American Committee for US-Russia Accord

Only a popular uprising against globalist leaders in Europe and their proxy in Ukraine will do, writes Ian Proud.

In this in-depth interview, Professor David Hendrickson, Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Colorado College and author of Restraining Power: The Law of Nature and the Theory of International Relations, joins The Golden Fleece Podcast to discuss the biggest geopolitical crises shaping today’s world. The conversation examines the escalating confrontation between the United States and Iran, the future of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Trump’s foreign policy, NATO, international law, realism versus constitutionalism, and the changing global balance of power. Hendrickson also explains why he believes diplomacy, sovereignty, and the law of nations remain essential to preventing great-power conflict in an increasingly multipolar world.

War Is Becoming Obsolete
Peter Kuznick, Professor of History at American University and Director of the Nuclear Studies Institute

The international community remains deeply divided over nuclear weapons, so it came as no surprise that the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference once again failed to adopt a final document. The world is moving in the wrong direction—toward rearmament.

In recent years, nuclear-armed states have not only modernized their nuclear arsenals but have also increased the number of nuclear warheads they possess.

Concerns about nuclear proliferation are also growing. In South Korea, about 70 percent of the public now supports the country acquiring its own nuclear weapons. In Japan, there is increasing domestic debate over abandoning the country’s Three Non-Nuclear Principles in favor of allowing U.S. nuclear weapons to be stationed in Japan or even developing an independent nuclear arsenal.

France is seeking to extend its nuclear umbrella to cover all of Europe. Countries around the world are receiving the message from the United States, Russia, and China that the only way to protect themselves is to possess nuclear weapons. China has made it clear that it will not participate in nuclear arms control until its nuclear forces reach the same level as those of the United States and Russia. But why should China build up its nuclear arsenal? Why don’t the United States and Russia reduce theirs to China’s level instead?

In today’s wars, where drones and artificial intelligence (AI) play an increasingly important role, defense has become easier than offense. Iran humiliated the United States. War itself is becoming obsolete.

Yet political leaders have failed to learn this lesson and continue to rely on military power. U.S. Vice President JD Vance has said of Iran, “There are still weapons we haven’t used.” The only weapon that has not been used is tactical nuclear weapons.

There are people around President Trump who are encouraging the use of nuclear weapons, raising concerns that he may break the long-standing “nuclear taboo.” I also know that there are hardliners in Russia urging President Putin to use nuclear weapons.

Ten years ago, then-President Barack Obama became the first sitting U.S. president to visit Hiroshima. The visit itself was commendable, but both his actions and his words were deeply disappointing. In his speech, he said, “Death fell from the sky, and the world was changed,” describing the atomic bombing in the passive voice. But death did not simply fall from the sky. The United States dropped the atomic bomb.

He also referred to “the World War that reached its brutal end in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.” This is a profound falsehood. It reinforces the claim that “the atomic bomb was necessary to avoid a ground invasion and save countless lives, making its use humane.” Yet of the eight five-star generals and admirals serving in the U.S. military in 1945, seven stated in official records that the atomic bomb was either militarily unnecessary, morally reprehensible, or both.

I was one of those who nominated Nihon Hidankyo for the Nobel Peace Prize. Rather than seeking revenge for the suffering they endured, its members have devoted themselves to leading the global movement for the abolition of nuclear weapons. They represent the conscience of humanity.

When things are going really badly in war, what’s the solution? Exactly. Start another one. It worked great for Third-Reich Germany; it worked great for Imperial Japan. So why would it not work for MAGA America? What could go wrong? The signs of hegemonic overreach and imperial desperation are now undeniable. The only question is how long until the ultimate collapse of the 21st century’s empire of evil? And will it go quietly, or does it want to drag the world with it?

Dr. Pietro Shakarian joins Pascal to discuss Iran’s war fallout, Khamenei’s funeral, Hormuz, and the limits of U.S. power. They also cover Armenia’s disputed election, the Trump corridor, EU policy, Turkey, Israel, Russia’s war strategy in Ukraine, NATO risks, Finland’s loss of neutrality, and why Washington may need deep reform at home.

Trump reminds one of a baseball team that, after losing 1–0, claims victory because it outhit its opponent—and demands a rematch. The lesson that the rest of the world has learned seems to have escaped him. Iran’s military and its infrastructure have indeed been pummeled, but Iran has not lost the war.

The United States is right to address its long-standing lack of icebreaking capabilities by investing in new ships. But the case for building these new icebreakers should focus on preventing accidents, protecting communities, and keeping the Arctic safe as ice melts and traffic grows – not countering Russia or China.

Both China and Russia, which can be regarded as quasi-allies of Iran, deputed senior officials to represent their governments. In particular, the presence of Dmitry Medvedev, Deputy Chairman of Russia’s Security Council [and former president and prime minister], takes the limelight. Medvedev is de facto holding the number 2 position in the Kremlin hierarchy. He is a long-time political associate of President Vladimir Putin. 

They were lucky in 1914: They only had the Guns of August to worry about. Here in 2026, we are facing thermonuclear weapons.

Ukraine’s scandal of the decade, the so-called Mindichgate affair, and associated corruption scandals, have weakened Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenskiy and his ruling clan but not fatally so. Although the clan’s ‘business’ coordinator Timur Mindich was under criminal suspicion, near arrest, and forced to leave the country; although the clan’s political coordinator, Head of Zelenskiy’s Office of the President (OP), Andrei Ermak, was dismissed and indicted; although deputies from Zelenskiy’s party group in the Verkhovna Rada are also under suspicion of crimes and Zelenskiy’s control over the Rada has been weakened; Zelenskiy, nevertheless, remains more or less in charge and his damaged clan is still perhaps the most powerful in Ukraine.

The Nato summit in Ankara was a showcase of Turkish hospitality and ruthless authoritarian efficiency. Journalists were showered with Turkish delights, perfumes, and porcelain coffee cups, and even Turkey’s cats were enlisted in the charm offensive: white Angora kittens were introduced to cooing journalists in the press center.

Renowned political scientist and proponent of offensive realism, Professor John Mearsheimer, delivers a stark address to the European Parliament, hosted by the Patriots for Europe Foundation. In this comprehensive lecture, Mearsheimer breaks down why he believes the Western strategy in Eastern Europe has failed, why Russia is currently winning a brutal war of attrition, and why structural forces are pushing the United States to pivot its military “pacifier” away from Europe toward East Asia.

Popular memory tends to separate the Holocaust and the German war against the Soviet Union, but for the Nazi regime they were two faces of the same undertaking.

Lithuania, a NATO member which borders the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad, has decided to remove a constitutional ban on nuclear weapons.

George W. Bush had the hawkish Charles Krauthammer to explain his hawkish presidency to the public and advise him in private. Barack Obama liked talking to The New Yorker’s David Remnick. And Donald Trump has increasingly, improbably turned to a former Bush speechwriter best known for defending the least popular elements of Bush’s foreign policy, the Iraq War and CIA torture: The Washington Post’s Marc Thiessen.

The resignation had been brewing for some time. While Starmer led the Labour Party to an astounding landslide election victory in July 2024, by September 2025, he was already being labeled the most unpopular prime minister since polling began; this followed a series of U-turns and poorly handled crises. After heavy losses of council seats in local elections in May, the Labour Party moved quickly to remove him.