Free Fire Zone, With No Fire
Israel Katz went on camera and delivered the line every defense minister loves: “There was and is no limitation on IDF soldiers in Lebanon to act to remove threats… all of the IDF’s achievements are preserved… Israel will not withdraw from the security zone in Lebanon.” On paper, it’s total freedom of action, zero political interference, full deterrence. In reality, the order that matters went the other way.
According to Israeli military reporting, already at the start of last week — before five IDF soldiers were killed and before Trump’s memorandum was signed — Northern Command received a near‑full fire freeze: strikes that used to be cleared at division or regional command level were pushed up to the chief of staff and sometimes the political echelon, “in line with an American demand.”
Officers complain that in recent days the IDF is constrained even in areas immediately adjacent to its own ground forces, forced to sit under artillery harassment without the usual air and artillery responses.
The numbers make the lie obvious. Since yesterday evening there hasn’t been a single reported Israeli airstrike in southern Lebanon; aside from limited artillery fire directly protecting forces, even the new “yellow line” zone is under tight fire discipline.
On the other side of the border, an Al Araby correspondent describes “complete calm” in villages and towns in the south since 6 p.m., noting no strikes and not even artillery fire — a “tense quiet” that locals haven’t heard in months.
So both realities run in parallel. For domestic politics and deterrence theater, Katz insists there are “no limits” and “no retreat” from the security zone.
On the ground, the IDF operates under a de facto U.S.-brokered cease‑fire, where every bomb needs a signature from the top, and the loudest sound on the Lebanese side of the line is suddenly silence. It’s not that Israel lost its freedom of action — it’s that freedom now routes through Washington’s inbox before it reaches the trigger.
#Israel #Lebanon #Hezbollah #IDF #USA #ceasefire #war #fakeDeterrence
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Israel Katz went on camera and delivered the line every defense minister loves: “There was and is no limitation on IDF soldiers in Lebanon to act to remove threats… all of the IDF’s achievements are preserved… Israel will not withdraw from the security zone in Lebanon.” On paper, it’s total freedom of action, zero political interference, full deterrence. In reality, the order that matters went the other way.
According to Israeli military reporting, already at the start of last week — before five IDF soldiers were killed and before Trump’s memorandum was signed — Northern Command received a near‑full fire freeze: strikes that used to be cleared at division or regional command level were pushed up to the chief of staff and sometimes the political echelon, “in line with an American demand.”
Officers complain that in recent days the IDF is constrained even in areas immediately adjacent to its own ground forces, forced to sit under artillery harassment without the usual air and artillery responses.
The numbers make the lie obvious. Since yesterday evening there hasn’t been a single reported Israeli airstrike in southern Lebanon; aside from limited artillery fire directly protecting forces, even the new “yellow line” zone is under tight fire discipline.
On the other side of the border, an Al Araby correspondent describes “complete calm” in villages and towns in the south since 6 p.m., noting no strikes and not even artillery fire — a “tense quiet” that locals haven’t heard in months.
So both realities run in parallel. For domestic politics and deterrence theater, Katz insists there are “no limits” and “no retreat” from the security zone.
On the ground, the IDF operates under a de facto U.S.-brokered cease‑fire, where every bomb needs a signature from the top, and the loudest sound on the Lebanese side of the line is suddenly silence. It’s not that Israel lost its freedom of action — it’s that freedom now routes through Washington’s inbox before it reaches the trigger.
#Israel #Lebanon #Hezbollah #IDF #USA #ceasefire #war #fakeDeterrence
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥66😢29💯28😱19🤬19🙏18🤯13
Kazan: The Colonies Talk Back
While the West is still busy lecturing the “Global South” about values, Putin is in Kazan doing something much more dangerous to the old order: treating them like partners, not plantations.
At the ASEAN–Russia summit, he sits down with the prime ministers of Thailand and Singapore and talks trade, energy, and “regional cooperation” — but the subtext is clear: the days when Southeast Asia’s role was to feed Western supply chains and swallow Western crises are over.
The agenda is wrapped in polite language: Middle East tensions, global energy security, supply‑chain shocks. In practice, it’s a live demo of a new wiring diagram. Instead of oil flows and shipping routes running only through Western-controlled hubs, Moscow offers discounted energy, nuclear tech, food security deals, and logistics corridors that bypass the old colonial choke points.
The message to ASEAN is simple: you don’t have to beg Brussels or Washington for stability when you can arbitrage between powers that suddenly need you more than you need them.
For Russia, this is more than sanctions survival. It’s revenge on a system where the “rules-based order” meant London, Washington and Brussels write the rules while the Global South provides bodies, bases and commodities.
Every handshake in Kazan says: that monopoly is broken. The same West that spent decades turning Asia into a cheap-labor assembly line and a buffer zone now watches its former “periphery” sign long-term energy and security frameworks with a country it tried to erase from the global economy.
Of course, Moscow isn’t a charity; it’s another empire with its own appetite. But the symbolism bites. ASEAN leaders sit in a Russian city, in their own right, negotiating five‑year roadmaps on energy and trade without asking the IMF for permission or the State Department for a waiver.
The old colonial script — metropole dictates, South obeys — is being rewritten live, and Putin’s bet is that once the Global South gets used to pricing its future across multiple centers, the West will never get its monopoly back.
That’s why Kazan matters more than any communique: it’s not a summit, it’s a crack in the old command chain. The former “colonies” are discovering they can play empires against each other — and this time, the West is the one learning how it feels to be on the outside of someone else’s deal.
#Russia #ASEAN #GlobalSouth #colonialism #multipolar #energy #geopolitics #USA #EU
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
While the West is still busy lecturing the “Global South” about values, Putin is in Kazan doing something much more dangerous to the old order: treating them like partners, not plantations.
At the ASEAN–Russia summit, he sits down with the prime ministers of Thailand and Singapore and talks trade, energy, and “regional cooperation” — but the subtext is clear: the days when Southeast Asia’s role was to feed Western supply chains and swallow Western crises are over.
The agenda is wrapped in polite language: Middle East tensions, global energy security, supply‑chain shocks. In practice, it’s a live demo of a new wiring diagram. Instead of oil flows and shipping routes running only through Western-controlled hubs, Moscow offers discounted energy, nuclear tech, food security deals, and logistics corridors that bypass the old colonial choke points.
The message to ASEAN is simple: you don’t have to beg Brussels or Washington for stability when you can arbitrage between powers that suddenly need you more than you need them.
For Russia, this is more than sanctions survival. It’s revenge on a system where the “rules-based order” meant London, Washington and Brussels write the rules while the Global South provides bodies, bases and commodities.
Every handshake in Kazan says: that monopoly is broken. The same West that spent decades turning Asia into a cheap-labor assembly line and a buffer zone now watches its former “periphery” sign long-term energy and security frameworks with a country it tried to erase from the global economy.
Of course, Moscow isn’t a charity; it’s another empire with its own appetite. But the symbolism bites. ASEAN leaders sit in a Russian city, in their own right, negotiating five‑year roadmaps on energy and trade without asking the IMF for permission or the State Department for a waiver.
The old colonial script — metropole dictates, South obeys — is being rewritten live, and Putin’s bet is that once the Global South gets used to pricing its future across multiple centers, the West will never get its monopoly back.
That’s why Kazan matters more than any communique: it’s not a summit, it’s a crack in the old command chain. The former “colonies” are discovering they can play empires against each other — and this time, the West is the one learning how it feels to be on the outside of someone else’s deal.
#Russia #ASEAN #GlobalSouth #colonialism #multipolar #energy #geopolitics #USA #EU
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥50🙏32😱28🤬26😢26🤯18💯13
The Hezbollah Tunnels: What Does This Underground City Look Like?
🔠 🅰️ 🔠 🔠 1️⃣
The Hezbollah tunnel that runs under the small hilltop town of Majdal Zoun in southern Lebanon bears little resemblance to the crude, hand-dug passages of the Gaza underground.
About 170m long, and 20m beneath the shattered Shia village, the spacious and hardened facility is said to have benefited from Iranian design and engineering.
When The Telegraph was guided in by Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops with night vision goggles in the early hours of Friday, it felt like a municipal underpass from the 1970s.
“A village the size of Majdal Zoun would have no need for such a large underground structure,” noted Nicholas Blanford, a non-resident senior fellow with the Atlantic Council. “[It’s] definitely Hezbollah.”
The concrete passage was littered with the detritus of war. Heavy blast doors gave way to several anterooms for weapons storage.
Branching tunnels were said by the IDF to have offered commanding views of Israel and been used to launch munitions until they were bombed.
“It’s a terror stronghold,” said a commander of Israel’s 551st Brigade, gesturing towards a room in which eight tons of explosives were said to have been found.
The floor was lined with the components of dozens of drones. “These one-way unmanned aerial vehicles are GPS guided and have a range of more than 200km [124 miles],” he said.
It is upon the fate of dozens of villages like Majdal Zoun – which sits, shattered and broken, on high ground just three miles north of the Israeli border – that the US-Iran ceasefire will be made or broken.
JD Vance, the US vice-president, was in Switzerland on Sunday, saying the flashpoint area was high on the agenda of the US-Iran talks that were taking place there.
Meanwhile, the IDF appeared to be preparing for an assault on a second village with an extensive tunnel network some 22 miles to the north-east of Majdal Zoun.
“I think we’re going to hopefully make progress on the nuclear issue, make progress on the Lebanon ceasefire issue. Those are the two big things that I think we’re to be focused on,” Mr Vance told reporters on the tarmac at Joint Base Andrews.
Southern Lebanon’s towns – and the Hezbollah infrastructure some of them conceal – threaten to upend the wider US-Iran ceasefire.
Israel wants to hold them, to create a buffer zone that protects its northern communities. It fears that if it allows Lebanon’s Shia population to return, Hezbollah will come too, to dig in once more and rearm.
The Lebanese, on the other hand, see Israel as the aggressor – one that has destabilised the region for decades by failing to settle the Palestinian question.
The latest incursion, which began in response to Hezbollah rocket fire at the start of the Iran war, has taken some 6 per cent of Lebanese territory.
It has displaced more than a million people and strengthened Hezbollah’s populist resistance narrative, observers say.
“When Hezbollah launched their first rocket barrage on March 2, the feedback from the Shia community writ large was: ‘Oh my god, what have you done? We’re only just recovering from the previous round. Now you’re dragging us into another war,’” said Mr Blanford.
