Our Friday News Analysis | What the World Reads Now!

EDITORIAL | Are World Leaders Dumb, Stupid, Sociopaths, or Psychopaths, or All of the Above (Part 16)?

 

Click here for Part 1
Click here for Part 2
Click here for Part 3
Click here for Part 4
Click here for Part 5
Click here for Part 6
Click here for Part 7
Click here for Part 8
Click here for Part 9
Click here for Part 10
Click here for Part 11
Click here for Part 12
Click here for Part 13
Click here for Part 14
Click here for Part 15

 

By Abraham A. van Kempen
19 September 2025

 

Enjoy your weekend.

Abraham A. van Kempen
Senior Editor

Building the Bridge Foundation
A Way to Get to Know Each Other and the Other

 

 

LARRY JOHNSON: ISRAEL'S ATTACK ON QATAR PROVOKES BACKLASH

 

Former CIA intelligence analyst Larry Johnson also worked at the US State Department's Office of Counterterrorism. He discusses the fallout from Israel's strike on Qatar and the self-delusion within the West as the proxy war in Ukraine begins to slip away.

 

 

View the Video Here (48 minutes, 29 seconds)

 

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
17 September 2025

 

Geopolitical Shifts and Conflict Analysis

 

Prof. Diesen discusses the global shift away from the US dollar with former CIA analyst Larry Johnson, exploring China and Russia’s creation of financial alternatives and their impact on inflation and US economic policy. It examines rapid territorial changes in the Ukraine War, the increasing risk of humanitarian and strategic disaster, and the West’s reluctance to negotiate with Russia. The analysis draws historical parallels to past European conflicts, warning of potential nuclear escalation and emphasizing the urgent need for pragmatic and empathetic solutions in global politics.

 

Today, we're pleased to welcome back Larry Johnson, a former CIA analyst, who will share his expertise on recent geopolitical developments and the ongoing conflicts in the Middle East and Eastern Europe.

 

Israeli Attack in Doha, Qatar: Consequences and Blowback

 

Israel has launched a surprise attack in Doha, Qatar, a key US ally, aimed at killing Hamas peace negotiators. As things calm down, it becomes clear that the attack will have far-reaching consequences. The incident recalls a pivotal moment in "The Godfather II," where an unexpected attack shatters a sense of security. Qatar has a special relationship with the US, hosting the Al Udeid Air Force Base, which serves as the forward headquarters for US Central Command and the Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC).

 

Located in the region, this center handles air traffic control for Turkey, Syria, Israel, Lebanon, and Iran. The long-standing nature of this partnership indicates that an attack like this couldn't have happened without US approval or involvement, serving as a warning not just to Qatar, but to the entire region.

 

Following this severe betrayal by the Trump administration, the Arab Islamic Conference held an emergency summit, uniting 54 heads of state and foreign ministers from across the Arab and Muslim world, including Turkey, Azerbaijan, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Indonesia, Malaysia, Yemen, Iran, and Syria. The event sparked historic diplomatic shifts, including the announcement of renewed relations between Egypt and Iran after nearly 45 years. Jordan also launched a new conscription campaign, highlighting the region's growing unease. Overall, these developments represent a significant setback for US diplomacy in the area.

 

Global Reassessment of Security Alliances

 

A broader trend is unfolding beyond the Middle East. In East Asia, South Korea and Japan are reassessing their reliance on US security, while similar concerns are emerging in Europe. The idea of outsourcing foreign policy and security to the US is being questioned, especially with the Trump administration's controversial moves, such as its claims over Greenland following Denmark's military involvement in Ukraine. These shifts come as a UN commission report finds Israel guilty of genocide, putting pressure on countries worldwide to respond. The once supportive EU now appears more cautious and seeks to distance itself from any perceived complicity. It remains unclear whether these developments are substantive or merely a matter of political theater.

 

Reactions to the UN Report and Arab Islamic Summit

 

While the UN report is a step in the right direction, it may be more symbolic than practical. The Arab Islamic summit has issued a declaration calling for joint action to expel Israel from the UN. This movement is gaining momentum, especially with the recent UN Security Council condemnation of Israel's attack on Qatar, although it didn't directly name Israel. There's growing political will among the Arab Islamic Council and BRICS nations, which could potentially stop the war in Gaza and the ongoing genocide by imposing a complete economic embargo on Israel. Despite increasing isolation, it's notable that Israel is recognizing its vulnerable position. Turkey has the power to make a significant impact by cutting off oil supplies to Israel, but it hasn't done so yet. The UN report expands the context to include the Global South, possibly signaling a further movement toward collective action.

 

Regional Implications and Israeli Strategy

 

Across the region, countries are aware of the conflict's broader implications, which go beyond the violence in Gaza to include government upheavals in Syria, destruction in Libya, and repeated attacks on Yemen. Israeli leaders have brought up the idea of "Greater Israel," suggesting expansion into neighboring territories and attacks on Iran, which is causing concern among regional players. Instead of negotiating peace while they're strong, Israel seems to be going for an all-out win, putting its future at risk as the United States signals a strategic shift away from the region. The long-term viability of Israel’s strategy is uncertain, given its limited resources, small population, and dependence on outside supplies of oil and natural gas. Despite its military advantages, Israel faces ongoing resistance in Gaza and growing internal pressure, including rising suicide rates and sharp political divisions. Another attack on Iran could push the situation beyond what the US can handle.

