A Justiça da Bahia condenou, nesta quarta-feira (21), o quarto acusado pelo assassinato da líder quilombola Maria Bernadete Pacífico, Sérgio Ferreira de Jesus, a 23 anos e 9 meses de prisão em regime inicial fechado.
A sessão de júri popular ocorreu no Fórum Ruy Barbosa, em Salvador. Durante a sessão, além do réu, foram ouvidas duas testemunhas de acusação e quatro de defesa.
O crime foi analisado como homicídio qualificado por motivo torpe, meio cruel, impossibilidade de defesa da vítima e uso proibido de arma de fogo.
Durante o julgamento, o MPBA (Ministério Público da Bahia) destacou a articulação criminosa e a motivação do assassinato, vinculada à atuação de Mãe Bernadete contra a expansão do tráfico de drogas no Quilombo Pitanga dos Palmares, em Simões Filho, na Região Metropolitana de Salvador.
As investigações do Gaeco (Grupo de Atuação Especial de Combate às Organizações Criminosas), apontam que Sérgio participou diretamente da organização do crime. O homem é padrasto de Arielson da Conceição Santos, um dos executores do homicídio que foi condenado abril deste ano.
Ele teria contribuído para fomentar a motivação do assassinato, em conjunto com “Maquinista”, homem apontado como líder do tráfico de drogas na localidade, além de auxiliar os executores a realizar o crime.
Na noite do crime, Sérgio orientou Arielson e Josevan, conhecido como “BZ” ou “Buzuin”, sobre como entrar na casa da vítima sem chamar a atenção e evitar as câmeras de segurança.
Não houve necessidade de execução da pena, já que Sérgio estava preso preventivamente enquanto aguardava seu julgamento.
Veja quem são os cinco acusados:
Mãe Bernadete era uma das principais lideranças quilombolas da Bahia e atuava na defesa do território e dos direitos da comunidade.
Segundo as investigações, ela vinha denunciando ameaças antes de ser morta, mesmo estando incluída em um programa de proteção.
A líder foi assassinada na noite de 17 de agosto de 2023, na sede do Quilombo Pitanga dos Palmares, no município de Simões Filho, na Região Metropolitana de Salvador.
Ela estava em casa quando o imóvel foi invadido por homens armados e foi atingida por 25 disparos de arma de fogo.
No momento do crime, três netos da ialorixá estavam na residência. Eles foram retirados da sala antes dos disparos e não sofreram agressões físicas.
A CNN Brasil tenta localizar as defesas. O espaço segue aberto.
Click to see the full-size image
Written by Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst
Being a country that almost entirely depends on energy imports, Japan is extremely vulnerable to virtually all forms of geopolitical instability. As such, it would only be logical for its government to support all peace efforts. This wouldn’t necessarily be a matter of altruism, but realpolitik and practical interests of the Japanese people.
Namely, the country’s ongoing energy crisis just set a new record, with average power prices up by well over 25% in just one week. The massive hike is caused by soaring LNG and higher coal prices. Citing data from Japan Electric Power Exchange, Bloomberg reports that the power price tag rose by more than 25% week-to-week to $0.19 per kWh (kilowatt-hour). Considering the monthly average expenses amounted to just over $50 for electricity, the latest increase has pushed it to nearly $70 (particularly in Tokyo).
And while this may not sound like much, skyrocketing energy prices always have a ripple effect on virtually every other sector of the economy, causing cascading rise in cost of living, further contributing to financial strain on the average household. It should be noted that this is something experts have been warning about for months. Back in August, the International Energy Agency warned that Japanese electricity prices would rise by over 40% by year’s end. This estimate is now considered conservative given the latest surge. Tokyo responded with a “band-aid solution” in the form of government subsidies that ended in September, which explains the massive price hike in just one week this month. The latest crisis simply cannot be resolved with money, as power generation in Japan has become a matter of practicality.
Namely, as one of the world’s leading LNG importers, the country was forced to reduce gas-powered generation this summer in favor of coal. This was the direct result of the LNG price hikes caused by geopolitical factors (primarily American aggression in the Middle East and partially the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict).
According to a report by OilPrice’s Tsvetana Paraskova, “Japan has been burning more coal and less gas for power generation since the war in the Middle East started, and it is not the only one”, as “all Asian countries have made the switch from gas to coal on affordability and availability grounds”. Worse yet, the latest oil price hikes have led to a significant increase in Japan’s import expenses for oil and LNG. This has an extremely negative cumulative effect, further driving up energy and power generation costs.