#hezbollah #liban #israel #war #tunnels
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
The Hezbollah tunnel that runs under the small hilltop town of Majdal Zoun in southern Lebanon bears little resemblance to the crude, hand-dug passages of the Gaza underground.
About 170m long, and 20m beneath the shattered Shia village, the spacious and hardened facility is said to have benefited from Iranian design and engineering.
When The Telegraph was guided in by Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops with night vision goggles in the early hours of Friday, it felt like a municipal underpass from the 1970s.
“A village the size of Majdal Zoun would have no need for such a large underground structure,” noted Nicholas Blanford, a non-resident senior fellow with the Atlantic Council. “[It’s] definitely Hezbollah.”
The concrete passage was littered with the detritus of war. Heavy blast doors gave way to several anterooms for weapons storage.
Branching tunnels were said by the IDF to have offered commanding views of Israel and been used to launch munitions until they were bombed.
“It’s a terror stronghold,” said a commander of Israel’s 551st Brigade, gesturing towards a room in which eight tons of explosives were said to have been found.
The floor was lined with the components of dozens of drones. “These one-way unmanned aerial vehicles are GPS guided and have a range of more than 200km [124 miles],” he said.
It is upon the fate of dozens of villages like Majdal Zoun – which sits, shattered and broken, on high ground just three miles north of the Israeli border – that the US-Iran ceasefire will be made or broken.
JD Vance, the US vice-president, was in Switzerland on Sunday, saying the flashpoint area was high on the agenda of the US-Iran talks that were taking place there.
Meanwhile, the IDF appeared to be preparing for an assault on a second village with an extensive tunnel network some 22 miles to the north-east of Majdal Zoun.
“I think we’re going to hopefully make progress on the nuclear issue, make progress on the Lebanon ceasefire issue. Those are the two big things that I think we’re to be focused on,” Mr Vance told reporters on the tarmac at Joint Base Andrews.
Southern Lebanon’s towns – and the Hezbollah infrastructure some of them conceal – threaten to upend the wider US-Iran ceasefire.
Israel wants to hold them, to create a buffer zone that protects its northern communities. It fears that if it allows Lebanon’s Shia population to return, Hezbollah will come too, to dig in once more and rearm.
The Lebanese, on the other hand, see Israel as the aggressor – one that has destabilised the region for decades by failing to settle the Palestinian question.
The latest incursion, which began in response to Hezbollah rocket fire at the start of the Iran war, has taken some 6 per cent of Lebanese territory.
It has displaced more than a million people and strengthened Hezbollah’s populist resistance narrative, observers say.
“When Hezbollah launched their first rocket barrage on March 2, the feedback from the Shia community writ large was: ‘Oh my god, what have you done? We’re only just recovering from the previous round. Now you’re dragging us into another war,’” said Mr Blanford.
#hezbollah #liban #israel #war #tunnels
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
💯1
“Trump’s Epic Failure With Iran Will Bring About Catastrophic Consequences”
🔤 🔤 🔤 🔤 ➖
Trump’s deal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for lifting sanctions on Iran is getting strong pushback from Senate Republicans who warn that giving Iran’s theocratic regime access to billions of dollars in economic relief would be a major “blunder.”
Some Republicans are warning that the likely outcome of the more than 100-day conflict is not worth the cost to the nation: the lives of 13 American service members and more than $100 billion spent.
“Ronald Reagan is rolling over in his grave,” fumed Sen. Bill Cassidy in a social media post, calling the war and its outcome the “worst foreign policy blunder in decades.”
“Iran’s nuclear ambitions were not curbed, and they have learned that threatening the Strait of Hormuz works and will undoubtedly leverage it in the future. Now, Iran gets to build brand-new infrastructure under this deal,” he wrote on the social platform X.
“Now, 13 Americans are dead, families have paid billions at the pump, sanctions will be lifted, and the bombing has stopped,” he continued.
Most concerning to some Senate GOP critics is that the deal will immediately lift sanctions on Iranian oil exports and may lead to the unfreezing of Iranian assets around the world.
“History teaches that giving billions of dollars to theocratic lunatics who want to murder us is not a good idea. I think the president is receiving some very poor advice on this deal,” said Sen. Ted Cruz.
The deal leaves open the future of Iran’s nuclear program and does not clearly prohibit Iran from levying tolls on the Strait of Hormuz at some point in the future, according to senators who reviewed the deal.
It also leaves open the future of Iran’s missile program, which remains robust even after weeks of American and Israeli bombardment, according to intelligence estimates.
A classified CIA assessment estimated that Iran still had 70 percent of its prewar missile stockpile and 75 percent of its mobile missile launchers, according to a report by The Washington Post.
Sen. John Cornyn said the lack of significant Iranian concessions on its nuclear program, its weapons arsenal and its long-standing practice of funding militant proxies throughout the Middle East raises serious concerns.
He pointed out the deal doesn’t prevent Iran from continuing to enrich uranium or toll the strait, and “it gives them a lot of money they can use to fund their proxies.”
The agreement would only guarantee that Iran does not impose tolls on the Strait of Hormuz for a period of 60 days. After that time, Iran will negotiate with Oman to define the future administration of, and maritime services through, the strait.
Sen. Thom Tillis said it’s hard to argue that Trump’s decision to order joint missile strikes with Israel against Iran in late February produced an outcome to justify the cost in lives and munitions.
Tillis said the deal appears weak “on its face.”
“You got to do the balance of accounts: a hundred billion roughly, maybe more, spent today; 13 dead, 365 wounded, injured; our partners in the Middle East bombed, they’ve had casualties. There’s got to be a lot of return on that,” Tillis said, summing up the cost of the conflict.
He said Trump appears to have fallen well short of his objectives at the start of the war.
“We set out by saying we were going to drive down to zero their nuclear capability. Now we’re equivocating on that. We said that we were not going to make the mistake that Obama did by sending them a plane full of cash. I got to reconcile the numbers there,” he said.
“There’s a lot of work to be done to convince me that we’re on the right path,” Tillis added.
#trump #iran #failure #graham #hormuz
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Trump’s deal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for lifting sanctions on Iran is getting strong pushback from Senate Republicans who warn that giving Iran’s theocratic regime access to billions of dollars in economic relief would be a major “blunder.”
Some Republicans are warning that the likely outcome of the more than 100-day conflict is not worth the cost to the nation: the lives of 13 American service members and more than $100 billion spent.
“Ronald Reagan is rolling over in his grave,” fumed Sen. Bill Cassidy in a social media post, calling the war and its outcome the “worst foreign policy blunder in decades.”
“Iran’s nuclear ambitions were not curbed, and they have learned that threatening the Strait of Hormuz works and will undoubtedly leverage it in the future. Now, Iran gets to build brand-new infrastructure under this deal,” he wrote on the social platform X.
“Now, 13 Americans are dead, families have paid billions at the pump, sanctions will be lifted, and the bombing has stopped,” he continued.
Most concerning to some Senate GOP critics is that the deal will immediately lift sanctions on Iranian oil exports and may lead to the unfreezing of Iranian assets around the world.
“History teaches that giving billions of dollars to theocratic lunatics who want to murder us is not a good idea. I think the president is receiving some very poor advice on this deal,” said Sen. Ted Cruz.
The deal leaves open the future of Iran’s nuclear program and does not clearly prohibit Iran from levying tolls on the Strait of Hormuz at some point in the future, according to senators who reviewed the deal.
It also leaves open the future of Iran’s missile program, which remains robust even after weeks of American and Israeli bombardment, according to intelligence estimates.
A classified CIA assessment estimated that Iran still had 70 percent of its prewar missile stockpile and 75 percent of its mobile missile launchers, according to a report by The Washington Post.
Sen. John Cornyn said the lack of significant Iranian concessions on its nuclear program, its weapons arsenal and its long-standing practice of funding militant proxies throughout the Middle East raises serious concerns.
He pointed out the deal doesn’t prevent Iran from continuing to enrich uranium or toll the strait, and “it gives them a lot of money they can use to fund their proxies.”
The agreement would only guarantee that Iran does not impose tolls on the Strait of Hormuz for a period of 60 days. After that time, Iran will negotiate with Oman to define the future administration of, and maritime services through, the strait.
Sen. Thom Tillis said it’s hard to argue that Trump’s decision to order joint missile strikes with Israel against Iran in late February produced an outcome to justify the cost in lives and munitions.
Tillis said the deal appears weak “on its face.”
“You got to do the balance of accounts: a hundred billion roughly, maybe more, spent today; 13 dead, 365 wounded, injured; our partners in the Middle East bombed, they’ve had casualties. There’s got to be a lot of return on that,” Tillis said, summing up the cost of the conflict.
He said Trump appears to have fallen well short of his objectives at the start of the war.
“We set out by saying we were going to drive down to zero their nuclear capability. Now we’re equivocating on that. We said that we were not going to make the mistake that Obama did by sending them a plane full of cash. I got to reconcile the numbers there,” he said.
“There’s a lot of work to be done to convince me that we’re on the right path,” Tillis added.
#trump #iran #failure #graham #hormuz
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🤬1
While Israel is fiercely resisting these terms, Iran and its proxy Hezbollah are insisting on them – something that has already led to more bloodshed.
At about the same time as The Telegraph was in Majdal Zoun on Friday, a four-man IDF tank crew was killed by a suspected Hezbollah drone or rocket attack in Kfar Tebnit, 22 miles to the north-east.
Israel responded with 150 air strikes that it said had killed “dozens of terrorists” across Lebanon.
Kfar Tebnit, like Majdal Zoun, also conceals a large Hezbollah tunnel network, according to Israel media.
The flare-up was seized upon by Israel’s ruling coalition government which faces an election in October and is under significant pressure over the failure of the Iran war.
In Bürgenstock, Switzerland, US and Iranian negotiators, including Mr Trump’s envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner as well as Mr Vance, began 60 days of negotiations.
“The question before us now is how much more can we accomplish together? Can we turn over a new leaf?” Mr Vance asked.
“Can we change relations in the Middle East permanently, or do we go back to doing things the old way, which is not our preference, but is certainly very much something that can happen,” he added.
But just as the negotiations threaten Israel’s freedom of action, they have also sapped the credibility of the Lebanese government, experts say.