 

Information Warfare and the Ukrainian Front

 

Examining the Ukrainian conflict, information warfare plays a crucial role in shaping public opinion. Despite the disproportionate number of Ukrainian casualties and Russia’s manpower advantage, General Keith Kellogg claims Russia is losing the war. The West’s narrative focuses on Ukrainian resilience and Russian losses, but this doesn't match the reality of massive Ukrainian losses and the need for widespread mobilization. The media and politicians downplay the conflict's true horrors, silencing calls for negotiation even though the public wants the war to end.

 

Drone Operations and Western Response

 

Recent drone incidents in Poland have added to the confusion. Social media posts show skepticism about official explanations for the attacks, with evidence pointing to Ukrainian involvement in staging provocations to drag Poland and NATO into the conflict. The drones, often of low quality and repurposed, don't match Russian military tactics or capabilities. Western reactions have been marked by panic, while Russia has stayed calm, offering talks and denying any involvement. These incidents reveal the growing desperation of Ukraine as its situation worsens.

 

Europe’s Lack of Strategy and Industrial Capacity

 

European countries appear eager to draw the US further into the conflict, but they lack a clear plan or goals beyond prolonging the war and securing American backing. Europe’s capacity to produce weapons and munitions in the necessary quantities has been compromised, putting Ukraine at a disadvantage. The story of Russia's depleted military capabilities has proven to be false, as Russia still maintains overwhelming strength in the air and on the ground. Western nations can't match Russia’s production of artillery shells, missiles, and drones, leaving them in a weaker position on the battlefield.

 

US and European Sanctions Policy

 

Trump’s rhetoric on Russia includes demands for full secondary sanctions and a complete ban on Russian oil, which would also affect India and other trading partners. However, the US is now putting the onus on Europe, refusing to act unless Europe takes the lead. This shift indicates that the US is losing its grip on global leadership in economic, political, and military spheres. The decline is evident in military losses, economic shifts such as India and China selling US Treasury bills and conducting trade in their own currencies, and a decrease in demand for the dollar, as seen in fewer SWIFT transactions. These trends are further isolating the US and boosting the influence of Russia and China.

 

Global Financial Realignment

 

China and Russia have created alternatives to SWIFT, reducing their reliance on the dollar and limiting the US's ability to track global trade. As countries switch to local currencies, demand for dollars decreases, which contributes to inflation and erodes the dollar's value. This shift has significant implications for US economic policy and the ability to forecast global market trends.

 

Developments in the Ukraine War: Territorial Advances

 

Recent updates from the front lines indicate a swift decline in Ukraine's positions, particularly along the Zaporizhzhia front and in key areas such as Kherson and Odessa. Russian forces seem to be gearing up for more territorial wins, with the potential to take Odessa and other strategic regions if talks break down and NATO or European troops are sent to Ukraine. Russian military briefings hint at plans to bring more territories, including Odessa and Transnistria, under Russian control. The chances of a peace agreement are dwindling, and ongoing conflict could split Ukraine and worsen humanitarian disasters.

 

Western Reluctance and Strategic Implications

 

It's puzzling that the West is so unwilling to consider compromise or negotiations with Russia, given the severe impact on Ukraine. The approach of backing Ukraine "to the last Ukrainian" is growing more reckless, with little thought given to realistic goals or a way to achieve peace. The ongoing provocations of Russia and the refusal to talk are showing a lack of reason and empathy for those caught up in the war.

 

Historical Perspective and Final Thoughts

 

Looking back at history, the current situation bears resemblance to the strategic mistakes of past conflicts, such as World Wars I and II. Failing to see where events are headed and refusing to have serious talks suggests a Europe that has lost its way. With Ukraine on the verge of collapse and Russia angry over European actions, the growing strikes against Russia are a recipe for disaster, including the risk of nuclear escalation. The lack of a clear plan and the reliance on slogans instead of actual policy mark a troubling time in global relations.

 

Conclusion

 

Our conversation with Larry Johnson underscores the significant shifts in global politics and the pressing need for thoughtful, empathetic, and strategic solutions to ongoing conflicts.

 

Thanks for being part of this in-depth discussion.

 

 

SWISS INTELLIGENCE COLONEL JACQUES BAUD: THE CHANGING GEOPOLITICAL LANDSCAPE

 

Colonel Jacques Baud, a seasoned former military intelligence analyst from the Swiss Army and a prolific author, shares insights on a pivotal shift in global power dynamics. He emphasizes that the most significant change of our era is the decline of Western dominance in the international arena. A crucial question arises: how can the Western world effectively find its place in a world that no longer revolves around hegemonic power? Addressing this question with care and clarity could help prevent ongoing chaos and potential collapse, guiding us toward a more stable future.

 

 

View the Video Here (1 hour, 8 minutes, 7 seconds)

 

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
11 September 2025

 

Professor Glenn Diesen’s interview with Colonel Jacques Baud explores critiques of Western democracy and security policies, revealing the gap between our ideals and actual practices.

 

The conversation emphasizes:

• NATO’s challenges in adapting to a world with multiple power centers
• Stressing the need for collaboration and open dialogue over confrontation
• Embracing different governance styles and being open, arguing that these are crucial for a stable and thriving international community.