Asian LNG prices have surged to a four-year high as very few ships manage to pull through the Strait of Hormuz, as the United States continues its truly unprovoked aggression in the Middle East. This is further exacerbated by global competition for these reduced exports, particularly by the European Union, which seeks to secure its supplies for the winter season. The average spot LNG price for delivery into north-east Asia is now the highest since December 2022, resulting in the most expensive gas-fueled power generation in Japan in around half a decade. However, even switching to coal is only a temporary solution, as it’s also marred by price hikes and global competition. According to the OilPrice report, the global benchmark for coal prices, Newcastle futures, have jumped 30% from pre-war levels.
Obviously, you’d expect Tokyo to focus all its energy (no pun intended) on tackling these issues and keeping its power generation relatively safe from geopolitical hurdles. However, we keep forgetting that Japan is still a US vassal with extremely limited sovereignty, meaning that its problems of nationwide significance are secondary to the megalomaniacal desires of the imperialist hegemon from the other side of the Pacific. Thus, Tokyo is now directly engaged in America’s attempts to undermine China’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and basic national security interests. Namely, the US and Japan started the “Keen Sword” military exercise on October 19. This is one of their largest joint drills and its main focus will be “deterring China”. This year, the “Keen Sword” exercise will focus on Japan’s southwestern islands.
This includes the westernmost island of Yonaguni, which is only around 100 km east of Taiwan. Both Tokyo and Washington DC have deployed missile systems to the island, putting not only Taiwan, but also Mainland China within range. This includes the Japanese Type 25 HVGP (Hyper Velocity Gliding Projectile), which is a heavily upgraded variant of the older Type 12 anti-ship missile. Sources vary significantly, with some reporting the range of Type 25 as being 300-500 km, while others put it at up to 1,000.
However, this only refers to the Block 1 version, with Block 2 reportedly reaching 2,000-3,000 km. Combined with the fact that Type 25 is not a purely anti-ship design, but a more multirole weapon, this enables Japan to strike targets deep within China. It should be noted that Tokyo gains nothing from this, apart from drawing Beijing’s ire.
And who could possibly blame China? Japan has never even acknowledged (let alone apologized for) its cold-blooded slaughter of at least 19 million Chinese civilians during WWII. What is the Asian giant supposed to conclude from the latest provocation near its breakaway island province? Is China undermining Japan’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and national security?
Obviously, it’s a rhetorical question, as we all know who really does. Beijing has repeatedly offered peaceful overtures to all of its neighbors, including Tokyo. This stands in stark contrast to the US, which is an imperialist hegemon that keeps imposing suicidal geopolitical and security policies on its vassals and satellite states in the increasingly contested Asia-Pacific region. Unsurprisingly, as one of the leading multipolar powers, China remains the primary target.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
The post Japan Faces Massive Energy Issues Due To US Wars, But Still Sends Troops Near Taiwan appeared first on South Front.
Europe’s leaders can no longer trust a word that comes out of Washington. No more slaps on the wrist – we need concrete steps to punish Trump
Historical comparisons are always inexact. No one conflict precisely mirrors another. Yet Donald Trump’s shameless appeasement of Vladimir Putin carries more than a noxious whiff of Neville Chamberlain’s failed attempt in Munich in 1938 to head off war with Nazi Germany. To be fair to the former UK prime minister – and history largely hasn’t been – his peacemaking efforts had the enthusiastic backing of most people in Britain and France who, like him, were desperate to avoid a repeat of the horrors of the first world war. Trump enjoys no equivalent public support for his treachery. Nor does he face the prospect of a US war with Russia. His betrayal of Ukraine is cynically self-interested, globally dangerous and utterly contemptible.
US-Russian talks on agreeing the shoddy terms of a precedent-setting American sell-out of Ukraine are at an advanced stage, after meetings in St Petersburg this week. Trump has zigzagged over the war ever since returning to office. Now, panicked by record-low poll ratings, he seems determined to scapegoat Ukraine and force its de facto capitulation. Recent steps – his shocking decision to fund Putin’s war machine by buying Russian diesel, his waiving of tougher sanctions, his mysterious, lethal interruptions in US satellite and intelligence sharing with Kyiv, and his renewed attempt to oust Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy – mark Trump out as the skulking Judas, the craven Brutus of the modern age. He makes Chamberlain look like a man of iron principle. All that’s lacking is an umbrella.
Simon Tisdall is a Guardian foreign affairs commentator
Continue reading...
