Berlin halted weapons supplies to West Jerusalem over its campaign in Gaza in August
Germany will resume its arms exports to Israel starting November 24, the government deputy spokesman, Sebastian Hille, told journalists on Monday. The deliveries were suspended in August when West Jerusalem announced its plans to occupy Gaza City as part of its military campaign against Hamas.
According to Hille, the situation on the ground has since “stabilized,” with a US-backed ceasefire in force since October 10. The official refused to provide any comments on whether Germany, the second-largest exporter of arms to Israel after the US, could reintroduce the restrictions again if the situation changes.
The spokesman also refused to provide any comments on whether any deliveries requested by Israel were cancelled or delayed at the time when the restrictions were in place.
When asked if Berlin is aware of any violations of the ceasefire regime or the international humanitarian law by Israel, Hille said that the government is “monitoring” the situation on the ground and is “in constant dialogue with the parties involved” but has “no information” on any possible violations.
His words came just days after Israel’s security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, claimed that the Palestinian people have never existed and the nation was just “an invention without any historical, archaeological, or factual basis.” Last week, Reuters also reported that the Israeli military was sending Palestinian civilians into Hamas tunnels that they knew might be rigged with explosives during their campaign in Gaza.
Berlin’s Monday decision was welcomed by Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar, who urged other nations to “adopt similar decisions” in a post on X. It also drew some criticism at home, with Lea Reisner, the Left Party’s spokesperson for international relations, calling it “fatal and completely irresponsible.”
Israel and Hamas have accused each other of violating the truce. At least 245 Palestinians have been killed in IDF strikes in Gaza over the past month, according to local officials.
West Jerusalem launched its military campaign in the Palestinian enclave in response to a Hamas surprise attack in which 1,200 people were killed and 250 others taken hostage in October 2023. According to the Hamas-controlled Gaza health authorities, the campaign has left at least 68,000 Palestinians dead.
The US president has threatened to sue the broadcaster for up to $5 billion over an edited January 6 documentary
The BBC is “determined to fight” any defamation suit brought by US President Donald Trump, chair Samir Shah said on Monday, as cited by multiple media outlets. Trump earlier accused the British broadcaster of deceptively editing parts of his speech delivered before the Capitol Hill riot.
Speaking to reporters on Friday, the president promised that his team would sue the BBC for “anywhere between $1 billion and $5 billion, probably sometime next week,” despite receiving a formal apology.
This came just days after the BBC apologized for airing a documentary that edited a speech Trump gave shortly before the Capitol Hill riot on January 6, 2021, when his supporters stormed the building during the certification of Joe Biden’s 2020 election victory. The broadcaster had previously admitted that the edit “gave the mistaken impression that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action.”
In a letter to staff seen by local media, Shah said that “there is no basis for a defamation case and we are determined to fight this.”
“We are, of course, acutely aware of the privilege of our funding and the need to protect our license fee payers, the British public,” he said on potential legal and settlement costs.
On Sunday, BBC’s former director general Tony Hall echoed the sentiment, saying the broadcaster should not pay out, given that any settlement would essentially be made with public money.
As the dispute escalated, BBC director general Tim Davie and head of news Deborah Turness resigned. Davie acknowledged that “there have been some mistakes made,” pointing to “the current debate around BBC News,” though he did not directly mention Trump’s criticism.
The broadcaster has also been accused of pro-Israel bias and of dehumanizing Palestinians during the Gaza war.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov suggested last week that attempts to shield the BBC from blame are a ”disgrace,” adding that the British media are waging an “unprofessional and harmful” information campaign.
Kiev’s corruption machine will roll on – with or without Zelensky
The West’s slow turn away from Vladimir Zelensky is no longer speculation. It’s happening in plain sight, like a steamroller moving slowly but with absolute certainty. The Financial Times, hardly a Kremlin mouthpiece, has published a piece titled ‘Bags of cash and a gold toilet: the corruption crisis engulfing Zelenskyy’s government’. Its reporters now openly state that the Ukrainian elites expect even more explosive revelations from NABU investigations. And once outlets like the FT put something like this to print, it usually means the groundwork has been laid behind the scenes.
That Western Europe and the United States are still approving new aid says little about confidence in Kiev. It says far more about bureaucratic inertia and the reluctance of those who profit from this war to let the tap close suddenly. Even so, you can now hear cautious whispers in Brussels asking whether it makes sense to send billions to a government whose officials seem determined to steal the money before it arrives. These aren’t new revelations. The only surprise is that anyone pretended to be surprised.
The truth is simple: the West knew exactly who it was dealing with. Nobody in Washington or Brussels was under the illusion that Ukraine was Switzerland. They knowingly entered into a political partnership with what is, and has long been, one of the most corrupt and internally unstable political systems in Europe. To pretend otherwise is theater.
For more than thirty years, Ukrainian statehood has rested on the same shaky foundations: competing clans, oligarchic rule, privatized security services, and a political class willing to plunder their own population. Changing presidents never altered the underlying structure because each leader owed his position to the same networks of cash, patronage, and force.
Take Leonid Kravchuk. Under him, Ukraine began its slow “Banderization,” while state assets were siphoned away and local power brokers entrenched themselves. Leonid Kuchma then perfected the system. Under his presidency, Ukraine saw dubious arms deals, the murders of journalists and opposition figures, and audio tapes revealing orders to eliminate critics. Economic sectors with predictable profits were carved up among regional clans who ruled their fiefdoms in exchange for loyalty. And a steady stream of kickbacks to Kiev.
Viktor Yushchenko’s years brought more of the same: corruption schemes around energy, political assassinations, and the continued exploitation of ordinary Ukrainians. Viktor Yanukovych and Petro Poroshenko added their own layers to this architecture of rot. Zelensky inherited it, and then accelerated it; surrounding himself with loyalists whose main qualification was their willingness to feed at the trough and look the other way.
