says "No": Refusing U.S. bases, Israeli arms shipments, and unconditional support for Israel. 2. Morocco opens the floodgates: Thousands of migrants pour into Ceuta, creating a crisis to punish Spain. 3. Israel supplies weapons: Missiles, drones, and air defense systems transforming Morocco into a regional military power. 4. The US provides cover: Washington supports Israel-Morocco military cooperation and tacitly condones the weaponization of migration. 5. The Strait of Gibraltar is the prize: a strategic waterway controlling 10% of global maritime trade. 6. Gaza is the ultimate goal: Morocco playing a "peacekeeping" role in Israeli-occupied Gaza.

Aprajita Nafs Nefes 🦋 Ancient Believer

995,928 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Breaking News🇬🇧⚡️: Top Manchester Cop Caught In Another Catastrophic Blunder - "On behalf of Greater Manchester Police I offer my sincere apologies for the mishandling of the grooming gangs in Manchester cases". Manchester Police Chief Stephen Watson back in 2024 - now at the centre of mobile phone data cover up allegations where Islamic terrorist want to blow up UK Army bases. Once again Andy Burnham appointed Chief of Great Manchester Police, Stephen Watson is caught looking the other way placing British lives at risk, including those of our Armed Forces. Another inexcusable fuck up endangering the lives of innocent civilians and British military - or as Greater Manchester Police whitewash it a "missed opportunity". Mohammad Asim Bashir, 31, last ‌month admitted driving Jihad Al-Shamie to the UK Defence Academy in Oxfordshire, central England, in August 2025 to carry out hostile reconnaissance. It doesn't end there GMP to possibly stop a deadly attack on a Manchester synagogue last year, as an associate of the attacker was jailed ​for helping carry out earlier reconnaissance on a UK defence site. Prosecutors said at Bashir's sentencing at Manchester Crown Court this ​week that Al-Shamie was arrested twice before his fatal attack; in February 2025 for allegedly breaching ​a non-molestation order and again in September for an alleged rape. His mobile devices were seized but it was not ‌until ⁠after Al-Shamie's attack that the material on them was examined, the court heard. Chief Constable Stephen Watson from Greater Manchester Police (GMP) said in a statement that he was "deeply sorry" that the force did not review the data which contained significant evidence of Al-Shamie's mindset. The Andy Burnham appointed Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Stephen Watson Police issued an apology in January 2024 to grooming gang victims in Rochdale. His apology came following a report into grooming in the town found police failed to protect hundreds of young girls. One has to ask how can Chief Constable Stephen Watson still have a job as well as former Manchester Mayor and now selected PM Andy Burnham still have jobs when their actions have resulted in such wilful incompetence threatening our national security and civilian population alike? Prosecutors said Bashir had driven Al-Shamie on a 10-hour round trip from Manchester to the ​UK Defence Academy, which provides defence and security education to armed forces ​and government personnel, ⁠in August 2025. In October that year, Al-Shamie attacked the Heaton Park synagogue before calling police and saying: "I pledge allegiance to the Islamic State and I have killed two Jews." GMP's Watson said it was for ⁠the ​Independent Office for Police Conduct and inquests into the deaths ​to "determine the impact of not reviewing the contents of the devices". "There can, however, be little doubt that the information contained ​within these devices would have inspired further investigative action," he added.
1:02

Breaking News🇬🇧⚡️: Top Manchester Cop Caught In Another Catastrophic Blunder - "On behalf of Greater Manchester Police I offer my sincere apologies for the mishandling of the grooming gangs in Manchester cases". Manchester Police Chief Stephen Watson back in 2024 - now at the centre of mobile phone data cover up allegations where Islamic terrorist want to blow up UK Army bases. Once again Andy Burnham appointed Chief of Great Manchester Police, Stephen Watson is caught looking the other way placing British lives at risk, including those of our Armed Forces. Another inexcusable fuck up endangering the lives of innocent civilians and British military - or as Greater Manchester Police whitewash it a "missed opportunity". Mohammad Asim Bashir, 31, last ‌month admitted driving Jihad Al-Shamie to the UK Defence Academy in Oxfordshire, central England, in August 2025 to carry out hostile reconnaissance. It doesn't end there GMP to possibly stop a deadly attack on a Manchester synagogue last year, as an associate of the attacker was jailed ​for helping carry out earlier reconnaissance on a UK defence site. Prosecutors said at Bashir's sentencing at Manchester Crown Court this ​week that Al-Shamie was arrested twice before his fatal attack; in February 2025 for allegedly breaching ​a non-molestation order and again in September for an alleged rape. His mobile devices were seized but it was not ‌until ⁠after Al-Shamie's attack that the material on them was examined, the court heard. Chief Constable Stephen Watson from Greater Manchester Police (GMP) said in a statement that he was "deeply sorry" that the force did not review the data which contained significant evidence of Al-Shamie's mindset. The Andy Burnham appointed Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Stephen Watson Police issued an apology in January 2024 to grooming gang victims in Rochdale. His apology came following a report into grooming in the town found police failed to protect hundreds of young girls. One has to ask how can Chief Constable Stephen Watson still have a job as well as former Manchester Mayor and now selected PM Andy Burnham still have jobs when their actions have resulted in such wilful incompetence threatening our national security and civilian population alike? Prosecutors said Bashir had driven Al-Shamie on a 10-hour round trip from Manchester to the ​UK Defence Academy, which provides defence and security education to armed forces ​and government personnel, ⁠in August 2025. In October that year, Al-Shamie attacked the Heaton Park synagogue before calling police and saying: "I pledge allegiance to the Islamic State and I have killed two Jews." GMP's Watson said it was for ⁠the ​Independent Office for Police Conduct and inquests into the deaths ​to "determine the impact of not reviewing the contents of the devices". "There can, however, be little doubt that the information contained ​within these devices would have inspired further investigative action," he added.

HIN News🇬🇧🇺🇸

21,715 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Finally, Ed Davey calls for the UK to join the EU Single Market 👏 "We meet at an extraordinary moment. Vladimir Putin is still waging war on our continent. Donald Trump's chaos in the Middle East goes on. And our government, our own government is paralysed by infighting, waiting for Makerfield to release them from their agony." "And yet, despite all that, standing with you here today, I feel hope. And not just about England's chances against Croatia tonight, but hope about our country's future." "Not hope because the path ahead is easy. It isn't. Not hope because everything will magically get better. It won't." "But hope because finally, after ten long, difficult years, I believe we can move on. We can finally fix the Brexit damage, end the Brexit chaos and get our country back on track." "Because the story the media won't tell you, as they fawn over the rise of Farage, as they hang on his every empty press conference, is that the country is with us. We hear it on the doorsteps, we see it in the polls, we feel it in our communities." "People are fed up. They've had enough. Enough of the chaos in government, the queues at ports, the queues at airports, the bills that just keep on going up." "They know the hard truth that most politicians won't admit. The Brexit experiment has failed. And it's failed all of us." "£90 billion a year. That's how much it's costing us all as taxpayers" "£90 billion every year, gone" "That's £250 million every single day. Taken away from our schools, our hospitals, our armed forces. Taken out of everyone's pockets in the form of unfair tax rises." "Not because of a pandemic, not because of a war, not because of some force of nature out of our control, but because of their Brexit experiment. Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and the rest. An experiment that has now consumed a decade of British politics. That has tangled British businesses up in pointless red tape, that has pushed up prices for British families and that has left us all poorer." "Well, not all of us, apparently. Farage says that the five million he got from a crypto billionaire was his reward for Brexit. So when he said 'We'll be better off after Brexit,' it turns out he was using the royal we." "But friends, it's not only the economic and financial impact, as disastrous as those have been. It's the way they have poisoned our relationship with our nearest neighbours and friends, making it harder to work together on all the things we need to. Energy security and climate change, migration and refugees, AI, and above all, defence." "Britain has always been at its best when we stand tall with our European allies, not when we shut ourselves off. Now they promised us global Britain, but they have left us isolated at the worst possible time. Poorer, weaker and more insecure." "Their experiment has failed. We all know it. So it's time to move on." "But what do they say? The ones who caused all this. The people responsible. Farage and the Conservative Party. They say 'Tough.' They say you can't move on. They say you can't question Britain's relationship with Europe now. You can't dare to suggest there might be a better way. Doesn't matter how bad it gets, doesn't matter how much you're struggling. You just have to live with it, they say." "We say 'No.' We say Britain shouldn't have to live with a bad deal they've lumped us with. We say our country deserves far better than that." "Theirs is old thinking. It's 2016 thinking. The world has changed dramatically since then. It's time for us to change too. It's time for us to move on, move forward." "Just look around. Vladimir Putin is bombing schools and hospitals in Ukraine, murdering innocent civilians. He's testing NATO's resolve and setting his sights on the rest of Eastern Europe. He has shown that territorial conquest is not some relic of the distant past. It is happening now on European soil to our friends and our allies who share our values and our way of life." "And Donald Trump, he's torching the world economy for fun with his tariffs and his trade wars and now his actual war with Iran. He's ripping up the rules-based international order that generations of British leaders, American leaders, European leaders, painstakingly built after the Second World War. Trump threatening NATO, emboldening Putin and actively meddling in our democracies." "And then there's China, increasingly using trade supply chains and strategic dependencies as instruments of geopolitical competition." "And to add to all those political changes, there's the billionaire tech barons taking more and more control of our lives and our jobs with their empires of AI and social media, that no one nation can govern on its own." "The assumptions we have lived by for decades, that global trade would keep expanding, that international rules would broadly be respected, that our security would be underwritten by stable alliances. Those assumptions no longer hold. The world has changed more rapidly than at any time since the end of the Cold War. And our politics must change too." "Now we obviously can't turn to those who wrecked it. Farage and the Conservatives. They only want to make things worse. Even now, pushing for Brexit 2.0 with their plans to rip up the European Convention on Human Rights. They would just rerun all the old arguments, forcing Britain to replay the last ten years over and over in a never ending Brexit doom loop." "But nor, I'm afraid, can we look to Labour. Labour who failed to act with anything like the urgency this moment demands. Who don't seem to grasp the scale of the change we need in our relationship with Europe. Labour, who still kept us hemmed in the red lines they set more than five years ago. No single market, no customs union. Red lines they set before Putin invaded Ukraine, before Trump returned to the White House. Red lines that were wrong then and are even more wrong now." "The world has changed and it's time to move on. We cannot be trapped by that old thinking anymore. We have to look to the future. Not back to 2016 but to 2036 and beyond." "And that's why we're all here today, isn't it? Not because we are bitter about the past, but because we believe in a better future. Because we love our country and we know its brightest days still lie ahead." "We're here for our children and our grandchildren because we want them to inherit a country that is growing, that is confident, that is leading, not one that is shrinking, stagnating and standing alone." "That's what drives us. We're here because the world has changed, because the challenges we face to our economy, to our society and to our national defence are real and urgent. And because we believe Britain deserves ambition that matches the scale of this moment." "So what does that ambition look like? Well, first the government needs to drop those old red lines that stop us getting rid of the Conservatives' red tape. Those red lines are holding Britain back. They're hurting the British people and they are playing into the hands of Farage and Reform." "So my message to Andy Burnham, to Wes Streeting, to whoever the next Prime Minister may be, is drop those red lines. Drop them now." "If we do, we can move on from the torpor and timidity that has marked out Labour's approach to Europe so far. We can put an end to the endless talk of a reset that so far seems to just mean saying no more politely than the Conservatives did. And we can get on with properly fixing our relationship with Europe, for our economy, for our security, for our future." "Our party has led that debate for years. Last year, days before Trump took office, we set out plans for the UK to join a new customs union with the EU. And today I want to build on that and go further, much further." "Today we are calling for a new growth and defence partnership with the European Union. A new growth and defence partnership with the European Union. A bold new deal that will make Britain richer, safer and stronger, including a customs union, but also crucially taking Britain back into the single market." "Tearing down the barriers to trade. Ending the mountains of paperwork, the cost, the delays, the queues. Giving our young people the chance to study and work, live and love anywhere in the EU. Undoing the damage of the Johnson Farage Brexit deal that has held our economy back for so long." "Giving British businesses the certainty they need to invest, to hire and to grow. Giving Britain's economy the boost it needs after years of stagnation. Crucially, giving Britain's public finances a growth dividend. Tens of billions of pounds that we would use to cut the cost of living, to fix the NHS and to strengthen our armed forces." "And this new partnership must go beyond trade and growth. In the age of Putin, Xi and Trump, this must be about defence and security too. No country can be prosperous and free if it is not safe." "And Britain can help lead on defence in Europe as we have so decisively in the past. Despite the Conservatives' short-sighted cuts to our armed forces and Labour's chaos over investing in them now, Britain is still one of Europe's foremost military powers. We are a leading intelligence nation, a permanent member of the UN Security Council and the third-biggest contributor to NATO." "We should be using those strengths. We should be at the table, helping to shape Europe's security future, not watching from the sidelines. And Europe wants us at the table. They know they need our leadership on defence." "So let's seize the initiative from a position of strength to form a new partnership that strengthens both Britain's economy and our collective security. That is why our new partnership would be about defence as much as it is about growth." "That means financial cooperation through a new European rearmament bank, alongside securing UK access to the one hundred and fifty billion euro safe programme. It means joint defence procurement, creating jobs in Britain while strengthening our collective capabilities. It means deeper cooperation on intelligence, on cyber security and on protecting critical infrastructure." "It means working together on energy security so that none of us can be held hostage by an authoritarian regime turning off the gas. It means political cooperation through a new European Security Council with a permanent seat for the UK, ensuring that Europe can shoulder greater responsibility for its own security within NATO." "As Trump's actions remind us every day, that we cannot afford to rely so much on the United States. Friends, this is not a choice we can afford to dodge any longer. In the face of Putin's threats and Trump's unpredictability, a new defence pact with Europe, with allies on whom we can depend, allies who share our interests and our values, is frankly the only way to keep Britain safe and defend our values in a dangerous world." "A new defence pact with Europe is not a choice, it is a necessity. So let's get on with it." "That is the ambition we need when it comes to our relationship with Europe. No more tinkering around the edges of a bad deal. No more shackling ourselves to the arguments of the last ten years, but building something new. A partnership fit for the enormous challenges we face today." "A new growth and defence partnership with a new pact for our collective security. Forming a customs union, joining the single market. A new partnership to make us richer, safer and stronger." "I think it's the best hope our country has to stop the chaos and end the crisis. And, my friends, it is the biggest step we could take now back towards membership of the EU." "And there's another big step we need to take too. Defeating Nigel Farage and Reform. We have to stop them from turning our United Kingdom into their version of Trump's America." "And here's the point. Until we do defeat them, many in Europe will not countenance Britain joining." "Let's remember why this matters, why it's so crucial for Britain to be there at the heart of Europe, at the table with our nearest neighbours." "I've been privileged to see it for myself, the power we have when Britain leads in Europe. When Vladimir Putin invaded Crimea in 2014, we recognised then that the way to defeat him would be to get Europe off its dependence on Russian oil and gas, to take away the money that was funding his aggression, to bankrupt the Russian war machine." "So I led Britain's efforts to bring Europe together behind that common cause, and we succeeded. We wrote Europe's energy security strategy. Britain did that, sitting at the table, leading in Europe." "But then, instead of seeing it through, the Conservatives walked away. They gave up Britain's seat at the table. They locked us out of those discussions at the worst possible time." "Just imagine where we could be now if Britain had continued to lead on energy security. Imagine how much weaker Putin would be now. Imagine how much safer Ukraine and the rest of Europe, including Britain, would be now. What a terrible waste. What an indictment of the Conservatives." "And that is why I am so determined to get us back at the table, back at the heart of Europe. Britain leading again." "Now I want to speak for a moment about the bigger picture. Because our ambition is not limited to Europe alone. It's about Britain's place in the world." "The old assumption that trade, security and prosperity could be treated as separate issues no longer holds. Supply chains can be disrupted. Energy can be weaponised. Economic security and national security are now inseparable." "At a time when authoritarian powers are doing so much to undermine our security, democratic nations must work more closely together to enhance it. As Mark Carney said in Davos, middle powers must act together, because if we're not at the table, we're on the menu. He is right." "Fixing our relationship with Europe is the essential foundation, but it's not the ceiling. The UK can be an incredible force for good when it stands tall on the world stage. Our history, our alliances and our relationships across every continent gives us a unique position for us to act as a bridge, not just between Europe and the US but between Europe and the whole wider democratic world." "We are here because we believe that our country and our people thrive when we are open and outward looking. That is Britain at its best. Not a small inward looking island clinging to the wreckage of a failed experiment, but a leader, a convening power, a country that helps shape the international order rather than being buffeted by it." "That is the Britain we can be." "But friends, I want to be honest with you about the task ahead. What we are proposing is bold. It is ambitious. It requires courage, requires leadership. And it will not happen without all of us." "We know the obstacles we face, the arguments ahead, the opponents who would rather replay the last ten years instead of moving on from them. Who will tell us we can't even talk about a new deal with Europe, let alone make one. The politicians who will claim change isn't possible because the status quo works for them. But it doesn't work for anyone else." "So our job is to get out there and show people that change is possible, that it doesn't have to be like this, that there is a way forward. A better future for our country. Leading in Europe once again." "This isn't just because we believe in Europe. It's not just about friendship or shared history, or the fact that a divided Europe has always ended in misery. Fixing it is about us, our country, our future, our hopes and our dreams." "Britain needs a new plan. A plan for growth, for jobs, for defence. A plan to give our children the better future they deserve. A new deal with Europe. The only way to fix the cost of living crisis. The only way to get our country back on track." "So let us stand together. Let us end the chaos. Let us show the world what Britain can be. Not a small island clinging to a failed experiment, but a leader, open, outward looking. At the table, not on the menu." "A Britain that is richer, safer and stronger. That is the future we are fighting for." " Thank you. Thank you very much."
23:40