© Photograph: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
© Photograph: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
© Photograph: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
“Se pensano di potermi tappare la bocca con questi metodi non sanno con chi hanno a che fare. Non mi sono lasciato intimidire da Riina e Berlusconi, non mi lascerò intimidire da questa sporca politica”. In conferenza stampa con Giuseppe Conte e i capigruppo Luca Pirondini e Riccardo Ricciardi, il senatore M5s Roberto Scarpinato risponde alle accuse della destra e del procuratore di Caltanissetta Salvatore De Luca, che martedì in Commissione Antimafia ha indicato di nuovo l’ex procuratore generale di Palermo come “depistatore” delle indagini sulla strage di via D’Amelio. “Ci sono una decina di persone che, se domani potessero dire cos’è successo dietro le stragi del ’92-’93, questo Paese si fermerebbe, il governo cadrebbe”, afferma Scarpinato. “La campagna stragista del 92-93 ha portato al potere questa classe politica, i Berlusconi, i Dell’Utri. Questa commissione e la presidente” Chiara Colosimo, di Fratelli d’Italia, hanno impedito qualsiasi indagine conoscitiva sui mandanti e i concorrenti esterni” delle stragi: è stata chiusa una saracinesca sul passato, hanno militarizzato la commissione e vogliono strumentalizzare gli errori della procura di Caltanissetta”, ha attaccato.
L'articolo Stragi, Scarpinato risponde alle accuse della destra: “Non mi hanno intimidito Riina e Berlusconi, non mi farò intimidire da questa sporca politica” proviene da Il Fatto Quotidiano.
In a direct confrontation with Russia, European NATO states would likely be even more vulnerable than Ukraine to swarms of Russia’s new jet-powered strike weapons, Fabian Hoffmann of the Norwegian Institute for Defence Studies (NIDS) argued in a 20 October op-ed for the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA). He calls them low-cost cruise missiles. Just three days earlier, Romania met what it believes were two of them over the Black Sea.
Romanian F-16 fighter jets shot down two jet-powered Geran-family drones over Romania’s territorial waters on 17 October, the Defense Ministry said. Interim Defense Minister Radu Miruță said they flew at about 450 km/h and were likely Geran-4s, the first of that type Romania had downed.
Russia began using the Geran-4 in May in response to effective Ukrainian interceptor drones, Ukraine’s military intelligence (HUR) said, adding that it reaches up to 500 km/h. By June, those interceptors were downing about half of slower Shahed-type drones, defense adviser Serhii Beskrestnov estimated.
Hoffmann traces the shift to the Geran-3, a model Ukraine recovered intact in 2025. In his account, a Chinese JT80 turbojet roughly doubled its speed, from 185 to 350 km/h. However, he puts newer models, including the Geran-4, at 600 km/h or more, above HUR’s figure for that model.
By his estimate, each costs $150,000–$250,000, against about $50,000 for a long-range drone. Still, from Russia’s perspective, he wrote, that buys a significantly higher chance of getting through.
Hoffmann argues defenses must match the threat’s speed, for example with jet-powered interceptor drones. Ukraine already fields some. On 4 October, President Zelenskyy said its Bars interceptors had shown the highest percentage among Ukrainian interceptors, about 30% of targets, according to Militarnyi. One unit destroyed five aerial targets with five Bars interceptors, Defense Minister Yevhenii Khmara later told journalists. He also called aviation one of the most effective tools against jet drones.
Hoffmann’s concern is scale. Jet engines are in short supply, he wrote, because too few European and US suppliers can meet demand. Ukraine’s Defense Industry Council flagged a shortage of such engines for its drones in April. In his view, gun systems and higher-end missile defenses are too scarce or too costly to fill the gap.
Avere la partita Iva, essere iscritti all’albo e fatturare compensi non basta a dimostrare che un rapporto lavorativo sia autonomo. Anzi se il professionista è inserito stabilmente nell’organizzazione aziendale, si assume responsabilità e risponde ai vertici societari, la collaborazione può essere qualificata come lavoro dipendente, anche con inquadramento dirigenziale.
In questo modo la Cassazione con la sentenza 24668/2026 tutela tutti quei professionisti “esterni” che, in concreto, svolgono attività secondo i canoni della subordinazione. Questi stessi professionisti hanno bisogno delle tutele tipiche di chi è alle dipendenze.
La controversia nasce dal ricorso presentato da un commercialista che aveva collaborato con una società, dopo aver firmato un contratto di consulenza.
Il professionista avrebbe però collaborato per quasi dieci anni con modalità ben diverse da quelle di una consulenza esterna. Egli infatti sosteneva di avere diretto l’area amministrativa e finanziaria, coordinato gli uffici e il personale, assunto responsabilità gestionali e mantenuto un rapporto costante con l’amministratore unico della società.
Di conseguenza chiedeva al giudice di accertare il vincolo di subordinazione nel rapporto, con riconoscimento della qualifica dirigenziale, delle differenze retributive, del Tfr, dell’indennità sostitutiva del preavviso e di ulteriori somme, compreso il risarcimento connesso all’illegittimità del recesso.