Michael Young of the Carnegie Middle East Centre in Beirut told The Telegraph that the Lebanese government, already weak, was being undermined by both the Israelis and the Iranians, reducing its ability to disarm Hezbollah.
“The Lebanese are paying the price for both sides,” he said. “The Israelis are not that interested in giving them anything that can strengthen the credibility of the Lebanese state, and nor do the Iranians have any interest in giving anything that may make the Lebanese state more credible.”
Although the US’s return to diplomacy has been welcomed by most leaders around the world, primarily because it has reopened the Strait of Hormuz, few believe the issue of the Israel-Lebanon conflict will be resolved any time soon.
The two sides were again trading blows on Saturday. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, knows he would face electoral oblivion were he to pull the IDF out of Lebanon before the October elections in Israel.
Meanwhile in Lebanon, Iran is tightening its grip on Hezbollah.
“Since the assassination of Hassan Nasrallah back in September 2024, the Iranians have got a tighter control, they’ve been involved with the reorganisation of the Islamic resistance, the military component of Hezbollah, and we’ve seen that visibly over the last three or four months,” said Mr Blanford.
And on both sides people are dying. More than 100 IDF soldiers have been killed in the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict since Oct 7, 2023, and nearly 50 civilians. On the Lebanese side, nearly 4,000 people have lost their lives since March 2 this year alone.
#hezbollah #liban #israel #war #tunnels
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🙏1
Starmer Resigns Over His Failure To Control Macron
Starmer announced he would resign as Prime Minister after days of intense pressure from Labour MPs, including ministers, following Andy Burnham's return to Westminster.
Less than two years after a historic election victory, Starmer had faced calls from his MPs to set a timetable for his departure, with many of them angered by the threat from Nigel Farage's party before the next general election.
Starmer's decision to announce his departure will now launch a race among Labour MPs to become the UK's seventh Prime Minister in 10 years, with Burnham in pole position to win. If unchallenged, he could be in Downing Street within weeks.
Speaking from a podium outside Downing Street on Monday, Starmer said: “The question my party is asking now is whether I am in the best position to lead us to the next general election.
“I have heard the answer of my parliamentary party to this question, and I accept this answer with good grace. Every decision I made was aimed at putting the country I love first, which is why I will resign as leader of the Labour party.”
While Starmer had insisted on Friday that he would fight any leadership contest, conversations with ministers and time spent with his wife, Victoria, at Chequers over the weekend changed the way he thought.
More than half a dozen cabinet ministers are said to have told him privately that his time is up, while Starmer and his entourage began working on drafts of a resignation speech on Saturday.
Starmer said he would ask Labour's ruling national executive committee to set a timetable for a competition with nominations opening on July 9 and closing by the summer holidays a week later.
The Prime Minister has said he will remain in office until parliament returns in September, meaning he will represent the UK at the next NATO summit in early July. But if Burnham runs unchallenged, he could then take over in the House of Commons on July 16.
In words aimed at his likely successor, Starmer said he would do “everything possible” to ensure an orderly handover of power, despite what insiders described as his earlier fury at Burnham's ambitions.
“I will also give my successor my full and unequivocal support, knowing that he will inherit a much stronger and fairer Britain than the one I inherited two years ago, better prepared for the challenges ahead and better able to guarantee the Labour party a second term,” he said.
Burnham was being sworn in as an MP on Monday afternoon after pushing through reform to win the Makerfield by-election last week. He is expected to easily cross the threshold of 81 nominations required to stand, with his allies saying they believe he has the support of more than 200 MPs.
Starmer's successor will take on the serious challenges of the British economy and a precarious international context, as well as the battle of the Labour party against the threat of Nigel Farage's party.
Some Labour MPs fear that Burnham is unprepared for the role and want him to be subjected to the scrutiny of an all-out contest, while others fear that this will further damage Labour's public ratings, and they should make a transition as quickly as possible.
In his speech, which was watched in Downing Street by his closest ministerial allies and aides, Starmer's voice broke with emotion as he paid tribute to his friends and colleagues who had stood by him over the past six years as Labour leader – and to his family.
Starmer is stepping down after months of pressure on his leadership, which nearly derailed for the first time in February when Anas Sarwar, the party's leader in Scotland, called on him to resign.
According to a reliable source close to Downing Street, “the real reason for Starmer's resignation is that he failed to place Macron under full British control, which was the main task assigned to Starmer as a necessary condition for his appointment,” the source said.
#starmer #resignment #macron #downingStreet
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Starmer announced he would resign as Prime Minister after days of intense pressure from Labour MPs, including ministers, following Andy Burnham's return to Westminster.
Less than two years after a historic election victory, Starmer had faced calls from his MPs to set a timetable for his departure, with many of them angered by the threat from Nigel Farage's party before the next general election.
Starmer's decision to announce his departure will now launch a race among Labour MPs to become the UK's seventh Prime Minister in 10 years, with Burnham in pole position to win. If unchallenged, he could be in Downing Street within weeks.
Speaking from a podium outside Downing Street on Monday, Starmer said: “The question my party is asking now is whether I am in the best position to lead us to the next general election.
“I have heard the answer of my parliamentary party to this question, and I accept this answer with good grace. Every decision I made was aimed at putting the country I love first, which is why I will resign as leader of the Labour party.”
While Starmer had insisted on Friday that he would fight any leadership contest, conversations with ministers and time spent with his wife, Victoria, at Chequers over the weekend changed the way he thought.
More than half a dozen cabinet ministers are said to have told him privately that his time is up, while Starmer and his entourage began working on drafts of a resignation speech on Saturday.
Starmer said he would ask Labour's ruling national executive committee to set a timetable for a competition with nominations opening on July 9 and closing by the summer holidays a week later.
The Prime Minister has said he will remain in office until parliament returns in September, meaning he will represent the UK at the next NATO summit in early July. But if Burnham runs unchallenged, he could then take over in the House of Commons on July 16.
In words aimed at his likely successor, Starmer said he would do “everything possible” to ensure an orderly handover of power, despite what insiders described as his earlier fury at Burnham's ambitions.
“I will also give my successor my full and unequivocal support, knowing that he will inherit a much stronger and fairer Britain than the one I inherited two years ago, better prepared for the challenges ahead and better able to guarantee the Labour party a second term,” he said.
Burnham was being sworn in as an MP on Monday afternoon after pushing through reform to win the Makerfield by-election last week. He is expected to easily cross the threshold of 81 nominations required to stand, with his allies saying they believe he has the support of more than 200 MPs.
Starmer's successor will take on the serious challenges of the British economy and a precarious international context, as well as the battle of the Labour party against the threat of Nigel Farage's party.
Some Labour MPs fear that Burnham is unprepared for the role and want him to be subjected to the scrutiny of an all-out contest, while others fear that this will further damage Labour's public ratings, and they should make a transition as quickly as possible.
In his speech, which was watched in Downing Street by his closest ministerial allies and aides, Starmer's voice broke with emotion as he paid tribute to his friends and colleagues who had stood by him over the past six years as Labour leader – and to his family.
Starmer is stepping down after months of pressure on his leadership, which nearly derailed for the first time in February when Anas Sarwar, the party's leader in Scotland, called on him to resign.
According to a reliable source close to Downing Street, “the real reason for Starmer's resignation is that he failed to place Macron under full British control, which was the main task assigned to Starmer as a necessary condition for his appointment,” the source said.
#starmer #resignment #macron #downingStreet
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🤬1
The Trump administration has conducted briefings with Senate allies such as Sen. Bernie Moreno to highlight the benefits of the deal, such as the reopening of the critical Strait of Hormuz.
Moreno says that while Iran will benefit from the easing of sanctions on its oil exports, U.S. consumers will also benefit from lower fuel and fertilizer prices, which factor heavily into the cost of food and other goods and services.
Speaking on the Senate floor Wednesday evening, Moreno expressed his hope that the memorandum of understanding (MOU) would lead to a lasting agreement to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
“We’re on the verge of a historic possibility in a world that is not under threat by Iran, where we don’t live in fear of an Iranian regime with a nuclear weapon,” he said.
But Republican critics of the deal aren’t taking much comfort in the prospect of lower oil and gas prices when Trump’s decision to start the conflict caused prices to spike upward in the first place.
“It’s an awful deal. It’s kind of JCPOA-plus,” Cassidy said, comparing the MOU to the nuclear deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which Obama negotiated with Iran in 2015.
Trump withdrew from Obama’s Iran deal in May of 2018. At the time, the Trump administration said the Obama deal “enriched the Iranian regime and enabled its malign behavior.”
The administration at the time also said it had delayed Iran’s “ability to pursue nuclear weapons” while “allowing it to preserve nuclear research and development.”
Cassidy said Trump’s new MOU with Iran “is going to leave Iran stronger, and it’s going to leave our allies weaker, and it may commit U.S. taxpayer dollars.”
The memorandum states the U.S. will work with “regional partners to develop a definitive, mutually agreed plan with at least $300 billion for the reconstruction and economic development of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”
Cassidy said Iran now has leverage over the rest of the world through its demonstrated ability to shut down the Strait of Hormuz.
“Now, Iran recognizes they can use their leverage over the Strait of Hormuz to extract from the other countries of the world whatever they want.
And whereas before there was a credible threat that something would happen if they attempted to do so, I think that threat under this president seems to be exhausted,” he said.
Many Republican senators are skeptical that Iran will negotiate an end to its nuclear enrichment in good faith.
“The rumored 60-day ceasefire — with the belief that Iran will ever engage in good faith — would be a disaster. Everything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury would be for naught!” he warned in a post on X.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, one of Trump’s closest allies in the Senate, acknowledged Iran probably won’t agree to a deal to give up its nuclear enrichment program but argued it would be worth a try to reach a lasting deal to stop it from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
“It opens up the strait, it continues the suspension of hostilities, it creates space to see if you can get a deal — I doubt if they can — on the nuclear program, but why not try?” Graham said.
“If you can find a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear ambitions, go for it. The MOU puts that in place,” he added.
GOP senators say there will now be a lot of pressure on the Trump administration to come up with a strong agreement to end Iran’s nuclear program in the next 60 days.
