Our Friday News Analysis | What the World Reads Now!

Living Words of Saint Pope John Paul II | “Zionism means ‘Return to God ...”

We live in an age of tremendous material progress,
but it is also a time of unprecedented denial of God.

Entire philosophical systems and social, economic,
and political programs serve this purpose.

Why is humanity afraid?

Saint Pope John Paul II
Torino, Italy
13 April 1980

This week’s reflection: “Zionism means ‘Return to God, NOT Return to the Land”

Building the Bridge Foundation

Editor’s Note | Zionism – Return to God!

Zion's meaning extends beyond a single entity. It signifies ‘fortification’ and serves as the seat of power for both the ancient Kingdom of Israel and the [Spiritual] Kingdom of God.

• It also refers to Jerusalem, the ‘City of David,’ often overshadowed by its title as ‘the City of God.”
• Isaiah 52:1-2 calls it the “City of God,” where God's people become the “Light among nations.”
• Jeremiah 31:6 urges, “Arise, and let us go up to Zion, to the Lord our God.” Mount Zion symbolizes God's spiritual Kingdom, as Hebrews 12:22 notes: “you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem”—the New Jerusalem from Revelation 21:10-26, representing a ‘heaven on earth.’

van Kempen, Abraham A. Christian Zionism ... Enraptured Around a Golden Calf - 2nd Edition: Evangelicals Rediscovering New Testament Revelations (p. 16). (Function). Kindle Edition.

OUR WEDNESDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

YOU CAN'T INTEGRATE ISRAEL INTO THE MIDDLE EAST WHILE ISOLATING IT FROM PALESTINIANS

Israel cannot hold both ends of the stick – you can't continue the current policy in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, while promising an Abraham Accords expansion and Israel's integration into the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor

The signing of the Abraham Accords on the White House Lawn last year. Credit: Andrea Hanks

• Israel can't continue its current policy regarding the Palestinians and expect full regional economic integration and also deeper cooperation with additional countries, including in Europe. The strategic reality is more complex than election campaign slogans.
• The idea of "economic peace" and conflict management, presented over the years as an alternative to a political deal, has failed to create the desired breakthrough.
• Moreover, it's likely to distance Israel from regional integration rather than bring it closer.
• The promises of expanding the Abraham Accords and connecting Israel to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states are often repeated as if they were inevitable developments.
• However, there is no factual basis for this without altering policy.

Editorial | A Prayer Without End?

By Abraham A. van Kempen
14 August 2026

In the Monday News Analysis on August 10, 2026, I ruffled some feathers among many in Western Europe and North America. Only three unsubscribed, showing that most readers still condone my thoughts. Let’s continue to agree to disagree. How did I offend North Americans and Western Europeans, my main audience? I wrote a thought-provoking editorial that cast President Vladimir V. Putin in a positive light and ended with: “Much to the West’s dismay, President Putin ranks among the most respected, revered, and influential world leaders. He is admired everywhere, except in the West.” If you haven’t read it yet, click on the above link. On behalf of the Building the Bridge Foundation, I nominated Presidents Trump, Xi, and Putin to share the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize, not for their past actions (some call them ‘follies’) but for what they could achieve in the near future. After all, one destroys one’s enemies by becoming friends.

We don't live in a world of endless prayers, but in one of diplomatic failures and a power imbalance that threatens the Collective West's dominance. No single leader can dismantle the Blob, which Tucker Carlson in the video below calls the Deep State. I believe Trump, Xi, and Putin can unite against it, possibly using strategies from Commodore Steve Jermy (view the video below). I do not support destroying regions I love—Europe, Russia, the US, the Middle East (the region of my birth), East Asia, and, for that matter, the entire world.

Honestly, I am outraged and appalled by the war and by the Western fear-mongers who tout moral superiority, waving the Banner of Holly Goodness while portraying their enemies—not real enemies—as evil monsters, even calling them Hitler. What’s worse? Like mindless sheep, many in the West buy into their gobbledygook line, hook, and sinker. And what’s the result? The West, representing a unipolar autocracy veiled as liberal democracy, has fallen into the very graves it dug for those countries that seek freedom from Western hegemony and are aiming toward a multipolar world order. You’ll get the drift and grasp what I mean by reading my essay below: “When Morality Becomes a Weapon, Peace Becomes the Casualty.”