La società si opponeva indicando alcune “spie” di un rapporto autonomo: tipologia di contratto, iscrizione del professionista all’albo, partita Iva, fatturazione dei compensi e assenza di vincoli gerarchici. Contestava inoltre che le mansioni svolte giustificassero un inquadramento dirigenziale.
Il Tribunale di Roma riconosceva la natura subordinata e dirigenziale del rapporto, condannando la società al pagamento del Tfr e dell’indennità sostitutiva del preavviso, ma respingendo le altre domande. Stesso esito presso la Corte d’Appello capitolina.
Insoddisfatta dell’esito del giudizio, la società ricorreva in Cassazione e, con sentenza 35687/2021, quest’ultima annullava la pronuncia d’appello per motivazione insufficiente sulla rilevanza e il ruolo del contratto di consulenza, predisposto dallo stesso professionista. Senza escludere la subordinazione, la Corte chiedeva cioè di verificare con maggior attenzione la corrispondenza tra accordo scritto e modalità concrete del rapporto.
Nel giudizio di rinvio, la Corte d’Appello capitolina ribadiva la natura dipendente e dirigenziale della collaborazione. La società proponeva quindi un nuovo ricorso in Cassazione.
Il principio centrale evidenziato dalla Cassazione è che la qualificazione formale del rapporto non è decisiva quando le modalità effettive di lavoro indicano una situazione diversa.
La distinzione tra lavoro autonomo e subordinato non dipende soltanto dal “nome” attribuito al contratto, ma dal modo in cui la prestazione viene concretamente organizzata e svolta.
Ecco perché la Suprema Corte ha ritenuto corretta la valutazione degli elementi raccolti nel corso del processo, tra cui:
Non solo. Le testimonianze, le e-mail e gli atti societari raccolti confermavano il ruolo del professionista come direttore amministrativo e finanziario.
Parallelamente, la presenza di una partita Iva, l’iscrizione all’Albo, la titolarità di uno studio professionale e l’entità elevata dei compensi non sono stati considerati elementi sufficienti a escludere la subordinazione. Queste circostanze erano qui “secondarie” e, anzi, potevano ben coesistere con il lavoro dipendente. Era stata esclusa anche la collaborazione a progetto.
Nel lavoro dirigenziale, la subordinazione può manifestarsi in forma attenuata perché il dirigente gode di ampia autonomia e non necessita di ordini continui o controlli puntuali. Come chiarito dalla sentenza 3640/2020 della Cassazione, occorre piuttosto verificare se la prestazione sia funzionalmente coordinata con gli obiettivi aziendali e soggetta alle direttive generali del datore di lavoro.
Nello specifico caso in oggetto, la subordinazione era emersa dagli indici già descritti mentre la qualifica dirigenziale è stata giustificata dalle responsabilità quotidianamente esercitate.
Le citate procure e le deleghe gli consentivano inoltre di rappresentare e impegnare la società nei confronti di terzi, distinguendo la sua posizione da quella del quadro. La Cassazione ha così confermato la correttezza della valutazione tecnico-giuridica fatta dalla Corte d’Appello.
La società contestava anche il riconoscimento del Tfr (tema delicato come conferma un recente contributo giurisprudenziale) e dell’indennità sostitutiva del preavviso sostenendo che i compensi già elargiti al professionista, eventualmente superiori a quelli previsti dal contratto collettivo, dovessero essere considerati ai fini dell’assorbimento delle somme dovute.
La Cassazione ha però bocciato questo ragionamento ribadendo che — quando viene accertato un rapporto subordinato formalmente qualificato come autonomo — il principio dell’assorbimento non si applica né alle spettanze del Tfr né all’indennità sostitutiva del preavviso. La società è stata altresì condannata al pagamento delle spese del giudizio di Cassazione.
Il principio giurisprudenziale che emerge dalla sentenza 24668/2026 dei giudici di piazza Cavour interessa i professionisti: partita Iva e contratto di consulenza non garantiscono, da soli, l’autonomia. Lo stesso principio potrebbe riguardare, per esempio, un avvocato che coordina stabilmente l’ufficio legale di un’azienda o un ingegnere che dirige un reparto tecnico, rispondendo direttamente ai vertici.
Inoltre le conseguenze della riqualificazione di un rapporto non riguardano soltanto le tutele del lavoratore, ma anche gli obblighi contributivi dell’impresa, come chiarito dalla Cassazione in un’altra vicenda relativa a collaborazioni trasformate in rapporti subordinati.
