Js G

The United States has just nuked its own arms export business. Not with a missile. With a phone call. Pete Hegseth rang Estonia’s defense minister and told him the HIMARS and Javelin deliveries are on hold. Indefinitely. Months, not weeks. No timeline. No alternative. Just: sorry, we’re busy bombing Iran. And that’s it. Twenty years of patient alliance-building, vaporized in a Monday morning call. Here’s what European defense planners now know for certain: American weapons come with an asterisk. The asterisk reads “subject to cancellation whenever Washington decides its own adventure takes priority.” You can sign the contracts. You can train your soldiers. You can build your entire defensive posture around US systems. And then one day, the ammo stops. No warning. No plan B. Estonia is already shopping elsewhere. So is everyone else, with the kind of focus that only comes from genuine betrayal. The Americans think this is a pause. Europe knows it’s a divorce.

Comment l'éolien produit essentiellement des flux financiers du contribuable vers les promoteurs : 69% des revenus des parcs de St Brieuc, St Nazaire et Fécamp sont des subventions. Le contribuable ne paie pas de l'électricité, il paie des moulins à vent qui tournent essentiellement à perte.

How can dozens of ships defeat the US Blockade, as the FT repost below says is happening? The map shows how a tanker can travel from Kharg Island to Mumbai while remaining within the territorial waters of Pakistan and India. The US Blockade Rules and UNCLOS (UN Law of the Sea) give ships the right of innocent passage through a coastal state’s territorial sea, and it is the coastal state that will regulate that passage. Once in Pakistani or Indian waters, they can transfer their cargo or continue without entering international waters. @mercoglianos @johnkonrad

C'est pas récent ni original (et ça éclaire aussi pourquoi tant de "décoloniaux" tiennent à présenter tout Israélien comme un colon et le sionisme comme un nazisme.) Tal Bruttmann, historien de la Shoah, et d'autres historiens y ont déjà répondu.

Approximate estimates of percentages of U.S. munitions expended in Iran war, per @CNN : 50% THAAD interceptors 50% Patriot interceptors 45% Precision Strike Missiles 30% Tomahawk missiles 20% Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles 20% Standard Missiles (SM-3 and SM-6)

Daily U-turns, whether the Strait of Hormuz is open or closed, are reckless. Transit through the Strait must remain free of charge. The EU has reached the political agreement to widen our sanctions regime to also target those responsible for breaches to freedom of navigation. None of us want to see a nuclear-armed Iran. We are in agreement with our regional partners that any durable settlement must address also other issues in addition to the nuclear one, including Iran's missile programme and its continued support to terrorist groups. My press remarks following today's Foreign Affairs Council ↓

German authorities seem to have zero recognition of the security dilemma, and even believe it is immoral to recognise that there is any security competition. Germany assisted in toppling the government in Ukraine, developed Ukraine as a frontline against Russia, and sabotaged the Minsk peace agreement—yet any reaction by Russia would inevitably be considered “unprovoked", and Germany predictably went into full moral outrage. Germany can cut energy deals with Russia, stay silent about the U.S. destroying Nord Stream, and assist in targeting Russian oil refineries and hunting Russian commercial vessels—yet Russia cutting energy supplies to Germany is met with righteous indignation as it is believed to be an unprovoked “hybrid war”. Similarly, German-backed attacks on Russia will at some point trigger retaliatory strikes against Germany. In the minds of social constructivists, recognising this reality and the world as it is, is consistently condemned as “legitimising” Russian aggression, taking the side of Russia etc. etc. Recognising how your own side threatens the security of others and having the foresight to predict how the opponent will likely react is effectively criminalised. Armed with normative arguments and moral righteousness, how have any of the "pro-Ukrainian" policies since 2013 actually helped Ukraine? What was smeared as "pro-Russian" arguments in 2013/2014 would have resulted in Ukraine keeping its territory (including Crimea), its men and infrastructure. Is morality about chanting normative arguments, ignoring the security concerns of opponents and criminalising foresight? Or does morality demand that we recognise the world as it is to set achievable objectives?

La conference de révision du Traité de non prolifération (TNP) nucléaire débutera la semaine prochaine dans une ambiance électrique : - la Russie reproche à la France d'augmenter son arsenal nucléaire, jugeant cette décision comme hautement déstabilisatrice et potentielle menace pour Moscou (sans rire...), alors qu'elle possède plus de 4000 têtes nucléaires, contre moins de 300 actuellement pour la France - sachant que l'augmentation ne sera vraisemblablement pas significative, ne serait-ce qu'en raison des contraintes de matières fissiles disponibles. - l'OTAN, au travers de secrétaire général adjoint Boris Ruge, soutient la décision française et la présente comme "mesurée, raisonnable et transparente au regard de la menace". - à l'inverse, l'OTAN reproche à la Russie d'avoir violé ses engagements à plusieurs reprises et d'utiliser la rhétorique nucléaire à fins de coercition, y compris par le tir au combat d'IRBM duaux (conventiionnels/nucléaires) ORESHNIK à deux reprises contre l'Ukraine, souvent interprété comme un signal à l'Alliance atlantique. - l'OTAN reproche à la Chine l'expansion massive de son arsenal, qui est passé de moins de 200 têtes nucléaires à plus de 600 en quelques années, et qui devrait l'amener vers les 1000 têtes à l'horizon 2030. - la Chine s'en offusque et répond qu'elle a toujours maintenu un arsenal à un niveau minimal requis pour sa sécurité nationale, tout en refusant toute course aux armements. Position qui n'est pas sans rappeler celle de... Paris - toute proportion gardée. - la position des États-Unis est très attendue, le TNP étant l'un des derniers traités multilatéraux dans lesquels ils sont engagés, alors que l'administration actuelle ne cache pas son mépris pour ce type de traités. Dans tous les cas, la France et l'OTAN comptent réaffirmer leurs engagements internationaux sur le long terme vis-à-vis du TNP - la hausse de l'arsenal français étant une entorse temporaire à l'esprit du traité, mais jugée nécessaire puisque l'ensemble des autres États nucléaires se réarment. Sale temps pour le contrôle des armements ☢️