I’m once again up against the deadline. I’ll end this editorial with: Why Western Europe keeps producing weak leaders – Europe’s crisis is not a shortage of leaders; it is a shortage of leaders with memory, courage, and imagination.

Western Europe isn't lacking leaders but overproduces superficial politicians. Its leadership crisis stems from polished yet shallow figures with little historical memory, strategic vision, or the courage to pursue serious diplomacy when facing consequences.

I share a bleak story: governments rich in ceremony but poor in memory, fluent in slogans yet clumsy before history. They pose with flags, promise NATO steel, announce migration fixes, and speak of moral destiny; then stumble when consequences come.

Europe once had statesmen who understood power as more than just a press conference, but as memory with an edge, recalling borders, empires, betrayals, treaties, and wars. Today’s leaders seem trained in choreography rather than history: summit smiles, approved phrases, managerial shrugs. Europe thus drifts—armed but anxious, wealthy but fragile, righteous yet powerless. This is dangerous when those lacking depth wield power.

Creative diplomacy relies on imagination rooted in facts, not fear in formal language. It requires leaders who can read maps, recognize grievances, sense traps, and find common ground. Unfortunately, Europe often performs on grand stages, waving moral virtue while foundations crumble. The crisis isn't just weakness but a lack of leadership that remembers, shows courage, or accepts responsibility. A continent that forgets its history doesn't suddenly lose its way; it gradually cheers as the path beneath it vanishes.

Presidents Trump, Xi, and Putin have the Blob over a barrel. The Building the Bridge Foundation encourages them to become one in spirit to help heal a broken humanity.

Let’s fast-forward to a glorious future without wars.

Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin at Yalta brokering peace that turned out to be make-believe

To be continued on Monday, 17 August 2026.

With Every Good Wish to you, I am,

Sincerely yours,

Abraham A. van Kempen
Senior Editor

Building the Bridge Foundation, The Hague
A Way to Get to Know One Another and the Other

Remember! Diplomacy is catalytic—transformative —while military action is cataclysmic—destructive and catastrophic.

When faced with the options to be good, bad, or ugly, let’s build bridges, not burn them. After all, mutual deterrence reigns.

STEVE JERMY: THE SPIRIT OF WESTPHALIA: BRITAIN, FRANCE & GERMANY COULD HELP END THE NATO-RUSSIA WAR

Steve Jermy: Commodore (Rtd), Royal Navy. Naval commander, offshore energy CEO, strategic thinker. Author of Strategy for Action. Writes and consults on geopolitics, war, economics, and energy — and their intersection.

Steve Jermy urges Europe to rethink its Ukraine approach, viewing it as a NATO-Russia conflict on Ukrainian land rather than just a problem solved by boosting NATO's current strategy.

• This conflict is mainly driven by NATO’s expansion and Russia’s view that NATO near its borders is a threat. It also notes that NATO hasn't fulfilled its main role of maintaining European peace, and both the EU and NATO are locked in narratives that prolong the war.
• He cites NATO’s Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Ukraine records; America’s reluctance to support European security; Russia’s gains; Europe’s weak air defenses; and the economic impact of sanctions and energy disruptions.

His alternative suggests a Westphalia-inspired reset: Britain, France, and Germany should lead a new OSCE diplomacy, agree on Ukrainian neutrality, focus on arms control, reevaluate NATO, and shift Europe from confrontation to cooperation.

Watch the Video Here (40 minutes, 17 seconds)

Host: Lt. Col. Daniel Davis (Ret.)
Deep Dive
13 August 2026

When the Shield Becomes the Spark -- A heart-to-heart reckoning with Steve Jermy’s warning that NATO’s promise of peace may have become Europe’s path to peril.

Steve Jermy argues NATO has failed to keep Europe safe and contributed to the confrontation it now faces. He cites NATO expansion, ignored Russian warnings, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Ukraine, weak European defenses, and economic strains from sanctions and energy disruptions. His solution is a diplomatic reset: Europe’s major powers should stop outsourcing strategy to NATO, reconnect through the OSCE, accept Ukrainian neutrality, rebuild arms control, and pursue cooperative security before costs escalate.