Joining us today is Jacques Baud, a retired colonel from the Swiss strategic intelligence service, to discuss the latest developments in Europe, including the presence of Russian drones in Poland and whether we're on the cusp of a new era in modern warfare.

 

Shifting Power Dynamics and Western Hegemony

• The conversation begins with an examination of the shift in global power dynamics, where the long-held dominance of Western powers is giving way to a more multipolar world.
• For a long time, the West has promoted a single model of civilization, expecting others to conform to it.
• However, countries such as China, Russia, Iran, and India are taking different approaches, focusing on finding common ground and addressing shared challenges.

This divergence in viewpoints engenders persistent tensions.

• The Western perspective frequently characterizes interaction with alternative power centers as unacceptable, equating their conduct with breaches of universal principles.
• Initiatives by non-Western nations to diversify and pursue their national interests are often perceived as conspiratorial or hostile, resulting in diplomatic pressure and unresolved disputes.

The Collapse of Western Dominance

 

Colonel Baud contends that the decline of Western hegemony is a consequence of its own dominance. The United States exemplifies this transition: formerly a leader in technological and industrial output, it has progressively outsourced manufacturing to nations such as China and India. As a result, its economy is now predominantly propelled by financial engineering rather than industrial innovation, thereby diminishing its capacity to produce and supply goods globally.

 

At the same time, other parts of the world have developed their own industrial capabilities, with China emerging as a significant new player on the global stage. This has allowed the rest of the world to stand up to the West, particularly since Western interventions—both military and economic—have often led to instability rather than growth.

 

Security Through Cooperation vs. Confrontation

 

Historically, the West has relied on force and confrontation to maintain security. In contrast, regions like Russia have pushed for a more cooperative approach to security. This strategy, built on past initiatives such as the Helsinki process and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, aims to resolve disputes through dialogue and negotiation rather than military force.

 

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) exemplifies this model by offering a platform for nations such as India and China to engage in collaborative dispute resolution. The increasing interest in such organizations reflects a global shift towards resolving issues through dialogue rather than the use of force.

 

Western Interventions and Global Instability

 

The analysis emphasizes the disruptive consequences of Western interventions in regions such as Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, and Syria. These measures, frequently justified by objectives of regime change or humanitarian concerns, have resulted in considerable instability and increased migration. Colonel Baud questions the justification for these interventions, proposing that self-determination and internal reform are more appropriate than external interference.

 

Examples from Africa demonstrate how Western involvement can sometimes have unintended consequences. When leaders are removed, it can lead to power vacuums and the emergence of extremist groups. These situations are often misunderstood or misrepresented in Western media.

 

The Role of Ideology and Democracy

 

Western support for liberal democracy has turned into a defining identity, giving them the right to interfere in other countries. This ideological stance portrays the West as the "good guy," allowing it to criticize and intervene in different nations. However, the inner workings of democracy are often watered down, with dissent suppressed and opposition labeled as backing authoritarian regimes.

 

Colonel Baud highlights some disturbing paradoxes in Western democracies, where governments often claim to represent the people's wishes but sometimes appear to act in their own self-interest. He mentions the Democratic Perception Index, which reveals that people in countries like China and Switzerland see their governments as more democratic than those in France, even though their political systems are pretty different.

 

NATO, Security, and European Policy

 

Colonel Baud discusses NATO’s evolving role in a new interview, noting that the organization has not yet fully adapted to the current geopolitical landscape. He remembers NATO talks about the need for a more collaborative security approach, one that's closer to Russia's views. Looking back, examples such as the Swiss and Austrian neutrality guarantees demonstrate that security can be achieved through cooperation between major powers.

 

Colonel Baud underscores that the prevailing confrontational attitude within NATO represents an extension of Cold War-era perspectives. This mindset is incompatible with the realities of a multipolar world, where economic, political, and influence-based equilibria have transitioned to favor non-Western nations.

 

The Importance of Dialogue and Openness

 

The discussion concludes with an appeal for transparency and dialogue as the most effective means to promote security and international stability. Colonel Baud cautions against ideological fundamentalism that criminalizes engagement with opposing viewpoints, emphasizing that genuine advancement and peace necessitate understanding, collaboration, and a readiness to consider diverse values and perspectives.

 

Colonel Baud banks on the concept of "security by cooperation," arguing that confrontation can only deepen authoritarian tendencies and hinder the opportunity for everyone to grow together. The West’s struggle to keep up with the changing global landscape could lead to more loneliness and disagreements. But if we choose to listen and talk more openly, it could open the door to a safer and more prosperous future for all of us.

 

Final Thoughts

 

Jacques Baud’s insights highlight the importance of a fresh perspective on how the West approaches international relations. Embracing the legitimacy of different governance models and focusing on cooperation rather than confrontation can help us navigate our rapidly changing world and protect the core values that make Western civilization unique.

 

 

CHAS FREEMAN: THE OLD WORLD IS DYING, THE NEW WORLD STRUGGLES TO BE BORN

 

Ambassador Chas Freeman discusses the significant shift from the optimism of the 1990s to the chaos and decline of today's era.

 

How are the major powers adjusting to a world undergoing rapid change?

• Ambassador Freeman is a former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense (1993-94), earning the highest public service awards of the Department of Defense for his roles in designing a NATO-centered post-Cold War European security system and in reestablishing defense and military relations with China.