Commentaire: - l’Allemagne pense sa remontée en puissance militaire et donne une direction à ses moyens (rappelons que dans la trajectoire actuelle, le budget militaire de l’Allemagne sera le double de celui de la France à court terme). On peut considérer qu’ils ont beaucoup à rattraper, mais ça ne va pas durer longtemps. La trajectoire, si cela fonctionne, est de faire de facto de l’Allemagne le grand intégrateur militaire sur lequel vont se greffer l’Europe centrale et du Nord. 5/

"Aucun transit par l'oléoduc Droujba ne sera autorisé": la Russie va cesser de livrer du pétrole kazakh à l'Allemagne dès le 1er mai prochain l.bfmtv.com/jaZs

Le livret A ne doit pas financer la rente des oligarques de l'éolien en mer. Sans aide, (ie la subvention de 2 milliards pour 13 éoliennes) le projet Bretagne sud1 perdrait 425 millions d'Euros et c'est encore sous-estimé ! « Les autorités françaises ont calculé la VAN

‘In the final analysis, the problem of base vulnerability is a hard problem. There is no good solution to this problem. And therefore deterrence in Asia is dead. The underlying reason for the nonexistence of a solution is the fact that China is now vastly more powerful than the United States. The United States will soon reach an accord with Iran that marks Iran’s acceptable as a great power whose interests must be respected. What this means is that the days of playing empire in the gulf region are over. With deterrence in Asia dead, the American position in Asia is also now past is sell-by date. And Europe has already been abandoned. So the end of the empire is now in sight.’

à ce stade le problème n’est même plus la fuite le problème c’est le déséquilibre total entre l’appétit de collecte de données et la faiblesse de protection un État qui exige toujours + d’infos personnelles sans garantir leur inviolabilité finit par détruire la base même de sa légitimité numérique

Holocaust Museum, Amsterdam

Mapped the IDF's newly declared "Forward Defense Zone" in south Lebanon. Its maritime boundary fully absorbs Lebanon's Qana gas field, whose exploration rights were explicitly guaranteed under the 2022 US-brokered maritime border agreement. More maps in this thread 🧵

Interesting Chinese expert paper on how to take advantage of what is seen as declining U.S. hegemonic power. Not by seeking a direct confrontation but by "buying out" U.S. imperial assets gradually as they become unsustainable due to overreach: sinification.org/p/liquidating-…

Techlordism est beaucoup plus parlant que technofascisme et traduit bien mieux ce qui attend les américains. Chez nous par contre, technofascisme est sans doute plus approprié. Un technofascisme inféodé aux techlordism américain.

The more interesting part of Von Der Leyen's quote isn't so much Türkiye's new inclusion on the ever-growing list of what the EU considers "malign influence" but it's the "completing the European continent" bit. Concretely what she meant by this, and we know it from the fact her spokesperson literally said that's what she meant (turkiyetoday.com/region/eu-says…), is a reference to the absorption of the Western Balkans (Serbia, Bosnia, Albania, etc.) into the EU. But note the causality link that she's making between getting these countries in the EU and "freedom from influence". This implies that, basically, she has a zombie-movie logic to the EU: either you are in the interior, or outside it being contaminated - and, eventually, becoming a contaminant yourself. Türkiye, in this framing, is now a zombie: not only contaminated but a contaminant, which makes it all the more urgent, in her logic, to hurry the still-uncontaminated inside before they turn as well. To call this a toxic view of the world would be the understatement of the century. I wrote an article back in January (open.substack.com/pub/arnaudbert…) saying that one of the biggest "grey rhinos" (i.e. a problem that everyone can see is coming but that no-one does anything about) out there is Europe's search for a new ideology, given that liberal hegemonism is dead and Europe now has very little sense of purpose. The point I made was that this isn't something you should take lightly: Europe has amply demonstrated in its history that it has an unparalleled capacity for ideological extremism. Steered in the right direction this gave us beautiful cathedrals and the Enlightenment, but steered in the wrong one it gave us BOTH world wars and multiple genocides. Which means you need to be extremely wary of which way the replacement ideology goes: either constructive (oriented toward building and flourishing) or mobilizational (oriented against an Other). The fact we now have the EU's top official articulating a worldview built around ideological purity and absorption of peripheral states to prevent contamination isn't a reassuring sign...

Oui, l"UE n'a plus de légitimité depuis cette forfaiture historique. Nous vivons depuis 2008 dans une technocratie post-démocratique. Les élections ne sont plus qu'un "grand théâtre" (Todd) où des figurants font mine de s'affronter pour assurer "l'alternance unique" (Michéa).

Just the beginning. Jet fuel has supplies have completely collapsed