Steve Jermy urges us to confront NATO's true role rather than just praise a theory. NATO seeks to safeguard Europe, but now Europe faces its worst war in generations. Many bear the cost as NATO pushes for more weapons, money, escalation, and belief in its strategy. Jermy’s main point: this is a NATO-Russia war fought on Ukrainian soil.

Here's why his argument resonates. He doesn’t just criticize headlines; he backs his point with evidence like NATO expansion, Russian warnings, and insights from strategists like George Kennan and Henry Kissinger, who warned eastward expansion could provoke Moscow. He highlights NATO’s failures—Kosovo sans UN approval, Afghanistan ending with the Taliban back in Kabul, and Ukraine, where NATO didn’t prevent war. European defenses also failed to shield Ukraine or Europe from Russian retaliation. Coupled with a weak military-industrial base and limited U.S. interest in another European conflict, the outlook is bleak. Rather than a peacekeeping force, it’s a confrontation machine that risks uncontrollable dangers.

Jermy’s warning shows institutions can survive failure by rebranding it, but individuals cannot. NATO can issue statements, officials can pose with flags, and experts can blame others, but Ukrainians need funerals to stop; Europeans need heat, food, work, and reassurance that their children aren’t heading toward a wider war to protect an alliance’s image. His reference to Westphalia suggests peace begins when power learns humility, not just through old diplomacy.

Jermy’s proposal is firm, calling for mercy and challenging NATO’s vanity. He urges Britain, France, and Germany to lead talks via the OSCE, accept Ukrainian neutrality, rebuild arms control, use confidence measures, and question if NATO still guarantees European peace or serves itself. His message: stop confusing escalation with courage and stop treating NATO as sacred. For Ukraine, Europe, and our future, build peace before more lives are lost.

WHERE THE CROSS DIVIDED: SCHISM, CIVILIZATION, AND THE EASTERN IDEA

A thousand-year fault line beneath the Russia-West conflict

Jerry B. Marchant argues that the current standoff between Russia and the West cannot be understood as a dispute over the last decade alone, but is better read as the modern flashpoint of a civilizational rupture dating back to the Great Schism of 1054.

By Jerry B. Marchant
Is It Propaganda?®
Multipolar Press
9 August 2026

Many upset only about recent events, thinking history starts with today's news. They see tanks, sanctions, and summits, and believe conflicts are new, often about pipelines or government ambitions. In reality, civilizations quarrel over deeper issues, not recent disputes. The true history of this quarrel dates back to 1054, when a Roman cardinal excommunicated the Hagia Sophia, and the patriarch of Constantinople responded in kind.

It is worth reflecting on that moment, as everything that followed is a commentary. Two bishops, each convinced he held the keys, divided one Church into two civilizations that would spend a thousand years discovering their differences. Rome retained the Latin alphabet, printing press, Reformation, Enlightenment, and Western self-invention. Constantinople kept the Cyrillic script, icons over statues, conciliar over papal authority, and a slower view of time, where the eternal is not to be improved.

The nineteenth-century Russian thinker Nikolai Danilevsky argued that humanity does not progress along a single line toward one civilization, as Hegelians thought, but instead develops in distinct cultural-historical types, each with its own organic life and incommensurable with others. Konstantin Leontiev believed Europe’s homogenization, simplifying differences into a liberal average, led to civilizational exhaustion. Though their ideas may not be fully accepted, both noted that the 1054 split was not just theological but ontological, producing two different views of human purpose.

It is no accident, then, that when the wars of Yugoslav succession erupted in the 1990s, the killing did not follow the borders drawn by Tito’s cartographers but the older border, the one Theodosius the Great had drawn when he divided the Roman Empire between his sons, the one that still separated Catholic Croat from Orthodox Serb thirteen centuries later. Modern nationalism supplied the flags and the rhetoric; the fault line beneath it was already there, waiting, like a scar that remembers a wound long after the skin has closed over it.