Finally, Ed Davey calls for the UK to join the EU Single Market 👏 "We meet at an extraordinary moment. Vladimir Putin is still waging war on our continent. Donald Trump's chaos in the Middle East goes on. And our government, our own government is paralysed by infighting, waiting for Makerfield to release them from their agony." "And yet, despite all that, standing with you here today, I feel hope. And not just about England's chances against Croatia tonight, but hope about our country's future." "Not hope because the path ahead is easy. It isn't. Not hope because everything will magically get better. It won't." "But hope because finally, after ten long, difficult years, I believe we can move on. We can finally fix the Brexit damage, end the Brexit chaos and get our country back on track." "Because the story the media won't tell you, as they fawn over the rise of Farage, as they hang on his every empty press conference, is that the country is with us. We hear it on the doorsteps, we see it in the polls, we feel it in our communities." "People are fed up. They've had enough. Enough of the chaos in government, the queues at ports, the queues at airports, the bills that just keep on going up." "They know the hard truth that most politicians won't admit. The Brexit experiment has failed. And it's failed all of us." "£90 billion a year. That's how much it's costing us all as taxpayers" "£90 billion every year, gone" "That's £250 million every single day. Taken away from our schools, our hospitals, our armed forces. Taken out of everyone's pockets in the form of unfair tax rises." "Not because of a pandemic, not because of a war, not because of some force of nature out of our control, but because of their Brexit experiment. Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and the rest. An experiment that has now consumed a decade of British politics. That has tangled British businesses up in pointless red tape, that has pushed up prices for British families and that has left us all poorer." "Well, not all of us, apparently. Farage says that the five million he got from a crypto billionaire was his reward for Brexit. So when he said 'We'll be better off after Brexit,' it turns out he was using the royal we." "But friends, it's not only the economic and financial impact, as disastrous as those have been. It's the way they have poisoned our relationship with our nearest neighbours and friends, making it harder to work together on all the things we need to. Energy security and climate change, migration and refugees, AI, and above all, defence." "Britain has always been at its best when we stand tall with our European allies, not when we shut ourselves off. Now they promised us global Britain, but they have left us isolated at the worst possible time. Poorer, weaker and more insecure." "Their experiment has failed. We all know it. So it's time to move on." "But what do they say? The ones who caused all this. The people responsible. Farage and the Conservative Party. They say 'Tough.' They say you can't move on. They say you can't question Britain's relationship with Europe now. You can't dare to suggest there might be a better way. Doesn't matter how bad it gets, doesn't matter how much you're struggling. You just have to live with it, they say." "We say 'No.' We say Britain shouldn't have to live with a bad deal they've lumped us with. We say our country deserves far better than that." "Theirs is old thinking. It's 2016 thinking. The world has changed dramatically since then. It's time for us to change too. It's time for us to move on, move forward." "Just look around. Vladimir Putin is bombing schools and hospitals in Ukraine, murdering innocent civilians. He's testing NATO's resolve and setting his sights on the rest of Eastern Europe. He has shown that territorial conquest is not some relic of the distant past. It is happening now on European soil to our friends and our allies who share our values and our way of life." "And Donald Trump, he's torching the world economy for fun with his tariffs and his trade wars and now his actual war with Iran. He's ripping up the rules-based international order that generations of British leaders, American leaders, European leaders, painstakingly built after the Second World War. Trump threatening NATO, emboldening Putin and actively meddling in our democracies." "And then there's China, increasingly using trade supply chains and strategic dependencies as instruments of geopolitical competition." "And to add to all those political changes, there's the billionaire tech barons taking more and more control of our lives and our jobs with their empires of AI and social media, that no one nation can govern on its own." "The assumptions we have lived by for decades, that global trade would keep expanding, that international rules would broadly be respected, that our security would be underwritten by stable alliances. Those assumptions no longer hold. The world has changed more rapidly than at any time since the end of the Cold War. And our politics must change too." "Now we obviously can't turn to those who wrecked it. Farage and the Conservatives. They only want to make things worse. Even now, pushing for Brexit 2.0 with their plans to rip up the European Convention on Human Rights. They would just rerun all the old arguments, forcing Britain to replay the last ten years over and over in a never ending Brexit doom loop." "But nor, I'm afraid, can we look to Labour. Labour who failed to act with anything like the urgency this moment demands. Who don't seem to grasp the scale of the change we need in our relationship with Europe. Labour, who still kept us hemmed in the red lines they set more than five years ago. No single market, no customs union. Red lines they set before Putin invaded Ukraine, before Trump returned to the White House. Red lines that were wrong then and are even more wrong now." "The world has changed and it's time to move on. We cannot be trapped by that old thinking anymore. We have to look to the future. Not back to 2016 but to 2036 and beyond." "And that's why we're all here today, isn't it? Not because we are bitter about the past, but because we believe in a better future. Because we love our country and we know its brightest days still lie ahead." "We're here for our children and our grandchildren because we want them to inherit a country that is growing, that is confident, that is leading, not one that is shrinking, stagnating and standing alone." "That's what drives us. We're here because the world has changed, because the challenges we face to our economy, to our society and to our national defence are real and urgent. And because we believe Britain deserves ambition that matches the scale of this moment." "So what does that ambition look like? Well, first the government needs to drop those old red lines that stop us getting rid of the Conservatives' red tape. Those red lines are holding Britain back. They're hurting the British people and they are playing into the hands of Farage and Reform." "So my message to Andy Burnham, to Wes Streeting, to whoever the next Prime Minister may be, is drop those red lines. Drop them now." "If we do, we can move on from the torpor and timidity that has marked out Labour's approach to Europe so far. We can put an end to the endless talk of a reset that so far seems to just mean saying no more politely than the Conservatives did. And we can get on with properly fixing our relationship with Europe, for our economy, for our security, for our future." "Our party has led that debate for years. Last year, days before Trump took office, we set out plans for the UK to join a new customs union with the EU. And today I want to build on that and go further, much further." "Today we are calling for a new growth and defence partnership with the European Union. A new growth and defence partnership with the European Union. A bold new deal that will make Britain richer, safer and stronger, including a customs union, but also crucially taking Britain back into the single market." "Tearing down the barriers to trade. Ending the mountains of paperwork, the cost, the delays, the queues. Giving our young people the chance to study and work, live and love anywhere in the EU. Undoing the damage of the Johnson Farage Brexit deal that has held our economy back for so long." "Giving British businesses the certainty they need to invest, to hire and to grow. Giving Britain's economy the boost it needs after years of stagnation. Crucially, giving Britain's public finances a growth dividend. Tens of billions of pounds that we would use to cut the cost of living, to fix the NHS and to strengthen our armed forces." "And this new partnership must go beyond trade and growth. In the age of Putin, Xi and Trump, this must be about defence and security too. No country can be prosperous and free if it is not safe." "And Britain can help lead on defence in Europe as we have so decisively in the past. Despite the Conservatives' short-sighted cuts to our armed forces and Labour's chaos over investing in them now, Britain is still one of Europe's foremost military powers. We are a leading intelligence nation, a permanent member of the UN Security Council and the third-biggest contributor to NATO." "We should be using those strengths. We should be at the table, helping to shape Europe's security future, not watching from the sidelines. And Europe wants us at the table. They know they need our leadership on defence." "So let's seize the initiative from a position of strength to form a new partnership that strengthens both Britain's economy and our collective security. That is why our new partnership would be about defence as much as it is about growth." "That means financial cooperation through a new European rearmament bank, alongside securing UK access to the one hundred and fifty billion euro safe programme. It means joint defence procurement, creating jobs in Britain while strengthening our collective capabilities. It means deeper cooperation on intelligence, on cyber security and on protecting critical infrastructure." "It means working together on energy security so that none of us can be held hostage by an authoritarian regime turning off the gas. It means political cooperation through a new European Security Council with a permanent seat for the UK, ensuring that Europe can shoulder greater responsibility for its own security within NATO." "As Trump's actions remind us every day, that we cannot afford to rely so much on the United States. Friends, this is not a choice we can afford to dodge any longer. In the face of Putin's threats and Trump's unpredictability, a new defence pact with Europe, with allies on whom we can depend, allies who share our interests and our values, is frankly the only way to keep Britain safe and defend our values in a dangerous world." "A new defence pact with Europe is not a choice, it is a necessity. So let's get on with it." "That is the ambition we need when it comes to our relationship with Europe. No more tinkering around the edges of a bad deal. No more shackling ourselves to the arguments of the last ten years, but building something new. A partnership fit for the enormous challenges we face today." "A new growth and defence partnership with a new pact for our collective security. Forming a customs union, joining the single market. A new partnership to make us richer, safer and stronger." "I think it's the best hope our country has to stop the chaos and end the crisis. And, my friends, it is the biggest step we could take now back towards membership of the EU." "And there's another big step we need to take too. Defeating Nigel Farage and Reform. We have to stop them from turning our United Kingdom into their version of Trump's America." "And here's the point. Until we do defeat them, many in Europe will not countenance Britain joining." "Let's remember why this matters, why it's so crucial for Britain to be there at the heart of Europe, at the table with our nearest neighbours." "I've been privileged to see it for myself, the power we have when Britain leads in Europe. When Vladimir Putin invaded Crimea in 2014, we recognised then that the way to defeat him would be to get Europe off its dependence on Russian oil and gas, to take away the money that was funding his aggression, to bankrupt the Russian war machine." "So I led Britain's efforts to bring Europe together behind that common cause, and we succeeded. We wrote Europe's energy security strategy. Britain did that, sitting at the table, leading in Europe." "But then, instead of seeing it through, the Conservatives walked away. They gave up Britain's seat at the table. They locked us out of those discussions at the worst possible time." "Just imagine where we could be now if Britain had continued to lead on energy security. Imagine how much weaker Putin would be now. Imagine how much safer Ukraine and the rest of Europe, including Britain, would be now. What a terrible waste. What an indictment of the Conservatives." "And that is why I am so determined to get us back at the table, back at the heart of Europe. Britain leading again." "Now I want to speak for a moment about the bigger picture. Because our ambition is not limited to Europe alone. It's about Britain's place in the world." "The old assumption that trade, security and prosperity could be treated as separate issues no longer holds. Supply chains can be disrupted. Energy can be weaponised. Economic security and national security are now inseparable." "At a time when authoritarian powers are doing so much to undermine our security, democratic nations must work more closely together to enhance it. As Mark Carney said in Davos, middle powers must act together, because if we're not at the table, we're on the menu. He is right." "Fixing our relationship with Europe is the essential foundation, but it's not the ceiling. The UK can be an incredible force for good when it stands tall on the world stage. Our history, our alliances and our relationships across every continent gives us a unique position for us to act as a bridge, not just between Europe and the US but between Europe and the whole wider democratic world." "We are here because we believe that our country and our people thrive when we are open and outward looking. That is Britain at its best. Not a small inward looking island clinging to the wreckage of a failed experiment, but a leader, a convening power, a country that helps shape the international order rather than being buffeted by it." "That is the Britain we can be." "But friends, I want to be honest with you about the task ahead. What we are proposing is bold. It is ambitious. It requires courage, requires leadership. And it will not happen without all of us." "We know the obstacles we face, the arguments ahead, the opponents who would rather replay the last ten years instead of moving on from them. Who will tell us we can't even talk about a new deal with Europe, let alone make one. The politicians who will claim change isn't possible because the status quo works for them. But it doesn't work for anyone else." "So our job is to get out there and show people that change is possible, that it doesn't have to be like this, that there is a way forward. A better future for our country. Leading in Europe once again." "This isn't just because we believe in Europe. It's not just about friendship or shared history, or the fact that a divided Europe has always ended in misery. Fixing it is about us, our country, our future, our hopes and our dreams." "Britain needs a new plan. A plan for growth, for jobs, for defence. A plan to give our children the better future they deserve. A new deal with Europe. The only way to fix the cost of living crisis. The only way to get our country back on track." "So let us stand together. Let us end the chaos. Let us show the world what Britain can be. Not a small island clinging to a failed experiment, but a leader, open, outward looking. At the table, not on the menu." "A Britain that is richer, safer and stronger. That is the future we are fighting for." " Thank you. Thank you very much."

