cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/41718801

Archived link

• The EU lacks a clear “China conditionality” in its enlargement policy with Western Balkan countries—that is, defining and implementing conditions for candidates to engage with China—and the topic of China remains largely absent from accession talks.
• The EU’s own hesitant China policy is in part to blame. The union’s official stance of balancing cooperation and rivalry no longer reflects EU actions in practice, which lean towards confrontation.
• As membership talks stall, China’s influence in the Western Balkans grows, raising fears that new member states could act as promoters of Chinese interests and veto actions against Beijing in the EU.
• The EU must clarify its China policy and embed it as a clear conditionality in the accession process.

...

In 2021, one instance of China’s involvement in the Western Balkans set off the EU’s alarm bells: Montenegro was heading towards financial collapse after a huge loan from China’s Exim Bank for a controversial highway project swelled into a debt mountain—at one point topping a third of the country’s annual budget. The EU sprang into action. It rapidly mapped developments on the ground, strengthened its China teams and eventually stepped in to prevent Montenegro from falling into debt bondage with China.

The episode was a wake-up call for the EU on Beijing’s expanding footprint in the bloc’s periphery. Yet, four years later, the EU still does not have a clear “China conditionality” for EU aspirant countries, and the topic of China remains noticeably absent from formal accession talks. The void is made larger by the EU’s own hesitant and ambiguous China policy.

More than two decades since the EU granted a perspective for membership to Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia, accession seems to have drifted ever farther from sight. What was once a time-bound political and institutional effort with a clear goal has shifted into an open-ended, multi-generational journey buffeted by geopolitical headwinds and mounting frustration.

...

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/41718801

Archived link

• The EU lacks a clear “China conditionality” in its enlargement policy with Western Balkan countries—that is, defining and implementing conditions for candidates to engage with China—and the topic of China remains largely absent from accession talks.
• The EU’s own hesitant China policy is in part to blame. The union’s official stance of balancing cooperation and rivalry no longer reflects EU actions in practice, which lean towards confrontation.
• As membership talks stall, China’s influence in the Western Balkans grows, raising fears that new member states could act as promoters of Chinese interests and veto actions against Beijing in the EU.
• The EU must clarify its China policy and embed it as a clear conditionality in the accession process.

...

In 2021, one instance of China’s involvement in the Western Balkans set off the EU’s alarm bells: Montenegro was heading towards financial collapse after a huge loan from China’s Exim Bank for a controversial highway project swelled into a debt mountain—at one point topping a third of the country’s annual budget. The EU sprang into action. It rapidly mapped developments on the ground, strengthened its China teams and eventually stepped in to prevent Montenegro from falling into debt bondage with China.

The episode was a wake-up call for the EU on Beijing’s expanding footprint in the bloc’s periphery. Yet, four years later, the EU still does not have a clear “China conditionality” for EU aspirant countries, and the topic of China remains noticeably absent from formal accession talks. The void is made larger by the EU’s own hesitant and ambiguous China policy.

More than two decades since the EU granted a perspective for membership to Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia, accession seems to have drifted ever farther from sight. What was once a time-bound political and institutional effort with a clear goal has shifted into an open-ended, multi-generational journey buffeted by geopolitical headwinds and mounting frustration.

...

People who can't get laid because they fall asleep too easily

MARVEL Cosmic Invasion launches December 1st on Steam, Nintendo Switch 2, Nintendo Switch, PlayStation and Xbox consoles!

In this new devlog, the team at Tribute Games discusses how they built on Marvel’s legacy with arcade games, and  modernized the classic Beat Em Up gameplay while preserving the retro pixel art style that defines their signature look to craft a fresh and dynamic experience for players of all generations!

Je ne peux pas oublier les photos des otages palestiniens morts sous la torture

Où sont l’indignation et même la couverture médiatique des corps mutilés de Palestiniens, aux jambes broyées et à la tête criblée de balles, que les Israéliens ont finalement rendus dans le cadre de cet accord de « cessez-le-feu » ?

extrait:
"J’ai obtenu des photos de certains des corps palestiniens qui ont été rendus – des photos que j’aurais préféré ne pas voir et que je ne peux plus oublier.

Il était clair qu’Israël avait torturé, maltraité et exécuté de nombreux Palestiniens qu’il avait enlevés à Gaza. Sur une photo, les jambes d’un homme étaient écrasées, probablement par un char israélien, tandis que son cou portait des traces de pendaison.

Cela correspond à ce que les soldats israéliens ont ouvertement déclaré avoir fait pendant plus d’un an. "

suite ici:

https://www.chroniquepalestine.com/je-ne-peux-pas-oublier-photos-otages-palestiniens-morts-sous-torture/

#palestine
#gaza
#genocideInGaza
#stopTorture
#zionistsTorturePalestinianPrisoners

@fedipourgaza
@palestine

As Keir Starmer announces SMRs to be built in Wales, US ambassador says Britain should choose ‘a different path’

Keir Starmer has announced that the UK’s first small modular nuclear reactors will be built in north Wales – but immediately faced a backlash from Donald Trump’s administration after it pushed for a US manufacturer to be chosen.

Wylfa on the island of Anglesey, or Ynys Môn, will be home to three small modular reactors (SMRs) to be built by British manufacturer Rolls-Royce SMR. The government said it will invest £2.5bn.

