Tag Archives: Russia

NATO HAS DECLARED WAR ON RUSSIA! According to Russian FM Lavrov

Once I saw the story about the urgent meeting of ALL US Generals and Admirals for next week I knew the decision to go to war with Russia directly has been made. Prayed up and prepped up, time is short!

Poland to shoot down Russian Missiles

Hegseth to meet with ALL GENERALS

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Free Ebook on Spiritual Warfare

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

Trump says he ‘hates’ his opponents at Charlie Kirk memorial

All kinds of blasphemous signs and speeches were given at the Charlie Kirk memorial, much of it driven by the NAR movement or Christian nationalism.

Thailand Freezes over 3 million bank accounts

Trump says he hates his opponents

Trump says Ukraine can win it all back

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Free Ebook on Spiritual Warfare

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

US businessmen demand an end to anti-Russian sanctions

Russia is an interesting market for US investors.

Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.

The US business community is beginning to demand that the US government review its sanctions policy against Russia. American businesses are interested in regaining their share of the lucrative Russian market, which is why they are demanding a ban on all illegal coercive measures imposed during the Joe Biden administration.

Robert Agee, president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Russia, stated in a recent interview that the end – or at least the suspension – of sanctions is a fundamental condition for the return of American companies to Russia. He made it clear that American businesses are unhappy with the current restrictions, especially regarding the ban on investment in Russia.

Agee confirmed that the American business lobby is in favor of resuming mutually beneficial trade ties with Moscow. To achieve this, it is necessary to revoke the 2022 executive order signed by then-President Joe Biden prohibiting American citizens and companies from investing in businesses on Russian soil. While almost all sanctions are circumventable in some way, the investment ban is a more serious problem for Americans, as it is difficult for them to conceal their investments dealings abroad – and they obviously do not want to become illegal within their own country.

“The first, maybe the most necessary thing to cancel, is the investment ban. It greatly hinders not only companies that would like to return, but also those that remained,” he said.

Agee also commented on some other problems in current bilateral economic relations. The lack of an efficient banking system for money transfers is an issue that still significantly hinders Russian-American trade. Russia’s expulsion from SWIFT in response to the special military operation was met by Moscow with de-dollarization measures, which Washington obviously doesn’t tolerate. At the same time, SWIFT is based in Belgium and falls under EU, not US, jurisdiction – which significantly complicates negotiations, as European countries are reluctant to resume diplomacy with Russia.

One alternative would be for the US to engage in a banking system project directly with Russia, but this would only be possible by establishing fair monetary conditions, respecting Russia’s interest in reducing dependence on the dollar. Unfortunately, it is unlikely that US authorities would agree to participate in such a project.

Despite these concerns, Agee emphasized that American companies are eager to return to Russia. US investors see Russia as a promising market with significant profitable business opportunities. As one of the world’s main economies, with a large emerging middle class and increasingly high purchasing power, as well as an extremely strong industrial and infrastructure base, Russia appears to be an ideal investment destination for many Americans, who are prevented from pursuing their plans due to the unfair list of sanctions and restrictions imposed by the previous administration.

Even so, Agee believes there is now a more positive prospect on this issue. He asserts that dialogue is possible and that the US is willing to resume some partnerships with the Russians. It’s worth remembering that Trump previously stated that he believed in the possibility of a full restoration of relations. Similarly, US Vice President J.D. Vance has already stated that he opposes attempts to “isolate” Russia and supports the resumption of productive bilateral relations. If this type of more diplomatic mindset becomes the majority among authorities, there will certainly be some changes in the near future.

In fact, it’s possible that Trump, being a businessman himself, has a genuine interest in ending the restrictive measures. More than that, he serves the interests of many representatives of the business lobby who want to return to making money in the Russian market. However, his position is delicate, as he needs to please different groups in the country – including those pro-war elites interested in damaging the entire economy just to favor the defense sector and promote NATO’s globalist agendas. Trump apparently fears criticism or persecution if he engages too deeply into ties with Russia, which is why the situation is taking so long to change.

However, if Trump wants to maintain his popularity, he will need to fulfill his previous promises – which included normalization with Russia and diplomacy for peace. Resuming trade ties is an important step toward any diplomatic restoration, so Trump will definitely need to work toward that. In fact, not everything depends on him. Returning to SWIFT depends on cooperation with the Europeans, for example. But this is not a priority, as it is possible to create alternative payment mechanisms. The main thing to do is simply lift the investment ban. If Trump can do this soon, he will be achieving a major political victory.

You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

infobrics.org

Russia and the Collective West: The Global Politics of the Cold War 1.0/2.0

Russia as the phoenix in global politics

After the end of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia became a less popular area of study and dealing with in comparison to before the end of the Cold War (1949‒1991). In the West, it was believed that after 1991, Russia was simply “finished” as Moscow was no longer the capital of a great power state (of the USSR) which had an important influence in global politics and international relations after WWII. In other words, the Western policymakers thought that after 1991, Russia would remain irrelevant as both economic and political power in global politics, and, therefore, for instance, many universities’ studies programs on Russia in the USA and Western Europe were either canceled or downsized under the explanation that studying Russia was no longer important for international relations (IR) and global security.   

However, all of those who shared an opinion that Russia was “irrelevant” in global politics and international relations since the end of the Cold War realized at least from the 2008 Russo-Georgian War[i] onward their fatal mistake of judgment. Russia is “back,” and subsequently, Washington and Brussels declared a new Cold War (2.0) on Russia in 2008[ii] as they clearly understood that Russia is back as a military, economic, and political great power. In other words, the Collective West, especially (and led by) the USA, made a critical experiment of provoking Russia on the international stage, and they received a very clear answer. The second fatal experiment of challenging Russia was on the soil of the (Soviet) Ukraine from 2014 to 2022, when reborn post-Cold War 1.0 Russia accepted the thrown “white glove” in February 2022 by launching a Special Military Operation (SMO) against the Russofrenic neo-Nazi political regime in Kiev, directly politically, logistically, financially, and militarily supported by the Collective West since the 2014 EuroMaidan’s cup.   