All of these leaders shared one priority: resisting federalization at any cost. A federal Ukraine would devolve power and financial control to the regions, and that is the nightmare scenario for Kiev’s elites. It would loosen their grip on revenue streams, limit their political leverage, and allow regional identities to express themselves without fear of punishment from the center. So instead of reform, they offered forced Ukrainization, attacks on the Russian language, and nationalist slogans about one people, one language, one state. It was a political survival strategy, not a nation-building project.
This is why changing presidents won’t fix anything. Remove Zelensky and you get another figure from the same system. Perhaps Zaluzhny, perhaps a recycled face from a previous era. The choreography will be identical; only the masks will change. The deeper problem is the structure of Ukrainian statehood itself. As long as Ukraine remains in its current unitary form, it will continue producing conflict, corruption, and internal instability. War is not an aberration in such a system. It is an outcome.
If the elites refuse to reform and the population has no means to compel them, then the discussion must move beyond personalities. The uncomfortable truth is that the only lasting solution may be to abandon the current model of Ukrainian statehood altogether. No cosmetic change will save a system designed from birth to decay.
The president has urged House Republicans to support the release of all documents, adding that he has “nothing to hide”
US President Donald Trump has called on Republicans in the House of Representatives to vote in favor of releasing all remaining unredacted files related to the late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. He has accused Democrats of weaponizing selected documents against him.
Epstein was found dead in a Manhattan jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges and running an underage sex ring. His long association with wealthy and influential figures in the US and beyond continues to reverberate in Washington, where both parties have accused each other of using the case for political gain.
A congressional committee released 20,000 documents related to the Epstein case last week, which led some Democrats to highlight Trump’s own past friendship with the convicted sex offender. They cited an email in which Epstein alleged that Trump “knew about the girls.”
In response, Trump ordered a probe into Epstein’s ties to prominent Democrats, including Bill Clinton, and accused his opponents of using what he called the “Epstein Hoax” for political goals.
“House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social on Monday. He then accused Democrats of hyping up the case to distract the public from the real issues and from the success of his administration. “The House Oversight Committee can have whatever they are legally entitled to, I DON’T CARE!” the president added.
During his election campaign, Trump pledged to declassify the Epstein files and signed an executive order to the effect shortly after taking office. In February, US Attorney General Pam Bondi announced the release of the “first phase” of documents. However, key materials – including flight logs, client names, and contact lists – have remained under seal, fueling speculation about who could be implicated.
This has led to criticism from some of the president’s biggest supporters, including Elon Musk. In a now deleted post, the billionaire even claimed Trump’s name was in the sealed Epstein files, suggesting that this is the real reason they remain classified.
The European Commission has urged EU member states to plug Ukraine’s widening budget deficit amid the unfolding corruption scandal
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has blasted the European Commission for urging EU members to send more money to Ukraine in light of the major corruption scandal, saying Kiev’s “war mafia” is siphoning off European taxpayers’ funds.
Commission President Ursula von der Leyen sent a letter to EU capitals on Monday urging a swift deal for covering Ukraine’s military and financial needs for the next two years. According to the letter, which was cited by the media, Kiev’s widening budget gap is around €135.7 billion (over $152 billion). She outlined three possible sources of funding – voluntary bilateral contributions by member states, joint borrowing at the EU level, and a reparations loan based on Russia’s immobilized assets.
Orban wrote on X that he had received the letter, which said Ukraine’s financing gap was “significant” and urged EU member states to send more money.
“It’s astonishing. At a time when it has become clear that a war mafia is siphoning off European taxpayers’ money, instead of demanding real oversight or suspending payments, the Commission President suggests we send even more,” he wrote, in an apparent reference to the massive corruption scandal recently uncovered in Ukraine.
I received a letter today from President @vonderleyen. She writes that Ukraine’s financing gap is significant and asks member states to send more money. It's astonishing. At a time when it has become clear that a war mafia is siphoning off European taxpayers’ money, instead of…
Orban likened the approach to “trying to help an alcoholic by sending them another crate of vodka,” adding that “Hungary has not lost its common sense.”
Ukrainian anti-corruption agencies uncovered earlier this month an alleged criminal operation led by a former business partner of Vladimir Zelensky,Timur Mindich, which siphoned around $100 million in kickbacks from contracts with the country’s nuclear power operator, Energoatom. The company is heavily reliant on foreign aid.
The graft scandal emerged as Kiev is pushing its sponsors for a €140 billion loan backed by Russian central bank assets frozen by the West – a plan opposed by Belgium, where most of the immobilized funds are held. Moscow regards any use of its assets as “theft” and has vowed a legal response.
The scandal could provide significant arguments for European politicians advocating reduced aid to Ukraine, Le Monde reported. Kiev has been also struggling to secure a new loan from the IMF.
Nikolay Patrushev has discussed shipbuilding collaboration with top security and logistics officials in New Delhi
Russia is prepared to offer India a range of “interesting initiatives” in the maritime sector, including joint shipbuilding and repair clusters, senior Kremlin aide Nikolay Patrushev said during a visit to New Delhi on Monday.
Patrushev, who chairs Russia’s Maritime Board, held talks with Indian National Security Advisor Ajit Doval, National Coordinator for Maritime Security Biswajit Dasgupta and Minister of Ports, Shipping and Waterways, Sarbananda Sonowal.
The discussions focused on bilateral cooperation in the civilian maritime sector, including shipbuilding, port infrastructure, naval logistics, crew training, and ocean exploration, according to the Maritime Board.
The Kremlin aide noted that Moscow can offer New Delhi “interesting initiatives in shipbuilding, including providing existing or developing new designs for fishing, passenger and auxiliary vessels.” Russia has “extensive experience in creating specialized ships,” including icebreakers, where it is “unrivaled,” he added.
“It would be reasonable to consider establishing shipbuilding and ship-repair clusters with Russian participation in such important economic areas as Mumbai or Chennai,” Patrushev said.