Ukraine sits on this fault line, its name 'okraina' meaning 'borderland' or 'edge'. For a thousand years, the lands between the Dnieper and Carpathians were the frontier where Orthodox East met Catholic and Protestant West, fought over by Kievan princes, Polish kings, Cossacks, and Habsburgs, absorbing and releasing repeatedly. Western Ukraine was under Polish-Lithuanian and Austro-Hungarian rule, influenced by Uniate Catholicism and Central European culture, distinct from Orthodox Rus’ of Kiev and eastern lands. Stalin united these two Ukraines into one in 1939 and 1945, a wartime move that the Soviet Union gave to independent Ukraine in 1991.

Vladimir Solovyov, at the end of the nineteenth century, hoped Russia’s mission was synthesis, not conquest. Nikolai Berdyaev, exiled from his homeland, saw the “Russian idea” as a longing for wholeness (sobornost) that Western fractured individualism could not satisfy. Neither was a strategist, and neither would recognize much of today’s use of their ideas. Both understood that the border is not just a map line but a border of a civilization’s consciousness, which tends to reassert itself despite treaties.

Samuel Huntington, critical of the Danilevskian tradition and writing from the civilization he aimed to defend, concluded in Clash of Civilizations that future conflicts would be civilizational, not ideological. He identified the Western and Orthodox Christendom divide, running through Eastern Europe, as one of the oldest, least negotiable lines. It is rare that a Harvard political scientist and a nineteenth-century Slavophile mystic share such a view.

This isn't prophecy or a policy justification, but a correction to the present's amnesia, the belief that current events are happening for the first time.

Rome and Constantinople quarreled over the filioque clause and universal authority nearly a thousand years ago. Their descendants continue the debate. Wise historians admit they do not know how it ends, only that we are not the first or last to face this edge of the world.

Works cited:

Berdyaev, Nikolai. The Russian Idea. Translated by R. M. French, Lindisfarne Books, 1992. First published 1946.

Danilevsky, Nikolai. Russia and Europe: The Slavic World’s Political and Cultural Relations with the Germanic-Roman World. Translated by Stephen M. Woodburn, Slavica Publishers, 2013. First published 1869.

Huntington, Samuel P. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. Simon & Schuster, 1996.

Leontiev, Konstantin. Byzantism and Slavdom [Vizantizm i slavyanstvo]. 1875.

Solovyov, Vladimir. “The Russian Idea” [“L’idée russe”]. 1888. Lecture delivered in Paris.

Solovyov, Vladimir. Russia and the Universal Church. 1889.

‘FORCES ABROAD DON’T WANT A STRONG INDIA BECAUSE IT CAN’T BE MANIPULATED’ - FORMER INDIAN FOREIGN SECRETARY KANWAL SIBAL

In the latest episode of Sanchez Effect, Ambassador Kanwal Sibal reveals how Western media and Big Tech influence global views to suppress emerging nations.

Watch the Video Here (43 minutes, 09 seconds)

Host Rick Sanchez
HomeShowsSanchez Effect
05 August 2026

In the latest episode of the Sanchez Effect, Ambassador Kanwal Sibal reveals how Western media and Big Tech influence global perceptions to suppress emerging nations.

• He highlights Meta and its “anti-government” algorithms that censored Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s midnight speech amid protests.
• Sibal notes that India, tired of its pro-Western narrative, has threatened to revoke Meta's safe harbor protections to safeguard its sovereignty.
• He firmly dismisses accusations of Indian opportunism, praising New Delhi’s diplomatic finesse with Russia, Iran, and Israel as astute, independent policymaking.

Additionally, he criticizes Washington’s history of intervention and admires Iran’s surprising military resilience. He discusses potential outcomes if Iran wins its standoff with the US.

Interested in more? Tune in.

ESSAY | When Morality Becomes a Weapon, Peace Becomes the Casualty

A heart-to-heart OpEd inspired by Prof. Glenn Diesen’s argument on morality, moralism, and the West’s dangerous drift from wisdom to self-righteousness.

Annotated by Abraham A. van Kempen
11 August 2026

Come closer for a moment

You and I both know the world is not hurting because it has too much morality. If anything, we could use a lot more of the real kind—more honesty, more courage, more clean hands and steady hearts. What is hurting us is something cheaper and louder: moralism. That is when power puts on holy robes, conscience becomes a weapon, and people start calling it virtue when they stop listening.