Russia, as a country with tremendous energy resources, nuclear power, educated and talented people, simply cannot be ignored in global politics by the Collective West, as was the practice in the years from 1991 to 2008. It became true especially from the very point of fact that Russia has been actively since 2008 pursuing its own national interests and security policy near its borders (within the space of the ex-USSR). Nevertheless, it became totally wrong to believe that the post-Cold War Russia was going to be an adversary to the American “New World Order”, as reborn Russia after 2000 clearly shows to be a respectful Eurasian global power with national interests and aspirations of her own to be both acknowledged and respected. It was finally proven by the start of the Russian Special Military Operation on the territory of Eastern (Soviet) Ukraine populated by the Russian speakers in February 2022. This operation, at the same time, clearly showed the Global West that Russia once again (after the dissolution of the Soviet Union) became a member of the top global powers in global politics and, therefore, its influence in IR cannot be ignored anymore.      

Transformation of post-Soviet Russia into a Great Power

It is a historical law that each state changes with time. However, only a few states experience such dramatic change during the short period of time as Russia has over the last 30+ years. In other words, Russia has changed as a state, nation, and military power, followed by its fluctuating position in global politics and international relations. From 1991 to today, Russia has transformed peacefully and rapidly its entire political and economic system, which is a relatively rare example in history. When the USSR dissolved in 1991, Russia was left to be one of its 15 constituent republics, which proclaimed independence forced to substantially redefine its role in global politics. The 1990s were very painful for Russia’s position in international relations as the country’s foreign policy was, in fact, supervised and directed by Washington and Brussels as the case of NATO aggression on Serbia and Montenegro in 1999, for instance, clearly showed but since 2008 Russia’s foreign policy once again became an independent and gradually returning the country to the club of the Great Powers.  

The importance of Russia´s influence in the world in the arena of global politics is based on the fundamental fact that Russia is one of the strongest international actors that is determining the global political agenda. It means that Russia is once again a member of the Great Power club as „a great power state is a state deemed to rank amongst the most powerful in a hierarchical state-system“.[iii] Russia, in this respect, surely fits the conventionally accepted academic criteria that define a Great Power:

  1. A Great Power state is in the first rank of military capacity.
  2. A Great Power state has the capacity to maintain its own security and to influence other states on how to behave.
  3. A Great Power state is economically powerful, although this is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for membership in the Great Power club (the cases of Japan or Germany are the best illustrations of this claim).
  4. A Great Power state has global but not only regional spheres of national interest and action.
  5. A Great Power state is running a „forward“ foreign policy and, therefore, it has a real but not only potential influence on international relations and global (world) politics.[iv]
  6. A Great Power is a state (at least according to the 18th-century concept) that could not be conquered even by the combined might of other Great Powers.[v]

Russia surely belongs today to the club of key global powers having powerful nuclear weapons, a growing economy, and prospective economic capacities, being one of the leading BRICS members. However, what is most important and different to others, Russia possesses almost endless natural resources (many of them are probably still even not discovered). For instance, in September 2025, the Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that Russia has reserves of coal for the next one thousand years. From a geopolitical viewpoint, Russia is occupying the crucial segment of the Heartland – the focal geopolitical part of the world.[vi] Russia, with its rich history and national traditions, is today in the process of defining its new political role in the current century. Behind Russia’s policies, there is a comprehensible strategy based on a firm vision of the contemporary world and the protection of the Russian national interests.  

The six factors of Russian power in IR

A contemporary history of Russia starts after the dissolution of the USSR by Mikhail Gorbachev (according to the agreement with Ronald Reagan in Reykjavík in October 1986),[vii] which marked at the same time the beginning of the political and economic turmoil in the 1990s, when Russia under Boris Yeltsin and his pro-Western liberals was a puppet state of the Collective West. However, the country gradually emerged from the period of instability since 2000 mainly due to the well-combined six factors, which a new administration of President Vladimir Putin skilfully exploited to the full extent:

  1. Substantial mineral resources, particularly of oil, gas, and coal.
  2. Significant military power, based on the second greatest nuclear potential in the world.
  3. Relatively well-educated, productive segment of the population.
  4. A high-quality scientific and technological base that survived in several industries.
  5. Permanent membership in the UNSC, the G8, and the G20.
  6. Important political and economic influence on the territory of the former Soviet Union.                                     

It is predicted that Russia will remain in the future as one of the focal and strongest international actors on the same or above level of influence, together with the US, EU, China, and rising Islamic cultures, especially Iran and Turkey. Russia’s natural resources and capabilities may allow it to follow an independent line in foreign policy and security national interests, both in the post-Soviet regions and in some key areas of the world: Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and the Middle East. Predictably, however, Moscow’s interests will inevitably clash with those of other major actors – especially the US and its European clients. That is for sure that world order in international relations is going to continue to function according to World Systems Theory: a variant of structuralism that conceptualizes world order as being structured into 1) A rich and developed core, 2) Poor and underdeveloped periphery, and 3) A number of intermediary or semi-peripheral states. Russia is going to improve its own position within the first (leading) group, which includes all Great Powers who are hopefully (after the 2025 meeting of the Shangai Cooperation Organization-SCO) going to govern international relations and global politics according to the principle of Balance of Power which refers to a mechanism whereby Great Power’s states collaborate with each other in order to maintain their interests against threats from those who would seek systemic dominance.