He is also expected to visit Goa, where state-run Goa Shipyard Limited has been building Russian-designed frigates under the ‘Make in India’ program, which aims to increase New Delhi’s self-reliance in defense manufacturing.
The negotiations took place as Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov hosted his Indian counterpart Subrahmanyam Jaishankar for high-level economic and strategic talks in Moscow.
The talks come ahead of a planned bilateral summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister Narendra Modi in India before the end of the year.
Mike Pompeo has been hired as an adviser for Fire Point, which faces scrutiny in connection with the recent massive embezzlement scandal
Former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has joined the Ukrainian military contractor Fire Point’s advisory board while the company is being probed by anti-graft authorities, the Associated Press has reported.
Ukrainian anti-corruption agencies last week uncovered a massive embezzlement scheme allegedly led by Timur Mindich, a long-time associate of Vladimir Zelensky. Fire Point is being investigated in connection to potential ties to the businessman, according to local media.
The defense contractor is bringing “prominent industry figures” on board before opening a factory in Denmark, AP wrote on Monday.
Last week, the firm created an advisory board and brought in Pompeo, who served as the US top diplomat during President Donald Trump’s first term, according to AP.
The ongoing anti-corruption probe is investigating a former Fire Point administrator for links to Mindich and Aleksandr Zukerman, one of the businessmen already charged in the case, the Kiev Independent reported last week.
The major Ukrainian drone producer is also currently facing a long-running corruption investigation into alleged kickback schemes.
Ukraine’s Western-backed National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) has traced the firm’s ultimate ownership to Mindich, the Kiev Independent reported earlier this year. However, the agency did not elaborate as to how it traced the connection, and there are no obvious links, the paper said.
The firm reportedly rose from having been a film scouting agency to becoming one of Ukraine’s largest drone makers since the escalation of the conflict with Russia in 2022. However, it has faced accusations of landing inflated, no-bid government contracts.
Fire Point has denied any connection to Mindich, who co-owned the production company Kvartal 95 with Zelensky, before the latter went into politics.
Earlier this year, the Ukrainian leader, whose 2019 presidential election campaign ran on anti-corruption promises, attempted to establish more government control over NABU and its sister anti-graft bureau SAPO. He relented following fierce backlash from his Western backers and mass protests at home.
Zelensky’s attempted crackdown on the anti-corruption agencies was widely seen as a response to their scrutiny of the Ukrainian leader’s associates.
Belgium has been resisting the bloc’s plan to leverage the funds to back Ukraine loan, citing legal and financial risks
The EU has pledged to spread the financial and legal risks of using Russia’s frozen central-bank assets to fund the government in Kiev, Politico reported on Monday. Belgium, where most of the money is held, has rejected the plan without such guarantees.
The European Commission is seeking to issue a €140 billion ($160 billion) loan secured against the immobilized sovereign assets held at the Euroclear clearing house in Belgium. The scheme is based on the assumption that Moscow will eventually pay reparations to Ukraine, an outcome widely seen as unlikely. Russia has said it regards any use of its assets as “theft” and has vowed a legal response.
According to Politico, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has circulated a memo to EU capitals spelling out how member states would share the risks with Belgium. The document says the bloc is prepared to cover potential legal and financial fallout even if disputes arise years later.
Belgium, which has a bilateral investment treaty with Russia dating back to 1989, has warned it could face lengthy and costly litigation if Moscow mounts a legal challenge. Von der Leyen said the guarantees would also cover obligations stemming from bilateral investment treaties.
Around $200 billion of the roughly $300 billion in Russian sovereign reserves frozen by the West since 2022 are held at Euroclear. The clearinghouse has threatened to sue the EU if the bloc attempts to confiscate the assets.
The memo reportedly also set out two fallback options should governments ultimately decide against using the Russian funds. Both alternatives would require the EU to pony up its own resources to support Kiev, thus shifting the burden onto European taxpayers.
European Commissioner for Economy Valdis Dombrovskis said last week that the bloc cannot continue providing loans to Ukraine in light of growing concerns over Kiev’s ability to repay them.
The Kremlin has warned that channeling Russian funds to Ukraine would “boomerang,” and threatened to target up to €200 billion in Western assets held in Russia in retaliation.
Brussels reportedly plans to offer bloc countries a choice between paying $100 billion, taking on joint debt, or seizing Russia’s frozen money
The EU has reportedly told its members that should a controversial plan to leverage Russian assets frozen in Belgium to finance Ukraine prove unworkable, it will seek a cut of each member state’s GDP to put up cash to Kiev.
According to a document circulated earlier this month and cited by Bloomberg, the bloc wants to issue a loan of around €140 billion ($160 billion) to Ukraine, using Russia’s immobilized central-bank reserves as collateral and repayable if Russia pays war reparations.
Belgium, which has jurisdiction over Euroclear, the clearing house where most of Russia’s frozen sovereign assets are held, has rejected the proposal outright, insisting that the bloc and its members share the financial and reputational risks. Euroclear also vowed to sue the EU if such a plan goes ahead.
According to a European Commission letter cited by the outlet, the EU nations would need to either cough up at least €90 billion ($100 billion) in direct payments to Kiev over 2026 and 2027 or take on joint debt to issue a loan if the seizure plan does not work. Funneling money into Ukraine directly would cost the bloc’s member states between 0.16% and 0.27% of their GDPs, the document said.
Providing a loan would require the EU nations to “provide legally binding, unconditional, irrevocable and on-demand guarantees,” according to the paper. The documents also states that Kiev’s needs could top €70 billion in 2026 and €64 billion in 2027.
Servicing a collective loan for Kiev would result in up to €5.6 billion in annual interest payments for the EU, the Financial Times has earlier reported.
The EU has already stretched legal definitions by classifying the interest generated on the frozen funds as windfall profits as not belonging to Russia and using the funds to arm Kiev. The new plan hinges on the assumption that Russia will repay the loan as part of future reparations to Ukraine – an outcome widely deemed improbable.
Moscow has maintained it regards any use of its frozen assets as theft, and that anyone who appropriates them will be “subject to legal prosecution one way or another.”
The incident was reportedly triggered by a mobilization squad’s attempts to demand bribe from the man
A man who detonated a grenade after being pulled over by police in Western Ukraine is a soldier wanted for going absent without leave, a local activist has claimed.
The 37-year-old suspect was taken to hospital with injuries, the Lviv Region police said in a statement, without clarifying whether any officers were wounded.
Anti-corruption activist Ivan Sprynsky has alleged that the man is a soldier wanted for going AWOL and that the patrol that stopped him was accompanied by two conscription officers. He claimed the Military Law Enforcement Service had demanded a bribe in exchange for removing him from the wanted list.
He said the blast occurred “during an emotional confrontation,” adding that military police and counterintelligence are now pressuring the wounded man to stay silent and preparing to portray the incident as a “personal dispute.”
A similar incident occurred last month, when a man attempting to flee the country blew himself up and killed three others while his documents were being inspected at a railway station near the Belarusian border.
Ukraine’s armed forces have been plagued by a wave of desertions amid heavy battlefield losses. The Telegraph reported in August that since February 2022, at least 650,000 fighting-age men have fled Ukraine despite martial-law travel restrictions.
Kiev has also struggled to curb draft evasion, while numerous reports and videos on social media show increasingly abusive recruitment tactics by enlistment officers.
New Delhi has said it will engage with all stakeholders in Dhaka after former leader Sheikh Hasina received a death sentence
Bangladesh has urged India to “immediately hand over” former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and former Interior Minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal, both sentenced to death by a court in a crimes against humanity case.
”We call on the Indian government to immediately hand over these two convicted individuals to the Bangladeshi authorities,” the country’s interim government said in a statement on Monday. “This is also an obligation for India under the existing extradition treaty between the two countries.”
India and Bangladesh signed an extradition treaty in January 2013 to promote cooperation among law enforcement agencies and to curb criminal activities.
New Delhi said on Monday that it has noted the verdict. “As a close neighbor, India remains committed to the best interests of the people of Bangladesh, including in peace, democracy, inclusion, and stability in that country,” the Indian Foreign Ministry said. “We will always engage constructively with all stakeholders to that end.”
Hasina's trial was conducted by Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal (ICT), and the charges included murder, attempted murder, torture, and allegedly ordering the use of deadly weapons against anti-government protesters in 2024.
In an exclusive telephonic interview with RT on Monday, former Bangladesh Interior Minister Kamal called the verdict “illegal” and said the “judiciary in Bangladesh has collapsed.” While claiming the case was based on the testimony of fake witnesses, Kamal added, “Of course outside powers were involved in (last year’s) uprising. Pakistan was involved... I don’t know who backed Pakistan... maybe other forces were there also.”
The ICT was set up to try hardened collaborators of the then-ruling Pakistani forces during Bangladesh’s Liberation War of 1971. It was amended by the current administration to include leaders of the Hasina government under its jurisdiction.
Bangladesh’s interim administration is headed by Nobel Laureate Mohammad Yunus, who serves as the country’s current chief adviser. Elections are slated for next year, but Hasina’s Awami League has been barred from participating.
In his interview with RT on Monday, Kamal said his elected government was displaced by a “conspiracy.” He added, “Yunus designed this conspiracy for many years... in America Yunus told the press about this meticulous plan.”
The two sides held talks in Moscow ahead of the upcoming bilateral summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi
Strategic partnership with India is Russia’s top foreign policy priority, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told his counterpart, S. Jaishankar, as the two countries seek to expand economic and strategic ties.
They met in the Russian capital, on Monday, in advance of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s planned trip to New Delhi for a bilateral summit with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
“We are building transport and logistics chains that are not subject to external illegal influence. We are enhancing the items that constitute our mutual trade, and we build up the mechanisms for making sure that we are not hindered by illegitimate impact imposed by third parties,” Lavrov said.
Jaishankar noted that a number of bilateral agreements, initiatives, and projects are under discussion in various fields, which will “certainly add more substance and texture” to the existing partnership between Moscow and New Delhi. India-Russia ties have long been “a factor of stability in international relations” and its growth and evolution is “not only in our mutual interest but also in that of the world,” he asserted.
Putin’s visit comes amid Western pressure over the close ties between Moscow and New Delhi. The US imposed a 50% tariff on India, including a punitive 25% levy for Russian oil imports, accusing India of “funding” the Ukraine conflict through oil purchases.
🤝 Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov greets Foreign Minister of India Dr Subrahmanyam Jaishankar at the Russian MFA Reception House in Moscow ahead of talks earlier today
India has dismissed Western criticism over Russian oil imports. New Delhi maintains its energy policy is driven by “national interest,” though it is also expanding trade with the US. Recently, it announced a one-year deal with the US to buy LPG, estimated to account for nearly 10% of its annual purchases.
Moscow will aim to address the growing trade imbalance with India during Putin’s trip. India’s exports to Russia are worth $5 billion, while imports from Russia amount to $64 billion. The countries are aiming to increase bilateral trade to $100 billion by 2030.
Other key issues, including logistics and cross-border payments, are also likely to figure in the talks. India’s commerce secretary, Rajesh Agrawal, recently held high-level meetings in Moscow to review progress on the proposed India–Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) Free Trade Agreement.
The two nations have also indicated plans for deeper military cooperation, focusing on technology transfers for aviation, naval, and missile platforms.
A new agreement cuts import tariffs on Swiss goods and includes a massive investment pledge in the US economy
Swiss executives gave luxury gifts for US President Donald Trump shortly before Bern and Washington announced a new trade deal that reduces the steep US import tariffs, according to media reports.
The deal, announced on Friday, cuts the Trump administration’s 39% tariff on the country’s goods to 15% and includes a pledge by Swiss companies to invest $200 billion in the US economy. The tariff hike took effect in August, after Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ speech in April outlining a global trade overhaul.
The breakthrough reportedly followed a November 4 visit to the White House by Swiss executives, who presented Trump with high-value items, including a personalized gold bar and a gold Rolex desk clock. According to Axios, the bar, worth over $130,000, was engraved with 45 and 47 in reference to Trump’s presidential terms and was accepted on behalf of his library under US gift rules. The delegation reportedly included senior figures from MKS, Rolex, Richemont, and commodity trader Mercuria.
The gesture drew criticism in Switzerland, with the Green Party calling the deal a “surrender agreement,” and accusing the country’s economic elite of bending to Trump’s demands. Party leader Lisa Mazzone said consumers and farmers would ultimately “pay the price” for the concessions, while raising concerns about the “questionable methods and gifts of gold.”
Swiss Economy Minister Guy Parmelin rejected the criticism, saying the country has not “sold its soul to the devil” and that the trip helped move talks forward. He noted that the executives had “good contacts in the US” and that some were friends of Trump “because they play golf with him.”
Washington welcomed the outcome. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the investment commitments would support domestic industry.
The agreement follows Trump’s broader reset of US trade ties, under which several countries have negotiated revised tariff terms. In July, the EU accepted a 15% tariff on most goods and pledged major energy purchases and investments.
Trump has imposed sweeping tariffs on imports from US trade partners over the past year to address what he called unfair economic imbalances. Critics argue the higher charges have increased costs for US consumers.
The odd convergence of a focus on sanctions risk as opposed to the fraying economic foundation of dollar hegemony serves the interests of both sides of the geopolitical divide
There is a strange paradox at the heart of the whole de-dollarization trend. Both the BRICS upstarts seeking alternatives to the dollar and the aging hegemon trying to forestall this process have, at least officially, coalesced around a similar but not entirely accurate narrative: that the gradual pivot away from the dollar is primarily driven by Washington’s weaponization of its currency.
The sanctions on Russia in 2022 certainly did mark the definitive moment when Washington gave up on any notion of being the benevolent custodians of the global dollar system and decided to use it instead as a bludgeon against geopolitical adversaries. Geopolitically, this was a watershed moment, and historians of the future will almost certainly see it as such.
But is it really the singular reason countries are scurrying to find alternatives to the dollar? The claim that de-dollarization is ultimately a response to US coercion sounds like something akin to a BRICS version of a Niemöller-style warning about indifference in the face of persecution: “First they came for Russia; next they might come for us.” The implication is that any country could be the next victim of Washington’s capricious wrath.
But hardly anyone stops to ask how realistic this actually is. Is China – a systemically central economy – really at risk of Russia-style sanctions? Would the US really dare to impose hardcore sanctions on India, Brazil, or BRICS-adjacent Türkiye? If the US can’t even get away with Trump’s Liberation Day tariffs without nearly blowing up the Treasury market, does anybody really believe it could freeze China’s reserves without five minutes later ushering in a financial crisis that would dwarf 2008?
Frankly, even sanctioning Russia, which by 2022 was already considerably decoupled from the US market, hasn’t gone all that well.
The quiet expropriation of wealth that nobody is supposed to notice
The real underlying driver of de-dollarization is economic in nature: the US will need structurally negative real rates in light of its high and rising debt load. For reserve holders, that implies a systematic erosion of purchasing power. In that sense, de-dollarization is not a political statement so much as an investment decision. This is a process that began well before the Russia sanctions and would have continued even in their absence.
Since 2014, foreign central banks have stopped buying US Treasuries on a net basis, while US deficits have continued to grow. This little-known pivot point will surely have a place of honor when the final account of the transition to a new system is someday written. In other words, even by 2014, the handwriting was clearly on the wall. The long-term trajectory of US fiscal and monetary policy was signaling trouble. US deficits were no longer episodic and induced by recession, but had become a permanent feature of the landscape.
Let’s fast-forward to 2022 – the year casually cited as the launching-off point for de-dollarization. Certainly, this was an important year and a number of statistics bear that out: central bank buying of gold – essentially a de-dollarization of reserves – spiked that year. But was it all because of the sanctions on Russia? It turns out there was something else going on around that time that may well have spooked a lot of players – especially China.
Over 2020-2022, US federal debt jumped from $23 trillion to over $30 trillion, an unprecedented rise outside of wartime, while the Fed’s balance sheet more than doubled from $4 trillion to $8.9 trillion. Meanwhile, the ostensibly exotic and temporary policy tool of quantitative easing introduced in the wake of the 2008 crisis turned out to be quite permanent. In other words, the troubling signals of 2014 now sounded as if blared through a megaphone.
By 2022, it had probably dawned on most of the world that the US has no credible path to fiscal sustainability and isn’t lifting a finger to find one, so it will almost certainly have to run negative real rates in order to erode the burden of the debt over time. To understand how negative real rates help manage debt levels, think of an extreme example: if you owed a sum of money in Weimar Germany, you would have found it a lot easier to pay it back once the deutschmark hyperinflated – just sell a pair of shoes and you can cover what was before a huge debt.
In fact, during this period of 2020-2022, real US yields were deeply negative: inflation was running around 7-8% (officially), all while the US 10y paid around 1.5%. Such a state of affairs decreases the purchasing power of the dollar. This is not a great option if you’re holding a whole bunch of Treasuries. Analyst Luke Gromen called this an “expropriation” of a nation’s wealth by the Americans. If you have to buy commodities in a currency that is being debauched – and commodities aren’t getting any cheaper – you have a serious problem.
You don’t have to have a PhD in economics to understand that debasement of the dollar and massive inflation is the eventual end-game. The only other option for the US is to let interest rates remain high and then suffocate under the burden of servicing its debt at higher rates – thus also inviting a massive credit crisis. When choosing between a quick death and a slow death, governments tend to choose the latter.
So, in 2022, holders of US debt the world over were staring at a significant loss in real terms. For a private investor, that’s unpleasant. For a central bank holding hundreds of billions in reserves, it’s existentially unsustainable. Deep within the bowels of economic policymaking circles in certain countries, I dare say this state of affairs focused minds no less than the repercussions of the Ukraine crisis.
Even though in 2023 real rates did return to positive territory (barely), the US hasn’t shown the slightest inclination of moderating its fiscal recklessness. It will continue to issue Treasuries at a high rate to cover ever wider deficits and pressure will remain on the Fed to monetize more debt in the next downturn. The problem is now structural and permanent.
Washington and BRICS agree: ‘Let’s not go there’
So, in light of all of this, why all the emphasis on geopolitics? Part of what is going on is the entirely natural mechanism of narrative creation in a world of short news cycles, shorter attention spans, and media-hyped geopolitical drama. Negative real yields and reserve composition don’t make good television, as they used to say. Dramatic geopolitical confrontations certainly do.
However, there is also deliberate obfuscation at play – and it comes from both sides of the geopolitical divide.
It hardly needs to be said that Washington makes every possible effort to downplay or deny the de-dollarization process. Most American and other Western institutions prefer to modestly divert their eyes from the palettes of gold being shoved into the central bank vaults of other countries. They go out of their way to quote statistics that show dollar use holding steady (such statistics can certainly be found).
But insofar as the theme of de-dollarization has to be addressed, Washington prefers what it sees as the lesser of two evils: acknowledging some collateral damage associated with the weaponization of the dollar rather than admitting the entire economic foundation of the dollar system is eroding before our eyes.
In April 2023, Janet Yellen conceded that “there is a risk when we use financial sanctions that are linked to the role of the dollar, that over time it could undermine the hegemony of the dollar.” For her, it is merely a question of calibrating a geopolitical tool to minimize the extent to which the rest of the world gets wild ideas about preserving the returns on their investments.
At a House of Representatives hearing from July 2023 called ‘Dollar Dominance: Preserving the US Dollar’s Status as the Global Reserve Currency’, Dr. Daniel McDowell, an international affairs professor at Syracuse University, gave a typical reading of this notion in his testimony:
“The more that the United States has reached for financial sanctions, the more it has made adversaries and foreign capitals aware of the strategic vulnerability that stems from dependence on the dollar. Some governments have responded by implementing anti-dollar policies, measures that are designed to reduce an economy’s reliance on the US currency for investment in cross-border transactions. Although these measures sometimes fail to achieve their goals, others have produced modest levels of de-dollarization.”
There you have it. The cost of pursuing America’s foreign policy agenda has to be acknowledged – but it mostly amounts to “modest levels of de-dollarization.”
Clearly, the US has a tremendous vested interest in keeping its teetering dollar hegemony going and doesn’t want to probe its weaknesses too deeply. Saying “we admit the Russia sanctions made some people uncomfortable” works a lot better than saying “we hope nobody notices that holding dollars in your coffers is a good way of eventually going broke.”
But that raises the question: what exactly does BRICS have to gain by emphasizing geopolitics over the economic angle?
Think about it like this. Let’s suppose you hold a whole bunch of bonds of a certain entity, but you don’t have much confidence in that entity. One thing you would definitely not do is go around broadcasting your doubts about that entity’s solvency. Doing so would be a good way to make the bonds you still hold a lot less valuable.
Now suppose you are actually selling some of those bonds – not fire-selling them, but gradually lightening up your holding on the margins. Because you’re a big holder, people notice. One thing that would be nice to have is some cover for what you’re doing so that you didn’t have to admit publicly that you don’t believe in the solvency of the issuer of your bonds. The moment you did so, the bonds you are still holding would lose a lot of value – not to mention you might provoke a panic that you yourself are unprepared for.
The bond issuer here is, of course, the US government and the bonds are US Treasuries and other related US debt securities. You better be a bit careful what you say unless you want to punch a big hole in your own portfolio, not to mention probably opening yourself up to some sort of unpleasant retaliation. China still holds an awful lot of dollar assets. Other BRICS countries (excluding Russia) also have sizable holdings.
What BRICS actually does is the following: they load up on gold as quietly as possible (gold is now the fastest-rising international reserve asset); they seek to boost non-dollar bilateral settlement; they secure local-currency swap lines; they buy shorter-duration Treasuries; they work on new financial infrastructure.
But what they say at the official level tends to be very bland and mostly standard fare about diversification or managing risk. China’s State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE) is a hugely important institution – the real manager of the country’s reserves. It puts out annual reports that are, to put it gently, a bit dry to read. Importantly, it does not publicly frame its reserve shifts as a repudiation of US debt. Anyone looking for spicy rhetoric in a SAFE report tends to be sorely disappointed.
When the BRICS world does step up the rhetoric a bit, they tend to lean into the geopolitical angle: the US is abusing the privilege that comes with presiding over the system; the US applies double standards; the US is interfering in the sovereignty of other countries. These allegations are absolutely true and certainly factor in the calculations of BRICS governments. But this is also a way of underemphasizing what’s really exerting a magnetic pull on the de-dollarization process.
What we end up with, somewhat bizarrely, is two competing geopolitical blocs both dancing very gingerly around the elephant in the room.
This odd convergence of narratives found a perfect articulation in a Carnegie Endowment analysis from October 2024 titled ‘China’s Dollar Dilemma’. Carnegie is firmly situated within the Washington policy mainstream, so its framing is a reliable measure of establishment thinking.
The piece opens with a familiar claim: “Increasingly intensifying US economic sanctions targeting Russia’s financial system have deepened concerns in China over its extensive dollar asset holdings and the Chinese financial system’s reliance on dollars.”