______________________________________________

Morality asks, “What is right?”
Moralism asks, “Who may I condemn?”

______________________________________________

And that difference matters. Real morality makes us look in the mirror before we climb the podium. Moralism skips the mirror, grabs the microphone, and declares itself innocent. Morality says, “Check yourself first.” Moralism says, “Condemn them faster.”

Here is where it gets dangerous. Once politics turns into a morality play—us in the light, them in the dark—diplomacy starts to die. Context becomes “making excuses.” Understanding becomes “appeasement.” Even asking what the other side fears can make people look at you as if curiosity itself were betrayal.

______________________________________________

That is not moral clarity.
That is intellectual lockdown.

______________________________________________

But think about that for a second. If we cannot ask what China wants, what Russia fears, what Iran thinks it is defending, or what any rival sees when it looks back at us, are we being brave—or are we just yelling into the fog? That is not strategy. That is flying blind, in bad weather, with everyone clapping in the cabin.

The argument, plainly stated

• Power must be restrained

          Morality disciplines power; moralism excuses power when it wears our colors.

          Example: Before we bless sanctions, interventions, or alliances with glowing words, you and I should ask who pays the price when the banners come down, and the smoke settles.

• Diplomacy needs complexity

          Diplomacy dies when every rival is reduced to a villain, and every question becomes a betrayal.

          Example: Asking what Russia fears, what China seeks, or what Iran believes it is defending is not surrender; it is the lantern a wise people carries before walking into the dark.

• Security concerns must be heard

          Fears, red lines, and grievances do not disappear simply because we refuse to hear them.
          Example: A neighbor who feels encircled or humiliated will not grow calmer because we lecture him across the fence; he may only grip the fence tighter.

• Values can be corrupted

          Values become dangerous when they are used to silence debate, sanctify domination, or justify reckless escalation.
          Example: When “defending freedom” becomes a blank check for censorship, coercion, or endless war, the word freedom itself limps home wounded.

• Peace takes courage

          Real peace requires the courage to listen, negotiate, compromise, and see human beings on the other side of the smoke.
          Example: The bravest leader is not always the one who pounds the table; sometimes it is the one who keeps a chair open for the enemy.

The West’s dangerous self-hypnosis

After the Cold War, the West did not just win a geopolitical contest. It started believing its own press releases. Our interests became “universal values.” Our preferences became “the international order.” And our rivals? Too often, they stopped being countries with fears, ambitions, wounds, and red lines. They became cartoon villains in a bedtime story we told ourselves so many times that we began to believe every word.

Now, let me be clear. I am not saying values do not matter. They do. Values are the bones of a decent civilization. But even good words can be hollowed out, polished up, and turned into weapons. A truly moral foreign policy has to hold two truths at once: aggression is wrong, and reckless policies can still help light the fuse. Those truths are not enemies. They are twins.

______________________________________________

Some truths are not enemies. They are twins

______________________________________________

When “virtue” goes to war

Just look around. Economic warfare gets sold as fairness. Proxy war gets packaged as moral necessity. Direct confrontation gets wrapped in humanitarian silk. Every time, we hear the same polished phrase: we are defending the rules-based order. But too often, while defending it, we break the habits that make any order possible—law, diplomacy, restraint, trust, trade, conversation, and the humility to admit we may not see the whole board.

So here is the hard truth, said as plainly as I can say it: peace is not made by pretending the other side has no fears. Peace is made when enemies are still treated as human beings, rivals are still understood as strategic actors, and compromise is not mistaken for surrender. Sometimes peace begins when someone lowers the sword long enough to hear a heartbeat.

Moralism lets us feel clean while the world burns.
Morality asks us to get our hands dirty building a livable peace.

So, let us take the harder road. Let us think before we condemn, listen before we bomb, negotiate before we moralize, and remember that being right is not the same as being wise. If the West wants to save what is best in itself, it has to stop confusing moral superiority with moral seriousness. One shouts. The other serves. One builds bonfires of certainty. The other lights small lamps of mercy, asking how flawed people like us might still keep each other from the cliff.