Farrukh

10,909 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

This 6-minute video reveals how Elon Musk learns complex topics: Elon Musk: “You don’t need college for learning.” “Everything is available basically for free. You can learn anything you want for free. It is not a question of learning.” Musk starts with a blunt point: College may still have value, but not for the reason most people think. He says the real signal of college is not intelligence. It is proof that someone can work through structure: “Can somebody work hard at something, including a bunch of sort of annoying homework assignments, and still do their homework assignments, and kind of soldier through and get it done?” That, in his view, is one of the main things a degree demonstrates: Discipline. Compliance. Follow-through. Not necessarily exceptional ability. Musk pushes the idea even further: “Colleges are basically for fun and to prove you can do your chores. But they’re not for learning.” Whether or not you agree with him fully, the underlying point is hard to ignore: We live in a time when knowledge is no longer locked inside institutions. The internet has dismantled the old gatekeeping model. Today, if someone wants to learn design, engineering, writing, sales, coding, marketing, or history, they can access world-class information without ever stepping into a lecture hall. The bottleneck is no longer access to information. It is desire. Focus. Curiosity. Consistency. Musk then draws a distinction that matters: “If you’re trying to do something exceptional, there must be evidence of exceptional ability.” That line changes the whole conversation. Because in real life, people do not reward credentials alone. They reward proof. Not what you enrolled in. What you built. Not what you intended to do. What you finished. Not what you say you know. What you can demonstrate. This is why portfolios outperform claims. Why execution beats prestige. Why visible work creates leverage. Musk even says, somewhat provocatively: “I don’t consider going to college evidence of exceptional ability.” And then he points to the kinds of examples people love to cite: “Gates is a pretty smart guy, he dropped out. John was pretty smart, he dropped out. Larry Ellison, smart guy, he dropped out.” His broader message is not that everyone should leave school. It is that conventional paths are not the only paths to intelligence, capability, or impact. Then Musk moves into something even more useful: His view of how people actually learn. “Education should be as close to a video game as possible. Like a good video game. You do not need to tell your kid to play video games. They will play video games on autopilot all day.” That comparison is simple, but powerful. Why do people obsess over games? Because games are interactive. They are immersive. They provide immediate feedback. They make progress visible. They create challenge without making the challenge feel meaningless. Musk’s point is that learning should work the same way. “If you can make it interactive and engaging, then you can make education far more compelling and far easier to do.” This is where traditional education often breaks down. Students are expected to move in lockstep. Same pace. Same timeline. Same structure. Same sequence. Musk rejects that model completely: “People are not objects on an assembly line.” That may be one of the clearest criticisms in the entire transcript. Because standard education often optimizes for administration, not human variation. It is easier to manage people in batches. But easier to manage does not mean better to learn. Some people move faster in math. Some are stronger in language. Some are highly visual. Some need to touch the thing, build the thing, test the thing. And yet most systems still treat learning like synchronized marching. Musk argues for something more individualized: “Allow people to progress at the fastest pace that they can or are interested in in each subject.” That idea matters beyond school. Adults learn this way too. No one becomes exceptional by waiting for permission to move at average speed. The most effective learners usually follow interest with intensity. They go deeper where curiosity pulls them. They accelerate where energy is highest. They build momentum through engagement, not force. Musk also shares one of the most practical ideas in the transcript: “Teach problem solving, or teach to the problem, not to the tools.” Then he gives an example. If you wanted to teach someone how engines work, the traditional system might start with separate lessons on screwdrivers, wrenches, and tools. Musk thinks that is backwards. A better method is: “Here’s the engine. Now let’s take it apart.” Then the tools become relevant in context. Now the student understands *why* the screwdriver matters. Now the wrench has meaning. Now the lesson is connected to reality. This is a much bigger principle than education. People learn faster when relevance is obvious. Abstract instruction is forgettable. Applied learning sticks. When people can see the problem first, they care about the tool. That is true in business too. You do not start with theory for theory’s sake. You start with the problem that needs solving. Then you learn exactly what is required to solve it. Finally, Musk says something that quietly explains why so much education fails: “A lot of things people learn, probably there’s no point in learning them because they never use them in the future.” That may sound harsh, but most people know the feeling. They do not resist learning because they are lazy. They resist learning because it feels disconnected. They are told to memorize before they understand relevance. They are told to sit still before they become curious. They are told to absorb information before they have any reason to care. Musk’s view, underneath the provocation, is actually simple: People learn best when learning is alive. When it is tied to action. When it respects differences in pace and aptitude. When it feels engaging instead of ceremonial. When it produces visible competence, not just paper credentials. The internet made learning abundant. What matters now is whether someone can turn information into evidence. That is the real separator. Lessons I'm taking away from this clip: 1. In today’s world, access to knowledge is cheap. Proof of skill is expensive. We have crossed a point where information alone is no longer impressive because everyone has access to it. You can watch the best interviews, read the best essays, take the best online lessons, and still remain average if you never turn any of it into real work. So the advantage now is not “I know this.” The advantage is “I built this, tested this, shipped this, and can show the result.” From my perspective, this is especially true in business and personal branding. The market rewards visible competence far more than silent knowledge. 2. People learn faster when the learning feels useful, alive, and connected to a real problem. This is why so many people struggle with conventional education but thrive when they start building something for themselves. Urgency creates focus. Relevance creates retention. Once the lesson is attached to a real outcome, the brain pays attention differently. That’s why I think one of the best ways to learn anything is to start a project that forces you to use the skill in public or in real life. Learning becomes sharper when there is something at stake. It stops being passive consumption and becomes active problem-solving. 3. The smartest people are often not the ones collecting credentials. They are the ones following curiosity with discipline. Exceptional people usually do not just learn what is assigned to them. They go where their interest is strongest and then they pursue it seriously. That combination matters: curiosity without discipline goes nowhere, and discipline without curiosity becomes lifeless. The sweet spot is when someone becomes obsessed enough to keep going deeper than required. To me, that is where the real edge comes from. Not from following the default path better than everyone else, but from developing uncommon depth in something that genuinely pulls you.
6:13

This 6-minute video reveals how Elon Musk learns complex topics: Elon Musk: “You don’t need college for learning.” “Everything is available basically for free. You can learn anything you want for free. It is not a question of learning.” Musk starts with a blunt point: College may still have value, but not for the reason most people think. He says the real signal of college is not intelligence. It is proof that someone can work through structure: “Can somebody work hard at something, including a bunch of sort of annoying homework assignments, and still do their homework assignments, and kind of soldier through and get it done?” That, in his view, is one of the main things a degree demonstrates: Discipline. Compliance. Follow-through. Not necessarily exceptional ability. Musk pushes the idea even further: “Colleges are basically for fun and to prove you can do your chores. But they’re not for learning.” Whether or not you agree with him fully, the underlying point is hard to ignore: We live in a time when knowledge is no longer locked inside institutions. The internet has dismantled the old gatekeeping model. Today, if someone wants to learn design, engineering, writing, sales, coding, marketing, or history, they can access world-class information without ever stepping into a lecture hall. The bottleneck is no longer access to information. It is desire. Focus. Curiosity. Consistency. Musk then draws a distinction that matters: “If you’re trying to do something exceptional, there must be evidence of exceptional ability.” That line changes the whole conversation. Because in real life, people do not reward credentials alone. They reward proof. Not what you enrolled in. What you built. Not what you intended to do. What you finished. Not what you say you know. What you can demonstrate. This is why portfolios outperform claims. Why execution beats prestige. Why visible work creates leverage. Musk even says, somewhat provocatively: “I don’t consider going to college evidence of exceptional ability.” And then he points to the kinds of examples people love to cite: “Gates is a pretty smart guy, he dropped out. John was pretty smart, he dropped out. Larry Ellison, smart guy, he dropped out.” His broader message is not that everyone should leave school. It is that conventional paths are not the only paths to intelligence, capability, or impact. Then Musk moves into something even more useful: His view of how people actually learn. “Education should be as close to a video game as possible. Like a good video game. You do not need to tell your kid to play video games. They will play video games on autopilot all day.” That comparison is simple, but powerful. Why do people obsess over games? Because games are interactive. They are immersive. They provide immediate feedback. They make progress visible. They create challenge without making the challenge feel meaningless. Musk’s point is that learning should work the same way. “If you can make it interactive and engaging, then you can make education far more compelling and far easier to do.” This is where traditional education often breaks down. Students are expected to move in lockstep. Same pace. Same timeline. Same structure. Same sequence. Musk rejects that model completely: “People are not objects on an assembly line.” That may be one of the clearest criticisms in the entire transcript. Because standard education often optimizes for administration, not human variation. It is easier to manage people in batches. But easier to manage does not mean better to learn. Some people move faster in math. Some are stronger in language. Some are highly visual. Some need to touch the thing, build the thing, test the thing. And yet most systems still treat learning like synchronized marching. Musk argues for something more individualized: “Allow people to progress at the fastest pace that they can or are interested in in each subject.” That idea matters beyond school. Adults learn this way too. No one becomes exceptional by waiting for permission to move at average speed. The most effective learners usually follow interest with intensity. They go deeper where curiosity pulls them. They accelerate where energy is highest. They build momentum through engagement, not force. Musk also shares one of the most practical ideas in the transcript: “Teach problem solving, or teach to the problem, not to the tools.” Then he gives an example. If you wanted to teach someone how engines work, the traditional system might start with separate lessons on screwdrivers, wrenches, and tools. Musk thinks that is backwards. A better method is: “Here’s the engine. Now let’s take it apart.” Then the tools become relevant in context. Now the student understands *why* the screwdriver matters. Now the wrench has meaning. Now the lesson is connected to reality. This is a much bigger principle than education. People learn faster when relevance is obvious. Abstract instruction is forgettable. Applied learning sticks. When people can see the problem first, they care about the tool. That is true in business too. You do not start with theory for theory’s sake. You start with the problem that needs solving. Then you learn exactly what is required to solve it. Finally, Musk says something that quietly explains why so much education fails: “A lot of things people learn, probably there’s no point in learning them because they never use them in the future.” That may sound harsh, but most people know the feeling. They do not resist learning because they are lazy. They resist learning because it feels disconnected. They are told to memorize before they understand relevance. They are told to sit still before they become curious. They are told to absorb information before they have any reason to care. Musk’s view, underneath the provocation, is actually simple: People learn best when learning is alive. When it is tied to action. When it respects differences in pace and aptitude. When it feels engaging instead of ceremonial. When it produces visible competence, not just paper credentials. The internet made learning abundant. What matters now is whether someone can turn information into evidence. That is the real separator. Lessons I'm taking away from this clip: 1. In today’s world, access to knowledge is cheap. Proof of skill is expensive. We have crossed a point where information alone is no longer impressive because everyone has access to it. You can watch the best interviews, read the best essays, take the best online lessons, and still remain average if you never turn any of it into real work. So the advantage now is not “I know this.” The advantage is “I built this, tested this, shipped this, and can show the result.” From my perspective, this is especially true in business and personal branding. The market rewards visible competence far more than silent knowledge. 2. People learn faster when the learning feels useful, alive, and connected to a real problem. This is why so many people struggle with conventional education but thrive when they start building something for themselves. Urgency creates focus. Relevance creates retention. Once the lesson is attached to a real outcome, the brain pays attention differently. That’s why I think one of the best ways to learn anything is to start a project that forces you to use the skill in public or in real life. Learning becomes sharper when there is something at stake. It stops being passive consumption and becomes active problem-solving. 3. The smartest people are often not the ones collecting credentials. They are the ones following curiosity with discipline. Exceptional people usually do not just learn what is assigned to them. They go where their interest is strongest and then they pursue it seriously. That combination matters: curiosity without discipline goes nowhere, and discipline without curiosity becomes lifeless. The sweet spot is when someone becomes obsessed enough to keep going deeper than required. To me, that is where the real edge comes from. Not from following the default path better than everyone else, but from developing uncommon depth in something that genuinely pulls you.