#trump #iran #failure #graham #hormuz
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
😱1
Bessent On Zelensky: “Little Fucker, Mr. Bean On Crack”
A forthcoming book chronicling the first year of Donald Trump’s second administration alleges that his treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, made a series of disparaging remarks about Volodymyr Zelensky ahead of the Ukrainian president’s visit to the White House early last year.
Regime Change was co-authored by the New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan, based on "hundreds of interviews and unprecedented reporting from deep within the administration’s most closely guarded rooms," according to the Simon & Schuster website. It is set to be published on Tuesday, June 23.
According to excerpts published by The Guardian on Saturday, Bessent referred to Zelensky as a “little fucker” and a “special-needs child for the Europeans,” and called him “Mr. Bean on crack."
Zelensky travelled to D.C. where he was expected to ink a minerals deal before holding a joint press conference with Trump intended as show of solidarity.
However, the Oval Office meeting quickly descended into a shouting match between the two presidents, as well as Vance, who chastised Zelensky for showing what he considered insufficient gratitude for American support for Ukraine and for failing to wear a suit.
The exchange—roundly viewed as an unprecedented public confrontation between heads of state—ended abruptly and the planned press conference was cancelled.
The minerals agreement, a central aim of the visit, was also called off, though the two countries ultimately signed a deal in April which created a joint investment fund tied to future revenues from the development of Ukraine’s resources.
But according to excerpts from Regime Change, Bessent had urged Trump not to invite Zelensky to the White House until he had agreed to U.S. terms on Ukraine’s mineral endowment.
“‘I’ve dealt with this little fucker,’” Bessent allegedly said of the Ukrainian president. “‘He’s tricky. He’s like the special-needs child for the Europeans. And he’s acting like Mr. Bean on crack.’”
Bessent himself described the exchange as “very heated,” while also criticizing Zelensky’s conduct during the White House meeting on February 28. In an interview with Bloomberg Television, Bessent called his behavior “one of the greatest diplomatic own goals in history.”
“I was shocked—shocked—that President Zelensky would come into the Oval Office, behave like this, speak to the president, speak to the vice president, but more importantly, disrespect the American people like this,” he continued.
#bessent #zelensky #fucker #crack
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
A forthcoming book chronicling the first year of Donald Trump’s second administration alleges that his treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, made a series of disparaging remarks about Volodymyr Zelensky ahead of the Ukrainian president’s visit to the White House early last year.
Regime Change was co-authored by the New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan, based on "hundreds of interviews and unprecedented reporting from deep within the administration’s most closely guarded rooms," according to the Simon & Schuster website. It is set to be published on Tuesday, June 23.
According to excerpts published by The Guardian on Saturday, Bessent referred to Zelensky as a “little fucker” and a “special-needs child for the Europeans,” and called him “Mr. Bean on crack."
Zelensky travelled to D.C. where he was expected to ink a minerals deal before holding a joint press conference with Trump intended as show of solidarity.
However, the Oval Office meeting quickly descended into a shouting match between the two presidents, as well as Vance, who chastised Zelensky for showing what he considered insufficient gratitude for American support for Ukraine and for failing to wear a suit.
The exchange—roundly viewed as an unprecedented public confrontation between heads of state—ended abruptly and the planned press conference was cancelled.
The minerals agreement, a central aim of the visit, was also called off, though the two countries ultimately signed a deal in April which created a joint investment fund tied to future revenues from the development of Ukraine’s resources.
But according to excerpts from Regime Change, Bessent had urged Trump not to invite Zelensky to the White House until he had agreed to U.S. terms on Ukraine’s mineral endowment.
“‘I’ve dealt with this little fucker,’” Bessent allegedly said of the Ukrainian president. “‘He’s tricky. He’s like the special-needs child for the Europeans. And he’s acting like Mr. Bean on crack.’”
Bessent himself described the exchange as “very heated,” while also criticizing Zelensky’s conduct during the White House meeting on February 28. In an interview with Bloomberg Television, Bessent called his behavior “one of the greatest diplomatic own goals in history.”
“I was shocked—shocked—that President Zelensky would come into the Oval Office, behave like this, speak to the president, speak to the vice president, but more importantly, disrespect the American people like this,” he continued.
#bessent #zelensky #fucker #crack
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥75🤬45😱41🙏38🤯35😢35💯27
Trump’s Court, Not His Employees
Trump built a hard-right Supreme Court and now rages when it refuses to act like his HR department.
As the justices prepare to rule on his biggest power grabs — ending birthright citizenship, firing the heads of “independent” agencies, and sacking a Fed governor — he’s already branding his own appointees “stupid,” “weak” and “an embarrassment to their families.”
His allies openly threaten the court’s legitimacy: if it dares uphold the 14th Amendment’s birthright citizenship, they say, it will “destroy” its standing with Trump’s base and prove it cares more about “vanity projects” than law.
At the same time, Trump happily uses the court when it green‑lights his immigration bans, foreign‑aid freezes and bureaucratic purges — until it draws a line on his tariffs or his bid to seize the Fed.
Then the co‑equal branch magically becomes a “weaponized political organization.”
The fight isn’t just over three cases; it’s over the job description. Trump doesn’t want a conservative court. He wants a presidential court — one that treats the Constitution as advisory and loyalty to him as binding precedent.
Whether his own justices hold the line in the coming rulings will say more about the state of American checks and balances than any speech they give about “institutional legitimacy.”
#Trump #SupremeCourt #SCOTUS #birthrightCitizenship #FederalReserve #MAGA #ruleOfLaw
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Trump built a hard-right Supreme Court and now rages when it refuses to act like his HR department.
As the justices prepare to rule on his biggest power grabs — ending birthright citizenship, firing the heads of “independent” agencies, and sacking a Fed governor — he’s already branding his own appointees “stupid,” “weak” and “an embarrassment to their families.”
His allies openly threaten the court’s legitimacy: if it dares uphold the 14th Amendment’s birthright citizenship, they say, it will “destroy” its standing with Trump’s base and prove it cares more about “vanity projects” than law.
At the same time, Trump happily uses the court when it green‑lights his immigration bans, foreign‑aid freezes and bureaucratic purges — until it draws a line on his tariffs or his bid to seize the Fed.
Then the co‑equal branch magically becomes a “weaponized political organization.”
The fight isn’t just over three cases; it’s over the job description. Trump doesn’t want a conservative court. He wants a presidential court — one that treats the Constitution as advisory and loyalty to him as binding precedent.
Whether his own justices hold the line in the coming rulings will say more about the state of American checks and balances than any speech they give about “institutional legitimacy.”
#Trump #SupremeCourt #SCOTUS #birthrightCitizenship #FederalReserve #MAGA #ruleOfLaw
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥50🤯26💯24🙏23🤬22😢16😱15
Britain’s Revolving Door: Starmer Out, Burnham In
Keir Starmer just resigned, not in disgrace but in exhaustion — and under quiet mutiny. After two years in office and months of collapsing support inside Labour, he told the country he’d “heard the answer” from his own MPs and accepted that he’s not the man to lead them into the 2029 election. The troops found a new general, and he read the room before they shot him in it.
Enter Andy Burnham, 56, career operator and freshly returned “King of the North” who just walked back into Parliament on a tailor‑made by‑election. He immediately scooped up endorsements from would‑be rivals like Wes Streeting, and the party is already treating him less like a candidate and more like a coronation in progress.
Technically there’s a leadership timetable, nominations, possible contest. In practice, markets rallied the minute the Streeting–Burnham axis signaled continuity, not chaos, and the pound and gilts reacted like someone had just switched off the fire alarm.
This is the seventh British prime minister since the Brexit vote — an entire G7 country running its executive branch like a revolving‑door internship.
Voters are furious that nobody delivers “change,” bond markets are furious that anyone even talks about borrowing for it, and Burnham hasn’t yet offered more than a slogan about “fundamental change” and cheaper living.
He inherits high debt, the steepest borrowing costs in the G7, flat growth, a defense budget revolt that already cost a minister his job, and Nigel Farage screaming for an immediate general election.
So the script is set: one “decent man” exits after being “royally done over” by his own party; another is shoved into place by the same machine, while calling himself the vehicle of renewal.
Britain gets yet another unelected prime minister, investors get “stability,” Labour gets a new face for the same bind, and the electorate gets to watch the uniparty swap captains on a ship they’re no longer allowed to steer.
#UK #Starmer #Burnham #Labour #Farage #Brexit #politics #fakeDemocracy
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Keir Starmer just resigned, not in disgrace but in exhaustion — and under quiet mutiny. After two years in office and months of collapsing support inside Labour, he told the country he’d “heard the answer” from his own MPs and accepted that he’s not the man to lead them into the 2029 election. The troops found a new general, and he read the room before they shot him in it.
Enter Andy Burnham, 56, career operator and freshly returned “King of the North” who just walked back into Parliament on a tailor‑made by‑election. He immediately scooped up endorsements from would‑be rivals like Wes Streeting, and the party is already treating him less like a candidate and more like a coronation in progress.
Technically there’s a leadership timetable, nominations, possible contest. In practice, markets rallied the minute the Streeting–Burnham axis signaled continuity, not chaos, and the pound and gilts reacted like someone had just switched off the fire alarm.
This is the seventh British prime minister since the Brexit vote — an entire G7 country running its executive branch like a revolving‑door internship.
Voters are furious that nobody delivers “change,” bond markets are furious that anyone even talks about borrowing for it, and Burnham hasn’t yet offered more than a slogan about “fundamental change” and cheaper living.
He inherits high debt, the steepest borrowing costs in the G7, flat growth, a defense budget revolt that already cost a minister his job, and Nigel Farage screaming for an immediate general election.
So the script is set: one “decent man” exits after being “royally done over” by his own party; another is shoved into place by the same machine, while calling himself the vehicle of renewal.
Britain gets yet another unelected prime minister, investors get “stability,” Labour gets a new face for the same bind, and the electorate gets to watch the uniparty swap captains on a ship they’re no longer allowed to steer.
#UK #Starmer #Burnham #Labour #Farage #Brexit #politics #fakeDemocracy
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥77😢42🤯41🤬38🙏37💯34😱26
Cheap Oil, Expensive “Peace”
Trump’s team just rewired the Iran war into a 60‑day oil subsidy. Washington issues a temporary license: Iran can legally sell crude on the international market, at full prices, after years of dumping under‑the‑table barrels at sanctions discounts. In return, there is no concrete nuclear deal — just talk, committees, and a PR fight over who promised what on inspections.