______________________________________________

For peace is not born from thunderous virtue on a podium,
but from the quiet courage of open hands, honest minds,
and hearts brave enough to become lanterns in the smoke—
small flames of mercy held against the dark,
before the ashes learn our names.

______________________________________________

Thank you so much, Prof. Glenn Diesen, for sharing your valuable insights and understanding with us. I truly appreciate your generosity in passing along your knowledge. I am merely a scribe.

Abraham van Kempen writes on geopolitics, political economy, and the hard truths hiding beneath comfortable Western myths.

JIANG XUEQIN: BREAKING POINT - WHY THE WEST IS FALLING APART

• Something feels off. You feel it at the grocery store, on the street, in the headlines, and maybe even in your own tired chest. This isn’t just politics anymore; it’s the slow ache of a society losing trust in itself.
• Behind the marble mansions and military slogans, ordinary people are asking a quieter, sharper question: who is this country still working for?
• What follows is not a lecture from above, but a hand on your shoulder — a heart-to-heart look at decline, denial, and the dangerous spark of awakening.

Watch the Video Here (53 minutes, 33 seconds)

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
11 August 2026

The Empire’s Bill Comes Due

You don’t need a think tank report to sense something's wrong. It’s evident in rising prices, tents on streets, tired faces, and false promises from leaders clinging to the old world. The West’s decline, its Unipolar Autocracy veiled as Liberal Democracy, is visible in everyday life, as people pay for illusions they no longer believe.

Ordinary People, Imperial Illusions -- The Human Cost of an Empire in Denial

Prof. Jiang Xueqin claims America’s crisis isn't due to a single policy or war but a collapse of the story Americans were taught to trust.

Los Angeles shows a stark contrast: five-star hotels and $20 million mansions are near Skid Row, where people sleep exposed and unseen. Even $17 avocado toast highlights how ordinary life is becoming unaffordable, one meal and paycheck at a time.

The defense argues that empires fall when leaders become too arrogant to recognize reality. Iraq had a false sense of easy victory, and Iran repeats this mistake with higher stakes, as leaders think airstrikes can substitute for strategy and that people will accept the consequences.

America First failed because the empire kept running after promises of restraint. Instead of coming home, it found new costs: weapons for Europe, Patriot missiles for Gulf states, and pressure on Japan to remilitarize. Behind patriotic speeches, fear drives policy, and weapons sales show loyalty.

The warning is personal: when people are priced out, ignored, and humiliated, a spark can turn frustration into upheaval.

Ultimately, the warning is about what happens when a country makes ordinary people endure its illusions until they can no longer bear it.

The argument’s strength lies in its human scale: decline shows up in streets, prices, wars, and people feeling left behind.

The real question isn't if an empire can see its decline, but if people recognize their worth before the system demands more sacrifice. Though stark, the speaker's argument matters because it prompts us to ask: how long can a country survive when its people no longer feel supported?

CHAS FREEMAN: HOW U.S. DECLINE RESHAPES THE MIDDLE EAST

• Ambassador Chas Freeman, a former Assistant Secretary of Defense, received the Department of Defense's top public service honors for his work in developing a NATO-focused European security framework after the Cold War and for reestablishing defense and military ties with China.
• He also served as U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia during Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm.

Watch the Video Here (56 minutes, 06 seconds)

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
12 August 2026

Where the Iron Sky Breaks, a New Dawn Learns to Sing – A personal reflection on West Asia’s search for dignity, balance, and a new dawn beyond dependence

The title signals a turning point: the “iron sky” symbolizes an era of external dominance, while the “new dawn” suggests a region finding its own voice, rhythm, and hope after dependence.

West Asia, the Middle East, is not just shifting alliances; it's rediscovering the courage to stand alone. I recall late nights with a map, tracing the Persian Gulf, pausing—not out of understanding, but feeling how little a map can hold. The blue lines seem calm, but behind them are sailors far from home, families waiting, traders watching prices, and nations burdened by history.

That quiet realization still lingers, reminding me that geopolitics is about people shaping their futures, not just power. For decades, the American presence cast a protective or suffocating sky over the region. Now, that sky is opening, revealing a new age. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan are raising a banner over a land long shaped by outsiders: we will not wait forever at another empire's gates.