Yasmine Khosrowshahi

34,213 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Belarus has become Russia’s nuclear staging ground. Belarus has not been annexed. But functionally, it has already become part of Russia. Lukashenko has long existed only with the Kremlin’s permission. When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Lukashenko officially appeared to be a bystander - yet missiles and columns of tanks moved through Belarusian territory. Russia used it as its own operational zone. In March 2023, Putin announced the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons. In December 2024, Russia and Belarus signed the Treaty on Security Guarantees that legalized permanent Russian bases and legally included Belarus in Russia’s nuclear strategy. Since mid-2025, around 2,000 Russian troops have been permanently stationed in Belarus, including air defense and aerospace units. In December 2025, the Oreshnik ballistic missile entered combat duty near Krychaw. In May 2026, large-scale joint nuclear exercises were held: 64,000 troops, 200 missile launchers, 73 surface ships, and 13 submarines. The nuclear sharing agreement marks a departure from Russia’s long-standing position, as Moscow spent decades criticizing NATO’s nuclear-sharing arrangements. Now it is reproducing the same model it once condemned. The 2024 nuclear doctrine explicitly equated a conventional attack on Belarus with an attack on Russia - automatically creating conditions for a nuclear response. Control over the warheads officially remains with Moscow. But Putin stated that Lukashenko himself would select targets for Oreshnik deployed in Belarus. In other words, the Belarusian president would bear public responsibility for missiles launched by Putin. Now to the arsenal and the numbers. As of March 2026, Russia possesses around 4,400 nuclear warheads in total, of which up to 2,000 are assigned to non-strategic tactical forces. Belarus hosts Iskander-M - the 465th missile brigade in Asipovichy. Range: up to 500 km. Accuracy: 5-7 meters. Nuclear warhead: 10-50 kilotons. Vilnius is just 340 km away. Flight time: 3-4 minutes. NATO would have virtually no warning time. Oreshnik belongs to another category. Speed exceeds 14,000 km/h. Up to six independent MIRV blocks, each capable of deploying up to six sub-warheads. Range exceeds 5,500 km. Interception by modern air defense systems is almost impossible. From Belarusian positions, Oreshnik can reach an airbase in Poland in 11 minutes and NATO headquarters in Brussels in 17 minutes. Berlin, Ramstein, and Warsaw all fall within range. According to Ukraine’s Defense Intelligence, only three missiles had been produced at the time of deployment. One was used against Dnipro in November 2024. One was destroyed in Kapustin Yar during a joint operation involving Ukraine’s Security Service, Defense Intelligence, and Foreign Intelligence Service. The Kremlin plans to produce up to six missiles per year. There is also Lida airbase - just 40 km from the Lithuanian border. Modified Su-25 aircraft are capable of carrying nuclear bombs. The most dangerous problem is neither range nor speed. It is the impossibility of identification. Until the moment of impact, it is impossible to determine whether Oreshnik carries a nuclear or conventional warhead. Every launch is an automatic nuclear alarm regardless of the actual payload. This ambiguity is a strategic weapon no less important than the warhead itself. Now to the likely scenarios. ◾️ The most likely scenario is not total nuclear war. It is a "demonstration strike": a single low-yield tactical strike against a peripheral military base - for example, an airfield in Poland or the Baltics. The goal is not destruction but testing Article 5. The Kremlin’s logic: "You will not launch a nuclear response over a single tactical strike." ◾️ The second scenario is an Oreshnik strike against a NATO logistics hub: Rzeszów, Ramstein, Warsaw. Most likely with conventional warheads. But this cannot be confirmed before impact. Even a conventional strike under the carrier’s nuclear ambiguity could freeze weapons transit to Ukraine. Shock and fear of escalation alone would be a sufficient outcome for the Kremlin. ◾️ The third scenario is a strike on a nuclear power plant with a conventional warhead. A radiological effect without the formal use of weapons of mass destruction. Maximum psychological pressure on Europe. ◾️ The fourth: a new ground offensive against Ukraine launched from Belarusian territory under nuclear blackmail. NATO freezes, Ukraine becomes isolated, and the frontline shrinks by 400 kilometers. Finally, let’s turn to the West’s response - or the absence of one. No symmetrical nuclear response followed. NATO did not deploy nuclear weapons in the Baltics or Poland. The response remained conventional: additional brigades and expanded air defense. New START expired in February 2026. No new treaty exists. Verification of nuclear arsenals is effectively absent. The United States abandoned the "voluntary compliance with limits" proposed by Russia. Patriot and THAAD were not designed to intercept targets at Mach 10 with maneuvering flight trajectories. Kyiv directly called Belarus’s transformation into a "nuclear outpost" near NATO borders an unprecedented challenge to the global security architecture and a dangerous precedent that de facto legitimizes nuclear proliferation among authoritarian regimes.
1:06

Belarus has become Russia’s nuclear staging ground. Belarus has not been annexed. But functionally, it has already become part of Russia. Lukashenko has long existed only with the Kremlin’s permission. When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Lukashenko officially appeared to be a bystander - yet missiles and columns of tanks moved through Belarusian territory. Russia used it as its own operational zone. In March 2023, Putin announced the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons. In December 2024, Russia and Belarus signed the Treaty on Security Guarantees that legalized permanent Russian bases and legally included Belarus in Russia’s nuclear strategy. Since mid-2025, around 2,000 Russian troops have been permanently stationed in Belarus, including air defense and aerospace units. In December 2025, the Oreshnik ballistic missile entered combat duty near Krychaw. In May 2026, large-scale joint nuclear exercises were held: 64,000 troops, 200 missile launchers, 73 surface ships, and 13 submarines. The nuclear sharing agreement marks a departure from Russia’s long-standing position, as Moscow spent decades criticizing NATO’s nuclear-sharing arrangements. Now it is reproducing the same model it once condemned. The 2024 nuclear doctrine explicitly equated a conventional attack on Belarus with an attack on Russia - automatically creating conditions for a nuclear response. Control over the warheads officially remains with Moscow. But Putin stated that Lukashenko himself would select targets for Oreshnik deployed in Belarus. In other words, the Belarusian president would bear public responsibility for missiles launched by Putin. Now to the arsenal and the numbers. As of March 2026, Russia possesses around 4,400 nuclear warheads in total, of which up to 2,000 are assigned to non-strategic tactical forces. Belarus hosts Iskander-M - the 465th missile brigade in Asipovichy. Range: up to 500 km. Accuracy: 5-7 meters. Nuclear warhead: 10-50 kilotons. Vilnius is just 340 km away. Flight time: 3-4 minutes. NATO would have virtually no warning time. Oreshnik belongs to another category. Speed exceeds 14,000 km/h. Up to six independent MIRV blocks, each capable of deploying up to six sub-warheads. Range exceeds 5,500 km. Interception by modern air defense systems is almost impossible. From Belarusian positions, Oreshnik can reach an airbase in Poland in 11 minutes and NATO headquarters in Brussels in 17 minutes. Berlin, Ramstein, and Warsaw all fall within range. According to Ukraine’s Defense Intelligence, only three missiles had been produced at the time of deployment. One was used against Dnipro in November 2024. One was destroyed in Kapustin Yar during a joint operation involving Ukraine’s Security Service, Defense Intelligence, and Foreign Intelligence Service. The Kremlin plans to produce up to six missiles per year. There is also Lida airbase - just 40 km from the Lithuanian border. Modified Su-25 aircraft are capable of carrying nuclear bombs. The most dangerous problem is neither range nor speed. It is the impossibility of identification. Until the moment of impact, it is impossible to determine whether Oreshnik carries a nuclear or conventional warhead. Every launch is an automatic nuclear alarm regardless of the actual payload. This ambiguity is a strategic weapon no less important than the warhead itself. Now to the likely scenarios. ◾️ The most likely scenario is not total nuclear war. It is a "demonstration strike": a single low-yield tactical strike against a peripheral military base - for example, an airfield in Poland or the Baltics. The goal is not destruction but testing Article 5. The Kremlin’s logic: "You will not launch a nuclear response over a single tactical strike." ◾️ The second scenario is an Oreshnik strike against a NATO logistics hub: Rzeszów, Ramstein, Warsaw. Most likely with conventional warheads. But this cannot be confirmed before impact. Even a conventional strike under the carrier’s nuclear ambiguity could freeze weapons transit to Ukraine. Shock and fear of escalation alone would be a sufficient outcome for the Kremlin. ◾️ The third scenario is a strike on a nuclear power plant with a conventional warhead. A radiological effect without the formal use of weapons of mass destruction. Maximum psychological pressure on Europe. ◾️ The fourth: a new ground offensive against Ukraine launched from Belarusian territory under nuclear blackmail. NATO freezes, Ukraine becomes isolated, and the frontline shrinks by 400 kilometers. Finally, let’s turn to the West’s response - or the absence of one. No symmetrical nuclear response followed. NATO did not deploy nuclear weapons in the Baltics or Poland. The response remained conventional: additional brigades and expanded air defense. New START expired in February 2026. No new treaty exists. Verification of nuclear arsenals is effectively absent. The United States abandoned the "voluntary compliance with limits" proposed by Russia. Patriot and THAAD were not designed to intercept targets at Mach 10 with maneuvering flight trajectories. Kyiv directly called Belarus’s transformation into a "nuclear outpost" near NATO borders an unprecedented challenge to the global security architecture and a dangerous precedent that de facto legitimizes nuclear proliferation among authoritarian regimes.