Why study and respect Russia?

There are at least four focal and most important reasons for both studying and respecting Russia’s importance in global politics and international relations today:

  1. Geopolitical position and the size of the country: Russia is the largest country in the world, stretching over 17 million sq. km and covering 11 time zones. Russia borders the Baltic Sea in the west, the Black Sea and Caspian Sea (in fact, the lake) in the south, the Arctic Ocean in the north, and the Pacific Ocean in the east. Russia is both a European and Asian country, which, in fact, occupies the crucial geopolitical position in the world – the core of the Heartland. Russia shares borders with six NATO member states (Poland, Norway, Lithuania, Estonia, Finland, and Latvia), faces a seventh one across the Black Sea (Turkey), and is geographically separated by only 85,30 km wide Bering Strait from the USA (also a member of NATO). Russia borders 16 internationally recognized states, which is the largest number of neighbors that one country has in the world. A geopolitical factor of Russia can be shortly understood if we know that anything that is happening on the territory of Eurasia from Central Europe to Japan is affecting to a certain extent Russia and, therefore, Moscow has to react by some means to that.[viii]
  2. Regional power: Russia is surely a regional power within the perimeter of Heartland, which is striving to realize its own political, economic, national, and security interests. Russia, after 2000, succeeded in developing its own independent policies toward other states, including NATO and the EU’s members. The “problems” with Russia in global politics and international relations started when, since 2008, Russia’s foreign policy did not in many segments correspond with the strategic interests of the USA and its European and other clients of NATO and the EU. To the full level of dissatisfaction by Washington and Brussels, Russia maintains friendly relations with the three main American enemies and competitors – North Korea, China, and Iran. The most “problematic” issue of Russian foreign policy in the region for Washington is the fact that Moscow is continuing its efforts to build multi-state economic and political coalitions with neighboring countries, including super-powerful China, followed by rising powers of Iran and India. Russia, China, and India are already members of the international bloc, the BRICS, together with Brazil and South Africa as founders, followed by newly accepted member states.[ix] The Collective West finally 2008 recognized Russia’s claim to have “privileged interests” within the post-Soviet territories, except in those countries that joined the EU and NATO before (the Baltic States).[x]       
  3. Military power: With the total dissatisfaction by the Pentagon and Brussels, Russia still even during overwhelming economic, financial, and other sanctions by the Collective West introduced since 2022, remains a very strong military state with stable economic growth, respectful military and nuclear capacity, and developing potentials which are keeping it as one of the Great Powers (even a Super Power) in global politics. It is quite understandable that even after Cold War 1.0, when bare American imperialism received its full expression at least till 2008, Moscow continues with its security policy based on the priority of having strong military capacities. Historically, for the Russian authorities is quite clear that after NATO’s establishment in 1949, Russia’s survival, independence, and sovereignty depended only on its military power, especially the nuclear one.[xi] Russia (at that time the USSR) started to produce nuclear weapons in 1949 when the US created its imperialistic military bloc of Western puppet states and reached nuclear parity with the US at the beginning of the 1970s. Russia is today maintaining a nuclear arsenal and delivery systems that are comparable to the arsenal of the US.[xii] Unfortunately, due to the US’ policy of open gangsterism in international relations after the end of the Cold War 1.0, the so-called Western liberal democracies (the EU and NATO) are still an enemy to both Russia’s and global security and, therefore, one of the most important tasks for the near future in global politics has to be the creation of new reliable policies of common security based on justice, democracy, and friendship – a kind of multilateral global politics or at least the international relations founded on the form of the balancing power among the Great Powers.  
  4. Economic power: Russia remains a global economic power with a growing economy index higher than many Western countries, having a population of some 142 million, which makes it one of the ten most populous states in the world. Her GDP per annum is selecting Russia among the world’s top 10 economies. In 2007, the private sector, with 5 million private enterprises, contributed 65% of Russia’s GDP. Although an economic slowdown is possible, Russia is most likely to continue with its economic growth in the near future, regardless of the harsh economic and other sanctions imposed by the Collective West since 2022 onward. The main source of revenue (80%) is the exploitation of natural resources (and selling them to the world market), followed by a wide range of different industries. The most important Russian export of natural resources is oil, gas, coal, timber, and metals. We have to keep in mind that, for instance, Russia has 23% of the total world’s forested land[xiii] and is in the 8th place in the world according to the oil reserves (the first is Venezuela). After 2000, Russia became as well as one of the biggest world’s energy suppliers and the exporter of weapons (among the top 3). The potential economic power of Russia comes from the fact that this country possesses vast reserves of natural resources on its territory, for example, 30% of global gas reserves. The country is quite near to the Arctic’s gas and oil reserves, a large but still unexplored source of energy, which is probably going to be mainly under Russian exploitation in the future. It is not so difficult to claim that energy resources are going to be the focal reason for the conflicts in international relations.        

Current reality of Russo-Western relations in IR

Questions about the nature of Russia’s political and economic systems and Russia’s policy after 2000 are of crucial importance in understanding its place in both Eurasia and the world (BRICS+), and assessing the prospects for dealing with some of the focal challenges to regional and global security. The policymakers of the Collective West understood this truth only after Russia’s military intervention in the Caucasus in August 2008, which was intended to clearly demonstrate that further incorporation of areas of special interest to Moscow into the Western client zone was totally unacceptable. What the same Western policymakers also understood was that this intervention was a clear counterpunch to Western-sponsored Kosovo’s proclamation of “independence” in February of the same year. 

