Foreign Policy Observer

Foreign Policy Observer Following US foreign policy with a critical eye. Views from outside the mainstream media. I am a mix of an anti-war idealist with some Mearsheimer-style Realism.

Plus throw in some wisdom from Noam Chomsky. Per Chomsky, I think western elites manufacture and manipulate public opinion using the media - especially when it comes to foreign policy! I hope to expose people to news and opinions that they might not otherwise hear.

*I deliberately do not source from RT or Sputnik to avoid being labeled as a Kremlin stooge.

Simplicius:As we reach the end of 2025, let us look forward to 2026 with a projection for where the battlefield will tak...
12/31/2025

Simplicius:

As we reach the end of 2025, let us look forward to 2026 with a projection for where the battlefield will take us in the next year.

But first, let us cover the current battlefield updates in order to understand where things currently stand to contextualize the situation before we begin prognosticating the future.

As we reach the end of 2025, let us look forward to 2026 with a projection for where the battlefield will take us in the next year.

President calls for talks with leaders of demonstrations caused by decline in currency and living standards
12/31/2025

President calls for talks with leaders of demonstrations caused by decline in currency and living standards

President calls for talks with leaders of demonstrations caused by decline in currency and living standards

Europe is discovering three painful truths:– It cannot defend itself without the US. NATO’s European pillars lack ammuni...
12/31/2025

Europe is discovering three painful truths:

– It cannot defend itself without the US. NATO’s European pillars lack ammunition, industrial capacity, and high-end military technology.

– Sanctions have weakened Europe more than Russia. Energy-intensive industries in Germany, Austria, and Italy are relocating to the US. Deindustrialisation is underway in Europe.

– The peace negotiations will not include Europe as a co-author. Europe will receive the final document, but not be invited to shape it.

This is why European strategists are furious: the security architecture that defined the continent is being rewritten over their heads.

Europe’s long-standing security framework is undergoing profound strain, increasingly overshadowed by economic instruments that shape geopolitical influence...

Russia said Ukraine attacked the presidential residence in the Novgorod region overnight with 91 long-range drones, whic...
12/30/2025

Russia said Ukraine attacked the presidential residence in the Novgorod region overnight with 91 long-range drones, which were all destroyed by Russian air defences. No one was injured and there was no damage, Lavrov said.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Monday that Ukraine had tried to attack President Vladimir Putin's residence in northern Russia and so Moscow's negotiating position would be reviewed, but Ukraine said it was a lie.

Alastaire Crooke:Netanyahu’s new slant to lure Trump into war with IranIn these last days, the Trump Administration has ...
12/29/2025

Alastaire Crooke:

Netanyahu’s new slant to lure Trump into war with Iran

In these last days, the Trump Administration has boarded or seized three tankers either loaded with Venezuelan oil or destined for Venezuela (such as the Bella1). The most egregious seizure – in terms of illegality – being a Chinese-owned, Panama-flagged vessel reportedly destined for China – and on no one’s sanctions list.

In a different zone of conflict, the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) last Friday claimed that it had struck a Russian so-called ‘shadow fleet’ tanker, the Qendil, with aerial drones in waters of the Mediterranean Sea off Morocco. The SBU did not give further details of the attack, including how the SBU deployed a drone in the Mediterranean (2,000 Km from Ukraine), or the site from which it was launched. The SBU source said the cargo ship was empty at the time of the attack.

President Putin, in midst of his annual question and answer marathon, vowed that Russia would retaliate.

‘Blockades’, seizures and attacks, very plainly, are acts of war (despite the U.S. claim that America owns all oil produced by Venezuela – until all historical U.S. legal claims against Venezuela are satisfied). This tanker-episode is yet another ratchet to the drift to lawlessness in U.S. foreign policy.

These acts pre-eminently are aimed at China (which has large equities in the Venezuelan oil industry) and Russia, which has longstanding ties to both Venezuela and Cuba (now under Trump ‘blockade’ too). Add to that the $11bn in weapons being sent to Taiwan — with a significant amount of medium to long-range missile systems being part of the planned transfer, including 82 HIMARS launchers with Army ATACMS missiles, allowing Taipei forces to hit targets across the Taiwan Strait.

This latter transfer has infuriated China.

What this suggests is that the National Strategy Statement (NSS) in respect to China (it states that Washington views China as no longer constituting a ‘prime threat’, but only as an economic competitor) is meaningless rhetoric. China is being treated as an adversarial threat and will respond as such.