Anton Gerashchenko

59,276 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

The video shows Philadelphia, USA. But what about Russia? The Russian regime fears neither protests nor its own oligarchs. Russia’s stability rests on the state’s ability to enforce obedience and on propaganda, not on shared consent or trust. It is enough for the regime that citizens are afraid and believe that nothing can be changed. According to sociological studies, 20-25% of Russians do not support Putin’s regime. That is one in five. But they are not ready to protest. The regime’s main pillar is its security apparatus. The FSB, national guard, interior ministry, prosecutor general’s office, investigative committee, military counterintelligence and the president’s personal security service do more than just suppress resistance. They control the elites, monitor one another, prevent conspiracies and keep discontent from turning into organized action. As long as this apparatus maintains a unified chain of command, any civilian protest can be isolated, intimidated, or suppressed. Russia’s security establishment also has the greatest interest in preserving the current order. The system gives them not only money and positions, but effective immunity, access to state resources, the ability to expropriate other’s property, and protection from accountability. For members of the security apparatus, the fall of the regime means the risk of losing everything at once. They therefore have a much stronger motivation to defend the system than ordinary officials, state employees or even most of big business. Big business benefits from the regime but does not constitute an independent center of power. Russia’s major owners can profit from government contracts, the war, monopolies and proximity to the Kremlin, but the state can arrest an owner, transfer an asset to another group or force a business to finance projects it needs. Oligarchs are therefore unlikely to be the first to oppose Putin. They may support a plot with resources, connections and money, but only after they see a split within the security apparatus and receive guarantees of protection. A second mechanism of stability is the disunity within the ruling coalition itself. The heads of security agencies, state corporations, regions and major business groups may be dissatisfied with Putin, the war or the redistribution of resources. But they do not trust one another and do not know who is actually ready to act. The first conspirator risks being betrayed by another who decides to demonstrate loyalty to the Kremlin. That is why discontent at the top can build for years without turning into open defiance. Economic problems remain manageable as long as the state can distribute losses unevenly. The regime can shift the costs of the war onto private businesses, regions, civilian industries and different groups of the population. It can also reward the loyalty of key groups with contracts, payments, positions, seized assets and new opportunities for enrichment. A falling standard of living or budget problems therefore do not automatically lead to a political crisis. The critical point may come when the center can no longer simultaneously finance the war, the security apparatus and the privileged groups whose loyalty ensures its survival. Mass discontent by itself is not a critical threat to the regime. People can be dissatisfied while continuing to obey the state out of fear. No street protest will matter for long and it will quickly be shut down if the security forces remain loyal to the regime. A protest can become critical, however, when it coincides with a split within the state apparatus. Under those conditions, even limited demonstrations can spread rapidly, and passivity can turn into mass disobedience. What might a split in the state apparatus look like? It will probably not be a dramatic event, and we may not immediately realize that anything is happening. A mid-ranking officer follows orders not out of loyalty, but because of the certainty that others will do the same, and that punishment for noncompliance is inevitable. When that certainty weakens, he does not suddenly join the protesters. He begins to act more slowly: asking for written confirmation, reporting an incomplete picture, "failing" to block a road in time, and so on. None of these actions alone is punishable, but together they slow down the state apparatus. The collapse of the security apparatus therefore does not necessarily look like units switching sides. It looks like action disappearing: orders are issued, confirmed - and not carried out. The first instance of public impunity could be the turning point. Fear is sustained by the inevitability of punishment; as soon as someone visibly fails to carry out an order and goes unpunished, the balance is upended before everyone’s eyes, and subsequent reassessments occur in a cascade - different people have different thresholds, and each subsequent instance of impunity adds to their boldness. The immediate trigger for such a protest will most likely be a sharp disruption of the established order. It could be unpaid salaries and military compensation, the collapse of regional budgets, an obvious military defeat, the return of large numbers of armed and disillusioned veterans, or a succession crisis. But even a severe shock does not guarantee protest: the state can redirect public anger toward lower-level officials, military commanders, oligarchs, migrants or an external enemy. For discontent to turn into protest, people need to feel that the risk of inaction has become greater than the risk of participation. They must lose not only comfort, but also confidence in their physical and material security. At the same time, they need to see that others share their dissatisfaction, that the authorities no longer fully control the situation and that the repressive apparatus cannot punish everyone. Without that shift, even a deeply dissatisfied society will remain passive. ‼️ Above all, a protest needs coordination and a focal point. It does not necessarily have to be a democratic opposition movement or a popular politician. It could be part of the ruling elite, a security faction, a respected military figure or a regional leader who demonstrates an ability to protect supporters and control resources. People rarely oppose a strong autocracy for an idea alone. They are much more likely to join once they see a real challenger to the regime and a possibility of victory. But even a successful protest would not automatically mean the democratization of Russia. The most likely result of a split would be a struggle among security and elite groups for control over the same centralized system. We would have little time to deepen that split and prevent the same regime from being recreated under a new leader.
2:55

The video shows Philadelphia, USA. But what about Russia? The Russian regime fears neither protests nor its own oligarchs. Russia’s stability rests on the state’s ability to enforce obedience and on propaganda, not on shared consent or trust. It is enough for the regime that citizens are afraid and believe that nothing can be changed. According to sociological studies, 20-25% of Russians do not support Putin’s regime. That is one in five. But they are not ready to protest. The regime’s main pillar is its security apparatus. The FSB, national guard, interior ministry, prosecutor general’s office, investigative committee, military counterintelligence and the president’s personal security service do more than just suppress resistance. They control the elites, monitor one another, prevent conspiracies and keep discontent from turning into organized action. As long as this apparatus maintains a unified chain of command, any civilian protest can be isolated, intimidated, or suppressed. Russia’s security establishment also has the greatest interest in preserving the current order. The system gives them not only money and positions, but effective immunity, access to state resources, the ability to expropriate other’s property, and protection from accountability. For members of the security apparatus, the fall of the regime means the risk of losing everything at once. They therefore have a much stronger motivation to defend the system than ordinary officials, state employees or even most of big business. Big business benefits from the regime but does not constitute an independent center of power. Russia’s major owners can profit from government contracts, the war, monopolies and proximity to the Kremlin, but the state can arrest an owner, transfer an asset to another group or force a business to finance projects it needs. Oligarchs are therefore unlikely to be the first to oppose Putin. They may support a plot with resources, connections and money, but only after they see a split within the security apparatus and receive guarantees of protection. A second mechanism of stability is the disunity within the ruling coalition itself. The heads of security agencies, state corporations, regions and major business groups may be dissatisfied with Putin, the war or the redistribution of resources. But they do not trust one another and do not know who is actually ready to act. The first conspirator risks being betrayed by another who decides to demonstrate loyalty to the Kremlin. That is why discontent at the top can build for years without turning into open defiance. Economic problems remain manageable as long as the state can distribute losses unevenly. The regime can shift the costs of the war onto private businesses, regions, civilian industries and different groups of the population. It can also reward the loyalty of key groups with contracts, payments, positions, seized assets and new opportunities for enrichment. A falling standard of living or budget problems therefore do not automatically lead to a political crisis. The critical point may come when the center can no longer simultaneously finance the war, the security apparatus and the privileged groups whose loyalty ensures its survival. Mass discontent by itself is not a critical threat to the regime. People can be dissatisfied while continuing to obey the state out of fear. No street protest will matter for long and it will quickly be shut down if the security forces remain loyal to the regime. A protest can become critical, however, when it coincides with a split within the state apparatus. Under those conditions, even limited demonstrations can spread rapidly, and passivity can turn into mass disobedience. What might a split in the state apparatus look like? It will probably not be a dramatic event, and we may not immediately realize that anything is happening. A mid-ranking officer follows orders not out of loyalty, but because of the certainty that others will do the same, and that punishment for noncompliance is inevitable. When that certainty weakens, he does not suddenly join the protesters. He begins to act more slowly: asking for written confirmation, reporting an incomplete picture, "failing" to block a road in time, and so on. None of these actions alone is punishable, but together they slow down the state apparatus. The collapse of the security apparatus therefore does not necessarily look like units switching sides. It looks like action disappearing: orders are issued, confirmed - and not carried out. The first instance of public impunity could be the turning point. Fear is sustained by the inevitability of punishment; as soon as someone visibly fails to carry out an order and goes unpunished, the balance is upended before everyone’s eyes, and subsequent reassessments occur in a cascade - different people have different thresholds, and each subsequent instance of impunity adds to their boldness. The immediate trigger for such a protest will most likely be a sharp disruption of the established order. It could be unpaid salaries and military compensation, the collapse of regional budgets, an obvious military defeat, the return of large numbers of armed and disillusioned veterans, or a succession crisis. But even a severe shock does not guarantee protest: the state can redirect public anger toward lower-level officials, military commanders, oligarchs, migrants or an external enemy. For discontent to turn into protest, people need to feel that the risk of inaction has become greater than the risk of participation. They must lose not only comfort, but also confidence in their physical and material security. At the same time, they need to see that others share their dissatisfaction, that the authorities no longer fully control the situation and that the repressive apparatus cannot punish everyone. Without that shift, even a deeply dissatisfied society will remain passive. ‼️ Above all, a protest needs coordination and a focal point. It does not necessarily have to be a democratic opposition movement or a popular politician. It could be part of the ruling elite, a security faction, a respected military figure or a regional leader who demonstrates an ability to protect supporters and control resources. People rarely oppose a strong autocracy for an idea alone. They are much more likely to join once they see a real challenger to the regime and a possibility of victory. But even a successful protest would not automatically mean the democratization of Russia. The most likely result of a split would be a struggle among security and elite groups for control over the same centralized system. We would have little time to deepen that split and prevent the same regime from being recreated under a new leader.

Anton Gerashchenko

26,150 Aufrufe • vor 22 Tagen

Why Russia launched “Special Military Operation” I publicly announced the reasons for and the main goal of Russia’s actions. It is to help our people in Donbass, who have been subjected to real genocide for nearly eight years in the most barbarous ways, that is, through blockade, large-scale punitive operations, terrorist attacks and constant artillery raids. Their only guilt was that they demanded basic human rights: to live according to their forefathers’ laws and traditions, to speak their native language, and to bring up their children as they want. During these years, the Kiev authorities have ignored and sabotaged the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures for a peaceful settlement of the crisis and ultimately late last year openly refused to implement it. They also started to implement plans to join NATO. Moreover, the Kiev authorities also announced their intention to have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. This was a real threat. With foreign technical support, the pro-Nazi Kiev regime would have obtained weapons of mass destruction in the foreseeable future and, of course, would have targeted them against Russia. There was a network of dozens of laboratories in Ukraine, where military biological programmes were conducted under the guidance and with the financial support of the Pentagon, including experiments with coronavirus strains, anthrax, cholera, African swine fever and other deadly diseases. Frantic attempts are being made to conceal traces of these secret programmes. However, we have grounds to assume that components of biological weapons were being created in direct proximity to Russia on the territory of Ukraine. Our numerous warnings that such developments posed a direct threat to the security of Russia were rejected with open and cynical arrogance by Ukraine and its US and NATO patrons. In other words, all our diplomatic efforts were fully in vain. We have been left with no peaceful alternative to settle the problems that developed through no fault of ours. In this situation, we were forced to begin this special military operation. The movement of Russian forces against Kiev and other Ukrainian cities is not connected with a desire to occupy that country. This is not our goal, as I pointed out openly in my statement on February 24. As for the combat tactics drafted by the Defence Ministry of Russia and the General Staff, this has fully justified itself. Our fellows – soldiers and officers – are displaying courage and heroism and are doing all they can to avoid civilian losses in Ukrainian cities. This is what I would like to say for the first time: at the very start of the operation in Donbass, the Kiev authorities were offered opportunities to avoid hostilities, via different channels, to simply withdraw their troops from Donbass as an alternative to bloodshed. They did not want to do this. Well, this was their decision; now they will understand what is happening in reality, on the ground. The operation is being carried out successfully, in strict conformity with the approved plan. I must note that, encouraged by the United States and other Western countries, Ukraine was purposefully preparing for a scenario of force, a massacre and an ethnic cleansing in Donbass. A massive onslaught on Donbass and later Crimea was just a matter of time. However, our Armed Forces have shattered these plans. Kiev was not just preparing for war, for aggression against Russia – it was conducting it. There were endless attempts to stage acts of subversion and organise a terrorist underground in Crimea. Hostilities in Donbass and the shelling of peaceful residential areas have continued all these years. Almost 14,000 civilians, including children have been killed over this time. As you know, there was a missile strike at the centre of Donetsk on March 14. This was an overt bloody act of terror that took over 20 lives. Shelling has been ongoing during the past few days. They are striking randomly at squares with the fervor of fanatics and the exasperation of the doomed. They are acting like the Nazis did when they tried to drag as many innocent victims as they could to their graves. But what is shocking in its extreme cynicism is not just Kiev’s blatant lies and statements that Russia allegedly launched this missile at Donetsk (they have gone as far as this), but the attitude of the so-called civilised world. The European and American press did not even notice this tragedy in Donetsk, as if nothing happened. This is how they have been hypocritically looking the other way over the past eight years as mothers buried their children in Donbass, as elderly people were killed. This is simply moral degradation, complete de-humanisation. It was no longer possible to tolerate this outrageous attitude towards the people of Donbass. To put an end to this genocide, Russia recognized the people’s republics of Donbass and signed treaties of friendship and mutual aid with them. Based on these treaties, the republics appealed to Russia for military aid in rebuffing the aggression. We rendered this aid because we simply could not do otherwise. We had no right to act otherwise. I would like to emphasise this point and draw your attention to it: if our troops had acted only within the people's republics and helped them liberate their territory, it would not have been a final solution, it would not have led to peace and would not have ultimately removed the threat – to our country, this time to Russia. On the contrary, a new frontline would have been extended around Donbass and its borders, and shelling and provocations would have continued. In other words, this armed conflict would have continued indefinitely. It would have been fuelled by the revanchist hysteria of the Kiev regime, as NATO deployed its military infrastructure faster and more aggressively. In this case, we would have been faced with the fact that the attack, the offensive weapons of the alliance were already at our borders. I will repeat – we had no alternative for self-defence, for ensuring Russia's security, to this special military operation. We will reach the goals we set. We will certainly ensure the security of Russia and our people and will never allow Ukraine to be a bridgehead for aggressive actions against our country.
8:03