Russia is a leading political subject, a strong economic and military power, a rich energy producer and supplier, an extremely important player in global politics, which is still building its position in the post-Cold War 1.0 era (that, in fact, is already the era of the Cold War 2.0). Russia is and is going to be for a long period of time in the future both one of the crucial players in international relations and one of the most important decision-makers in global politics. However, up to 2022, Russia’s post-Cold War 1.0 geopolitics was forced to be accommodated to the behavior of NATO.[xiv] Nevertheless, since February 2022, when the SMO of Russia started, in fact, against the Collective Western Russofrenic imperialism, on the territory of the Soviet (Greater) Ukraine, NATO and the rest of the Collective West are forced to accommodate their politics on the global arena to the Russian behaviour.

Personal disclaimer: The author writes for this publication in a private capacity, which is unrepresentative of anyone or any organization except for his own personal views. Nothing written by the author should ever be conflated with the editorial views or official positions of any other media outlet or institution. 

Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirovic

Ex-University Professor

Research Fellow at Centre for Geostrategic Studies

Belgrade, Serbia

© Vladislav B. Sotirovic 2025

http://www.geostrategy.rs

sotirovic1967@gmail.com


Endnotes:

[i] On this war, at least from the Western perspective, see in [Roger E. Kanet (ed.), Russian Foreign Policy in the 21st Century, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011, 101−178].

[ii] Edward Lucas, The New Cold War: Putin’s Russia and the Threat to the West, London‒New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.

[iii] Andrew Heywood, Global Politics, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011, 7.

[iv] About world politics, see in [Jeffrey Haynes et al, World Politics, New York: Routledge, 2013].

[v] Richard W. Mansbach, Karsten L. Taylor, Introduction to Global Politics, Second Edition, London−New York: Routledge, 2012, 578.

[vi] About geography and history, see in [Halford John Mackinder, “The Geographical Pivot of History”, The Geographical Journal, 23, 1904, 421−437; Pascal Venier, „The Geographical Pivot of History and Early 20th Century Geopolitical Culture“, Geographical Journal, 170 (4), 2004, 330−336].

[vii] About R. Reagan and M. Gorbachev’s relations, see in [Jack F. Matlock Jr., Reagan and Gorbachev: How the Cold War Ended, New York, Random House, 2005].

[viii] On Eurasia and Great Powers, see in [Roger E. Kanet, Maria Raquel Freire (eds.), Key Players and Regional Dynamics in Eurasia: The Return of the Great Game, Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010].

[ix] The BRICS is an acronym first used by the investment firm Goldman Sachs in 2003 (as the BRIC). Taking their rapid economic development, Goldman Sachs predicted that these economies are going to be wealthier by 2050 than the world’s current economic powers.

[x] About the foreign policy of Russia in the 21st century from the Western perspective, see in [Robert Legvold (ed.), Russian Foreign Policy in the 21st Century and the Shadow of the Past, New York: Columbia University Press, 2007; Roger E. Kanet (ed.), Russian Foreign Policy in the 21st Century, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011].

[xi] About this issue, see in [Richard Pipes, Survival is not Enough: Soviet Realities and America’s Future, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1984].

[xii] Robert Legvold, “The Russian File: How to Move Toward a Strategic Partnership”, Foreign Affairs, July/August 2009, 78−93.

[xiii] World Resource Institute: http://www.globalforestwatch.org/english/russia (2009).

[xiv] About the post-Cold War 1.0 geopolitics of Russia, see in [Срђан Перишић, Нова геополитика Русије, Београд: Медија центар „Одбрана“, 2015]. About the new Cold War 2.0, see in [Robert Legvold, Return to Cold War, Cambridge, UK−Malden, MA: Polity Press, 2016].

The Reported Russian Drone Incursions Into Poland Might Have Been Due To NATO Jamming

Guest Post by Andrew Korybko

It’s unlikely that Russia would risk rallying the West around a no-fly zone over Ukraine by staging a deliberate provocation against Poland or even just carrying out a recon mission in NATO airspace.

Poland claimed to have shot down several Russian drones on Wednesday morning that reportedly crossed into its airspace during the latest large-scale strikes against Ukraine. This occurred amidst the ongoing Polish, Lithuanian, and NATO drills involving 30,000 Polish troops and just ahead of the upcoming Russian-Belarusian Zapad 2025 drills. Some therefore suspect that this was either a deliberate provocation by Russia or a botched recon mission, but it might have just been due to NATO jamming.

It was recently argued that “There Might Be More To The Von Der Leyen-GPS-Russia Hoax Than Scoring Cheap Infowar Points” after the dramatic claim that Russia supposedly jammed her plane while it attempted to land in Bulgaria was debunked by Sofia itself and Western media. The alternative theory put forth was that this false narrative was meant to justify aggressive signals jamming in Kaliningrad, though this could also be directed towards Belarus given its hosting of the upcoming Zapad 2025 drills.

Such interference might have thus caused Russian drones to veer off course into Poland during the latest large-scale strikes against Ukraine. Aggressive signals jamming could also precede implementation of reported plans for imposing a no-fly zone over at least part of Ukraine in connection with the West’s security guarantees for that country. Although nowhere as foolproof as patrols over Ukrainian airspace and authorizing NATO-based Patriots to protect its skies, it would carry much less of an escalation risk.

Moreover, if NATO expected that its speculative signals jamming – possibly ramped up after the von der Leyen-GPS-Russia hoax, which might have been timed to coincide with the upcoming Zapad 2025 drills – would cause Russian drones to veer off course, then this might be part of a preplanned escalation. The objective could be to rally support for the abovementioned no-fly zone proposal or even begin the gradual process of implementing it on the pretext of “proactive defense” in light of this incident.