China and Russia will ‘read’ the Trump Administration by its actions, rather than its NSS rhetoric. And the signals speak plainly to escalatory steps.

Put all this into the context of ‘leaks’ by senior Trump officials which Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard says are “lies and propaganda”. She says the claims that “the ‘U.S. intelligence community’ agrees to, and supports the EU/NATO viewpoint, that Russia’s aim is to invade/conquer Europe (in order to ‘gin up support’ for their pro-war policies)” — that these are lies being pushed by what she terms “Deep State warmongers and their Propaganda Media … to undermine Trump’s efforts to bring peace to Ukraine”.

“The truth”, Gabbard writes on Twitter, is the opposite:

“[That] the U.S. intelligence community has briefed policymakers, including the Democrat HPSCI member quoted by Reuters, that U.S. Intelligence assesses that Russia seeks to avoid a larger war with NATO. It also assesses that, as the last few years have shown, Russia … does not have the capability to invade and occupy Europe” — and that “U.S. Intelligence assesses that Russia seeks to avoid a larger war with NATO”.

So, what Gabbard is telling us is that there is open intra-warfare at the top of the Trump Administration. On one side, there is the CIA, the hawks and their European collaborators, and on the other, Gabbard’s Intelligence analysts and a larger U.S. constituency.

Where is Trump in this brew? Why is he positioning himself at the cusp of another round of conflict with China? Why would he do that when U.S. economic structures are so fragile, and when China has shown that it has economic leverage with which to fight? Is the explanation the simplistic response that it is a diversion from the release of further Epstein images?

Why too did Trump despatch Messrs Witkoff and Kushner to Berlin when the intent of Europeans to wreck the negotiating process with Russia was quite evident aforehand? The two American ‘Envoys’ did not sign the Euro-proposal. They sat silently; yet neither did they enter a dissent, not even when (NATO-like) Article 5 security guarantees were mooted?

Also who was it who provided the targeting data by which Ukraine (apparently) was able to attack the Qendil off the North African coast 2,000 kms from Ukraine? What conclusion was intended for Putin to draw from the two incidents? Certainly, Russians will have made their own surmise.

And why draw-in Iran too, by seizing the Iranian Bella 1, ostensibly flagged to Guyana heading toward Venezuela? Does this represent the start to another round to the Iranian tanker war originally pursued by Israel? Does it suit Netanyahu’s and certain constituencies in Israel’s purposes to heat up the situation in respect to Iran?

It is worth asking because Netanyahu is scheduled to leave for Palm Beach, Miami, on the 28 December with a view to have one or perhaps two meetings with Trump at Mar-a-Lago during the following days (though the meetings with Trump have yet to be confirmed at time of writing).

It seems that it is neither Hamas, nor Gaza Phase Two, that lies predominantly behind Netanyahu’s summit intent – but rather Iran.

The Gaza and Hamas issues therefore are likely to play second fiddle to the ‘new’ narrative being framed by the Israeli PM’s office: Iran will not be presented to Trump as rushing toward ‘a nuclear breakthrough’ as per the old cliché.

That is the ‘old narrative’. The new one is, as leading Israeli commentator Anna Barsky writes in (Hebrew) in Ma’ariv:

“The more immediate threat here: [more] than the nuclear itself … [is] the systematic [Iranian] reconstruction of the middle layer: the ballistic missile industry, its production lines and the ability to restore the functionality to damaged air defence systems”.

“Not because the nuclear issue has fallen off the agenda … but because missiles are the key that allows Iran to protect everything else – and also to attack. Without missile and air defence shields, nuclear facilities are a vulnerable target. With a shield [by contrast] they become a much more complex strategic problem … And here is a point that often escapes public discourse: Iran is not ‘rehabilitating’ just to return to what it was, but to return differently”.

“In other words: “missile restoration” and “nuclear restoration” are not two separate axes, but one system – and it is of great concern to Israel. The missile builds a shell, the shell enables a nuclear power, and the nuclear power – even if rejected – remains the ultimate [Iranian] goal”.

The message that Netanyahu will take to Mar-a-Lago is that “Israel will not allow Iran to rebuild a missile and defence umbrella that will close the skies over sensitive sites”.

Trump may be more preoccupied with creating a new regional order without being dragged into a war with no clear end. Netanyahu likely will claim nonetheless (as he has been doing for over 25 years) that the ‘window’ in which Iran can rebuild its defence umbrella is fast closing, and will likely gently remind the President that Trump was placed in power, not just to promote Israel’s image, but for the Realpolitik purpose of expanding Israel’s real-world power in the region and control over territory.