He served as:

• U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense (1993-94)
• U. S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia (during operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm).
• Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs during the historic U.S. mediation of Namibian independence from South Africa and the Cuban troop withdrawal from Angola.

 

Watch the Video Here (45 minutes, 47 seconds)

 

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
11 September 2025

 

Hi everyone, and welcome back. Today, we're joined by Ambassador Chas Freeman, a former US Assistant Secretary of Defense. Thank you for returning to the program, Ambassador Freeman. Great to see you again, my friend.

 

Post-Cold War Optimism and Shifting Realities

 

Following the Cold War, there was a profound sense of optimism and a widespread political conviction that liberal democracy and human rights would evolve into global standards, guided predominantly by the leadership of the United States. Numerous politicians accepted this thesis as an incontrovertible fact, anticipating a peaceful and perhaps uneventful global order. However, the current reality substantially diverges from these expectations.

 

NATO has participated in a proxy conflict against Russia, the United States has conducted aerial bombardments on Iran’s nuclear facilities, and alliances have been established with organizations such as al-Qaeda and ISIS in regions including Libya and Syria. Reports have emerged of ethnic cleansing in Gaza, a strategic focus on countering China, and the looming threat of warfare. Furthermore, Washington is considering a decapitation strike against Venezuela.

 

Europe is currently confronting a decline in economic performance and democratic ideals, accompanied by an increasing propensity for conflict and a decline in its global significance, which is compounded by escalating desperation that exacerbates the crisis. Concurrently, the Eurasian nations are actively establishing new economic and political structures that are independent of Western participation.

 

Ambassador Freeman’s Reflections on the Changing Order

 

Ambassador Freeman recollects his tenure as Assistant Secretary of Defense and as Ambassador to Saudi Arabia during Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait. He describes advising President George H.W. Bush against accepting a new world order based on the annexation of smaller nations by larger aggressors, underscoring the importance of strengthening international law and the principles of the United Nations Charter. Freeman observes that the term “new world order” was misrepresented as a conspiratorial hegemony, which, ironically, materialized. The unipolar moment, once identified by Charles Krauthammer, has now ceased to exist.

 

The Rise of Eurasian Institutions

 

Recent developments, such as the expansion of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the establishment of new institutions like the SCO Bank, exemplify endeavors to unify development planning throughout non-European Eurasia. Contrary to American assumptions, these initiatives are directed not at the United States but towards the integration of Eurasia, with China inherently assuming a leadership role owing to its scale and vitality.

 

Freeman points out that American strategists have always feared hegemonic control of Eurasia. Now, regional organizations like BRICS and the SCO are moving toward a merger, excluding the United States mainly by its own choice. China’s invitation to the US to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank was declined, highlighting this self-exclusion. These organizations do not seek to overthrow the post-World War II order but to restore it, referencing the power and authority of global institutions like the World Trade Organization and the UN Charter, which are rarely mentioned in Western statements now.

 

The emerging bloc is primarily united by its decision to exclude the United States, underscoring the importance of sovereignty, freedom of choice, and protection from external interference.

 

Western Retreat and Globalization Beyond the West

 

The West is progressively withdrawing into a 'citadel,” even as globalization persists in other regions. Both Europe and North America (excluding Canada) have developed apprehensions toward the processes that historically contributed to prosperity; however, such processes continue to unfold across the globe. Recently, China and ASEAN have reinforced their trade and investment relationships, with ASEAN now serving as China’s largest trading partner. Regional organizations are gaining influence, a trend notably characterized by the absence of the United States.

 

Demonstrations of Sovereignty and Anti-American Sentiment

 

Recent military parades in Beijing and Brazil illustrate the increasing assertiveness of regional powers. In Brazil, substantial crowds reaffirmed Brazilian sovereignty in opposition to the United States in response to demands for constitutional reforms. Freeman characterizes a transition towards a multinodal reality, with regional alliances seeking to restore elements of the American-initiated post-World War II order, including the rule of law and trade liberalization—processes that are currently lacking in the transatlantic region.

 

European Dynamics and Transatlantic Partnership

 

The transatlantic partnership is going through some changes. Europe is facing some internal challenges, as shown in NATO consultations after Russian drones violated Polish airspace. Although the United States still leads NATO, European unity and quick responses are starting to erode, especially with political instability in countries such as France and Germany. However, Italy, under Meloni, seems to be less affected by these concerns.

 

Freeman anticipates a probable retreat of the United States to the Western Hemisphere, advocating for a more assertive, conventional form of hegemony. This transition is evident in US protectionism and unpredictability, which hinder practical cooperation with allies such as South Korea and the European Union. Consequently, transatlantic relations are deteriorating, and tourist numbers have decreased due to concerns about US immigration enforcement.

 

Global Political Transformations and the UN System

 

Israel’s actions in Qatar took place at the same time as the UN General Assembly’s meeting, where discussions about recognizing a Palestinian state and possibly overriding US Security Council vetoes are happening. Europe has started suspending transactions with Israel in response to its actions in Palestine, and Spain has taken strong measures.

 

Since World War II, the US and G7 have promoted a “rules-based order." However, it now appears to be a system of selective rule-making, where the US and its allies exempt themselves while expecting others to comply. We're seeing various regional groups form, with some, such as those dealing with Ukraine, trying to maintain peace, and others, like those resisting sovereignty intrusions, pushing back. Meanwhile, India is attempting to balance its non-alignment with the US, while tensions escalate.