Per le imprese, la qualificazione contrattuale deve sempre trovare riscontro nell’organizzazione concreta del lavoro. Per i professionisti, invece, fatture, iscrizione all’albo, la presenza di fatture e uno studio proprio non impediscono di chiedere il riconoscimento della subordinazione – e delle relative tutele (contributi, ferie, permessi ecc.) – se ne ricorrono i presupposti concreti. Saperlo in anticipo potrà evitare lunghi e onerosi strascichi giudiziari.
In definitiva, la valutazione del rapporto resta legata alle circostanze del singolo caso: nessun singolo indizio è necessariamente decisivo. È l’insieme degli elementi — letto alla luce delle norme e dei principi giurisprudenziali — a consentire di distinguere una vera consulenza autonoma da un rapporto di lavoro subordinato, anche dirigenziale.
© Corbis via Getty Images
O almirante Giuseppe Cavo Dragone diz que Portugal precisa de aviões de quinta geração para cumprir os objetivos de capacidades da Aliança Atlântica e que a NATO ainda não detetou atividade russa junto aos cabos ao largo da costa portuguesa. O militar mais graduado da Aliança espera para janeiro o resultado da revisão da presença militar dos Estados Unidos na Europa
O almirante Giuseppe Cavo Dragone diz que Portugal precisa de aviões de quinta geração para cumprir os objetivos de capacidades da Aliança Atlântica e que a NATO ainda não detetou atividade russa junto aos cabos ao largo da costa portuguesa. O militar mais graduado da Aliança espera para janeiro o resultado da revisão da presença militar dos Estados Unidos na Europa
The diplomatic track around the Ukraine conflict has become unusually busy. U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff is touring Europe, and a new round of contacts is unfolding just as Moscow and Kyiv weigh very different assumptions about who holds the stronger hand.
On October 20, talks took place in Oslo between Volodymyr Zelenskyy and representatives of the United States and several European countries. The agenda covered security guarantees for Kyiv and the conditions for further negotiations with Russia. Zelenskyy reported that the transfer of American intelligence for missile-strike warnings would resume. Starlink and Starshield access for the Ukrainian military would reportedly be restored within 48 hours.
Moscow, however, used the eve of Witkoff’s visit to set out its position. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov spoke on October 20 and kept expectations low. “Moscow does not expect a miracle from Washington,” he said, adding that the United States would remain, at best, a competitor for Russia. His main points were consistent. Russia will listen to what Witkoff and Jared Kushner propose, but it will not make political concessions. It is ready for economic deals, but not for political compromise. Relations with the West may resume, but not on the pre-2022 terms. Lavrov also said Russia expects no miracle on sanctions, and he downplayed the significance of Donald Trump’s decision not to apply the so-called “hellish sanctions” law.
The confidence in that tone has a source. Russia is negotiating from a position of battlefield momentum. Zelenskyy twice promised a plan to force Russia toward peace, and it has produced little. Ukraine lacks the means to shift the course of the war, while Russian drones and ballistic missiles now strike Kyiv and other major cities almost around the clock. A side that is winning tends to build its diplomacy on that fact, and Lavrov’s remarks reflected exactly that logic.
Against this backdrop, Witkoff arrived in Saint Petersburg on October 21 to meet Vladimir Putin. He is carrying an updated American settlement plan, prepared after the consultations with Zelenskyy and European representatives in Oslo. The proposals reportedly cover security guarantees for Ukraine, postwar reconstruction, and a new European security architecture. Washington hopes to lay the groundwork for direct three-way talks.
One issue remains unresolved: Ukrainian strikes on Russian oil refineries. Kushner again demanded that they stop. Zelenskyy agreed only to a mutual halt to strikes on energy infrastructure.
Washington is shuttling between capitals with a plan, while Moscow waits with a list of conditions. Kyiv, under nightly bombardment, is asked to compromise first. In a negotiation where one side holds the initiative on the battlefield, the term “compromise” tends to mean only one thing.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
DEAR FRIENDS. IF YOU LIKE THIS TYPE OF CONTENT, SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT WORK:
MONERO (XMR): 86yfEHs6pkoDEKCxc6MAnQX8cVHmzhYxMVrNuwKgNmqpWK8dDxjgGnK8PtUNJMACbn6xEGxmRauNTHJhUJpg9Mwz8htBBND
BITCOIN (BTC): bc1qgu58lfszcpqu6fd8l98m378wgzugyg9y93lcym
BITCOIN CASH (BCH): qr28d80s5juzv2793k5jrq59xrl5fxd8qg9h3zlkk2
PAYPAL, WESTERN UNION etc: write to info@southfront.press , southfront@list.ru
If you face any problems sending funds to the addresses given above, please contact us: info@southfront.press and southfront@list.ru. Also be aware that many email services such as Hotmail, Yahoo etc. may block correspondence from info@southfront.press and some others put it in spam.