Happy Christmas, Donald!

Simplicius: The biggest story the past week has been Russia’s strikes on the Odessa and Nikolayev region. These have tar...
12/27/2025

Simplicius:

The biggest story the past week has been Russia’s strikes on the Odessa and Nikolayev region. These have targeted both energy grid infrastructure as well as—most surprisingly—the transport and rail infrastructure, in what appears to be an attempt to cut Odessa off from logistics from the west.

The biggest story the past week has been Russia’s strikes on the Odessa and Nikolayev region.

M. K. BHADRAKUMARThe Trump administration has read the tea leaves that neither Russia nor China will offer Venezuela any...
12/27/2025

M. K. BHADRAKUMAR

The Trump administration has read the tea leaves that neither Russia nor China will offer Venezuela anything beyond rhetoric to counter any US aggression. The Russian foreign ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova at a press briefing on Thursday sought to show restraint to “prevent the events from sliding towards a destructive scenario,” while voicing support for Caracas.

As for China, despite being South America’s top trading partner and although a regime change in Caracas would certainly hurt China’s vital interests, Beijing is wary of falling into a geopolitical trap.

Both Moscow and Beijing keep the larger context of US global power projection in view. For Russia, the US role in the coming year or two becomes very crucial for reaching a durable settlement in Ukraine. As for China, the matrix is more complicated.

A satellite photo released by the Chinese private aerospace intelligence firm MizarVision showed a fleet of U.S. F-35 fighter jets at Jose Aponte de la Torre Airport, Puerto Rico, Dec. 25, 2025. The Pentagon has deployed special operations aircraft, troops and equipment to the Caribbean region near....

Jeffrey Sachs:Europe has repeatedly rejected peace with Russia at moments when a negotiated settlement was available, an...
12/27/2025

Jeffrey Sachs:

Europe has repeatedly rejected peace with Russia at moments when a negotiated settlement was available, and those rejections have proven profoundly self-defeating.

From the nineteenth century to the present, Russia’s security concerns have been treated not as legitimate interests to be negotiated within a broader European order, but as moral transgressions to be resisted, contained, or overridden.

This pattern has persisted across radically different Russian regimes —Tsarist, Soviet, and post-Soviet — suggesting that the problem lies not primarily in Russian ideology, but in Europe’s enduring refusal to recognize Russia as a legitimate and equal security actor.

My argument is not that Russia has been entirely benign or trustworthy. Rather, it is that Europe has consistently applied double standards in the interpretation of security.

Europe treats its own use of force, alliance-building, and imperial or post-imperial influence as normal and legitimate, while construing comparable Russian behavior — especially near Russia’s own borders — as inherently destabilizing and invalid.

This asymmetry has narrowed diplomatic space, delegitimized compromise, and made war more likely. Likewise, this self-defeating cycle remains the defining characteristic of European-Russian relations in the twenty-first century.

While other powers are presumed to have legitimate security interests that must be balanced and accommodated, Russia’s interests are presumed illegitimate. Russophobia functions less as a sentiment than as a systemic distortion — one that repeatedly undermines Europe’s own security. By Jeff

As challenges mount and workforces dwindle, much of Europe risks going broke — just not as quickly as France.
12/23/2025

As challenges mount and workforces dwindle, much of Europe risks going broke — just not as quickly as France.

As challenges mount and workforces dwindle, much of Europe risks going broke — just not as quickly as France.

Simplicius:[W]hat this means is two things: Firstly, that the EU has just criminally robbed its citizens of €90B by esse...
12/23/2025

Simplicius:

[W]hat this means is two things: Firstly, that the EU has just criminally robbed its citizens of €90B by essentially issuing a fake loan which is in actuality another free grant, given that there is zero chance of its repayment ever happening, since Ukraine has zero chance of ever decisively winning the war in such a way as to somehow “force” Russia into paying reparations—a laughable concept that no one even amongst the EUCO cattle could possibly imagine has a chance of happening.

But the second is the far more significant and sinister point: it legally ties the EU as a party to the war by giving it major stakes for winning the war against Russia. That means from this point forward, the EU is virtually obligated to do everything in its power to defeat Russia on the battlefield in order to win back its citizens’ criminally stolen assets.

The European Council summit that took place between December 18-19th in Brussels was declared a major ‘victory’ by the Eurocrats, when in reality it was again a resounding failure for von der Leyen’s rotten regime and her attempt to utilize stolen Russian assets for Ukraine’s war.