Why Russia launched “Special Military Operation” I publicly announced the reasons for and the main goal of Russia’s actions. It is to help our people in Donbass, who have been subjected to real genocide for nearly eight years in the most barbarous ways, that is, through blockade, large-scale punitive operations, terrorist attacks and constant artillery raids. Their only guilt was that they demanded basic human rights: to live according to their forefathers’ laws and traditions, to speak their native language, and to bring up their children as they want. During these years, the Kiev authorities have ignored and sabotaged the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures for a peaceful settlement of the crisis and ultimately late last year openly refused to implement it. They also started to implement plans to join NATO. Moreover, the Kiev authorities also announced their intention to have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. This was a real threat. With foreign technical support, the pro-Nazi Kiev regime would have obtained weapons of mass destruction in the foreseeable future and, of course, would have targeted them against Russia. There was a network of dozens of laboratories in Ukraine, where military biological programmes were conducted under the guidance and with the financial support of the Pentagon, including experiments with coronavirus strains, anthrax, cholera, African swine fever and other deadly diseases. Frantic attempts are being made to conceal traces of these secret programmes. However, we have grounds to assume that components of biological weapons were being created in direct proximity to Russia on the territory of Ukraine. Our numerous warnings that such developments posed a direct threat to the security of Russia were rejected with open and cynical arrogance by Ukraine and its US and NATO patrons. In other words, all our diplomatic efforts were fully in vain. We have been left with no peaceful alternative to settle the problems that developed through no fault of ours. In this situation, we were forced to begin this special military operation. The movement of Russian forces against Kiev and other Ukrainian cities is not connected with a desire to occupy that country. This is not our goal, as I pointed out openly in my statement on February 24. As for the combat tactics drafted by the Defence Ministry of Russia and the General Staff, this has fully justified itself. Our fellows – soldiers and officers – are displaying courage and heroism and are doing all they can to avoid civilian losses in Ukrainian cities. This is what I would like to say for the first time: at the very start of the operation in Donbass, the Kiev authorities were offered opportunities to avoid hostilities, via different channels, to simply withdraw their troops from Donbass as an alternative to bloodshed. They did not want to do this. Well, this was their decision; now they will understand what is happening in reality, on the ground. The operation is being carried out successfully, in strict conformity with the approved plan. I must note that, encouraged by the United States and other Western countries, Ukraine was purposefully preparing for a scenario of force, a massacre and an ethnic cleansing in Donbass. A massive onslaught on Donbass and later Crimea was just a matter of time. However, our Armed Forces have shattered these plans. Kiev was not just preparing for war, for aggression against Russia – it was conducting it. There were endless attempts to stage acts of subversion and organise a terrorist underground in Crimea. Hostilities in Donbass and the shelling of peaceful residential areas have continued all these years. Almost 14,000 civilians, including children have been killed over this time. As you know, there was a missile strike at the centre of Donetsk on March 14. This was an overt bloody act of terror that took over 20 lives. Shelling has been ongoing during the past few days. They are striking randomly at squares with the fervor of fanatics and the exasperation of the doomed. They are acting like the Nazis did when they tried to drag as many innocent victims as they could to their graves. But what is shocking in its extreme cynicism is not just Kiev’s blatant lies and statements that Russia allegedly launched this missile at Donetsk (they have gone as far as this), but the attitude of the so-called civilised world. The European and American press did not even notice this tragedy in Donetsk, as if nothing happened. This is how they have been hypocritically looking the other way over the past eight years as mothers buried their children in Donbass, as elderly people were killed. This is simply moral degradation, complete de-humanisation. It was no longer possible to tolerate this outrageous attitude towards the people of Donbass. To put an end to this genocide, Russia recognized the people’s republics of Donbass and signed treaties of friendship and mutual aid with them. Based on these treaties, the republics appealed to Russia for military aid in rebuffing the aggression. We rendered this aid because we simply could not do otherwise. We had no right to act otherwise. I would like to emphasise this point and draw your attention to it: if our troops had acted only within the people's republics and helped them liberate their territory, it would not have been a final solution, it would not have led to peace and would not have ultimately removed the threat – to our country, this time to Russia. On the contrary, a new frontline would have been extended around Donbass and its borders, and shelling and provocations would have continued. In other words, this armed conflict would have continued indefinitely. It would have been fuelled by the revanchist hysteria of the Kiev regime, as NATO deployed its military infrastructure faster and more aggressively. In this case, we would have been faced with the fact that the attack, the offensive weapons of the alliance were already at our borders. I will repeat – we had no alternative for self-defence, for ensuring Russia's security, to this special military operation. We will reach the goals we set. We will certainly ensure the security of Russia and our people and will never allow Ukraine to be a bridgehead for aggressive actions against our country.

Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil

47,164 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

🚨Why Russia launched “Special Military Operation” I publicly announced the reasons for and the main goal of Russia’s actions. It is to help our people in Donbass, who have been subjected to real genocide for nearly eight years in the most barbarous ways, that is, through blockade, large-scale punitive operations, terrorist attacks and constant artillery raids. Their only guilt was that they demanded basic human rights: to live according to their forefathers’ laws and traditions, to speak their native language, and to bring up their children as they want. During these years, the Kiev authorities have ignored and sabotaged the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures for a peaceful settlement of the crisis and ultimately late last year openly refused to implement it. They also started to implement plans to join NATO. Moreover, the Kiev authorities also announced their intention to have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. This was a real threat. With foreign technical support, the pro-Nazi Kiev regime would have obtained weapons of mass destruction in the foreseeable future and, of course, would have targeted them against Russia. There was a network of dozens of laboratories in Ukraine, where military biological programmes were conducted under the guidance and with the financial support of the Pentagon, including experiments with coronavirus strains, anthrax, cholera, African swine fever and other deadly diseases. Frantic attempts are being made to conceal traces of these secret programmes. However, we have grounds to assume that components of biological weapons were being created in direct proximity to Russia on the territory of Ukraine. Our numerous warnings that such developments posed a direct threat to the security of Russia were rejected with open and cynical arrogance by Ukraine and its US and NATO patrons. In other words, all our diplomatic efforts were fully in vain. We have been left with no peaceful alternative to settle the problems that developed through no fault of ours. In this situation, we were forced to begin this special military operation. The movement of Russian forces against Kiev and other Ukrainian cities is not connected with a desire to occupy that country. This is not our goal, as I pointed out openly in my statement on February 24. As for the combat tactics drafted by the Defence Ministry of Russia and the General Staff, this has fully justified itself. Our fellows – soldiers and officers – are displaying courage and heroism and are doing all they can to avoid civilian losses in Ukrainian cities. This is what I would like to say for the first time: at the very start of the operation in Donbass, the Kiev authorities were offered opportunities to avoid hostilities, via different channels, to simply withdraw their troops from Donbass as an alternative to bloodshed. They did not want to do this. Well, this was their decision; now they will understand what is happening in reality, on the ground. The operation is being carried out successfully, in strict conformity with the approved plan. I must note that, encouraged by the United States and other Western countries, Ukraine was purposefully preparing for a scenario of force, a massacre and an ethnic cleansing in Donbass. A massive onslaught on Donbass and later Crimea was just a matter of time. However, our Armed Forces have shattered these plans. Kiev was not just preparing for war, for aggression against Russia – it was conducting it. There were endless attempts to stage acts of subversion and organise a terrorist underground in Crimea. Hostilities in Donbass and the shelling of peaceful residential areas have continued all these years. Almost 14,000 civilians, including children have been killed over this time. As you know, there was a missile strike at the centre of Donetsk on March 14. This was an overt bloody act of terror that took over 20 lives. Shelling has been ongoing during the past few days. They are striking randomly at squares with the fervor of fanatics and the exasperation of the doomed. They are acting like the Nazis did when they tried to drag as many innocent victims as they could to their graves. But what is shocking in its extreme cynicism is not just Kiev’s blatant lies and statements that Russia allegedly launched this missile at Donetsk (they have gone as far as this), but the attitude of the so-called civilised world. The European and American press did not even notice this tragedy in Donetsk, as if nothing happened. This is how they have been hypocritically looking the other way over the past eight years as mothers buried their children in Donbass, as elderly people were killed. This is simply moral degradation, complete de-humanisation. It was no longer possible to tolerate this outrageous attitude towards the people of Donbass. To put an end to this genocide, Russia recognized the people’s republics of Donbass and signed treaties of friendship and mutual aid with them. Based on these treaties, the republics appealed to Russia for military aid in rebuffing the aggression. We rendered this aid because we simply could not do otherwise. We had no right to act otherwise. I would like to emphasise this point and draw your attention to it: if our troops had acted only within the people's republics and helped them liberate their territory, it would not have been a final solution, it would not have led to peace and would not have ultimately removed the threat – to our country, this time to Russia. On the contrary, a new frontline would have been extended around Donbass and its borders, and shelling and provocations would have continued. In other words, this armed conflict would have continued indefinitely. It would have been fuelled by the revanchist hysteria of the Kiev regime, as NATO deployed its military infrastructure faster and more aggressively. In this case, we would have been faced with the fact that the attack, the offensive weapons of the alliance were already at our borders. I will repeat – we had no alternative for self-defence, for ensuring Russia's security, to this special military operation. We will reach the goals we set. We will certainly ensure the security of Russia and our people and will never allow Ukraine to be a bridgehead for aggressive actions against our country.
8:03

🚨Why Russia launched “Special Military Operation” I publicly announced the reasons for and the main goal of Russia’s actions. It is to help our people in Donbass, who have been subjected to real genocide for nearly eight years in the most barbarous ways, that is, through blockade, large-scale punitive operations, terrorist attacks and constant artillery raids. Their only guilt was that they demanded basic human rights: to live according to their forefathers’ laws and traditions, to speak their native language, and to bring up their children as they want. During these years, the Kiev authorities have ignored and sabotaged the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures for a peaceful settlement of the crisis and ultimately late last year openly refused to implement it. They also started to implement plans to join NATO. Moreover, the Kiev authorities also announced their intention to have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. This was a real threat. With foreign technical support, the pro-Nazi Kiev regime would have obtained weapons of mass destruction in the foreseeable future and, of course, would have targeted them against Russia. There was a network of dozens of laboratories in Ukraine, where military biological programmes were conducted under the guidance and with the financial support of the Pentagon, including experiments with coronavirus strains, anthrax, cholera, African swine fever and other deadly diseases. Frantic attempts are being made to conceal traces of these secret programmes. However, we have grounds to assume that components of biological weapons were being created in direct proximity to Russia on the territory of Ukraine. Our numerous warnings that such developments posed a direct threat to the security of Russia were rejected with open and cynical arrogance by Ukraine and its US and NATO patrons. In other words, all our diplomatic efforts were fully in vain. We have been left with no peaceful alternative to settle the problems that developed through no fault of ours. In this situation, we were forced to begin this special military operation. The movement of Russian forces against Kiev and other Ukrainian cities is not connected with a desire to occupy that country. This is not our goal, as I pointed out openly in my statement on February 24. As for the combat tactics drafted by the Defence Ministry of Russia and the General Staff, this has fully justified itself. Our fellows – soldiers and officers – are displaying courage and heroism and are doing all they can to avoid civilian losses in Ukrainian cities. This is what I would like to say for the first time: at the very start of the operation in Donbass, the Kiev authorities were offered opportunities to avoid hostilities, via different channels, to simply withdraw their troops from Donbass as an alternative to bloodshed. They did not want to do this. Well, this was their decision; now they will understand what is happening in reality, on the ground. The operation is being carried out successfully, in strict conformity with the approved plan. I must note that, encouraged by the United States and other Western countries, Ukraine was purposefully preparing for a scenario of force, a massacre and an ethnic cleansing in Donbass. A massive onslaught on Donbass and later Crimea was just a matter of time. However, our Armed Forces have shattered these plans. Kiev was not just preparing for war, for aggression against Russia – it was conducting it. There were endless attempts to stage acts of subversion and organise a terrorist underground in Crimea. Hostilities in Donbass and the shelling of peaceful residential areas have continued all these years. Almost 14,000 civilians, including children have been killed over this time. As you know, there was a missile strike at the centre of Donetsk on March 14. This was an overt bloody act of terror that took over 20 lives. Shelling has been ongoing during the past few days. They are striking randomly at squares with the fervor of fanatics and the exasperation of the doomed. They are acting like the Nazis did when they tried to drag as many innocent victims as they could to their graves. But what is shocking in its extreme cynicism is not just Kiev’s blatant lies and statements that Russia allegedly launched this missile at Donetsk (they have gone as far as this), but the attitude of the so-called civilised world. The European and American press did not even notice this tragedy in Donetsk, as if nothing happened. This is how they have been hypocritically looking the other way over the past eight years as mothers buried their children in Donbass, as elderly people were killed. This is simply moral degradation, complete de-humanisation. It was no longer possible to tolerate this outrageous attitude towards the people of Donbass. To put an end to this genocide, Russia recognized the people’s republics of Donbass and signed treaties of friendship and mutual aid with them. Based on these treaties, the republics appealed to Russia for military aid in rebuffing the aggression. We rendered this aid because we simply could not do otherwise. We had no right to act otherwise. I would like to emphasise this point and draw your attention to it: if our troops had acted only within the people's republics and helped them liberate their territory, it would not have been a final solution, it would not have led to peace and would not have ultimately removed the threat – to our country, this time to Russia. On the contrary, a new frontline would have been extended around Donbass and its borders, and shelling and provocations would have continued. In other words, this armed conflict would have continued indefinitely. It would have been fuelled by the revanchist hysteria of the Kiev regime, as NATO deployed its military infrastructure faster and more aggressively. In this case, we would have been faced with the fact that the attack, the offensive weapons of the alliance were already at our borders. I will repeat – we had no alternative for self-defence, for ensuring Russia's security, to this special military operation. We will reach the goals we set. We will certainly ensure the security of Russia and our people and will never allow Ukraine to be a bridgehead for aggressive actions against our country.

Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil

21,050 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

War Diary Day 1,391 Blaise Metreweli, the Chief of Britain's Secret Intelligence Service, sticks it to the Killer in The Kremlin. And all his creepy helpers. I agree with every fucking word. VPDFO! (Transcript of the speech, exactly as it was delivered) 📷 Welcome inside MI6. This iconic building, familiar to movie fans everywhere, is the home of Britain’s foreign intelligence agency. But whilst hundreds of my team pass through the entry pods each day, the truth is that most of our work happens many miles away from this place - out of sight, hidden from the world, undercover, recruiting and running agents who choose to place their trust in us, sharing secrets to make the UK and the world safer. You might pass one of our officers on the street or sit next to them on a plane when you’re about to set off on an adventure of your own, or in a foreign city taking selfies by the sights. Whether it’s in seemingly everyday places, or on the front line embedded with our military, MI6 is there. In my first few weeks, I’ve heard repeatedly that MI6 is trusted and respected globally, two things that we never take for granted. We are seen as a source of hard power, soft influence and rapid innovation. I’ve also heard that people want to believe in MI6. It’s my job to make sure they can. Today, I want to talk about human agency. We all have choices to make about how we deal with the undercurrents shaping our world. About how, in our new, faster, more dangerous and technology-mediated world, it will be our rediscovery of our shared humanity, our ability to listen, and our courage that will determine how our future unfolds. Conflict is not inevitable. Understanding human nature is in my bones. From a family shaped by devastating conflict, I grew up with a deep sense of gratitude for the UK’s precious democracy and freedom. I spent much of my childhood overseas, which is where my passion for travel and adventure began. I studied anthropology, and later psychology and AI, exploring how we make sense of the world and each other. It’s why I was drawn to MI6: it offers strong purpose, a chance to serve and a belief in the positive power of human connection. Like the Service, I’m operational to my very core. Over nearly three decades, my career has involved recruiting and running agents in hostile territory; and leading operations in warzones to defuse threats and support peace. Always in teams, always learning from others. Over the years, I’ve worked with hundreds of brilliant partners – and indeed occasionally those we’d label as adversaries – across dozens of countries, tackling weapons proliferation and terrorism. During my time at MI5, I saw close up what it takes to defend Britain from being targeted by hostile states. You’ll find many like me in my organisation: powerfully motivated to protect our precious country; curious about how our world is changing, joining dots and taking action, across domains. But it was in my last role as ‘Q’, where it was my job to turn emerging technologies from threats to opportunities that I could most see the world changing. As I dug deep into data and extraordinary innovation, I could see how technology was rapidly reshaping not just our capabilities but also conflict and trust, truth and global power. Let me lay out how I see the global issues MI6 must tackle. Because the greatest danger we face is to misunderstand the nature of the problem. Let’s be in no doubt. Our world is more dangerous and contested now than it has been for decades. Conflict is evolving and trust eroding, just as new technologies spur both competition and dependence. We are being contested from sea to space, from the battlefield to the boardroom. And even our brains, as disinformation manipulates our understanding of each other and ourselves. Across the globe, we are now confronting not one single danger, but an interlocking web of security challenges – military, technological, social, ethical even – each shaping the other in complex ways. We are now operating in a space between peace and war. This is not a temporary state or a gradual, inevitable evolution. Our world is being actively remade, with profound implications for national and international security. Institutions which were designed in the ashes of the Second World War are being challenged. New blocs and identities forming and alliances reshaping. Multipolar competition in tension with multilateral cooperation. But there’s something distinctive that will make this change unlike any other: the impact of advanced technologies, which will accelerate the pace and scale of every threat and opportunity, and increasingly, individualise them too. Advances in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and quantum computing are not only revolutionising economies but rewriting the reality of conflict, as they ‘converge’ to create science-fiction-like tools. There’s incredible promise in all this for all of us, from green technologies to hyper-personalised medicine. But also peril. AI-powered robots and drones are brilliant for scaled manufacturing but devastating on the battlefield. Discoveries that cure disease can also create new weapons. And as states race for tech supremacy, or as some algorithms become as powerful as states, those hyper-personalised tools could become a new vector for conflict and control. Power itself is becoming more diffuse, more unpredictable as control over these technologies is shifting from states to corporations, and sometimes to individuals. And at the same time, the foundations of trust in our societies are eroding. Information, once a unifying force, is increasingly weaponised. Falsehood spreads faster than fact, dividing communities and distorting reality. We live in an age of hyper-connection yet profound isolation. The algorithms flatter our biases and fracture our public squares. And as trust collapses, so does our shared sense of truth – one of the greatest losses a society can suffer. The defining challenge of the twenty-first century is not simply who wields the most powerful technologies, but who guides them with the greatest wisdom. Our security, our prosperity, and our humanity depend on it. Our world is being remade. And for the first time, we are all at the heart of it. My Service must now operate in this new context too: not just expert on hostile states, terrorism, proliferation and more, but also fluent in technology, able to anticipate the second and third order effects of advances that reshape the world in minutes not months. And as China will be a central part of the global transformation taking place this century, it is essential that we, as MI6, continue to inform the government’s understanding of China’s rise and the implications for UK national security. I’m going to break with tradition and won’t give you a global threat tour, but will focus here on Putin’s Russia. We all continue to face the menace of an aggressive, expansionist and revisionist Russia, seeking to subjugate Ukraine and harass NATO. I find it harrowing that hundreds of thousands have died, with the toll mounting every day, because of Putin’s historical distortions and his compromised desire for respect. He is dragging out negotiations and shifting the cost of war onto his own population. But Putin should be in no doubt, our support is enduring. The pressure we apply on Ukraine’s behalf will be sustained. Because it is fundamental not just to European sovereignty and security but to global stability. Alongside the grinding war, Russia is testing us in the grey zone with tactics that are just below the threshold of war. It’s important to understand their attempts to bully, fearmonger and manipulate, because it affects us all. I am talking about: Cyberattacks on critical infrastructure. Drones buzzing airports and bases. Aggressive activity in our seas, above and below the waves. State-sponsored arson and sabotage. Propaganda and influence operations that crack open and exploit fractures within societies. Countering this activity is the work of intelligence and security services across Europe and the globe. And as the Foreign Secretary made clear in a speech last week, the UK is defending itself against this Russian information warfare – sanctioning Russian media outlets pushing Kremlin narratives. The export of chaos is a feature not a bug in this Russian approach to international engagement; and we should be ready for this to continue until Putin is forced to change his calculus. So, how should we respond? It’s not enough now just to understand the world. We must shape it too. MI6 is well-positioned to respond to these threats and wider global instability. And we will continue to evolve, just as we have throughout our long history. The UK government has invested in our intelligence agencies and we are all using our unique powers to keep the British people safe. Our ‘open and connected’ partnerships across the UK Intelligence Community, with HMGCC, NSSIF and the wider tech ecosystem in the UK will become even more important – because in the digital battleground, no single organisation can prevail alone. As a global agency, MI6’s inbuilt strength is our partners and our people. The risks I have set out require us to work ever more closely with our colleagues in MI5, GCHQ and in defence and diplomacy. But also with our Five Eyes partners, with the E3, the EU, NATO, those across the Middle East, the Indo-Pacific and beyond. And with many valued partners whose identity needs to remain secret. Together, we integrate our diverse talent, data and tools to meet the threat. AI is a domain in which we will excel, using the technology to augment, not replace, our human skills. Every digital trace, every byte of data, every algorithmic decision has implications for the safety of the lives of the courageous people who work with us as officers and agents, and for the UK’s strategic advantage. Mastery of technology will infuse everything we do. Not just in our labs, but in the field, in our tradecraft, and even more importantly, in the mindset of every officer. We will become as comfortable with lines of code as we are with human sources, as fluent in Python as we are in multiple other languages. Under my leadership, MI6 will continue to attract Britain’s best and most creative minds: linguists and data scientists, case officers and engineers, behavioural experts and technologists. We need people who walk in the shoes and get in the heads of our adversaries. We need people who think differently, challenge assumptions, and act decisively. All can thrive and make a difference at MI6. At an operational level, we will sharpen our edge and impact with audacity, tapping into – if you like – our historical SOE instincts. We’re at our best when we’re hustling to make things happen, because our intelligence is most valuable when it changes reality on the ground. We will take calculated risks, where the prize is significant and the national interest clear. We will never stoop to the tactics of our opponents. But we must seek to outplay them. In every domain. In every way. So intelligence must drive action. Action must deliver advantage. And advantage must serve Britain’s security and prosperity. But at the core, our deeper contribution is also our simplest – how we unlock human agency. Our fast-paced, tech and threat-infused world now generates more heat than light. As nations retrench and rearm, we are losing opportunities to listen to what’s really going on. I’ve seen time and again throughout my career, that this is where MI6 matters most: we listen and we hear. We understand, because we take time to learn languages and cultures, complex technical and historical detail, immerse ourselves in what’s really driving the situation. Across the globe, right now, our officers are finding people with the courage to step forward, and they are taking time to sit and listen to break these tightening cycles of violence. They listen for nuance, for connection, for opportunity. Over the years, I’ve listened to terrorists who have told us how to defuse the bomb because they know that more violence won’t help. To proliferators and smugglers who’ve told us where to find the dangerous material, motivated to protect their children’s future. To people trapped in authoritarian regimes who know, deep down, that their humanity is being chipped away – and that telling us what’s really going on is an important release, allowing us all to find better ways to navigate our changing world. So, we will work with our agents. And we will continue to engage directly, and with respect, with states and organisation currently working against us. Away from the glare of the media, we will use MI6’s convening power wherever we can to make a material difference, bringing parties together to defuse tensions. But the response to the increasing risks we face won’t be delivered by the UK intelligence community alone. Wider society has a role to play too. That includes work taking place in schools across the country so our children don’t get duped by information manipulation. Let’s all check sources, consider evidence, and be alive to those algorithms that trigger intense reactions, like fear. It also means everyone in society really understanding the world we are in – a world where terrorists plot against us, where our enemies fearmonger, bully and manipulate, and the front line is everywhere. Online, on our streets, in our supply chains, in the minds and on the screens of our citizens. We must all stand together against this. As we do today with our friends in Australia after the shocking antisemitic terrorist attack this weekend. My thoughts -and those of my whole organisation – are with the family, friends and loved ones of the victims. Light will always win over darkness. In rising to meet these challenges we, in MI6, will remain anchored to our values: courage, creativity, respect and integrity. And to our principles: accountability and trust are not constraints on our work; they are the foundations of our legitimacy with the British public. Recently, I had the privilege of meeting and thanking a foreign agent who has worked with us for decades, taking extraordinary risks to help keep the UK safe. I asked why. They said simply, ‘Your values. Your integrity and respect. None of us have a future without them’. This moment reinforced to me that we must remain a very human agency. And so, to sustain that trust, MI6 will continue to be more open. Not for the sake of visibility, but because it matters – and as my MI5 counterpart Sir Ken McCallum said recently - because it is a strength. We will continue the practice of speaking publicly, broaden our channels of engagement, and sustain our focus on attracting the most diverse talent to join our Service. Transparency does not mean revealing what must remain secret. It means showing the British people who we are, what we stand for, and why our work matters. We need your trust and support for the difficult and often dangerous work our agents pursue, every day of the year. In an age of uncertainty, one constant remains: the choices made by human beings still determine the shape of the world. Yes, technology can illuminate possibilities: but information requires judgement; complexity demands clarity; and only people can decide which path to follow. The United Kingdom’s global voice has never rested solely on strength – it has rested on trust, principle, and the ability to understand others as well as ourselves. That is also the essence of intelligence: not simply knowing the world, but interpreting it through a uniquely human lens. Ours is the quiet service, the hidden service. It is one rooted in a profound belief that when human beings act with purpose and integrity, they can steady a faltering world. When the Berlin Wall fell, it was our shared belief in freedom that carried Europe forward. When acts of terror targeted open societies, it was intelligence, cooperation and resolve that preserved them. And when adversaries blur fact and falsehood, our task is to defend the space where truth can still stand. As we step into the future, the tools at our disposal will evolve. But what will always matter most is the human element – the person who stands in the shadows and says: this is right, and that is wrong. That choice – the exercise of human agency – has shaped our world before, and it will shape it again. Because in the end, it is not what we can do that defines us, but what we choose to do. Thank you. Published 15 December 2025
0:59