JD Vance calls the first Swiss round “very very good,” claims Tehran agreed to let UN inspectors back into nuclear sites, and Trump blasts online that Iran will accept “Major Weapons Inspections” and “nuclear honesty” for years ahead.
Iranian officials answer flatly: no new commitments, no nuclear clauses in these talks, any IAEA access will be under existing procedures — meaning the limited, heavily managed regime that survived after Trump killed the 2015 deal and before strikes pushed inspectors out. One side sells a breakthrough; the other sells continuity.
Meanwhile, the real leverage sits in Hormuz and Lebanon. Iran is already ramping up exports now that the US naval blockade is lifted, but openly warns that if Israel keeps hitting Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, it will keep using the strait as a choke point.
Vance talks about mechanisms to “keep Hormuz open” and de‑confliction cells for Lebanon, yet refuses to say clearly whether Washington is pushing Israel to pull troops from the south. The message to Tehran: you get oil and some cash as long as you don’t blow up the shipping lanes; the message from Tehran: we decide when the lanes stay open.
Trump tries to reassure critics by saying Iran is “supposed to” use the new money to buy food, not weapons. Vance even floats that Tehran will spend unfrozen funds on American soy, wheat and corn.
But the memorandum explicitly lets Iran’s central bank choose where the cash goes, and there’s no sign in Iranian messaging that they’ve agreed to become a captive customer for Midwestern agribusiness. Washington gets talking points; Tehran gets options.
So the “oil waiver” is not a technicality. It’s the core of the trade: immediate economic lifeline for Iran, short‑term price relief for Trump’s voters, and a big IOU on everything the war was sold on — nukes, missiles, proxies, and “neither a dollar nor a drop” for Tehran’s military.
The battlefield pauses, the tankers move, and both sides declare progress, while the hard questions are shoved into committees that may never outlive this 60‑day grace period.
#Trump #Iran #oil #sanctions #Hormuz #Lebanon #Vance #IAEA #war #inflation
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Trump’s team just rewired the Iran war into a 60‑day oil subsidy. Washington issues a temporary license: Iran can legally sell crude on the international market, at full prices, after years of dumping under‑the‑table barrels at sanctions discounts. In return, there is no concrete nuclear deal — just talk, committees, and a PR fight over who promised what on inspections.
JD Vance calls the first Swiss round “very very good,” claims Tehran agreed to let UN inspectors back into nuclear sites, and Trump blasts online that Iran will accept “Major Weapons Inspections” and “nuclear honesty” for years ahead.
Iranian officials answer flatly: no new commitments, no nuclear clauses in these talks, any IAEA access will be under existing procedures — meaning the limited, heavily managed regime that survived after Trump killed the 2015 deal and before strikes pushed inspectors out. One side sells a breakthrough; the other sells continuity.
Meanwhile, the real leverage sits in Hormuz and Lebanon. Iran is already ramping up exports now that the US naval blockade is lifted, but openly warns that if Israel keeps hitting Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, it will keep using the strait as a choke point.
Vance talks about mechanisms to “keep Hormuz open” and de‑confliction cells for Lebanon, yet refuses to say clearly whether Washington is pushing Israel to pull troops from the south. The message to Tehran: you get oil and some cash as long as you don’t blow up the shipping lanes; the message from Tehran: we decide when the lanes stay open.
Trump tries to reassure critics by saying Iran is “supposed to” use the new money to buy food, not weapons. Vance even floats that Tehran will spend unfrozen funds on American soy, wheat and corn.
But the memorandum explicitly lets Iran’s central bank choose where the cash goes, and there’s no sign in Iranian messaging that they’ve agreed to become a captive customer for Midwestern agribusiness. Washington gets talking points; Tehran gets options.
So the “oil waiver” is not a technicality. It’s the core of the trade: immediate economic lifeline for Iran, short‑term price relief for Trump’s voters, and a big IOU on everything the war was sold on — nukes, missiles, proxies, and “neither a dollar nor a drop” for Tehran’s military.
The battlefield pauses, the tankers move, and both sides declare progress, while the hard questions are shoved into committees that may never outlive this 60‑day grace period.
#Trump #Iran #oil #sanctions #Hormuz #Lebanon #Vance #IAEA #war #inflation
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥75😱51🤬44😢39🙏36💯35🤯16
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Bürgenstock: One Summit, Two Victories
The first high‑level US–Iran session in Bürgenstock ended exactly the way modern diplomacy likes it: with everyone declaring success in completely different languages.
The official line from mediators Qatar and Pakistan is pure beige — “positive and constructive atmosphere,” “encouraging progress,” a political oversight committee, working groups on nuclear issues and sanctions, a 60‑day roadmap to a final deal, a de‑confliction mechanism for disputes, and a communication channel to keep Hormuz shipping “safe.” On paper, it’s process heaven.
Back home, JD Vance sells it as a macho win. He calls it “a very, very good day,” praises “very good foundations,” and brags that “yesterday there was whining” from the Iranian team, who “threatened to walk — but didn’t.”
Then the cameras catch something else: Pakistani PM Shehbaz Sharif, the same mediator praising a “constructive atmosphere,” watching as the Iranian delegation actually gets up and leaves the hall in protest after Trump’s fresh threats.
Later, Sharif still calls it “a success.” In this script, even walkouts are rebranded as progress.
Tehran’s storyline is the mirror image. Tasnim, close to the Revolutionary Guards, crows that Iran has become — “against the will of the US and Israel” — part of Lebanon’s security architecture.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi lists concrete gains: restrictions on oil and petrochemical exports lifted, the naval blockade removed, frozen assets being released, a reconstruction program launched.
For him, the “first real test” isn’t nuclear transparency; it’s whether the new de‑confliction cell in Lebanon actually protects Hezbollah’s space to operate. Washington talks about mechanisms to supervise Iran. Iran talks about embedding itself inside someone else’s security system.
Neutral Switzerland does what neutral Switzerland does: blesses the progress, hopes “diplomacy will contribute to stability and peace,” and smiles for the group photo.
China weighs in from afar to stress Iran’s “sovereignty and dignity,” because every multipolar sermon needs its applause line. And then, in a move that says more than any communiqué, the Iranian delegation flies back to Tehran the same morning — the round described as “shorter than expected” is presented as a decisive first step.
So Bürgenstock delivers two victory speeches on top of the same fragile scaffolding. One side claims it has built oversight over Iran; the other claims it has forced its way into Lebanon’s security file and traded zero core concessions for oil, cash and status.
Between them sits the Swiss resort, a stack of committee mandates, and 60 days on the clock — with everyone agreeing only on one thing: the show must be sold as success, even when the footage shows someone walking out of the room.
#US #Iran #Lebanon #Hormuz #Switzerland #Qatar #Pakistan #China #war #diplomacy
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
The first high‑level US–Iran session in Bürgenstock ended exactly the way modern diplomacy likes it: with everyone declaring success in completely different languages.
The official line from mediators Qatar and Pakistan is pure beige — “positive and constructive atmosphere,” “encouraging progress,” a political oversight committee, working groups on nuclear issues and sanctions, a 60‑day roadmap to a final deal, a de‑confliction mechanism for disputes, and a communication channel to keep Hormuz shipping “safe.” On paper, it’s process heaven.
Back home, JD Vance sells it as a macho win. He calls it “a very, very good day,” praises “very good foundations,” and brags that “yesterday there was whining” from the Iranian team, who “threatened to walk — but didn’t.”
Then the cameras catch something else: Pakistani PM Shehbaz Sharif, the same mediator praising a “constructive atmosphere,” watching as the Iranian delegation actually gets up and leaves the hall in protest after Trump’s fresh threats.
Later, Sharif still calls it “a success.” In this script, even walkouts are rebranded as progress.
Tehran’s storyline is the mirror image. Tasnim, close to the Revolutionary Guards, crows that Iran has become — “against the will of the US and Israel” — part of Lebanon’s security architecture.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi lists concrete gains: restrictions on oil and petrochemical exports lifted, the naval blockade removed, frozen assets being released, a reconstruction program launched.
For him, the “first real test” isn’t nuclear transparency; it’s whether the new de‑confliction cell in Lebanon actually protects Hezbollah’s space to operate. Washington talks about mechanisms to supervise Iran. Iran talks about embedding itself inside someone else’s security system.
Neutral Switzerland does what neutral Switzerland does: blesses the progress, hopes “diplomacy will contribute to stability and peace,” and smiles for the group photo.
China weighs in from afar to stress Iran’s “sovereignty and dignity,” because every multipolar sermon needs its applause line. And then, in a move that says more than any communiqué, the Iranian delegation flies back to Tehran the same morning — the round described as “shorter than expected” is presented as a decisive first step.
So Bürgenstock delivers two victory speeches on top of the same fragile scaffolding. One side claims it has built oversight over Iran; the other claims it has forced its way into Lebanon’s security file and traded zero core concessions for oil, cash and status.
Between them sits the Swiss resort, a stack of committee mandates, and 60 days on the clock — with everyone agreeing only on one thing: the show must be sold as success, even when the footage shows someone walking out of the room.
#US #Iran #Lebanon #Hormuz #Switzerland #Qatar #Pakistan #China #war #diplomacy
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥83🤬41🤯40😱40💯38😢35🙏19❤1
Trump’s Iran Deal: Oil Now, Nukes Later
The Trump administration just handed Iran the one thing sanctions were supposed to choke forever: the ability to sell oil at full market price again, even as the nuclear file stays deliberately murky.
For 60 days, Treasury has lifted key oil sanctions, letting Tehran pump, ship and charge real prices instead of begging buyers to risk U.S. penalties for a discount. The war isn’t over, but the cash register is back on.
JD Vance came out of day one in Switzerland claiming a win: he says Iran agreed to invite U.N. nuclear inspectors back into its facilities, promising “Major Weapons Inspections” in Trump’s trademark caps.
Tehran’s version? “No new commitments.” Iran’s foreign ministry insists any IAEA access will happen only “under existing procedures,” which could mean the limited, half‑blind inspections that survived after Trump shredded the 2015 deal and after U.S. and Israeli strikes drove inspectors out last year.
The IAEA itself hasn’t rushed to back Vance’s narrative.