 

Future Outlook: Regionalization and Exclusion of the US

 

Freeman expects that in the next few decades, regional groups will work together as they did after World War II, but without the involvement of the US. The US’s current approach—using bullying, extortion, and unpredictability—might discourage countries from forming alliances. Countries like Qatar and India, which are pursuing a non-aligned approach, might look to China for cooperation, especially since China has strongly condemned Israel's violations of sovereignty.

 

Several Middle Eastern countries, including those in the Gulf and Saudi Arabia, are coming together to form an anti-Israeli alliance, with the thawing of relations between Iran and Arab countries picking up steam.

 

Regional Tensions and Security

 

Israel’s strong alliance with the US has led to policy choices that might become difficult to sustain as American influence decreases. Rather than seeking common ground, Israel has taken a more assertive stance, which could lead to actions from the UN General Assembly, such as possibly suspending its membership. Several countries are now calling for the UN headquarters to be moved from New York because of the US ignoring agreements, especially the ban on the Palestinian delegation. With the World Trade Organization facing challenges and the UN potentially in a similar situation, new organizations might develop that better represent today’s global power structure.

 

Iran: A Civilizational State Amid Sanctions

 

Iran, like China and Russia, is a civilizational state with a rich and cohesive history. Its main priority is safeguarding national identity, independence, and strategic autonomy. The actions of the US and Israel have limited Iran’s options. At the same time, new financial tools—like secondary sanctions and the decline of dollar dominance—have made it easier for Iran to work outside dollar-based systems. Increasingly, trade is being settled in other currencies, particularly the Chinese yuan, and alternative currency arrangements are gaining popularity.

 

Although Iran is not experiencing strong economic growth, its people have shown strong support for their leaders in the face of external threats. Israel’s repeated attempts to target leadership in other countries haven’t always worked out as planned, but they continue to pursue this strategy. Freeman points out that Iran is now more equipped to respond to attacks than Israel is to carry them out, though the uncertainty surrounding Israeli actions still exists.

 

Conclusion

 

The global landscape is undergoing a significant transformation, with substantial developments across Eurasia, South America, the Caribbean, and Africa. The capacity of the United States to safeguard its allies, including Israel and Qatar, is demonstrably uncertain.

 

Projections suggest a potential future in which regional alliances will predominantly shape the international order, potentially diminishing the United States' influence. The sustainability of existing global institutions, such as the United Nations and the World Trade Organization, is being increasingly scrutinized, and alternative frameworks may emerge to more accurately reflect the contemporary distribution of power.

 

With that, we'll wrap up our conversation. Thanks so much to Ambassador Freeman for sharing your time and insights. I'm looking forward to our following conversation!

 

 

DMITRY POLYANSKIY: DRONES IN POLAND AND PREVENTING NUCLEAR WAR

 

First Deputy Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, Dmitry Polyanskiy, claims that the drones entering Poland were part of a Ukrainian false-flag operation, which he says could lead to escalation.

 

The Russia-US diplomatic efforts go beyond the proxy war in Ukraine, as agreements on arms control are falling apart, making successful talks crucial to preventing nuclear war.

 

 

Watch the Video Here (24 minutes, 28 seconds)

 

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
16 September 2025

 

US-Russia Diplomatic Relations: A Look at Insights from Dmitry Polyanskiy

 

Welcome back, everyone. Today, we are joined once again by Dmitry Polyanskiy, the First Deputy Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations. The discussion will focus on the latest diplomatic developments between the United States and Russia.

 

Recent Drone Allegations in Poland

 

Let's start with the recent events related to the alleged drone incursions in Poland. Several European countries have called these incidents attacks and urged NATO to take a tougher stance. However, media coverage often doesn't give a fair representation of Russia's perspective. When asked about Russia's stance, Mr. Pollanski said he was confused about the intense attention and "hype" surrounding the event.

 

He emphasized the need to investigate who benefits from these incidents, arguing that Russia doesn't gain from the current situation. The only evidence tying the drones to Russia was inscriptions, which could be easily faked in Ukraine. Mr. Polyanskiy claimed the drones came from within Ukraine, not necessarily from Russia, and some of the evidence presented has been questionable.

 

During the discussion, previous missile incidents blamed on Russia were brought up, but they were later found to have come from Ukraine, showing a pattern of hasty accusations.

 

Mr. Polyanskiy questioned why Russia would be testing European defense systems now, after years of conflict. He noted that Ukraine might benefit more from the increased international attention and support from neighboring NATO countries, which is something Ukrainian leaders have been advocating for. Despite strong anti-Russian sentiment, Poland remains cautious about escalating its involvement.

 

Mr. Polyanskiy spoke out against the rush to blame Russia for border incidents, criticizing the lack of objective analysis among European experts and media. He cautioned that this mindset could lead to more provocations and expressed disappointment with the current approach of labeling Russia as responsible without solid evidence.

 

Differences in Western Approaches to the Conflict

 

The discussion shifted to the broader differences between Western countries regarding the ongoing conflict. Mr. Pollanski pointed out that the United States, especially under the leadership of President Trump, seems more willing to bring the war to a close, despite divisions within the country. Meanwhile, Europeans appear less inclined to find a swift solution.