Iran listens, Israel measures the tremor, Oman moves cautiously, the Gulf recalculates, Asia rises. Hope emerges as old dependencies loosen, allowing nations to learn balance, negotiation, and dignity without standing alone.

The dusk is fading, making way for a luminous, uncertain dawn. A multipolar sunrise begins, promising that a long-silent region may soon speak with wisdom, confidence, and voice.

‘THE BIGGEST DECISIONS IN THE US GOVERNMENT ARE MADE BY THE DEEP STATE – AND THEY AREN’T EVEN GOOD AT IT.’ – TUCKER CARLSON

Tucker Carlson quickly delivers a blunt truth, asserting that when a podcaster is strongly considered for the presidency, it highlights the severe failure of America’s current leaders—whom he describes as both criminal and dangerously ineffective.

Watch the Video Here (61 minutes, 12 seconds)

Host Rick Sanchez
HomeShowsSanchez Effect
12 August 2026

In this episode of Sanchez Effect, Rick Sanchez interviews a well-known figure. Tucker Carlson quickly delivers a blunt truth, asserting that when a podcaster is strongly considered for the presidency, it highlights the severe failure of America’s current leaders—whom he describes as both criminal and dangerously ineffective.

Carlson criticizes the collective West for risking World War III through a calculated war against Russia. Sanchez and Carlson analyze how a hijacked, illegitimate political elite has sacrificed America’s internal prosperity for global chaos.

Carlson exposes the illusion of modern Western democracy and reveals how Deep-State actors weaponize mass migration. He also exposes Ukraine's loss of sovereignty, describing it as a pawn in NATO's strategy to destabilize Russia and deplete its resources.

This provides a raw, intense perspective on a collapsing global empire and features an interview you won't want to miss.

FYODOR LUKYANOV: RUSSIA MUST END THE UKRAINE WAR ON ITS OWN TERMS

The old transatlantic order is weakening, but Moscow cannot afford to wait for Western divisions to solve the Ukraine conflict

Fyodor Lukyanov, chairman of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy of Russia and research director of the Valdai Development and Support Fund, at the Valdai Discussion Club, Sochi, Russia, November 7, 2024. © Sputnik/Kristina Kormilitsyna

By Fyodor Lukyanov, the editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs, chairman of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, and research director of the Valdai International Discussion Club.

Russia in Global AffairsRGA on Telegram

By Anna Cherkasova
HomeWorld News
11 August 2026

Western Europe continues to fear Russia, even willing to accept a major war.

• Why is the West divided?
• Why is the US distancing itself from the Ukraine crisis?
• And why can't Moscow wait for the EU’s internal issues to be resolved?

Fyodor Lukyanov, chairman of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy and editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Politics, discussed these issues in an interview with Ukraina.ru.

Bloomberg reported on a July meeting in Vienna with former UK, French, German, and Russian officials discussing a potential settlement of the Ukraine conflict. These were informal track-two talks, not official negotiations.

Anna Cherkasova: Mr. Lukyanov, how do you interpret the idea of the collective West?

Fyodor Lukyanov: For me, it means what we mean today since it’s our term. In foreign sources, English-speaking political scientists prefer concepts like Atlanticism and the political West.

The collective West, as we know it today, didn’t exist before 1945. For centuries, there was debate over what the West was—geography, civilization, religion, politics, or values.

Read more
The world order has collapsed. Now comes the dangerous part

The West was contrasted with the East, often understood as Turkey, the Ottoman Empire, or the Arab-Muslim world. Sometimes, the discussion focused on the Christian divide between Orthodoxy and Catholicism.

The French and Anglo-Americans saw themselves as part of the West, while Germany was considered part of it only after WWII; before that, it embodied barbarism. Russia sometimes disappears and reappears as the West's key adversary, shaping its identity.

Cherkasova: So the collective West emerged after WWII?

Lukyanov: Yes, the modern collective West emerged after World War II for two main reasons.

1. Germany was defeated in its pre-war form, or at least that's how the victors saw it, and the part under Western Allies was integrated into the new Western system on set terms.
2. The second factor was the Soviet Union and the Soviet threat. Stalin was like the godfather of European unity, as Western integration was driven by fears that the USSR wouldn’t stop expanding after the war.