A significant tweet from the Vice President of the United States
12/23/2025

A significant tweet from the Vice President of the United States

Alastair Crooke:Trump morphs from asset to liability for IsraelLeading Israeli commentator, Anna Barsky, in Ma’ariv (in ...
12/23/2025

Alastair Crooke:

Trump morphs from asset to liability for Israel

Leading Israeli commentator, Anna Barsky, in Ma’ariv (in Hebrew) writes: “Let [Trump’s] plan in Gaza – fail”.

“An Israeli ‘waiting ploy’ is being formulated: not to hurl out a frontal rejection … [but rather] to bet that reality in the region will take its course”.
“[Yet], the fault line [over] Trump’s Gaza Plan is real … Israel demands a clear order: First, the disarmament of Hamas, i.e., first its actual removal from power, and only after that – reconstruction, international power and Israeli withdrawal”.
And here’s the ‘rub’: “The Prime Minister’s Office understands that Trump, apparently, does not intend to accept the Israeli ‘precondition’ formula”. “And here is the heart of the problem … which is that Hamas does not intend to disarm or leave the territory”.

Thus …“The Gulf states, Egypt, and also significant parts of the American establishment, propose a different order: First, reconstruction and an international mechanism are created, then a stabilisation force and a technocratic government are introduced, and then ‘in the process’, the issue of Hamas – is [only] gradually addressed”.

Thus, the Israeli leadership is both disillusioned and frustrated.

But this is just the tip of the spear. It goes deeper – as Alon Mizrahi points out:

“Israeli leaders are noting that Arab states have not agreed to normalise with Israel. The Jewish nationalists may have their man in the White House, but all he seems to care about is making Arab money. No [West Bank] annexation; no Iran [regime change] and now an ‘insulting’ demand for a ‘Phase 2’ in Gaza, where Israel is supposed to not only tolerate a foreign military presence, but also allow reconstruction to take place”.
The problem is the increasingly strategic divergence of interests between Netanyahu and Trump: They diverge not only on Trump’s Gaza plan, but on Syria (where U.S. Envoy Tom Barrack is seen to side with Turkey’s stance) and on Lebanon where Washington is seen to side with Beirut.

“Trump needs an achievement. He needs to sign something”. Whereas Israel’s goals are to maintain the freedom of military action that it currently enjoys in Syria and Lebanon, but which disturbs and disrupts U.S. efforts to orchestrate headline-catching agreements between Israel and regional powers.

Trump wants a Nobel prize and judging by his recent statements, feels that Netanyahu is not ‘providing the goods’ — a feeling of disillusion that is reciprocated in the Israeli Prime Minister’s office.

Ben Caspit relates that Trump’s inconsistent decision-making remains a major source of frustration for Netanyahu:

“The President can be on your side today, an associate suggests … but tomorrow he can easily flip without batting an eyelid, With Trump, every day is a new fight, depending on whom he spoke to the night before or what economic interests are at play. It’s a difficult and, above all, an endless struggle …”.
“Working with the Qataris and Saudis”, in the Israeli perspective, one commentator suggests, “represents for Trump the mesmerizing promise of mammoth investments, which bolster his image as effective and successful; but also, even more importantly, have opened a personal gateway to making billions in real estate deals across the Middle East”.
This Trump shift to his transactional business-first approach is in fact enshrined in the recent U.S. National Strategic Statement (NSS), which takes the U.S. focus away from Israeli security concerns to “partnership, friendship, and investment”. Bin Salman’s November visit to Washington vividly demonstrated this shift, shaped as it was by high-level meetings, an investment forum and a long list of agreements on expanding cooperation in these areas.

World Liberty Financial launched in 2024 by Trump’s sons Donald Jr. and Eric, alongside associates like Zach and Alex Witkoff (sons of Trump’s Envoy, Steve Witkoff), underscore the Trump family’s Gulf business priorities – projects that are adding billions of dollars to the family wealth.

Furthermore, Trump’s excessive partiality for Israel – such as acknowledging to Mark Levine at the White House Hanuka party that indeed, he is the first Jewish President of the U.S.: “True. That’s true”, Trump said gratuitously rubbing salt into the ‘America Firster’ open sores. This obsequiousness has translated into strategic damage for Zionism – even among American Conservatives in Congress: “They hate Israel”,Trump said at the same gathering.

“By now”, Alon Mizrahi argues, “Israel and its legions of supporters in the American political system have to be asking themselves whether they have made a critical mistake by betting ‘all’ on Trump”. They stood behind Trump for strategic purpose, and not merely for his commitment to defending Israel’s image and in making ‘anti-semitism’ laws bite.