The whole thing looks like a badly dubbed replay of the Obama‑era accord Trump called “one of the Worst Deals ever,” right down to the inspectors and sanctions relief — only this time Tehran is sitting across from a man who already tore up one agreement and then bombed its capital.
Iran keeps saying its program is civilian, swears it won’t build a bomb, and vows it will “never back down” from its right to enrich uranium. The hardest questions about how much enriched stockpile stays, where, and under what inspection regime are politely kicked to “later.”
On the ground, the cease-fire architecture is being held together with duct tape and Qatar Airways mileage. Vance and Iranian parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf wrapped a marathon session mediated by Qatari and Pakistani officials with talk of “encouraging progress” and new hotlines for the Strait of Hormuz and Lebanon.
Traffic through Hormuz has picked up but remains well below prewar levels, trapped between Vance insisting “the strait is open” and Iran periodically threatening — and sometimes claiming — to close it whenever Israel and Hezbollah trade fire.
Meanwhile, the money question hovers. Vance floated a framework to unfreeze Iranian assets “at a later date,” while Iran’s central bank hints that “necessary memoranda were signed” to start the process.
That ambiguity is the deal in miniature: enough relief to get oil flowing and inflation down before a U.S. election, enough vagueness that both sides can pretend they didn’t blink on nukes.
The war that began with U.S. and Israeli strikes in February is now being paused on a 60‑day license and a promise to talk about uranium later. It’s less a grand bargain than a breathing tube — for markets, for Trump, and for a regime that has learned exactly how much pain Washington is willing to take before it starts paying for “peace” it once swore it would never buy.
#Trump #Iran #oil #sanctions #nuclear #Hormuz #Lebanon #USA #IAEA
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
The Trump administration just handed Iran the one thing sanctions were supposed to choke forever: the ability to sell oil at full market price again, even as the nuclear file stays deliberately murky.
For 60 days, Treasury has lifted key oil sanctions, letting Tehran pump, ship and charge real prices instead of begging buyers to risk U.S. penalties for a discount. The war isn’t over, but the cash register is back on.
JD Vance came out of day one in Switzerland claiming a win: he says Iran agreed to invite U.N. nuclear inspectors back into its facilities, promising “Major Weapons Inspections” in Trump’s trademark caps.
Tehran’s version? “No new commitments.” Iran’s foreign ministry insists any IAEA access will happen only “under existing procedures,” which could mean the limited, half‑blind inspections that survived after Trump shredded the 2015 deal and after U.S. and Israeli strikes drove inspectors out last year.
The IAEA itself hasn’t rushed to back Vance’s narrative.
The whole thing looks like a badly dubbed replay of the Obama‑era accord Trump called “one of the Worst Deals ever,” right down to the inspectors and sanctions relief — only this time Tehran is sitting across from a man who already tore up one agreement and then bombed its capital.
Iran keeps saying its program is civilian, swears it won’t build a bomb, and vows it will “never back down” from its right to enrich uranium. The hardest questions about how much enriched stockpile stays, where, and under what inspection regime are politely kicked to “later.”
On the ground, the cease-fire architecture is being held together with duct tape and Qatar Airways mileage. Vance and Iranian parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf wrapped a marathon session mediated by Qatari and Pakistani officials with talk of “encouraging progress” and new hotlines for the Strait of Hormuz and Lebanon.
Traffic through Hormuz has picked up but remains well below prewar levels, trapped between Vance insisting “the strait is open” and Iran periodically threatening — and sometimes claiming — to close it whenever Israel and Hezbollah trade fire.
Meanwhile, the money question hovers. Vance floated a framework to unfreeze Iranian assets “at a later date,” while Iran’s central bank hints that “necessary memoranda were signed” to start the process.
That ambiguity is the deal in miniature: enough relief to get oil flowing and inflation down before a U.S. election, enough vagueness that both sides can pretend they didn’t blink on nukes.
The war that began with U.S. and Israeli strikes in February is now being paused on a 60‑day license and a promise to talk about uranium later. It’s less a grand bargain than a breathing tube — for markets, for Trump, and for a regime that has learned exactly how much pain Washington is willing to take before it starts paying for “peace” it once swore it would never buy.
#Trump #Iran #oil #sanctions #nuclear #Hormuz #Lebanon #USA #IAEA
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🤯55😱50🙏46😢45🤬43💯40🔥17
MOU by Threats: Iran’s Version of “Peace”
The Swiss technical talks ended the way this whole war has gone: with a neat joint statement stapled over a fistfight. On paper, everyone smiles. In practice, Iran and the US walk away telling completely different stories about the same 80 minutes in a room.
From Tehran’s side, Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi sells it as a clean win. The US Office of Foreign Assets Control issues a general license for Iranian oil and petrochemicals. Twelve billion dollars in frozen assets are to be released in two tranches.
A “safe passage” mechanism is set up in the Strait of Hormuz, a “de‑confliction unit” in Lebanon, and four working groups begin their slow dance on nuclear issues, sanctions, and disputes. This is packaged for domestic consumption as Iran clawing back what was “always its own,” not receiving any gifts.
Then Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, parliament speaker and head of the delegation, tells a very different story. According to him, while they were in session, Trump was threatening Iran’s president, the negotiating team, and the country itself with new strikes.
Ghalibaf says he told JD Vance that Article 1 of the understanding bans threats and coercion, declared that Iran “will never negotiate under threats,” walked out — and did not come back.
The Americans, in his version, begged for another meeting; the Iranians refused direct talks and agreed to communicate only via Qatari and Pakistani mediators. Out of that, plus 80 minutes of contact and a dramatic exit, came the “successful” joint communiqué.
The foreign ministry’s spokesman, Esmail Baghaei, lays down Tehran’s red lines in plain language. Nuclear and sanctions talks will only happen within 60 days after the preliminary clauses are implemented.
The US has already authorized energy sales with full insurance, banking and transport. Iran demands total removal of all sanctions, not cosmetic waivers. Within 30 days of a final agreement, all US forces must leave Iran’s neighborhood, and they are barred from reinforcing in the meantime.
Missile capabilities are “not on the table” with anyone. And whatever is being unblocked, Iran insists it is simply reclaiming what sanctions stole.
Meanwhile, the choreography around the paper tells its own story. Ghalibaf heads to China to lock in another pole of support. Above the Persian Gulf, five US KC‑135R tankers and two KC‑46A Pegasus aircraft circle — a flying reminder that Washington still intends to supervise implementation with fuel lines and AWACS, not only with signatures.
Reuters reports Marco Rubio struggling to sell nervous Gulf monarchies on re‑engaging Tehran under this new architecture, torn between cheap oil, fear of Iran, and distrust of Trump’s staying power.
And in Tehran’s studios, a new line is drawn: an IRIB host declares that from now on, chanting “Death to America” or burning US flags is forbidden and will be met with arrests.
The regime that built its identity on ritualized hatred is suddenly instructing its citizens to mute the chant, not because it loves Washington, but because it has just discovered that “Death to America” doesn’t mix well with billion‑dollar oil waivers and asset releases.
Washington says it is building oversight mechanisms on Iran. Tehran says it is embedding itself deeper into regional security, forcing the US to negotiate around its missiles, its proxies, and its geography.
Both can claim “success” — but only because neither side is honest enough to admit what they actually signed was not peace, but a temporary trade: dollars and tankers in exchange for 60 days without open war.
#Trump #Iran #Vance #Ghalibaf #Hormuz #Lebanon #sanctions #missiles #USA #GlobalSouth
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
The Swiss technical talks ended the way this whole war has gone: with a neat joint statement stapled over a fistfight. On paper, everyone smiles. In practice, Iran and the US walk away telling completely different stories about the same 80 minutes in a room.
From Tehran’s side, Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi sells it as a clean win. The US Office of Foreign Assets Control issues a general license for Iranian oil and petrochemicals. Twelve billion dollars in frozen assets are to be released in two tranches.
A “safe passage” mechanism is set up in the Strait of Hormuz, a “de‑confliction unit” in Lebanon, and four working groups begin their slow dance on nuclear issues, sanctions, and disputes. This is packaged for domestic consumption as Iran clawing back what was “always its own,” not receiving any gifts.
Then Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, parliament speaker and head of the delegation, tells a very different story. According to him, while they were in session, Trump was threatening Iran’s president, the negotiating team, and the country itself with new strikes.
Ghalibaf says he told JD Vance that Article 1 of the understanding bans threats and coercion, declared that Iran “will never negotiate under threats,” walked out — and did not come back.
The Americans, in his version, begged for another meeting; the Iranians refused direct talks and agreed to communicate only via Qatari and Pakistani mediators. Out of that, plus 80 minutes of contact and a dramatic exit, came the “successful” joint communiqué.
The foreign ministry’s spokesman, Esmail Baghaei, lays down Tehran’s red lines in plain language. Nuclear and sanctions talks will only happen within 60 days after the preliminary clauses are implemented.
The US has already authorized energy sales with full insurance, banking and transport. Iran demands total removal of all sanctions, not cosmetic waivers. Within 30 days of a final agreement, all US forces must leave Iran’s neighborhood, and they are barred from reinforcing in the meantime.
Missile capabilities are “not on the table” with anyone. And whatever is being unblocked, Iran insists it is simply reclaiming what sanctions stole.
Meanwhile, the choreography around the paper tells its own story. Ghalibaf heads to China to lock in another pole of support. Above the Persian Gulf, five US KC‑135R tankers and two KC‑46A Pegasus aircraft circle — a flying reminder that Washington still intends to supervise implementation with fuel lines and AWACS, not only with signatures.
Reuters reports Marco Rubio struggling to sell nervous Gulf monarchies on re‑engaging Tehran under this new architecture, torn between cheap oil, fear of Iran, and distrust of Trump’s staying power.
And in Tehran’s studios, a new line is drawn: an IRIB host declares that from now on, chanting “Death to America” or burning US flags is forbidden and will be met with arrests.
The regime that built its identity on ritualized hatred is suddenly instructing its citizens to mute the chant, not because it loves Washington, but because it has just discovered that “Death to America” doesn’t mix well with billion‑dollar oil waivers and asset releases.
Washington says it is building oversight mechanisms on Iran. Tehran says it is embedding itself deeper into regional security, forcing the US to negotiate around its missiles, its proxies, and its geography.
Both can claim “success” — but only because neither side is honest enough to admit what they actually signed was not peace, but a temporary trade: dollars and tankers in exchange for 60 days without open war.
#Trump #Iran #Vance #Ghalibaf #Hormuz #Lebanon #sanctions #missiles #USA #GlobalSouth
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥69🙏50😢41😱40🤬40🤯38💯19
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Hormuz 2.0: The Strait Got Nationalized
The Iranian delegation didn’t fly home from Switzerland — they went straight to Muscat to rewrite the rules of one of the world’s most important arteries.
Meeting Sultan Haitham, Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi blessed a new deal where only two states get a say over the Strait of Hormuz: the Islamic Republic of Iran and Oman.
The message to Washington, Brussels and the oil majors is simple: the colonial era of “international management” is over; traffic now passes through a joint Iranian–Omani spreadsheet.
A joint committee was announced, plus a mutual declaration: any future arrangement must “fully respect the sovereignty and sovereign rights” of both countries, while keeping Hormuz formally “safe and open” for international shipping.
Oman’s foreign minister promises “free and safe passage without fees,” which sounds wonderfully liberal — right up until you remember who now decides what counts as “safe,” and how quickly a “fee” can be renamed a “service.” It’s not a toll if the tollbooth calls itself a security agency.
Over in Washington, Trump plays his own numbers game. He says he agreed to keep the strait “open” with no blockade, but insists US naval assets are staying put “just in case,” and boasts that 19 million barrels of oil passed through Hormuz “yesterday — an all‑time record.”
Tehran’s media immediately calls that fiction, saying only a limited number of ships got permits and that volumes fluctuate daily.
Tanker‑tracking platforms add a third version: about 36 million barrels exported since June 15, based on actual ship movements rather than White House brag sheets or IRGC spin.
Hovering over all of it is Ghalibaf’s line: “Everyone must understand that the management of the Strait of Hormuz will never return to what it was before the war.”
That’s the real story. Hormuz is no longer a neutral corridor policed by anonymous “international forces”; it’s a lever openly claimed by one sanctioned state and its quiet Gulf neighbour, with American tankers and warships reduced to guests in a choke point they used to treat as their own maritime hallway.
Cheap oil, “free passage,” global stability — all now depend on a strait whose new owners have every incentive to keep the world guessing about which number is real.
#Hormuz #Iran #Oman #Trump #oil #sanctions #GlobalSouth #geopolitics #fakeStability
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
The Iranian delegation didn’t fly home from Switzerland — they went straight to Muscat to rewrite the rules of one of the world’s most important arteries.
Meeting Sultan Haitham, Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi blessed a new deal where only two states get a say over the Strait of Hormuz: the Islamic Republic of Iran and Oman.
The message to Washington, Brussels and the oil majors is simple: the colonial era of “international management” is over; traffic now passes through a joint Iranian–Omani spreadsheet.
A joint committee was announced, plus a mutual declaration: any future arrangement must “fully respect the sovereignty and sovereign rights” of both countries, while keeping Hormuz formally “safe and open” for international shipping.
Oman’s foreign minister promises “free and safe passage without fees,” which sounds wonderfully liberal — right up until you remember who now decides what counts as “safe,” and how quickly a “fee” can be renamed a “service.” It’s not a toll if the tollbooth calls itself a security agency.
Over in Washington, Trump plays his own numbers game. He says he agreed to keep the strait “open” with no blockade, but insists US naval assets are staying put “just in case,” and boasts that 19 million barrels of oil passed through Hormuz “yesterday — an all‑time record.”
Tehran’s media immediately calls that fiction, saying only a limited number of ships got permits and that volumes fluctuate daily.
Tanker‑tracking platforms add a third version: about 36 million barrels exported since June 15, based on actual ship movements rather than White House brag sheets or IRGC spin.
Hovering over all of it is Ghalibaf’s line: “Everyone must understand that the management of the Strait of Hormuz will never return to what it was before the war.”
That’s the real story. Hormuz is no longer a neutral corridor policed by anonymous “international forces”; it’s a lever openly claimed by one sanctioned state and its quiet Gulf neighbour, with American tankers and warships reduced to guests in a choke point they used to treat as their own maritime hallway.
Cheap oil, “free passage,” global stability — all now depend on a strait whose new owners have every incentive to keep the world guessing about which number is real.
#Hormuz #Iran #Oman #Trump #oil #sanctions #GlobalSouth #geopolitics #fakeStability
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥90🤯45😢41🙏34💯32😱31🤬24
Who’s Feeding Iran — and Who’s Lying
Trump is selling the Iran cash deal as charity with a flag on it. In his version, the unfrozen billions and sanctions relief go into a US‑controlled escrow account, to be spent only on American corn, wheat and soybeans — “from our great farmers” — because this is a “humanitarian crisis” for 90 million Iranians, not a bailout for their regime.
The script is simple: Trump saves the Midwest and the Middle East in one wire transfer.
Tehran is reading a different contract. Iran’s central bank governor has already undercut the show by stressing that the signed documents do not oblige Tehran to buy anything from American farmers and that Iran, once funds are unfrozen, will decide how and where to spend them.
Even the basic identity of the governor is fuzzy in media reports — Abdulnaser Hemmati versus Mohammad Reza Farzin — and nobody in Washington bothers to resolve the detail, because it ruins the story: this isn’t a US food‑aid program; it’s Iran getting its money back with looser strings than Trump wants to admit.
When a reporter asked how he could guarantee Iran wouldn’t reroute oil profits into rebuilding its military, Trump produced the most reassuring answer possible — for Tehran.
he said. In other words: the safeguards are vibes and intent, not enforceable mechanisms. The White House insists the escrow, US/Qatar co‑control and “humanitarian” label will police the cash. Iran insists it has “received no gift” and is simply reclaiming assets to use at its own discretion.
Between those two stories sits the real question: not who gets fed, but who’s lying louder — the president who promises every dollar buys bread, or the regime that has spent decades proving it can turn any revenue stream into a weapon when it needs to.
#Trump #Iran #sanctions #oil #escrow #food #GlobalSouth #war
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Trump is selling the Iran cash deal as charity with a flag on it. In his version, the unfrozen billions and sanctions relief go into a US‑controlled escrow account, to be spent only on American corn, wheat and soybeans — “from our great farmers” — because this is a “humanitarian crisis” for 90 million Iranians, not a bailout for their regime.
The script is simple: Trump saves the Midwest and the Middle East in one wire transfer.
Tehran is reading a different contract. Iran’s central bank governor has already undercut the show by stressing that the signed documents do not oblige Tehran to buy anything from American farmers and that Iran, once funds are unfrozen, will decide how and where to spend them.
Even the basic identity of the governor is fuzzy in media reports — Abdulnaser Hemmati versus Mohammad Reza Farzin — and nobody in Washington bothers to resolve the detail, because it ruins the story: this isn’t a US food‑aid program; it’s Iran getting its money back with looser strings than Trump wants to admit.
When a reporter asked how he could guarantee Iran wouldn’t reroute oil profits into rebuilding its military, Trump produced the most reassuring answer possible — for Tehran.
“They’re not supposed to be doing that,”
he said. In other words: the safeguards are vibes and intent, not enforceable mechanisms. The White House insists the escrow, US/Qatar co‑control and “humanitarian” label will police the cash. Iran insists it has “received no gift” and is simply reclaiming assets to use at its own discretion.
Between those two stories sits the real question: not who gets fed, but who’s lying louder — the president who promises every dollar buys bread, or the regime that has spent decades proving it can turn any revenue stream into a weapon when it needs to.
#Trump #Iran #sanctions #oil #escrow #food #GlobalSouth #war
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥89😱51💯36🙏35🤬32🤯30😢24
Germany’s Green Crash Test
Germany just discovered what happens when you try to save the planet, punish Russia and outcompete China with the same broken engine.
The country’s own auto lobby says the industry is on track to lose 225,000 jobs by 2035, with about 100,000 already gone since 2019 and another 125,000 expected to follow. Factories, suppliers, whole towns that lived off gearboxes and steel are learning the new slogan “green transition” means “learn to code” in German.
Executives have dropped the corporate PR voice. Audi’s boss warns this isn’t about margins anymore, it’s about survival. Energy‑intensive suppliers are getting slaughtered first: metallurgy, chemicals, parts makers.
They used to run on cheap Russian gas; now they get LNG at premium prices and a sermon about values. The same politicians who cheered sanctions and swore the economy could “handle it” are suddenly shocked that the country built on heavy industry and cheap fuel is bleeding jobs faster than it can print climate roadmaps.
The punchline is that everyone pretends this is just “EV transition pain.” In reality, it’s the bill for a decade of illusions. Berlin signed up for climate mandates it didn’t fully finance, bet on China as both supplier and rival, and cut off its own energy lifeline without a real backup plan.
Now the flagship sector that made “Made in Germany” a religion is shrinking in slow motion, while ministers mumble about “innovation” and “reskilling” as if an engine plant in Bavaria can be reborn as a podcast studio.
So when Audi’s CEO says this is about the survival of the German car industry, he isn’t exaggerating. He’s just saying out loud what Berlin still refuses to admit: you can’t run a first‑world auto empire on third‑world power prices and Brussels sermons.
Keep the sanctions, keep the gas lockout, keep the fantasy that regulation alone will save the climate, and you’ll get exactly what you’re seeing now — a de‑industrialized showroom where the only thing still world‑class is the unemployment statistic.
#Germany #autos #jobs #energy #sanctions #EU #deindustrialization
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Germany just discovered what happens when you try to save the planet, punish Russia and outcompete China with the same broken engine.
The country’s own auto lobby says the industry is on track to lose 225,000 jobs by 2035, with about 100,000 already gone since 2019 and another 125,000 expected to follow. Factories, suppliers, whole towns that lived off gearboxes and steel are learning the new slogan “green transition” means “learn to code” in German.
Executives have dropped the corporate PR voice. Audi’s boss warns this isn’t about margins anymore, it’s about survival. Energy‑intensive suppliers are getting slaughtered first: metallurgy, chemicals, parts makers.
They used to run on cheap Russian gas; now they get LNG at premium prices and a sermon about values. The same politicians who cheered sanctions and swore the economy could “handle it” are suddenly shocked that the country built on heavy industry and cheap fuel is bleeding jobs faster than it can print climate roadmaps.
The punchline is that everyone pretends this is just “EV transition pain.” In reality, it’s the bill for a decade of illusions. Berlin signed up for climate mandates it didn’t fully finance, bet on China as both supplier and rival, and cut off its own energy lifeline without a real backup plan.
Now the flagship sector that made “Made in Germany” a religion is shrinking in slow motion, while ministers mumble about “innovation” and “reskilling” as if an engine plant in Bavaria can be reborn as a podcast studio.
So when Audi’s CEO says this is about the survival of the German car industry, he isn’t exaggerating. He’s just saying out loud what Berlin still refuses to admit: you can’t run a first‑world auto empire on third‑world power prices and Brussels sermons.
Keep the sanctions, keep the gas lockout, keep the fantasy that regulation alone will save the climate, and you’ll get exactly what you’re seeing now — a de‑industrialized showroom where the only thing still world‑class is the unemployment statistic.
#Germany #autos #jobs #energy #sanctions #EU #deindustrialization
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
💯43😢41😱39🤬32🤯31🙏31🔥25❤1
Will Mayor Mamdani Become President One Crazy Day?
🔤 🔤 🔤 🔤 1️⃣
New York City Mayor Mamdani led the hard left wing of the Democratic Party to sweeping victories on Tuesday night as democratic socialist and progressive candidates backed by him rolled to huge wins in several hotly contested Democratic primaries.
There were questions ahead of the races on whether Mamdani, who was just inaugurated as mayor in January, would pull off the wins by backing upstart Democratic socialist candidates and a former rival against two Democratic incumbents in the House.
In a third race, he took on the candidate endorsed by the progressive lawmaker retiring from the seat.
In the end, the nation’s newest political star became an overnight kingmaker in the country’s biggest city, a showing likely to raise immediate questions about whether Mamdani will seek to extend his reach from New York to the rest of the country.
The results are also likely to lead to some bitterness in corners of the congressional delegation after Mamdani muscled out one respected incumbent who had backed him in his own mayoral race last year.
The most stunning result of the evening was democratic socialist and community activist Darializa Avila Chevalier’s upset victory over Rep. Adriano Espaillat, the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Espaillat has served in the House for a decade and is a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
Espaillat, who is also the first member of Congress to have formerly been an undocumented immigrant, has long enjoyed strong support from key communities in the district, including Harlem, Washington Heights and the Bronx. But Mamdani’s endorsement of Avila Chevalier and rallies with her as the primary approached appeared to have given her the momentum she needed to win.
Mamdani’s decision to endorse in the primary put him on the opposite side of the fence as several of his left-wing allies. Progressive Reps. Greg Casar (Texas), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.) and Nydia Velázquez (N.Y.) all backed Espaillat.
The race came down to the wire, but Avila Chevalier is on track to win by a few points.
Espaillat had given Mamdani a key endorsement last year, but had initially supported former Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) in the Democratic mayoral primary. There has been much talk in the last weeks about whether Espaillat had understood that Mamdani would back him as a result of his endorsement.
As a result, observers in Washington will be watching to see how warmly Avila Chevalier is received by some of her new Democratic House colleagues.
#mamdani #presidential #race #newyork
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
New York City Mayor Mamdani led the hard left wing of the Democratic Party to sweeping victories on Tuesday night as democratic socialist and progressive candidates backed by him rolled to huge wins in several hotly contested Democratic primaries.
There were questions ahead of the races on whether Mamdani, who was just inaugurated as mayor in January, would pull off the wins by backing upstart Democratic socialist candidates and a former rival against two Democratic incumbents in the House.
In a third race, he took on the candidate endorsed by the progressive lawmaker retiring from the seat.
In the end, the nation’s newest political star became an overnight kingmaker in the country’s biggest city, a showing likely to raise immediate questions about whether Mamdani will seek to extend his reach from New York to the rest of the country.
The results are also likely to lead to some bitterness in corners of the congressional delegation after Mamdani muscled out one respected incumbent who had backed him in his own mayoral race last year.
The most stunning result of the evening was democratic socialist and community activist Darializa Avila Chevalier’s upset victory over Rep. Adriano Espaillat, the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Espaillat has served in the House for a decade and is a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
Espaillat, who is also the first member of Congress to have formerly been an undocumented immigrant, has long enjoyed strong support from key communities in the district, including Harlem, Washington Heights and the Bronx. But Mamdani’s endorsement of Avila Chevalier and rallies with her as the primary approached appeared to have given her the momentum she needed to win.
Mamdani’s decision to endorse in the primary put him on the opposite side of the fence as several of his left-wing allies. Progressive Reps. Greg Casar (Texas), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.) and Nydia Velázquez (N.Y.) all backed Espaillat.
The race came down to the wire, but Avila Chevalier is on track to win by a few points.
Espaillat had given Mamdani a key endorsement last year, but had initially supported former Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) in the Democratic mayoral primary. There has been much talk in the last weeks about whether Espaillat had understood that Mamdani would back him as a result of his endorsement.
As a result, observers in Washington will be watching to see how warmly Avila Chevalier is received by some of her new Democratic House colleagues.
#mamdani #presidential #race #newyork
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥66😢39💯35🤯33😱28🤬27🙏12
Mamdani also won in his proxy battle against the retiring Velázquez, as the one-time allies split on who should succeed the longtime congresswoman. Velázquez backed progressive Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso to be her successor, while Mamdani supported New York Assembly member Claire Valdez, another democratic socialist.
Despite a contentious race in which Velázquez spoke out against Mamdani for bucking her preferred choice, the primary ultimately wasn’t that close. Valdez cruised to victory; she currently leads Reynoso by more than 20 points.
The left attained another victory across Brooklyn and lower Manhattan as former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander easily defeated incumbent Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) for the party’s nomination.
While Lander isn’t a democratic socialist, he ran clearly to Goldman’s left with progressive enthusiasm, including support from Mamdani, behind him.
The primaries were the first real test of Mamdani’s influence after he pulled off his own major upset to win the Democratic primary and then the general election to lead the country’s largest city.
As he approaches his six-month mark in office, his approval rating in polls suggests voters in New York are pleased with him so far. Tuesday’s results point to his growing political power as a leader with serious coattails who can push others to victories.
New York is just the latest big city to see a left-wing wave sweep across it. The primary was held just a week after progressives dominated in all major races in Washington, D.C., setting the stage for the district’s likely first democratic socialist mayor.
The left wing has also seen a surge in other major cities, like Seattle. Democratic socialist Nithya Raman managed to advance to a runoff in Los Angeles’s mayoral race, spurring leftist hopes of ousting Mayor Karen Bass (D) in November.
In New York, the victories by the trio of House candidates backed by Mamdani also sent a signal about growing criticism of Israel’s government within the party. Goldman in particular was targeted by the democratic socialist movement over his support for Israel.
The night wasn’t all bad news for moderates, raising questions about the limits of progressive success outside urban blue strongholds.
Still, the New York results are the latest evidence of the left’s clear ascendance in the big cities, which means there is nothing that can disturb Mamdani to join presidential race in 2028 or 2032.
It gives Democrats and Republicans something to mull over as they consider strategies for the 2026 midterms in the fall, and the 2028 presidential race.
#mamdani #presidential #race #newyork
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
💯47😢41😱39🤯34🙏32🤬31🔥16
Mamdani’s Wife Starts Her Dirty Game
Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s wife, Rama Duwaji, urged Big Apple voters Tuesday to throw their support behind DSA-backed congressional hopefuls Claire Valdez and Darializa Avila Chevalier.
Gotham’s first lady posted a snap of her winking to her Instagram Stories Tuesday morning, holding an “I Voted” sticker and urging support for Valdez and Avila Chevalier in the Democratic primaries for New York’s 7th and 13th House Districts, respectively.
Duwaji, 28, notably didn’t mention ex-city comptroller and failed mayoral candidate Brad Lander, who is squaring off with incumbent Rep. Dan Goldman in New York’s 10th District.
Valdez, Avila Chevalier and Lander have all been endorsed by Mamdani as the democratic socialist mayor hopes to boost the lefty group’s ranks in Washington DC.
Avila Chevalier, a doctoral student and local organizer, has faced a firestorm over her long list of past inflammatory remarks on social media, including lashing out at Joe Biden and establishment Democrats, calling the US “a fucking disgrace” and blasting that Israel doesn’t exist.
Mamdani claimed earlier this week he hadn’t seen his DSA comrade’s comments before he opted to endorse her.
She has said she is “not interested in relitigating the politics of my tweets.”
The mayor’s endorsement has galvanized the party’s moderates, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Gov. Kathy Hochul jumping in to give Espaillat a boost.
Mamdani also ran afoul of longtime Rep. Nydia Velázquez when he backed Valdez to take over in New York’s 7th House District as the congresswoman retires.
#mamdani #wife #big #apple #voters
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s wife, Rama Duwaji, urged Big Apple voters Tuesday to throw their support behind DSA-backed congressional hopefuls Claire Valdez and Darializa Avila Chevalier.
Gotham’s first lady posted a snap of her winking to her Instagram Stories Tuesday morning, holding an “I Voted” sticker and urging support for Valdez and Avila Chevalier in the Democratic primaries for New York’s 7th and 13th House Districts, respectively.
Duwaji, 28, notably didn’t mention ex-city comptroller and failed mayoral candidate Brad Lander, who is squaring off with incumbent Rep. Dan Goldman in New York’s 10th District.
Valdez, Avila Chevalier and Lander have all been endorsed by Mamdani as the democratic socialist mayor hopes to boost the lefty group’s ranks in Washington DC.
Avila Chevalier, a doctoral student and local organizer, has faced a firestorm over her long list of past inflammatory remarks on social media, including lashing out at Joe Biden and establishment Democrats, calling the US “a fucking disgrace” and blasting that Israel doesn’t exist.
Mamdani claimed earlier this week he hadn’t seen his DSA comrade’s comments before he opted to endorse her.
She has said she is “not interested in relitigating the politics of my tweets.”
The mayor’s endorsement has galvanized the party’s moderates, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Gov. Kathy Hochul jumping in to give Espaillat a boost.
Mamdani also ran afoul of longtime Rep. Nydia Velázquez when he backed Valdez to take over in New York’s 7th House District as the congresswoman retires.
#mamdani #wife #big #apple #voters
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥66🤬36😱35🤯32🙏31💯25😢19👍1