If you want to support SouthFront but have no opportunity to do it via cryptocurrency, please contact us: info@southfront.press and southfront@list.ru.
SouthFront: Analysis and Intelligence
NOW hosted at southfront.press
Previously, SouthFront: Analysis and Intelligence was at southfront.org.
The .org domain name had been blocked by the US (NATO) (https://southfront.press/southfront-org-blocked-by-u-s-controlled-global-internet-supervisor/) globally, outlawed and without any explanation
Back before that, from 2013 to 2015, SouthFront: Analysis and Intelligence was at southfront.com
The post No Miracles Expected: Moscow Meets Witkoff From A Position Of Strength appeared first on South Front.
By Jacob G. HORNBERGER
Join us on Telegram, X, and VK.
Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su
Right-wing and left-wing interventionists and interventionist mainstream-press commentators are up in arms over President Trump’s decision to ease economic sanctions against Russia in connection with the Russian government’s agreement to supply diesel fuel to the United States.
The notion is that nothing — not even the midterms — must be permitted to interfere with the Cold War II racket that holds that Russia is an aggressor nation that is hell-bent on conquering the world and, therefore, that it is necessary to target the Russian populace with severe impoverishment and even death by starvation or illness with ever-more economic sanctions.
Central to this racket, of course, is Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The notion was that Russia was on the march. As soon as it conquered Ukraine, U.S. officials maintained, it would re-conquer Eastern Europe, and then Western Europe and England, and then make its way to South America, Central America, Mexico, and finally the United States, all of which Russia would reconstitute into a new Soviet Union of the world. In other words, Russia is coming to get us again.
The Cold War I racket was used to justify the conversion of the federal government to a national-security state, a type of governmental structure that came with omnipotent powers, including the power of orchestrating and committing state-sponsored assassinations. The racket enabled the national-security branch of the government to quickly become the most powerful branch of the federal government, one to which the president, Congress, and the Supreme Court decided to defer.
The Cold War I racket was also used to justify an anti-communist crusade, during which the U.S. national-security establishment targeted suspected communists, both here and in foreign countries, with destruction of reputation or even with assassination.
Beginning in 1989, the Cold War racket came to a sudden and unexpected end. The Berlin Wall was torn down, Germany was reunified, the Warsaw Pact was dissolved, the Soviet Union disintegrated, and Russian troops withdrew from Eastern Europe.
Officials in the U.S. national-security branch — i.e., the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA — naturally were extremely concerned. Suddenly, they had lost the justification for their existence and for the racket that they were certain would go on forever. People were talking about a “peace dividend,” which would involve a deep reduction in national-security-state spending and maybe even a restoration of America’s founding governmental system of a limited-government republic.
To replace the old racket with a new racket, new official enemies were developed, such as “the terrorists,” “the Muslims,” “the drug dealers,” and “the illegals.” They were all coming to get us, or so they said. Everyone remained deathly afraid.
But the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA were not about to let go of their old Cold War racket so easily. After providing Soviet officials with assurances during the negotiations over German reunification that NATO would not expand eastward, U.S. officials proceeded to do precisely that. NATO began marching eastward, absorbing former members of the Warsaw Pact and moving inexorably toward Russia’s borders, knowing full well what Russia’s reaction would be.
That was what the threat to absorb Ukraine into NATO ultimately accomplished — provoking Russia into invading Ukraine in an effort to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO. U.S. officials had been warned for years that NATO expansion, especially into Ukraine, could produce precisely such a confrontation. Yet they proceeded anyway.
Voila! The national-security branch had its old Cold War racket back, albeit in a revised format. The Russians are coming to get us … again (along with the terrorists, the Muslims, the drug dealers, and the illegals). The big fly in the ointment, however, is that Russia has been unable to conquer Ukraine. That’s, of course, a problem. If Russia can’t even conquer Ukraine, how is it going to be able to conquer Eastern Europe, Western Europe, England, South America, Central America, Mexico, and then the United States? Whoops!
Never mind that inconvenient problem. In the eyes of national-security statists, it is imperative that we continue hewing to the official narrative. Russia is coming to get us, just like before. We need ever-increasing budgets for the national-security establishment and its ever-growing army of voracious fat-cat “defense” contractors. Who cares if the United States goes bankrupt in the process? We need to again be kept “safe” from the Reds — I mean, the Russians (and from the terrorists, Muslims, drug dealers, and illegals.)
Oh, and don’t forget the Cuban Reds! They are coming to get us too. No doubt the right-wing and left-wing interventionists and the interventionist mainstream press, all of whom remain steadfast acolytes of the national-security establishment, are scared to death that President Trump might lift the old Cold War embargo and the new Cold War blockade against the Cuban people as well. Of course, fat chance of that happening given Trump’s own interventionist mindset.