War Diary Day 1,391 Blaise Metreweli, the Chief of Britain's Secret Intelligence Service, sticks it to the Killer in The Kremlin. And all his creepy helpers. I agree with every fucking word. VPDFO! (Transcript of the speech, exactly as it was delivered) 📷 Welcome inside MI6. This iconic building, familiar to movie fans everywhere, is the home of Britain’s foreign intelligence agency. But whilst hundreds of my team pass through the entry pods each day, the truth is that most of our work happens many miles away from this place - out of sight, hidden from the world, undercover, recruiting and running agents who choose to place their trust in us, sharing secrets to make the UK and the world safer. You might pass one of our officers on the street or sit next to them on a plane when you’re about to set off on an adventure of your own, or in a foreign city taking selfies by the sights. Whether it’s in seemingly everyday places, or on the front line embedded with our military, MI6 is there. In my first few weeks, I’ve heard repeatedly that MI6 is trusted and respected globally, two things that we never take for granted. We are seen as a source of hard power, soft influence and rapid innovation. I’ve also heard that people want to believe in MI6. It’s my job to make sure they can. Today, I want to talk about human agency. We all have choices to make about how we deal with the undercurrents shaping our world. About how, in our new, faster, more dangerous and technology-mediated world, it will be our rediscovery of our shared humanity, our ability to listen, and our courage that will determine how our future unfolds. Conflict is not inevitable. Understanding human nature is in my bones. From a family shaped by devastating conflict, I grew up with a deep sense of gratitude for the UK’s precious democracy and freedom. I spent much of my childhood overseas, which is where my passion for travel and adventure began. I studied anthropology, and later psychology and AI, exploring how we make sense of the world and each other. It’s why I was drawn to MI6: it offers strong purpose, a chance to serve and a belief in the positive power of human connection. Like the Service, I’m operational to my very core. Over nearly three decades, my career has involved recruiting and running agents in hostile territory; and leading operations in warzones to defuse threats and support peace. Always in teams, always learning from others. Over the years, I’ve worked with hundreds of brilliant partners – and indeed occasionally those we’d label as adversaries – across dozens of countries, tackling weapons proliferation and terrorism. During my time at MI5, I saw close up what it takes to defend Britain from being targeted by hostile states. You’ll find many like me in my organisation: powerfully motivated to protect our precious country; curious about how our world is changing, joining dots and taking action, across domains. But it was in my last role as ‘Q’, where it was my job to turn emerging technologies from threats to opportunities that I could most see the world changing. As I dug deep into data and extraordinary innovation, I could see how technology was rapidly reshaping not just our capabilities but also conflict and trust, truth and global power. Let me lay out how I see the global issues MI6 must tackle. Because the greatest danger we face is to misunderstand the nature of the problem. Let’s be in no doubt. Our world is more dangerous and contested now than it has been for decades. Conflict is evolving and trust eroding, just as new technologies spur both competition and dependence. We are being contested from sea to space, from the battlefield to the boardroom. And even our brains, as disinformation manipulates our understanding of each other and ourselves. Across the globe, we are now confronting not one single danger, but an interlocking web of security challenges – military, technological, social, ethical even – each shaping the other in complex ways. We are now operating in a space between peace and war. This is not a temporary state or a gradual, inevitable evolution. Our world is being actively remade, with profound implications for national and international security. Institutions which were designed in the ashes of the Second World War are being challenged. New blocs and identities forming and alliances reshaping. Multipolar competition in tension with multilateral cooperation. But there’s something distinctive that will make this change unlike any other: the impact of advanced technologies, which will accelerate the pace and scale of every threat and opportunity, and increasingly, individualise them too. Advances in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and quantum computing are not only revolutionising economies but rewriting the reality of conflict, as they ‘converge’ to create science-fiction-like tools. There’s incredible promise in all this for all of us, from green technologies to hyper-personalised medicine. But also peril. AI-powered robots and drones are brilliant for scaled manufacturing but devastating on the battlefield. Discoveries that cure disease can also create new weapons. And as states race for tech supremacy, or as some algorithms become as powerful as states, those hyper-personalised tools could become a new vector for conflict and control. Power itself is becoming more diffuse, more unpredictable as control over these technologies is shifting from states to corporations, and sometimes to individuals. And at the same time, the foundations of trust in our societies are eroding. Information, once a unifying force, is increasingly weaponised. Falsehood spreads faster than fact, dividing communities and distorting reality. We live in an age of hyper-connection yet profound isolation. The algorithms flatter our biases and fracture our public squares. And as trust collapses, so does our shared sense of truth – one of the greatest losses a society can suffer. The defining challenge of the twenty-first century is not simply who wields the most powerful technologies, but who guides them with the greatest wisdom. Our security, our prosperity, and our humanity depend on it. Our world is being remade. And for the first time, we are all at the heart of it. My Service must now operate in this new context too: not just expert on hostile states, terrorism, proliferation and more, but also fluent in technology, able to anticipate the second and third order effects of advances that reshape the world in minutes not months. And as China will be a central part of the global transformation taking place this century, it is essential that we, as MI6, continue to inform the government’s understanding of China’s rise and the implications for UK national security. I’m going to break with tradition and won’t give you a global threat tour, but will focus here on Putin’s Russia. We all continue to face the menace of an aggressive, expansionist and revisionist Russia, seeking to subjugate Ukraine and harass NATO. I find it harrowing that hundreds of thousands have died, with the toll mounting every day, because of Putin’s historical distortions and his compromised desire for respect. He is dragging out negotiations and shifting the cost of war onto his own population. But Putin should be in no doubt, our support is enduring. The pressure we apply on Ukraine’s behalf will be sustained. Because it is fundamental not just to European sovereignty and security but to global stability. Alongside the grinding war, Russia is testing us in the grey zone with tactics that are just below the threshold of war. It’s important to understand their attempts to bully, fearmonger and manipulate, because it affects us all. I am talking about: Cyberattacks on critical infrastructure. Drones buzzing airports and bases. Aggressive activity in our seas, above and below the waves. State-sponsored arson and sabotage. Propaganda and influence operations that crack open and exploit fractures within societies. Countering this activity is the work of intelligence and security services across Europe and the globe. And as the Foreign Secretary made clear in a speech last week, the UK is defending itself against this Russian information warfare – sanctioning Russian media outlets pushing Kremlin narratives. The export of chaos is a feature not a bug in this Russian approach to international engagement; and we should be ready for this to continue until Putin is forced to change his calculus. So, how should we respond? It’s not enough now just to understand the world. We must shape it too. MI6 is well-positioned to respond to these threats and wider global instability. And we will continue to evolve, just as we have throughout our long history. The UK government has invested in our intelligence agencies and we are all using our unique powers to keep the British people safe. Our ‘open and connected’ partnerships across the UK Intelligence Community, with HMGCC, NSSIF and the wider tech ecosystem in the UK will become even more important – because in the digital battleground, no single organisation can prevail alone. As a global agency, MI6’s inbuilt strength is our partners and our people. The risks I have set out require us to work ever more closely with our colleagues in MI5, GCHQ and in defence and diplomacy. But also with our Five Eyes partners, with the E3, the EU, NATO, those across the Middle East, the Indo-Pacific and beyond. And with many valued partners whose identity needs to remain secret. Together, we integrate our diverse talent, data and tools to meet the threat. AI is a domain in which we will excel, using the technology to augment, not replace, our human skills. Every digital trace, every byte of data, every algorithmic decision has implications for the safety of the lives of the courageous people who work with us as officers and agents, and for the UK’s strategic advantage. Mastery of technology will infuse everything we do. Not just in our labs, but in the field, in our tradecraft, and even more importantly, in the mindset of every officer. We will become as comfortable with lines of code as we are with human sources, as fluent in Python as we are in multiple other languages. Under my leadership, MI6 will continue to attract Britain’s best and most creative minds: linguists and data scientists, case officers and engineers, behavioural experts and technologists. We need people who walk in the shoes and get in the heads of our adversaries. We need people who think differently, challenge assumptions, and act decisively. All can thrive and make a difference at MI6. At an operational level, we will sharpen our edge and impact with audacity, tapping into – if you like – our historical SOE instincts. We’re at our best when we’re hustling to make things happen, because our intelligence is most valuable when it changes reality on the ground. We will take calculated risks, where the prize is significant and the national interest clear. We will never stoop to the tactics of our opponents. But we must seek to outplay them. In every domain. In every way. So intelligence must drive action. Action must deliver advantage. And advantage must serve Britain’s security and prosperity. But at the core, our deeper contribution is also our simplest – how we unlock human agency. Our fast-paced, tech and threat-infused world now generates more heat than light. As nations retrench and rearm, we are losing opportunities to listen to what’s really going on. I’ve seen time and again throughout my career, that this is where MI6 matters most: we listen and we hear. We understand, because we take time to learn languages and cultures, complex technical and historical detail, immerse ourselves in what’s really driving the situation. Across the globe, right now, our officers are finding people with the courage to step forward, and they are taking time to sit and listen to break these tightening cycles of violence. They listen for nuance, for connection, for opportunity. Over the years, I’ve listened to terrorists who have told us how to defuse the bomb because they know that more violence won’t help. To proliferators and smugglers who’ve told us where to find the dangerous material, motivated to protect their children’s future. To people trapped in authoritarian regimes who know, deep down, that their humanity is being chipped away – and that telling us what’s really going on is an important release, allowing us all to find better ways to navigate our changing world. So, we will work with our agents. And we will continue to engage directly, and with respect, with states and organisation currently working against us. Away from the glare of the media, we will use MI6’s convening power wherever we can to make a material difference, bringing parties together to defuse tensions. But the response to the increasing risks we face won’t be delivered by the UK intelligence community alone. Wider society has a role to play too. That includes work taking place in schools across the country so our children don’t get duped by information manipulation. Let’s all check sources, consider evidence, and be alive to those algorithms that trigger intense reactions, like fear. It also means everyone in society really understanding the world we are in – a world where terrorists plot against us, where our enemies fearmonger, bully and manipulate, and the front line is everywhere. Online, on our streets, in our supply chains, in the minds and on the screens of our citizens. We must all stand together against this. As we do today with our friends in Australia after the shocking antisemitic terrorist attack this weekend. My thoughts -and those of my whole organisation – are with the family, friends and loved ones of the victims. Light will always win over darkness. In rising to meet these challenges we, in MI6, will remain anchored to our values: courage, creativity, respect and integrity. And to our principles: accountability and trust are not constraints on our work; they are the foundations of our legitimacy with the British public. Recently, I had the privilege of meeting and thanking a foreign agent who has worked with us for decades, taking extraordinary risks to help keep the UK safe. I asked why. They said simply, ‘Your values. Your integrity and respect. None of us have a future without them’. This moment reinforced to me that we must remain a very human agency. And so, to sustain that trust, MI6 will continue to be more open. Not for the sake of visibility, but because it matters – and as my MI5 counterpart Sir Ken McCallum said recently - because it is a strength. We will continue the practice of speaking publicly, broaden our channels of engagement, and sustain our focus on attracting the most diverse talent to join our Service. Transparency does not mean revealing what must remain secret. It means showing the British people who we are, what we stand for, and why our work matters. We need your trust and support for the difficult and often dangerous work our agents pursue, every day of the year. In an age of uncertainty, one constant remains: the choices made by human beings still determine the shape of the world. Yes, technology can illuminate possibilities: but information requires judgement; complexity demands clarity; and only people can decide which path to follow. The United Kingdom’s global voice has never rested solely on strength – it has rested on trust, principle, and the ability to understand others as well as ourselves. That is also the essence of intelligence: not simply knowing the world, but interpreting it through a uniquely human lens. Ours is the quiet service, the hidden service. It is one rooted in a profound belief that when human beings act with purpose and integrity, they can steady a faltering world. When the Berlin Wall fell, it was our shared belief in freedom that carried Europe forward. When acts of terror targeted open societies, it was intelligence, cooperation and resolve that preserved them. And when adversaries blur fact and falsehood, our task is to defend the space where truth can still stand. As we step into the future, the tools at our disposal will evolve. But what will always matter most is the human element – the person who stands in the shadows and says: this is right, and that is wrong. That choice – the exercise of human agency – has shaped our world before, and it will shape it again. Because in the end, it is not what we can do that defines us, but what we choose to do. Thank you. Published 15 December 2025

John Sweeney

42,257 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten