Trump’s foreign policy, outlined in the Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance, represents a bold shift in American power. By focusing on China and the Indo-Pacific, he aims to address what he sees as the biggest geopolitical challenge of the 21st century, believing that pulling back from other regions will be worth it.
Read moreCategory: Eastern Europe and Russia
News and Analyses of events in Eastern Europe and Russia
How Greenland Becomes the Icy Prize Trump Wants, Denmark Can’t Unlock, and the World Can’t Ignore
Trump’s idea is really stirring things up. It If the U.S. took control, it could turn the Arctic into a military area, angering Russia, which has a large fleet there. It could boost mining and possibly double Greenland’s economy in ten years, but it could also harm the environment—melting ice already releases 400 billion tons of water into the sea each year. Denmark could suffer, losing 1% of its economy tied to Greenland, which might lead to a nationalist reaction. Globally, it could make taking land seem acceptable again, weakening international rules. For Greenland, it could speed up the push for independence to avoid U.S. control, but without Danish financial support, its fishing industry wouldn’t be enough to survive.
Read moreStarlink in Bangladesh: The Intersection of Technology, Geopolitics, and Economic Goals
Starlink’s impact on Bangladesh could go in different directions. In a best-case scenario, it could help close the digital gap, connecting 20 million rural homes by 2030. This would boost freelance earnings by $5 billion by 2030 and increase GDP growth by 1.5% annually. However, there is also a risk that China could respond by pulling back from BRI projects, while India might tighten border security. Domestically, Starlink’s high cost could deepen economic inequality, making internet access even more of a privilege.
Read moreThe Legacy Western Media is a Tool of the Deep State Undermining Society
Governance becomes untenable when media prioritizes sensationalism over facts. The Iraq War provides a stark example. Legacy media uncritically amplified fabricated claims of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), with The New York Times running front-page articles based on anonymous intelligence sources. The truth was different: UN inspector Hans Blix found no WMDs before the 2003 invasion, yet by 2004, a PIPA study showed 57% of Americans still believed Iraq possessed such weapons—a testament to the media’s influence. The consequence? Over 4,000 US troops and 100,000+ Iraqi civilians perished, while trust in Western governance eroded. By 2007, only 19% of Britons trusted their government, per Ipsos Mori.
The media’s role in exacerbating racial tensions became glaring in the wake of the 2020 George Floyd riots. While outlets like CNN and The Guardian highlighted police brutality, they largely ignored the widespread rioting that caused $2 billion in damages, as estimated by AXA Insurance. The selective narrative deepened racial divisions; a Pew Research poll found that by year’s end, 73% of white Americans felt race relations had worsened, up from 44% before Floyd’s death. Rather than fostering understanding, the media amplified discord.
Read moreIndia’s Geopolitical Tightrope is Balancing the US and Russia Amidst a Shifting Global Order
India’s refusal to fully capitulate to US pressure is less a triumph of strategic autonomy than a desperate clinging to a crumbling status quo. By expanding its oil basket to 39 countries (up from 29), including Iraq and Nigeria, India dilutes its reliance on any single supplier—but this diversification is a Band-Aid, not a cure. The lack of a coherent energy strategy leaves India vulnerable to both American retaliation and Russian leverage, undermining its claims of geopolitical resilience.
Read moreHungary, the United Nations, Gender Politics, and the Soft Power of Liberal Western Elites
Hungary’s recent legislation is not an isolated act but part of a broader pushback against what Orbán calls “gender madness.” Since 2010, his government has enacted policies reinforcing traditional family values, including a 2020 constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and woman and restricting adoption to heterosexual couples. The 2021 Child Protection Act, which the new Pride ban builds upon, banned LGBTQ+ content in schools and media accessible to minors, drawing condemnation from the EU and UN alike.
Read moreA Tale of Trump, Zelensky, and the Theatre of the Absurd
Once upon a time, in a land not so far away, there was a man who believed he could play the piano with his pe… well, let’s just say it wasn’t his hands. This man, a former comedian turned wartime leader, found himself in a room with a man who once famously said, “You’re fired!” and another who wrote a bestselling memoir about hillbillies. The setting was the Oval Office, the stakes were global peace, and the outcome was, as one Ukrainian news site put it, “a grandiose failure.” This, dear reader, is the story of how Vladimir Zelensky, Donald Trump, and J.D. Vance turned diplomacy into a spectacle worthy of a Netflix special.
Read moreTrump-Putin Phone Call and the Ukraine Puzzle
In the short term, the Trump-Putin talks could lead to a ceasefire and the resumption of diplomatic efforts, such as the Minsk agreements, which have been stalled for years. However, a lasting peace will require addressing the root causes of the conflict, including Ukraine’s geopolitical orientation, the status of Crimea and the Donbas region, and the security concerns of both Russia and NATO. This is a Herculean task considering that there will be immense diplomatic pressure from the Europe on Trump Administration. However, it will test the diplomatic acumen of all parties involved in the war.
Read moreThe Role of Think Tanks in Legitimizing CIA-Backed Regime Change Operations
If history is any guide, these think tanks will continue to provide intellectual cover for future regime change operations. Perhaps tomorrow’s target will be Venezuela, where think tank reports have long painted Nicolás Maduro as an existential threat to regional stability. Or maybe it will be Iran again, where “experts” routinely warn about the dangers of its nuclear program, conveniently ignoring the long history of U.S. meddling in Iranian affairs. Wherever the next intervention occurs, one can be sure that a glossy think tank report will be there to justify it.
Read moreTrump’s Gaza Takeover and the Chaos That Will Follow
And then there’s Israel, which might be celebrating now but could soon regret this whole thing. Sure, the Israeli government loves a plan that involves fewer Palestinians in Gaza, but at what cost? If Hamas gets stronger, Hezbollah gets bolder, and international condemnation reaches new heights, Israel could find itself more isolated than ever. Even its European allies, who have been fairly tolerant of Israeli policies, might start pulling away. Because, let’s face it, even the most pro-Israel European leaders will struggle to justify a U.S.-led eviction of Palestinians. At some point, the international community might have to draw the line, and when they do, Israel could find itself in a diplomatic mess of its own making.
Read more