 

Trump's recent comments advocating for secondary sanctions against Russia, which could also impact China and India, were a topic of discussion. These measures could have the unintended effect of isolating Europe and triggering significant economic fallout, making them unlikely to happen. Mr. Pollanski saw these moves as attempts to pass the burden of dealing with Russia to Europeans or to reinforce U.S. control over Europe.

 

He noted that Trump’s rhetoric aligns with his down-to-earth, business-focused approach, which prioritizes U.S. national interests. Trump’s criticism of NATO was based on concerns about uneven defense spending, not ideological differences. He's seeking a solution that benefits the U.S. economy and doesn't exacerbate the financial burden. Trump’s stance on sanctions follows this line of thinking, asking if European citizens are willing to pay the costs. Mr. Pollanski stressed that Trump’s actions are driven by what's best for America, not loyalty to any other country.

 

European Involvement and Ideological Perspectives

 

Mr. Pollanski drew a contrast between Trump’s practical approach and Europe’s more ideological stance. He claimed that European leaders are deeply invested in the "anti-Russia project" in Ukraine and are hesitant to admit past mistakes or acknowledge the flaws of the Ukrainian regime, including human rights abuses and corruption. According to him, European countries don't hold Ukraine to the same standards of minority rights and democratic values they maintain at home.

 

He pointed out that solving the crisis as Trump suggests would mean European leaders having to acknowledge their mistakes and the anti-Russian tone of their Ukraine policies, which they're hesitant to do. As a result, Europe’s approach stays driven by ideology rather than pragmatism, causing a rift with the United States.

 

Mr. Pollanski warned against oversimplifying these dynamics by labeling leaders as pro- or anti-NATO, Russia, or Ukraine. He instead suggested focusing on national interests, citing the example of Hungarian President Orban, who prioritizes Hungary's best interests.

 

Legacy of the Alaska Summit

 

Discussion turned to the Alaska meeting between Presidents Putin and Trump, and its lasting impact. Mr. Pollanski saw this event as crucial, not just for talks about Ukraine, but also for global stability and nuclear security. He noted that many countries were wary of a thaw in U.S.-Russia relations, especially major European capitals.

 

Despite attempts to undermine the spirit of cooperation that emerged from the Alaska summit, Mr. Pollanski remained hopeful about its lasting effects. He characterized the meeting as a conversation between two "adults in the room," capable of thoughtful analysis and understanding the stakes, especially when it comes to the risk of escalation and nuclear war. He acknowledged that some parties tried to twist the summit's outcome, portraying Russia as solely to blame, but insisted that the direction set in Alaska remains clear and unchanged.

 

He emphasized that addressing the underlying causes of the Ukrainian crisis is crucial for a lasting, fair, and sustainable resolution. Given the complexity and history of the conflict, quick fixes are unlikely. Genuine cooperation from all parties is essential, but it's currently absent, especially from European leaders and the Ukrainian government.

 

Nuclear Security and Arms Control Challenges

 

Regarding nuclear security, Mr. Pollanski stressed the alarming state of arms control agreements and the pressing need to renew the START treaty, the only remaining framework for U.S.-Russia disarmament efforts. He pointed out the differing views between the U.S. and Russia on disarmament and non-proliferation, but underscored the importance of finding common ground for global security.

 

Mr. Pollanski gave credit to President Trump for understanding the importance of addressing the issue and pushing to extend the START treaty. He expressed regret over the breakdown of earlier arms control agreements by previous U.S. administrations, highlighting the vulnerability that comes with not having these agreements in place. His primary concern is that we extend the START treaty before it expires next February to avoid entering uncharted territory.

 

Conclusion

 

In conclusion, Mr. Pollanski expressed hope that the era of diplomatic stalemate has come to an end and that the Russian Federation and the United States will make progress on key issues, such as arms control and the Ukrainian crisis. He appreciated the chance to share his views with the interviewer.

 

 

IAN PROUD: COALITION OF THE UNWILLING THREATENS RUSSIA

 

Ian Proud contends that Europeans are locked into a pattern of reinforcing failed policies toward Russia, and he examines the underlying reasons for this absence of political creativity.

 

As a member of His Majesty's Diplomatic Service from 1999 to 2023, Proud held various senior positions, including a stint as a senior officer at the British Embassy in Moscow from July 2014 to February 2019, when UK-Russia relations were particularly strained.

 

During his time in Moscow, he served in multiple roles, including Head of Chancery, Economic Counsellor (responsible for advising UK ministers on economic sanctions), Chair of the Crisis Committee, Director of the Diplomatic Academy for Eastern Europe and Central Asia, and Vice Chair of the Board at the Anglo-American School.

 

 

Watch the Video Here (32 minutes, 02 seconds)

 

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
17 September 2025

 

European Responses to the Ukraine Conflict: Insights from Ian Proud

 

Joining us today is Ian Proud, a former British diplomat who held various roles at the British Embassy in Moscow from 2014 to 2019, including Head of the Chancery and Advisor to UK Ministers on Economic Sanctions. Today's discussion centers on his recent article, "Coalition of the Willing Gets Stuck in Groundhog Day," which examines the European push to deploy troops in Ukraine and confront Russia, as well as the argument that Russia shouldn't have a say in these decisions.