Over 3,5 years into the special operation, Russia would have by now presumably gamed out everything that could realistically follow the scenario of several of its drones crossing into Poland, with policymakers thus likely being aware that this could be exploited to advance the no-fly zone plot. The aforesaid insight accordingly reduces the odds that this was a deliberate provocation or a botched recon mission, either of which would have probably been carried out in force to make the cost-benefit tradeoff more worthwhile.

This is a similar logic as what was recently shared in this analysis here arguing that Russia probably didn’t deliberately target the Cabinet of Ministers building in Kiev so as to avoid fueling the no-fly zone plot. While that particular incident might have been randomly caused by drone debris, the latest one could have been planned to a much greater degree if NATO jamming was indeed responsible as conjectured. It remains to be seen, however, whether Poland will participate in any no-fly zone over Ukraine as a result.

Former President Andrzej Duda recently revealed that Zelensky tried to manipulate Poland into war with Russia over November 2022’s Przewodow incident, which he refused to fall for, while his successor Karol Nawrocki pledged ahead of the second round not to deploy troops to Ukraine. This policy continuity, which aligns with Poles getting fed up with Ukrainian refugees and this neighboring conflict, could foil NATO’s plans to manipulate Poland into this even though it might still agree to ramp up signals jamming.

Editors Note: If Russia is going to attack NATO proper it won’t do it with a couple dozen UNARMED drones. These drones were recon drones, not armed attack drones. Their primary mission is to distract air defenses away from the drones that are armed, all of which were sent against Ukraine. With all of the radar and GPS jamming being done on the borders in the warzone is it any wonder that a few veer off course?

This is why I didn’t jump on the hype bandwagon the other night when this was going on. My God given instincts told me it was a nothing burger because when Russia does attack NATO and the US it will be with hypersonic weapons, kinetic energy weapons and nukes, not unarmed drones. It will be MASSIVE and done in coordination with Iran, China, N. Korea, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, Mexico and more.

I believe that day is rapidly approaching! Prayed up and prepped up, time is short!

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Free Ebook on Spiritual Warfare

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

How Crypto Could Devalue US Debt: A Shocking Revelation

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED !!! CRYPTO is a US GOVERNMENT mechanism to devalue the $$$ & erase DEBT Putin’s advisor Kobyakov: The U.S. has devised a crypto scheme to erase its massive debt at the world’s expense. “The U.S. is now trying to rewrite the rules of the gold and cryptocurrency markets.

Remember the size of their debt—35 trillion dollars. These two sectors (crypto and gold) are essentially alternatives to the traditional global currency system. Washington’s actions in this area clearly highlight one of its main goals: to urgently address the declining trust in the dollar.

As in the 1930s and the 1970s, the U.S. plans to solve its financial problems at the world’s expense—this time by pushing everyone into the “crypto cloud.” Over time, once part of the U.S. national debt is placed into stablecoins, Washington will devalue that debt.

Put simply: they have a $35 trillion currency debt, they’ll move it into the crypto cloud, devalue it—and start from scratch. That’s the reality for those who are so enthusiastic about crypto.”

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Free Ebook on Spiritual Warfare

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

Ukraine “sanctioning” Hungary and Slovakia with terror and military provocations

Zelensky believes his country has the right to punish countries that cooperate with Russia.

Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.

Ukraine’s deliberate and unjustified provocations against sovereign European countries that refuse to support it in the current war are becoming one of the biggest sources of tension in recent times. Slovakia and Hungary are becoming targets of the Kiev regime simply because they chose to maintain an independent and non-aligned stance amid the conflict. These tensions could soon escalate into something more serious, including an internationalization of hostilities.

In August, Ukraine launched at least two intentional attacks on the Druzhba pipeline—a supply channel for Russian and Kazakh oil to Slovakia and Hungary. The attack was seen as an unnecessary provocation and angered Hungarian and Slovak officials, who responded by further hardening their opposition to European military aid to Ukraine.

These provocations are nothing new. Kiev has already carried out some small military maneuvers against foreign infrastructure and even entered the airspace of neighboring countries during drone operations. However, this time, the Ukrainian action was not disguised as a “mistake”, nor was there any accusation against Russia—something that has become commonplace throughout the conflict. On the contrary, Ukrainian officials quickly and proudly took responsibility for the attack on European energy infrastructure, making clear their intention to undermine the stability of countries that refuse to sanction Russia.

Not only that, but illegitimate Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky described the attacks as “sanctions” against Hungary and Slovakia. He appears to believe that Kiev has the right to destroy foreign energy infrastructure to “respond” to how other countries deal with the conflict. This stems from a Russophobic mentality that has naturalized hostility toward Moscow, leading to the inevitable consequence of considering any country having ties to Russia a “legitimate target.”

Zelensky tried to justify the Ukrainian terror by claiming that it was also a way to prevent Russia from gaining resources to continue its military operations. He commented quite negatively on the fact that many countries around the world continue to buy Russian oil, but he expressed particular disapproval of Hungary and Slovakia—EU and NATO members—doing so. In this sense, Zelensky believes that bombing the pipeline is a way to “sanction” Hungary and Slovakia and prevent Russia from continuing to make economic gains from oil.

“Among others, there are two countries [cooperating with Russia], we know that these are Hungary and Slovakia (…) [Ukrainian attacks] reduce the possibilities of [Hungary and Slovakia] obtaining the corresponding oil (…) Therefore, you see, Ukraine has found these types of sanctions.” he said.

A curious detail is that Zelensky’s words were said during a joint conference with French President Emmanuel Macron. Both leaders met on the eve of the summit in which 26 countries (mostly NATO) committed to sending “peacekeeping” troops to Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire—something Russia has repeatedly condemned and described as intolerable. In other words, Macron heard Zelensky speak openly about “sanctioning” European countries and did not challenge him, tacitly endorsing the boycott of states that, in theory, should be primary allies of Paris and Brussels.