Original article: www.fff.org
Click to see the full-size image
Reports published in recent weeks on the losses of foreign fighters near Kupyansk list dozens of names – primarily citizens of Brazil and Colombia, as well as people from the United States, China and several European countries. Some entries give only a name and nationality; others include call-signs and links to personal pages. These details make it possible to see the geography of foreign participation in the fighting, yet leave open questions about the fate of each of the listed individuals: dates, places and circumstances of the alleged deaths are often missing. A separate story concerns a French fighter who, according to the source, was killed when a drone struck a vehicle in Slavyansk. Altogether the materials contain 40 names from 11 countries.
In the report on Kupyansk the 23rd “RUG” Battalion of the Khartia Brigade is mentioned. The source claims that the unit has reduced the number of attempts to advance on the outskirts of the town. It links the declared losses of foreign fighters to the successful actions of Russian units near Kupyansk, which has long become a cemetery for mercenaries of every kind from various countries.
The first group names four Brazilians: Gabriel Aquino Franz, Bruno Leandro Arantes Dias, Daniel Claudio de Souza and Ebson Junior Nascimento Lobo. Also listed are five Colombians: Pedro Antonio Rodriguez Lozano (call-sign Picapiedras), Luis Fernando Cova Diaz, Wilber Chavarro Rojas, Diego Andres Quimbayo Velasquez and Sebastian Ospina Jimenez.
Click to see the full-size image
The second group consists entirely of Brazilian citizens. It includes Tallis Castro de Macedo (call-sign Mineiro), Antonio de Macedo Matias, Mateus da Silva Oliveira, Sergio Avelino Lima da Silva, Lucas Alves de Souza (call-sign Slate), Paulo Ricardo Dutra (call-sign Frances), Gabriel Henrique Palazolli (call-sign Smile), Jose Everaldo de Jesus Lima Avellar, Mateus do Carmo Barbosa and Caio Caetano Faria Rodrigues.
Click to see the full-size image
The third group is an international contingent representing citizens of several countries. Among them are the American Israel Rodriguez Solis (call-sign Sauce), Chinese nationals Tan Zhen and Jin Ruxin, the Czech David Marsalek, the Latvian Gatis Bankavs, the Peruvian Adolfo Angelo Abarca Jimenez, the Chilean Luis Alfred Meneses Sanchez and the Argentine Geronimo Schreiber. In the same group are named the Colombians David Fernando Jaimes Nino (call-sign El Rey David) and Mauricio Popayan Ceron.
Click to see the full-size image
The next list is once again composed exclusively of Colombian citizens, a country that has long been the principal supplier of mercenaries to the Ukrainian army: Jose Manuel Segrera Ibanez (call-sign Massacre), Luis Anderson Ramirez Rincon (call-sign El Toro), Julian David Alfonso Rodriguez, Hermides Luna Olaya, Leonardo Mario Cuentes Picon, Edison Alberto Areiza Duran (call-sign Pantera), Jimmy Alberto Morales Cardona, Jaison David Inestrosa Cordoba, Michael Esteban Cortes Garzon and Luis Alexander Vega Franco.
Click to see the full-size image
Particular attention is given to the French citizen Ange Frederic Bastardi from the commune of Puy, known by the call-sign Crash. He was killed in Slavyansk when a fibre-optic-controlled FPV drone struck a Nissan vehicle that, according to the report, belonged to the 60th Separate Mechanised Brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The strike took place on Torskaya Street.
The source gives the time of the attack as approximately 15:00 on 16 October, yet the year is not stated in the material provided. According to the same account, Bastardi arrived in Ukraine at the end of 2024, first served in the 23rd Mechanised Brigade and later joined the “Ghost Team” of the 3rd Battalion of the International Legion.
Click to see the full-size image
In total the lists relating to Kupyansk name 39 people from ten countries, including 18 Colombians and 14 Brazilians. Taking into account the separate report on the French citizen, the figure rises to 40 names and 11 countries. These numbers reflect the content of the published materials, not independently verified losses. Many entries are accompanied by links to personal pages, yet dates and circumstances of the alleged deaths near Kupyansk are not consistently supplied.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
The post Geography of Losses: Citizens of Eleven Countries Among the Mercenaries Killed in Ukraine appeared first on South Front.
Presented on Tuesday, 20 October, by the European Commission and EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, the strategy proposes a maritime security hub, expanded satellite surveillance, greater icebreaker capacity and improved military mobility across northern Europe.
The document marks a departure from the EU’s 2021 Arctic policy, which placed greater emphasis on climate change, environmental protection and scientific cooperation. The revised framework treats the region as an increasingly important component of European security and economic policy.