 

Groundhog Day Analogy in European Policy

 

Think of the concept of "Groundhog Day" to describe how European leaders seem stuck in a cycle with Russia. Every day, politicians like Von der Leyen and Mark Rutte appear to go through the same motions and make the same decisions, much like in the 1993 movie "Groundhog Day." In the film, the main character learns from his repeated experiences and eventually changes his approach to break the cycle. However, European policymakers seem to keep doing the same things, despite their lack of success, and are no closer to achieving their goals—goals that, according to Proud, are unclear except for the ultimate defeat of Russia in a war that isn't going in their favor.

 

Strategy and Sloganeering

 

One thing is missing from European leaders' discussions: a clear strategy. A proper strategy involves setting clear goals and mapping out realistic ways to achieve them, using the resources at hand. However, the conversation is bogged down by empty slogans like "stand up to Putin," "counter reward aggression," and calls for "unity." These phrases lack real meaning and don't lead to a coherent plan. As a result, the same actions are repeated without making any real progress. A good example is the ongoing push for Ukraine to join NATO, which, according to Proud, actually hurts the chances of peace.

 

Committee Decision-Making and Status Quo Preservation

 

According to Proud, trying to win a war through a committee is bound to fail. The European Union and NATO, with their large memberships, face a challenge in agreeing on decisive action due to the need for collective decision-making. This often results in a preference for maintaining the status quo rather than making significant changes. Efforts by figures like Donald Trump to create a peace framework for Ukraine have been met with resistance from European institutions, which tend to be hesitant to change and struggle to reach consensus on new approaches.

 

Hardline Positions and Institutional Stagnation

 

The inflexibility of key leaders, such as Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas, exacerbates the European Union’s struggle to adapt. According to Proud, the EU is a vast, unresponsive bureaucracy that merely repeats the same actions over and over. In contrast, Britain's post-Brexit position is uncertain, with ongoing confusion about its stance on Russia and Ukraine.

 

NATO-Russia Council and Lack of Flexibility

 

Historically, the NATO-Russia Council has shown that large multilateral groups can be inflexible. After NATO countries reach a consensus, there's little room to consider Russian views, resulting in one-sided demands and ultimatums. Proud suggests the EU faces similar challenges, with consensus only achievable through continued confrontation rather than exploring other options.

 

Origins of European Confrontation

 

According to Proud, the current standoff with Russia is primarily due to American influence, with the UK playing a supporting role. He believes the European bureaucracy, characterized by slow decision-making, lacks the capacity to break this cycle. Instead, he views this as a result of institutional stagnation rather than intentional policy, leading to a constant "Groundhog Day" situation.

 

Decision-Making Processes in European Institutions

 

Based on his time in the Foreign Office, Proud characterizes EU meetings as long and unproductive, with each member state sharing its views but few decisions being made. On the other hand, one-on-one meetings between leaders, like those between President Trump and President Putin, enable direct decision-making. In Europe, the absence of a central figure with the authority to make decisions leaves the region mired in indecision and red tape.

 

Responses to Russian Drone Incidents

 

Recent claims of Russian drone incursions have triggered familiar demands from European countries to ramp up pressure on Russia, including ideas to revive no-fly zones. However, these proposals rely on the assumption that Russia won't respond militarily to assets in neighboring countries—an assumption that former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev disputes. Proud describes the European response as predictable: holding meetings, expressing outrage, and repeating calls for increased pressure, without resulting in meaningful change.

 

Loss of EU Influence and Legislative Power

 

Europe's former influence as a legislative superpower, which enabled it to sway smaller countries through trade deals, has waned. The pull of EU membership is waning, and the Union has lost its influence over Russia. Despite this change, European leaders haven't adjusted their tactics, sticking to meetings and statements that no longer hold the same power.

 

War of Narratives and Lack of Evidence-Based Policy

 

Controlling information and narratives has sparked widespread distrust in media coverage, with stories often fueling conflict. Proud points out the lack of demands for a thorough investigation into incidents like drone attacks, mirroring a larger trend toward post-truth politics, where evidence is viewed as a hindrance and the narrative is enough.

 

Domestic Political Drivers and Instability

 

Developments increasingly drive decisions on foreign policy at home. Take Poland’s involvement in the conflict, for instance - concerns about national security and economic interests mainly drive it. Other countries, like Germany and France, are limited by domestic politics and financial struggles, which make it challenging to escalate tensions. Proud expects a period of intense instability and economic hardship among major European powers, leading to the rise of more nationalist governments that may attempt to maintain peaceful relationships with all countries, including Russia.

 

Nationalism and Foreign Policy

 

According to Proud, nationalism isn't inherently bad if it's about advancing one’s national interests without harming others. To have an effective foreign policy, you must begin by examining how international issues affect national security and prosperity. In this view, nationalism means avoiding harm to oneself when dealing with other countries.

 

European Political Legitimacy and Free Speech

 

One major challenge Europe faces is a crisis of legitimacy stemming from the suppression of the free press and free speech, particularly in the UK. Democracy relies on open debate and citizens being able to choose between different options. When free speech is stifled, it undermines democratic processes and contributes to citizens feeling disconnected from the political system, leading to more significant problems.

 

The Role of Alternative Media

 

With a positive tone, Proud wraps up by highlighting the crucial role alternative media plays in offering diverse viewpoints and broadening people's understanding. He thinks this is a vital component of the ongoing transformation Europe needs.