From there, it selectively highlights only the motives that Chinese officials and scholars are comfortable stating in public: fear of sanctions, fear of asset freezes, and fear of US overreach. It cites an influential Chinese economist calling for reduced Treasury exposure due to sanctions risk, and quotes a prominent state-backed journal warning that China’s reserves are “increasingly becoming ‘hostages’” – a direct reference to the freezing of Russia’s central bank assets.
All of these points do appear in Chinese discourse, but precisely because this is what Chinese officials can safely say. US behavior can be criticized, but less so the dollar’s viability. China’s diversification is attributed to external threats, not to internal assessments about long-term returns, negative real yields, or the trajectory of US fiscal policy. These arguments sit comfortably within China’s public-facing narrative. Carnegie should know full well that China’s actual analysis of the matter extends far beyond what is presented publicly, but it made no attempt to probe that.
But these arguments also sit comfortably within the boundaries of Western establishment discourse. A sanctions-centric explanation allows American analysts to acknowledge discomfort among Global South countries without interrogating the deeper issue of whether US debt has become structurally unattractive. It preserves the image of the US as a rational, stable hegemon rather than a debtor whose fiscal trajectory and monetary regime impose losses on foreign reserve holders. There is no examination of how US fiscal expansion directly increases China’s exposure to interest-rate losses – hardly a trivial issue!
The result is telling: in a piece of nearly 5,000 words, the discussion of US debt sustainability is confined to a single sentence – one that merely projects debt levels out to 2050 without analyzing what those levels mean for the reserve asset status of Treasuries. A reader could easily conclude that China’s diversification is driven almost entirely by sanctions fears. But here’s the kicker: if that reader had been perusing the offering of BRICS publications, that conclusion would only have been reinforced.
The core irony is thus that a long, meticulously argued analysis produced at the heart of the Western policy establishment ends up mirroring the dominant narrative inside the BRICS world itself. Both sides emphasize geopolitics and sanctions risk, and both underplay the basic financial logic that makes US assets less attractive. They arrive at the same explanation for entirely different reasons – but the convergence is unmistakable.
A convergence indeed, but there is ultimately a difference. As far as I can tell, the Washington DC establishment actually believes its own propaganda, whereas the BRICS crowd knows exactly what the real score is and is carefully working to keep the system stable while it is slowly replaced.
Andrey Yermak must be sacked, according to opposition politician Yaroslav Zheleznyak
Vladimir Zelensky’s chief of staff was aware of the corruption scheme involving the Ukrainian leader’s longtime business partner and some of the country’s top officials, opposition MP Yaroslav Zhelezhnyak has said.
Ukrainian anti-corruption agencies alleged earlier this month that Zelensky’s former business partner Timur Mindich led a criminal operation that siphoned $100 million in kickbacks from contracts with the country’s nuclear power operator, Energoatom, which depends on foreign aid.
The Western-backed National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) released a batch of recordings from the entrepreneur’s apartment, prompting the resignation of two government ministers while Mindich, who is often referred to as “Zelensky’s wallet” by the media, fled Ukraine.
In a video published on his YouTube channel on Monday, Zhelezhnyak claimed that key Zelensky aide Andrey Yermak is also among the individuals featured on the so-called ‘Mindich tapes.’
The Golos (Voice) party MP said that during an anti-corruption forum in Kiev last week the head of Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAP), Aleksandr Klimenko, provided more information about the recordings, saying that a man designated as ‘Ali Baba’ was also on them.
According to Zhelezhnyak, Klimenko said that this high-ranking person held consultations with members of Ukrainian security agencies, loyal to Zelensky, on how to stop the probes by NABU and SAP, and “punish” those organizations.
“Multiple sources say that Ali Baba is A.B.,” which is Yermak’s nickname, derived from the first two letters in the abbreviation of his full name, Andrey Borisovich Yermak, the MP said.
“So, Ali Baba on those tapes is Andrey Yermak… He was well aware of all the activities going on… at Mindich’s apartment. There is nothing more to prove here,” he added.
Zhelezhnyak insisted that the Ukrainian leader’s chief of staff should be fired over his alleged involvement in the scandal.
Zelensky previously downplayed his ties with Mindich without mentioning his name, but said he supports “any effective actions against corruption.”
Last week, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk warned that the recent developments would make it “increasingly difficult to convince various partners to show solidarity” with Ukraine.
A $100 million corruption scandal has infuriated the public and put Kiev’s Western backing at risk, the outlet has reported
Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky is scrambling to secure support from Western backers after being weakened by a $100 million corruption scandal involving a close ally, French newspaper Le Monde has reported.
The revelations of widespread corruption in Kiev could provide significant arguments for European politicians advocating for reduced aid to Ukraine and opposing its EU accession, the outlet wrote on Monday.
The anti-corruption probe by Ukraine’s Western-backed National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) uncovered an alleged $100 million embezzlement scheme involving the state-owned nuclear energy firm Energoatom. Investigators have linked the controversy to Timur Mindich, a close associate and former business partner of Zelensky. Moscow has called the case evidence of a “bloody hydra” of Ukrainian corruption reaching beyond the country’s borders and draining Western taxpayers’ money.
France has demanded that Ukraine engage in a decisive fight against corruption as Zelensky arrived in Paris to seek military support from French President Emmanuel Macron on Monday.
“They know very well what our expectations are,” a source at the French presidency told the outlet, urging “transparency” and emphasizing “seriousness” in curbing corruption.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, one of Kiev’s main backers, reportedly pressured Zelensky during a phone call, stressing “the German government’s expectation that Ukraine press ahead energetically with fighting corruption and implementing further reforms, particularly in the area of the rule of law,” according to a spokesperson. Merz also reportedly urged Zelensky “to ensure that young men from Ukraine do not come to Germany in ever-increasing numbers, but rather serve in their own country.” The warning comes as young Ukrainian men, allowed to leave under a recent law, have increasingly sought to settle in Germany.