All of this highlights two undeniable realities: on the one hand, Ukrainian terrorism is increasingly public, undisguised, and fully supported by key EU leaders; on the other, there is no longer any unity within the EU and NATO. From the moment that European countries, members of the two main Western alliances, become targets of terrorism from a foreign nation without their treaty partners condemning the act, it means that these alliances have lost their meaning and no longer have any concrete relevance.

Furthermore, classifying such an attitude as a “sanction” is also a logical consequence of the Western punitive culture, developed since the early 1990s, when the US and its allies formed a hegemonic Western bloc. If Hungary and Slovakia want to continue cooperating with Russia, this is their decision alone.

Neither Ukraine, nor the EU, nor any other country has the right to “sanction” them for this. “Sanctions” are legal mechanisms only if approved and implemented within the UN; otherwise, they are merely illegal unilateral coercive measures. Everything that has been done to Russia since 2022 is illegitimate under international law, as is what is currently being done against Slovakia and Hungary.

Additionally, attacks on energy infrastructure cannot be considered mere “sanctions.” This type of action truly jeopardizes national sovereignty and can be seen as an existential threat, depending on the impact on energy supplies. Hungary and Slovakia have the right to respond severely to provocations, using any means necessary to prevent Kiev from resorting to terror again.

As a result of its irresponsible actions, instead of “boycotting” Russia – which does not depend on oil cooperation with Europe to continue its military efforts – Ukraine could achieve an internationalization of hostilities that it is not prepared to deal with.

You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

infobrics.org

The SCO & BRICS Play Complementary Roles In Gradually Transforming Global Governance

Guest Post by Andrew Korybko

The processes that are unfolding will take a lot of time to complete, perhaps even a generation or longer, so expectations of a swift transition to full-blown multipolarity should be tempered.

The recent SCO Leaders’ Summit in Tianjin drew renewed attention to this organization, which began as a means for settling border disputes between China and some former Soviet Republics but then evolved into a hybrid security-economic group. Around two dozen leaders attended the latest event, including Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who paid his first visit to China in seven years. Non-Western media heralded the summit as an inflection point in the global systemic transition to multipolarity.

While the SCO is more invigorated than ever given the nascent Sino-Indo rapprochement that the US was inadvertently responsible for, and BRICS is nowadays a household name across the world, both organizations will only gradually transform global governance instead of abruptly like some expect. For starters, they’re comprised of very diverse members who can only realistically agree on broad points of cooperation, which are in any case strictly voluntary since nothing that they declare is legally binding.

What brings SCO and BRICS countries together, and there’s a growing overlap between them (both in terms of members and partners), is their shared goal of breaking the West’s de facto monopoly over global governance so that everything becomes fairer for the World Majority. To that end, they seek to accelerate financial multipolarity processes via BRICS so as to acquire the tangible influence required for implementing reforms, but this also requires averting future domestic instability scenarios via the SCO.

Nevertheless, the BRICS Bank complies with the West’s anti-Russian sanctions due to most members’ complex economic interdependence with it, and there’s also reluctance to hasten de-dollarization for precisely that reason. As for the SCO, its intelligence-sharing mechanisms only concern unconventional threats (i.e. terrorism, separatism, and extremism) and are hamstrung to a large degree by the Indo-Pak rivalry, while sovereignty-related concerns prevent the group from becoming another “Warsaw Pact”.

Despite these limitations, the World Majority is still working more closely together than ever in pursuit of their goal of gradually transforming global governance, which has become especially urgent due to Trump 2.0’s casual use of force (against Iran and as threatened against Venezuela) and tariff wars. China is at the center of these efforts, but that doesn’t mean that it’ll dominate them, otherwise proudly sovereign India and Russia wouldn’t have gone along with this if they expected that to be the case.

The processes that are unfolding will take a lot of time to complete, perhaps even a generation or longer, due in no small part to leading countries like China’s and India’s complex economic interdependence with the West that can’t abruptly be ended without dealing immense damage to their own interests. Observers should therefore temper any wishful thinking hopes of a swift transition to full-blown multipolarity in order to avoid being deeply disappointed and possibly becoming despondent as a result.

Looking forward, the future of global governance will be shaped by the struggle between the West and the World Majority, which respectively want to retain their de facto monopoly and gradually reform this system so that it returns to its UN-centric roots (albeit with some changes). Neither maximalist scenario might ultimately enter into force, however, so alternative institutions centered on specific regions like the SCO vis-à-vis Eurasia and the AU vis-à-vis Africa might gradually replace the UN in some regards.

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Free Ebook on Spiritual Warfare

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

PayPal Link

SCO+ Summit 2025 – Towards a New Global Reality. Towards A Multipolar World Order?

What the 20th Century was to the West — the next 100 Years will be to the Global South *Editors note* That’s assuming we have 100 years left, we don’t. Time is short! That being said the power structure of the world has shifted from the West to the East, just I’ve been saying for years! JS

By Dr. F. Andrew Wolf, Jr. Reposted with permission by globalresearch.ca

History will record the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Tianjin, China this year as a pivotal moment in the evolution towards a new world order.

The SCO’s burgeoning role as a critical player in the development of a multipolar world was demonstrated this week. It illustrated the Global South’s solidarity with its defining principles: the recognition of sovereignty, non-interference and a rebuttal to the West’s hegemonic model of globalization under the guise of ‘liberal democracy’.

Significance of the event was also connoted through its symbolism —its proximity to the September 3 military parade in Beijing, marking not just the end of World War II but the 80th anniversary of China’s victory in the Sino-Japanese War.