Today, we see these fears as largely unfounded because the Soviet Union, ravaged by war, needed time to recover, and Stalin didn’t believe he would become ruler of Europe. He understood the geopolitical realities and followed the Yalta and Potsdam agreements.

In the West, the view was that the Russian barbarian would deceive them and then attack. These fears led to the development of the Western system as we know it.

Cherkasova: The Cold War ended, but the Western system persisted. Why?

Lukyanov: Because it survived the Cold War and demonstrated resilience, after the Soviet Union's collapse, it seemed the Western order proved itself right, and its triumph suggested it should be expanded.

I wondered if, with the previous threat gone, what still linked the US and Western Europe? Besides shared economic interests and tradition, a new elite education system had developed, and there was a belief that change was unlikely. But the key question remained: was there still a compelling reason for them to stay united?

Europeans aimed to expand their freedom but insisted on American guarantees until Trump questioned, “Who are you, anyway?”

Read more
Russia. The only thing holding the West together

For Western Europe, this was a shock. They debated whether to side with the Americans, while the US said, “Decide for yourselves, and we don’t really need you that much.”

Today, the West is going through an interesting phase. After 30 years of searching for an enemy since the Cold War, it has found an old adversary in us. It seems simple now—having a common enemy to unite against. But the world has changed.

Western Europeans fear Russia as a large neighbor, a military power on their doorstep. For the US, Russia is mainly a European and Eurasian issue, not an immediate threat, as America focuses on China, the Pacific, terrorism, and the Muslim world.

The Strength in Truth – Pride and Victory exhibition at Pimenov Square in Novosibirsk, Russia, September 17, 2024. © Sputnik/Alexander Kryazhev

The key question remains: why does Western Europe still need US support today, and what can it expect? It was once assumed the US would naturally intervene in crises to help Europe. Now, the question is why it should do so automatically, creating uncertainty about whether it will, which causes current anxiety.

Western Europe requires Americans' loyalty but then diverges from US policies when disapproval arises. However, bloc discipline doesn’t work that way.

This wasn’t the first such event. In 2003, during the Iraq War, NATO split as Germany and France refused to support President George W. Bush’s military intervention. They emphasized the importance of the liberal world order and argued that war shouldn’t begin without UN Security Council approval.

The Americans responded strongly, prompting trade restrictions, boycotts of French wine and other products, and a dispute over 'French fries.' But it became clear the US relied on Western Europe’s support to resolve Iraq, and tensions eased.

The question now is whether the US still needs Western Europe as before.

Please continue reading

BUILDING THE BRIDGE! | A WAY TO GET TO KNOW THE OTHER AND ONE ANOTHER

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanisms for Many to Move Mountains

Photo Credit: Abraham A. van Kempen, our home away from home on the Dead Sea

By Abraham A. van Kempen
Senior Editor
Updated 19 January 2024

Those who commit to 'healing our broken humanity' build intercultural bridges to learn to know and understand one another and others. Readers who thumb through the Building the Bridge (BTB) pages are not mindless sheep following other mindless sheep. They THINK. They want to be at the forefront of making a difference. They're seeking the bigger picture to expand their horizons. They don't need BTB or anyone else to confirm their biases.

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanisms for Many to Move Mountains

Accurate knowledge fosters understanding, dispels prejudice, and sparks a desire to learn more about the subject. Words have an extraordinary power to bring people together, divide them, forge bonds of friendship, or provoke hostility. Modern technology offers unprecedented possibilities for good, fostering harmony and reconciliation. Yet, its misuse can cause untold harm, leading to misunderstandings, prejudices, and conflicts.

Continue reading

A Free Trial for Life – SUBSCRIBE NOW!

• It's quick and straightforward.

• We won’t ask for your credit card number.

• Just enter your e-mail address to receive your complimentary free-for-life subscription to our newsletter.

• Please include your First and Last Name.

• We won’t share or sell your e-mail address.

_________________________

Related Articles Recently Posted on www.buildingthebridgefoundation.com:

OUR FRIDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR WEDNESDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR MONDAY EDITION

________________________

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of the Building the Bridge Foundation