Russia’s expanding military infrastructure in the High North is a principal concern behind the policy revision.
Moscow has reopened Soviet-era military installations, strengthened its northern forces and maintained substantial nuclear capabilities on the Kola Peninsula. The region contains strategically important naval bases used by Russia’s Northern Fleet, including facilities supporting its submarine-based nuclear deterrent.
Russian operations in the Arctic also have implications for maritime access between the Atlantic and the Barents Sea, an area increasingly important to NATO’s northern defence arrangements.
The EU intends to work more closely with NATO and its northern partners, including Norway, Iceland, Britain, Canada and the United States, while developing capabilities that complement existing military structures.
Kallas said the Arctic’s security environment had deteriorated significantly since 2021, with geopolitical competition increasingly affecting a region previously associated principally with environmental and economic cooperation.
The EU’s revised priorities reflect concerns extending beyond conventional military deployments, particularly the exposure of undersea communications networks and energy infrastructure to sabotage and disruption.
A central proposal involves establishing an EU Maritime Security Hub to improve information-sharing between member states and partner countries operating in Arctic waters.
The system would strengthen monitoring of maritime movements and support the identification of suspicious activity near critical infrastructure.
Brussels also proposes an Arctic Cable Hub, initially concentrating on the protection, monitoring and repair of submarine communications cables across the North Atlantic and Arctic.
Such infrastructure carries international data traffic and supports communications between Europe, Greenland and North America. Damage to cables could interrupt telecommunications, financial services and government networks.
The Commission’s new Arctic policy framework also supports the proposed Pan-Arctic Cable connecting Greenland directly with Europe, together with secure satellite communications through the EU’s IRIS² programme.
Further measures envisage expanded use of Copernicus satellite surveillance, improved maritime intelligence and closer monitoring of vessels associated with Russia’s shadow fleet.
These measures form part of a broader attempt to improve European surveillance capabilities without relying exclusively on military assets provided by individual NATO members.
The strategy also addresses Europe’s limited capacity to operate in extreme northern conditions.
The Commission wants to support additional icebreaker capabilities, which are essential for maintaining access to Arctic waters, conducting emergency operations and supporting scientific and logistical activity.
Russian icebreaker capabilities remain considerably more extensive than those available to most European countries, providing Moscow with operational advantages along the Northern Sea Route.
European investment would also support ports, railways, energy terminals and digital infrastructure capable of serving both civilian and security requirements.
The emphasis on dual-use infrastructure reflects the growing importance of military mobility across northern Europe, particularly following Finland’s and Sweden’s accession to NATO.
Improved transport links could facilitate the movement of equipment and personnel while also supporting economic development in sparsely populated northern regions.
However, the Commission has not provided a comprehensive financial allocation for the proposed security measures, leaving important questions about funding, procurement and implementation.
The revised strategy also introduces a significant change in the EU’s position on Arctic fossil fuel development.
In 2021, Brussels proposed pursuing an international legal commitment to prohibit further oil, gas and coal extraction in the Arctic.
The new strategy maintains the EU’s opposition to environmentally damaging fossil fuel development but no longer includes the explicit ambition to secure a multilateral legal prohibition.
The adjustment follows sustained disagreement with energy-producing countries and recognition that an international agreement would be difficult to achieve under current geopolitical conditions.
Norway has argued that continued exploration in parts of the Barents Sea remains important for European energy security, particularly as production from mature Norwegian fields is expected to decline.
EU Today previously reported on Brussels’ opposition to Norwegian Arctic drilling plans and the disagreements between environmental objectives and Europe’s long-term energy requirements.
The latest strategy does not represent an endorsement of new Arctic drilling. It does, however, acknowledge the limitations of the EU’s previous diplomatic approach.
Greenland occupies a prominent position in the revised strategy because of its location, mineral resources and importance to transatlantic communications.
The Commission wants to expand cooperation on digital connectivity, critical raw materials, research and infrastructure investment, while recognising the responsibilities of Greenland’s own institutions and the Kingdom of Denmark.
Brussels also intends to strengthen scientific cooperation and support Arctic communities adapting to rapid environmental change.
The Arctic is warming nearly four times faster than the global average, creating new commercial opportunities while imposing substantial costs on local populations and infrastructure.
The EU’s proposals therefore combine security measures with investment in transport networks, research facilities and economic diversification.
For Brussels, implementation will require agreement between member states with different geographical interests, defence capabilities and budgetary priorities. Cooperation with NATO will also require careful coordination to avoid duplicating existing military arrangements.
The Commission has established a significantly broader Arctic agenda than the one adopted five years ago. Its practical impact will depend on whether member states finance the surveillance systems, vessels and infrastructure that the new strategy envisages.
Login