Russian President Vladimir Putin was conspicuous as an omnipresent figure at both the summit and parade events – carrying both symbolic weight and strategic meaning.

Moscow continues to advance its role as a reliable interface between nations across Asia and the Middle East – a role of consequence, especially today, given the shifting center of gravity in geopolitical affairs toward Asia and the Global South.

The Russian president’s remarks at the summit were characteristic of his vision of the future; he reiterated the import of adopting and implementing the SCO Development Program through the remainder of the decade. It defines the group’s strategic path towards establishing a carefully-conceived foundation for orchestrating economic and infrastructure initiatives.

Perhaps of equal significance was Moscow’s enthusiastic support for Beijing’s proposal to establish an SCO Development Bank. In addition to financing infrastructure projects, it would assist member countries in reducing their dependence on Western financial institutions and lessen the impact of Western sanctions – pressures which – with varying degrees of severity — Russia, China, Iran, India and others continue to experience.

The imagery from China indicates how the Russian president’s attendance at the summit carried both concrete and symbolic significance: As occurred previously in May, Moscow and Beijing continue to signal their determination to defend historical – not revisionist – truth.

The arrival in Tianjin of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi brought into specific relief New Delhi’s strategic flexibility and willingness to revisit and advance its relationship with China. In the face of unmitigated pressure from US President Donald Trump, the visit amounted to a definitive statement of India’s shift from historical non-alignment to strategic autonomy.

Modi’s talks with Xi Jinping – his first visit to China in seven years – symbolized their intent to resolve differences. Their continuing border dispute notwithstanding, the countries signaled a willingness to remove obstacles – and move closer. 

Xi remarked to the Indian prime minister that true ‘normalization’ between their nations had actually begun last year at the BRICS summit in Kazan, when both nations deescalated a tense situation. The two sides should “not let the border issue define the overall China-India relationship,” Xi said, adding that economic development should be their main focus.

Modi, referring to relations with Beijing as a ‘partnership’, announced the resumption of direct flights and even voiced an intent to reduce India’s trade deficit with China. 

A priority for India lies in multilateral relationships that augment a multipolar system concerning geopolitical affairs. New Delhi has consistently defended its right to pursue a multi-directed, autonomous foreign policy, viewing Global South initiatives (e.g. SCO and BRICS+) as pivotal in strengthening its sovereignty, pragmatism of strategic autonomy and global relevance.

While India attempts to eschew diplomatic issues with the US, its message is categorical: New Delhi will not accept ‘bullying’, especially with issues impacting national and regional priorities.

The symbolism of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, also being present at the gathering, was evident. The leader of a NATO-member state attending the SCO summit connoted to the Western alliance that Ankara intends to assert a more sovereign, self-defined foreign policy. 

This reflects Türkiye’s concept of ‘strategic flexibility’, in which the SCO is viewed as more than a forum for regional cooperation; rather, it is a platform for extending Turkish influence and securing access to key assets – from transport corridors to energy markets.

The Tianjin summit welcomed as well the presidents of Belarus, Iran and Pakistan along with Malaysia, Armenia and Azerbaijan signaling their interest in full membership. The wide geographical mix of attendees illustrates that the SCO is moving beyond Eurasia — developing toward a nucleus of an alternative global order.

The Tianjin Declaration, delineating the principles uniting SCO member states was a pivotal outcome of the summit – delineating non-interference in internal affairs, respect for sovereignty, rejection of the use or threat of force and opposition to unilateral sanctions as instruments of coercion. It expressed the common vision of the organization.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov commented:

“The main outcome of the SCO and SCO+ summits is the shared determination to uphold our rights, without yielding to provocations, in full compliance with international law, the UN Charter, and the principles of the international monetary, financial, and trade systems – the very principles once promoted by the West itself.”

The summit in China manifested more than imagery and words – it confirmed the reality of a multipolar world order – a concept Putin has advanced for years. One thing is certain — it can no longer be treated theoretically. The SCO has given ‘multipolarity’ institutional integrity – steadily expanding, gaining influence and authority throughout the Global South.

The organization is reviewing applications from some ten countries seeking observer or dialogue partner status – indicating a burgeoning interest in the SCO as an alternative center of power in geopolitical affairs.

And one must not overlook rising interest in the SCO from the Arab world. Bahrain, Egypt, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE are already SCO dialogue partners – nations central to the Middle East’s energy and investment hierarchy. This indicates that a new geopolitical axis linking Eurasia and the Middle East is becoming a reality – with the SCO emerging as a viable alternative to the West’s hegemonic model.

The SCO today is no longer a regional structure; rather, it is a strategic center of gravity in geopolitical affairs. What was once disparaged by the West as a mere ‘regional club’ has matured into a meaningful platform for the Global South – a geopolitical entity with expanding membership, burgeoning economic vigor and a shared political horizon – a new political reality.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.

F. Andrew Wolf, Jr. is director of The Fulcrum Institute, a new organization of current and former scholars, which engages in research and commentary, focusing on political and cultural issues on both sides of the Atlantic. After service in the USAF (Lt.Col.-Intel) Dr. Wolf obtained a PhD-philosophy (Wales), MA-theology (Univ. S. Africa), MTh-philosophical theology (TCU-Brite Div.). He taught philosophy, humanities and theology in the US and S. Africa before retiring from university.