 

 

What is the Side of the Story that is Not Yet Decisive? Edited and annotated by Abraham A. van Kempen

 

 

SCOTT RITTER: NATO PREPARES FOR WAR WITH RUSSIA

 

Scott Ritter is a former Major, Intelligence Officer, US Marine, and UN Weapons Inspector.

 

Ritter argues that the war rhetoric between Russia and NATO has escalated to dramatic levels following the drone incident in Poland.

 

 

View the Video Here (30 minutes, 18 seconds)

 

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
17 September 2025

 

Analysis of Mounting Tensions Between NATO and Russia

 

Today, we’re joined by Scott Ritter, a former US Marine and UN weapons inspector, to discuss the growing tensions between NATO and Russia.

 

Recent Incidents and Reactions

 

Poland and Romania have accused Russia of violating their airspace using decoy drones, with some calling these acts attacks and pushing for a no-fly zone. In response, former Russian President Dmitri Medvedev claimed that such moves would be equivalent to direct war. At the same time, Kremlin spokesperson Peskov argued that NATO is already effectively at war with Russia. These developments come as Russia and Belarus conduct joint military exercises called Sabad.

 

Assessment of Drone Incidents

 

Scott Ritter stressed that any scenario involving potential direct conflict between NATO and Russia should be taken seriously. However, he clarified that Russia didn't attack Poland or Romania. The Romanian drone incident probably involved a drone veering off course due to electronic warfare, not a deliberate Russian incursion. The incident in Poland was a setup by Ukraine, using disposable decoy drones they'd gathered and repaired over time, then sent into Poland in a coordinated way. Polish authorities weren't caught off guard and played along, declaring an Article 4 emergency to trigger a NATO surge of resources into Poland.

 

NATO's Military Response

 

Although NATO did launch a military surge, it was limited in scope. The UK, France, and Germany sent a total of seven fighter jets to Poland, while the US deployed ten F-35s to Puerto Rico for reasons unrelated to the situation. These moves suggest that European countries aren't taking the threat seriously from a military perspective. Poland did boost its border troops by 30,000 to 40,000, but that's hardly a substantial show of military strength.

 

Integration of Air Defenses

 

One key development is Ukraine's training with NATO on air defenses to take down Russian drones and missiles. This training allows the integration of Polish and NATO air defense systems with Ukraine's, creating a force that can extend its air defense umbrella to western Ukraine if needed. This marks a significant change from previous limits on direct NATO involvement in Ukraine.

 

Potential Escalation and European Options

 

There's growing concern that as Ukraine’s military crumbles, European and NATO countries will face a tough choice: either negotiate an end to the war or step up their involvement. Since European leaders have ruled out talks with Russia, it seems more likely that they'll escalate. Still, Scott Ritter believes Europe lacks the capacity to make a significant difference and won't intervene aggressively.

 

Scenarios for Western Ukraine

 

Discussions have taken place about Western Ukraine possibly coming under Polish control as a form of controlled escalation. As Ukraine weakens, resources and refugees will head west, creating conditions for Poland to take over Western Ukraine. Poland would need to expand its air defenses into this region and meet demilitarization and denazification commitments, which could include disarming Ukrainian military forces in areas it controls. Similar talks have considered the possibility of Hungary and Romania taking control over other Ukrainian territories.

 

Russian and Polish Coordination

 

Any Polish intervention in Western Ukraine would likely need Russia's approval first, since Belarus has warned it will join the war if Poland acts alone. Scott Ritter believes that intelligence agencies on both sides may have already reached an agreement to prevent unpredictable outcomes and ensure a controlled collapse of Ukraine.

 

NATO's Institutional Challenges

 

At the same time, NATO is facing significant challenges. Its Secretary General, Mark Rutte, is taking a hardline approach on Ukraine’s NATO membership and troop deployments. Yet, Europe's capabilities are limited, and most people don't want to see direct conflict with Russia. According to Scott Ritter, if NATO can't act decisively, it may fall apart as an organization.

 

Incrementalism and Risks of Miscalculation

 

There's a risk of escalating tensions and miscalculation, given the United States' significant role in logistics and targeting operations based in Germany. Although European leaders may think Russia won't retaliate, the fact is that Russia has inflicted substantial losses on Ukraine and damaged a lot of the equipment NATO has provided.

 

Current State and Prospects of the War

 

Russia is sticking to its strategy of wearing down Ukraine's military, crippling its forces and gradually taking over more territory. At the same time, economic and political turmoil are eroding Ukraine’s ability to keep fighting. This is likely to eventually lead to a combination of military, financial, and political collapse, leaving the way open for Russia and its allies to control the aftermath, including potentially dividing up territory.

 

The Role of the United States and Future Outlook

 

Scott Ritter thinks the US will eventually pull back its support for Ukraine, particularly if Europe doesn't meet the conditions Donald Trump set. If that happens, Ukraine’s collapse would speed up, and Europe's ability to help would be severely limited, leading to a humanitarian disaster. If the US and Europe refuse to negotiate and stick to their current narratives, the result could be catastrophic for Ukraine and the region.

 

Conclusion

 

Overall, the ongoing crisis between NATO and Russia is characterized by political posturing, limited military involvement, and preparations for a potential controlled collapse of Ukraine. The deployment of air defenses and the placement of troops indicate readiness for various scenarios, but a decisive intervention seems unlikely. If a collapse were to occur, the humanitarian impact could be dire, and the chances of a negotiated settlement are unclear.

 

 

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 awa