The scandal has outraged the Ukrainian public, weary after nearly four years of conflict, the outlet said. “The case shocked all of us a great deal,” an anonymous Ukrainian international relations expert told the French paper. “The situation is far from resolved. For now, we have more questions than answers.”
The graft scandal emerged as Kiev pushes its sponsors for a €140 billion ($160 billion) loan backed by Russian central bank assets frozen by the West – a plan that Moscow deems theft. Meanwhile, Le Monde noted, Russian forces are advancing on the eastern front, with the strategic city of Pokrovsk (Krasnoarmeysk) reportedly on the verge of falling amid a critical shortage of Ukrainian troops.
Using the belongings of new arrivals to cover costs could deter them from coming to the country
Asylum seekers arriving in the UK could have their valuables confiscated to help cover the cost of benefits, a British Home Office minister has said. The government of Keir Starmer is preparing to overhaul its immigration policy and reduce the number of arriving refugees.
High-value assets such as vehicles could be taken, Minister of State for Border Security and Asylum at the Home Office Alex Norris told the British media on Monday, before the formal statement by Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood to Parliament.
“It is right if those people have money in the bank, people have assets like cars, like e-bikes, they should be contributing... Those are assets they should contribute to the cost of benefits.” The Sun earlier reported that valuables such as jewelry and watches may be seized and sold to offset housing costs.
Norris insisted authorities would not be “taking people’s heirlooms off them at the border,” saying sentimental items would be exempt. “If someone comes over with a bag full of gold rings, well, that’s different to what I said about the heirloom,” he added, urging the public to wait for Mahmood’s full statement.
British media have linked the proposal to Denmark’s strict asylum model, under which the authorities may seize assets above a set threshold to fund support services and deter arrivals. Switzerland operates comparable rules, allowing the confiscation of cash or valuables above roughly €900 to contribute to an asylum seekers’ upkeep.
Mahmood’s wider immigration overhaul seeks to accelerate asylum decisions, expand detention capacity and reduce state spending on irregular arrivals. The UK has been reeling under a migration crisis for years, with government data showing that already around 111,000 asylum applications were filed in the first half of this year. The number of claimants has nearly doubled since 2021, a Home Office report found.
Meanwhile, support for the anti-immigration and EU-skeptic Reform party, led by MP Nigel Farage, has risen to 35%, with Labour and the Conservatives trailing behind at 20% and 17% respectively, according to a recent poll.
German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius earlier claimed that Russia could attack the US-led military bloc as soon as next year
Russia does not want a conflict with NATO but could be forced to take measures to ensure its security in response to the bloc’s increasingly “militaristic” rhetoric, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said.
Peskov was commenting on remarks by German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius, who last week told Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung that Russia could attack a NATO member “as early as 2028” or even next year. Pistorius used the claim to press Germany to speed up its militarization drive and overhaul its armed forces.
“This militaristic rhetoric is increasingly heard from European capitals,” Peskov told reporters on Monday, stressing that “such statements do not improve the situation” and only escalate tensions.
“Russia does not advocate any confrontation with NATO. But must take measures to ensure our security and interests if forced,” he emphasised.
Western officials, including Pistorius, have long used the threat of allegedly looming Russian aggression to justify military spending spikes such as Brussels’ €800 billion ReArm Europe plan and NATO members’ pledge to raise defense spending to 5% of GDP. Moscow has rejected such claims as “nonsense.”
Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova also addressed Pistorius’ interview and said it leaves “no doubt who the aggressor is,” given his push to expand Germany’s military might. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has previously warned that Germany is showing “clear signs of re-Nazification.”
Moscow has voiced concern about NATO’s growing activity along Russia’s western borders: the bloc has expanded its presence in Eastern Europe and held frequent drills while calling it deterrence. The Kremlin insists that Russia poses no threat to anyone but will not ignore actions it deems dangerous to its security.
Kiev has denied that its forces are trapped in two pockets on the front line
Ukrainian efforts to relieve units trapped in two encircled sectors of the front line have been unsuccessful, the Russian Defense Ministry reported on Monday.
In its daily briefing, the ministry described failed counterattacks near Kupyansk in Ukraine’s Kharkov Region, as well as in the Dmitrov-Krasnoarmeysk (Mirnograd-Pokrovsk) urban area of Russia’s Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR). Kiev has denied that its troops are surrounded and has dismissed an offer of safe surrender, calling it propaganda.
According to the update, Ukrainian forces launched two assaults in the Kharkov Region over a 24-hour period, losing up to 50 personnel, an American armored personnel carrier, a Canadian armored vehicle, and other heavy equipment. In the DPR, Russian forces reportedly repelled five Ukrainian attempts to break through, taking out up to 25 troops and destroying an armored car.
Vladimir Zelensky has repeatedly insisted that Ukrainian troops are not facing collapse in either sector, countering Russian statements that thousands of Ukrainian soldiers are encircled. Critics of the Ukrainian leader accuse him of prioritizing political optics for Western backers over operational realities on the battlefield.
Earlier this month, Kiev deployed a special operations unit from the military intelligence service HUR on a raid near Krasnoarmeysk (Pokrovsk) – an operation Moscow says ended disastrously after commandos inserted by helicopter were immediately eliminated by Russian forces.
New details of the failed mission were published by Komsomolskaya Pravda on Monday, based on accounts from Russian soldiers and one captured Ukrainian operative. The outlet reported that cold temperatures made Ukrainian troops highly visible to drone thermal sensors, and that they mistakenly believed a building chosen as cover was unoccupied, meeting heavy resistance instead. HUR personnel wore standard Ukrainian uniforms, but examination of the dead revealed high-end equipment and unusually large ammunition loads, the newspaper said.
Login