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Free Ebook on Spiritual Warfare

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

PayPal Link

Kiev Regime Has Officially Declared War on Russia. On Whose Behalf? Zelensky is a “Proxy President”

By Drago Bosnic

In his speech on the occasion of the so-called “Independence Day” on August 24, the Neo-Nazi junta frontman Volodymyr Zelensky made numerous promises. He started out by praising the infamous Maidan coup that brought NATO’s Nazi puppets to power in former Ukraine. His following line was the “unwavering determination to restore 1991 borders”, where he mentioned “our Donetsk, our Lugansk, our Crimea” and “reminded everyone that all of this is Ukraine”. Zelensky stated that he believes “Ukraine can achieve this — achieve peace, peace across all its land”. The Kiev regime frontman praised his forces, bragging about “truly stopping the second army of the world” and supposedly “destroying the myth of the invincible Russian army”.

These ludicrous claims come at a time when leaked data shows that the actual ratio of losses for the Neo-Nazi junta forces is now worse than 13:1 and that they’ve lost close to two million men, most of whom are forcibly conscripted. Worse yet, they’re now even being killed by the most radical Nazi units whose sole raison d’être is to prevent their retreat “by any means necessary” in unwinnable firefights with the advancing Russian military. Mind you, the personnel in these so-called “barrier detachments” aren’t even fighting the “evil Russians”, but are only waiting to see who’s trying to retreat among forcibly conscripted Ukrainians and then proceed to shoot them, as evidenced by verified combat footage. Is this really a “struggle for freedom”?

Well, Zelensky claims it is. Interestingly, he also mentioned the failed Kursk oblast (region) incursion as if it were something positive. Even more interestingly, Zelensky stated that “no one can forbid us [long-range] strikes [deep within Russia], “because they deliver justice”. He also mentioned the so-called “Operation Spider Web”, which was a series of sabotage attacks on Russian strategic aviation. The Trump administration just decided to send ERAMs (Extended Range Attack Munitions) that should be delivered in the next six weeks. The United States insists that they’ve “put limitations in place” on how these weapons would be used, supposedly “to prevent uncontrollable escalation”. Well, how does one reconcile that with the promises Zelensky made in his speech?

In fact, he also stated that “this is Ukraine now” and that “this Ukraine will never again in history be forced into the shame that the ‘Russians’ call a ‘compromise’”. In other words, the talks between President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump were all “for nothing”, according to Zelensky. This comes after Vice President JD Vance stated that Moscow supposedly “made significant concessions” during these talks. Obviously, both of these things cannot be true at once. If Zelensky’s idea of a “just peace” is to “completely defeat” Russia, this isn’t a concession, but a demand that the Kremlin capitulates. What reason would the latter have to accept such terms? Is the Russian military losing 13:1 and with nearly two million casualties?

However, while he keeps talking about the so-called “just peace”, Zelensky is only promising more war (obviously, not for himself, but for hundreds of thousands of forcibly conscripted Ukrainians). He also insisted that “our future will be up to us alone” and that “the world knows it and respects it, respects Ukraine, and accepts Ukraine as an equal”. Zelensky is a comedian and this would certainly be a laughing matter if millions of lives weren’t at stake (possibly billions if we consider the fact that the chances of uncontrollable escalation are still there, precisely thanks to extremist regimes such as the Neo-Nazi junta). And yet, he continued with nonsensical statements about the supposed “respect for Ukraine” and its alleged “rightful place at the table”.

“Ukraine can truly gather and unite the world’s leaders in a single day. Ukraine, with which America and the whole world want to jointly produce drones. Ukraine, which restored unity between Europe and the US and is now the foundation of this alliance. Ukraine, which stands firm and can defend itself. Therefore, Ukraine is heard, Ukraine is counted, Ukraine is listened to. Its place is at the table; it is not told, ‘Wait outside.’ It is told, ‘The decision is yours alone,’” Zelensky said with a straight face.

He also claimed that “both the US and Europe agree: Ukraine has not yet won, but it certainly will not lose” and that “Ukraine is recognized — not as a poor relative, but as a strong ally”. Zelensky is insistent that “this is what the ‘coalition of the willing’ is about” and that “Ukraine will achieve lasting peace because it will receive security guarantees so strong that no one in the world will ever again even think of attacking Ukraine”. He never revealed who would (or could) give such guarantees, but given his previous statements about nuclear weapons, this should certainly be taken as a potentially serious threat. The main takeaway of this year’s “Independence Day” speech is that Zelensky just raised the stakes and effectively declared total war on Russia.

It should be noted that these statements aren’t mere rhetoric. On August 25, only a day after his speech, the Neo-Nazi junta unveiled a new, longer-range, land-attack version of the R-360 “Neptune” cruise missile, itself a copy of the Soviet-era turbojet-powered Kh-35. Colloquially known as the “Long Neptune”, the upgraded missile reportedly has a range of around 1,000 km, with no information on other specifications. Just like the Kh-35, the original R-360 “Neptune” is a subsonic anti-ship cruise missile with a range of approximately 200 km. In 2023, the Kiev regime revealed it fired a land-attack version of the missile, dubbed the “Neptune-MD” by some analysts. Its range was also reportedly 1,000 km (it’s possible this is the same missile).

This comes approximately a week after the Neo-Nazi junta revealed the FP-5 “Flamingo”, another land-based cruise missile which is effectively a crossover between the Nazi German V-1 flying bomb (essentially an early cruise missile concept) and the Soviet-era Tu-141/143 turbojet-powered drone. It allegedly has a range of 3,000 km and a massive warhead weighing around 1,150 kg. Albeit a very rudimentary design that could easily be picked up by Russian air defenses, it could give the Kiev regime means of mass terror strikes on Russian cities (after all, this was Nazi Germany’s concept of total war Zelensky is now threatening to unleash). The Russian military already destroyed most of the “Sapsan” program precisely for this reason.

Reposted with permission from globalresearch.ca

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Free Ebook on Spiritual Warfare

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

PayPal Link

« Older Entries Recent Entries »