Mizrahi explains:

“Nice and potentially important, PR-related objectives are not what [the Israeli eschatological Right] is really about: The expansion of real-world power and control over people and territory is its defining, guiding vision and aspiration. Trump was chosen to help with that: for Israel to formally own parts of Syria; to terminate Hezbollah in Lebanon; to annex and ethnically cleanse the West Bank … to break Iran, and to curtail the rise of any rival power in the Middle East, including one as accommodating of Zionism as the Arab Gulf states”,
“They know they have limited time before the general distaste for Zionism in the world, including the U.S., gives way to new leaders, norms, and standards. So, they need to act with urgency. And this is what they’re doing: not damage control, but preparation for impact. They are not playing defence; they are playing offense”.

Ben Caspit writes that, whereas the second phase of Trump’s Gaza plan likely will be the most pressing issue at the Netanyahu-Trump year-end summit, it is Iran that poses the greater strategic threat to Israel. And it is in this context that Israeli strategic commentator Shemuel Meir raises another Israeli-perceived Trump lapse:

Were Iran’s uranium enrichment sites truly ‘obliterated’ on 13 June? And what happened to the 440 kg of 60% enriched uranium that Iran still has?

In the current state of wide scepticism as to the results of Trump’s attack on Iran, “an extraordinary nuclear story emerged in Israeli discourse this week, with more to it, than meets the eye: Netanyahu unexpectedly announced the appointment of his military secretary, Major General Roman Goffman, as the next head of the Mossad”.

Goffman, with no known Intelligence experience, is more known for having written on the nuclear issue a few years ago, proposing a radical change to Israel’s strategic deterrence doctrine.

As head of the Mossad, Goffman reports directly and exclusively to Netanyahu. In Israel, the PM is also the Head of the Atomic Energy Commission. “It seems that more than thinking outside the box, Goffman thinks in Netanyahu’s terms”, Meir writes.

Through the ‘Nixon-Golda Understandings’ initiated by Henry Kissinger fifty years ago Israel was granted a unique American exemption from the obligation to join the NPT treaty. The U.S., for its part, set conditions for this unique nuclear status: Israel would not declare that it had nuclear weapons and would not conduct a nuclear test. This is Israel’s policy of nuclear ambiguity.

A possible reason for Netanyahu contemplating moving away from official ‘ambiguity’ is what Shemuel Meir calls the ‘Trump effect’:

“On the one hand, there is a U.S. president who gave Israel the green light to attack the nuclear sites when his national intelligence assessed that Iran was not building nuclear weapons. Yet, on the other hand, there stands a volatile and unpredictable man”.
“A President who declared that all nuclear sites had been ‘obliterated’ offers no certainty that he will give Netanyahu the option for a second round of preventive war, in contrast to Netanyahu’s assertion of Israeli freedom of action whenever signs, (real or not), of the renewal of the Iranian nuclear program are discovered”.
Well, Mossad just has declared that “Iran is just waiting for the chance to build a nuclear bomb. They want to wipe Israel off the map. We’ll find their agents. We’ll deal with them. Justice will be done” — said David Barnea, the out-going Mossad Chief.

The change of leadership at Mossad may intentionally signal that the nuclear issue in respect to Iran will be on the table at the end-of-year summit.

On this vital issue, Netanyahu may also determine whether Trump, once an ‘asset’, has now become a liability.

“If he stays in office and remains adamant on pursuing financial gains while enjoying a pro-Zionist aura and delivering nothing substantial for Israel, I just can’t see how they’re going to let him continue”, Mizrahi speculates.
“They’d much rather he just disappeared”.
Yet, Vice-President JD Vance now is tainted too. “Systematic delegitimization of Jews” came today from the U.S. Vice-President, writes Anna Barsky in Ma’ariv:

“There is a difference between dislike for Israel and anti-Semitism” – this is what the Vice-President of the U.S., J. D. Vance, wrote on social media”, Barsky wrote.

“From the perspective of Israel, there is nothing more disturbing than this short, almost casual text. Not because it is surprising, not because it is blatant, but because of what it symbolizes — an open adoption, on the part of senior U.S. administration officials, of an ideological narrative that seeks to separate attitudes towards Israel from attitudes towards Jews and to legitimize deep hostility towards the Jewish state, while maintaining a clean moral façade”.
Perhaps – paraphrasing Anna Barsky – Israel is now realising that ‘realities in the region’ have changed.

Address

Boston, MA

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Foreign Policy Observer posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Share