SMRs are a new – and untested – technology aiming to produce nuclear power stations in factories to drive down costs and speed up installation. Rolls-Royce plans to build reactors, each capable of generating 470 megawatts of power, mainly in Derby.

Summary

-Ethiopia wins backing of African nations, seeing off Nigeria

-Host role gives Ethiopia influence over outcomes and agenda

-COP31 remains a contest between Turkey and Australia with Pacific Islands

If you're 21 you're straight busted. If you're 22 you're complete chopped unc

Following months of debate, the coalition government has agreed on a new mechanism to boost soldier numbers. It includes the option for partial compulsory enlistment.

The difference between people who supported the British Empire and people who support the US empire is that those who supported the British Empire knew they were supporting an empire.

Someone who supported the British Empire’s acts of mass military slaughter around the world did so because they supported the Crown and wanted His Majesty to civilize the godless savages and turn the whole world into his royal subjects. Someone who supports the US empire’s warmongering thinks they are doing so because Saddam is an evil dictator, because Gaddafi is an evil dictator, because Maduro is an evil dictator, because Hamas and Hezbollah and the Houthis are terrorists, etc.

Supporters of the British Empire understood that the enemies of the Empire were being killed because they refused to adequately subject themselves to the King and his demands. Supporters of the US empire think the US and its allies are always attacking Evil Bad Guys in the name of spreading Freedom and Democracy, and if this happens to advance pre-existing geostrategic agendas and/or resource interests then it is purely by coincidence.

Supporters of the British Empire understood that they were living under an actual empire: a power umbrella comprised of colonies, protectorates, dominions, mandates and territories which spanned the globe. Supporters of the US empire think it is entirely by coincidence that there is a giant cluster of nations which happens to move in near-perfect unison on all foreign policy agendas and continually wages war upon nations which are not part of that cluster.

The British Empire was entirely open about what it was. It would conquer a place, tell its inhabitants that they are now British subjects, and make them raise the Union Jack on their flag pole. The western empire which is loosely structured around Washington lets its member states keep their own flag and pretend they’re sovereign nations, while behaving in ways that are not significantly different from the subjects of the British Empire.

The difference between people who supported the British Empire and people who support the US empire is that those who supported the British Empire knew they were supporting an empire.

Someone who supported the British Empire’s acts of mass military slaughter around the world did so because they supported the Crown and wanted His Majesty to civilize the godless savages and turn the whole world into his royal subjects. Someone who supports the US empire’s warmongering thinks they are doing so because Saddam is an evil dictator, because Gaddafi is an evil dictator, because Maduro is an evil dictator, because Hamas and Hezbollah and the Houthis are terrorists, etc.

Supporters of the British Empire understood that the enemies of the Empire were being killed because they refused to adequately subject themselves to the King and his demands. Supporters of the US empire think the US and its allies are always attacking Evil Bad Guys in the name of spreading Freedom and Democracy, and if this happens to advance pre-existing geostrategic agendas and/or resource interests then it is purely by coincidence.

Supporters of the British Empire understood that they were living under an actual empire: a power umbrella comprised of colonies, protectorates, dominions, mandates and territories which spanned the globe. Supporters of the US empire think it is entirely by coincidence that there is a giant cluster of nations which happens to move in near-perfect unison on all foreign policy agendas and continually wages war upon nations which are not part of that cluster.

The British Empire was entirely open about what it was. It would conquer a place, tell its inhabitants that they are now British subjects, and make them raise the Union Jack on their flag pole. The western empire which is loosely structured around Washington lets its member states keep their own flag and pretend they’re sovereign nations, while behaving in ways that are not significantly different from the subjects of the British Empire.

Cross posted from !lefty_news@ibbit.at

Image by Christian Lue.

The “Make America Great Again” project is no longer confined to U.S. domestic politics; it is expanding into Europe—not through direct military intervention, but via cultural, political, and economic penetration. Washington is determined to reconstruct Europe’s prevailing liberal order—not by collision, but by the soft re-engineering of policies and political currents—so that the continent becomes part of US’s project rather than an equal partner.

Europe today faces a cluster of crises: the rise (and normalization) of far-right parties; a gnawing decline of trust in Brussels-based institutions among segments of the electorate; and structural weaknesses in coordinating foreign, energy, and security policies among member states. These very conditions have created a unique opening for the Trump project to inject nationalist and anti-liberal ideas into the heart of European politics. What is taking shape is a vision in which Europe is redefined not as a partner, but as subordinate to Washington’s preferences.

Elimination, Conversion, Submission: Three gears of influence

Elimination means sidelining moderate currents by tilting the political marketplace toward hard-right and anti-liberal actors. The 2024 European Parliament election marked a structural inflection: hard-right forces gained unprecedented leverage after group reorganization, with the new 720-seat chamber reflecting a rebalanced right bloc in which the Patriots for Europe emerged as a major pole and the Europe of Sovereign Nations (ESN) group crystallized around Germany’s AfD.

This is not abstract Brussels numerology—it registers in capitals. Giorgia Meloni’s Brothers of Italy formed Italy’s government in 2022; Robert Fico’s SMER returned to power in Slovakia in 2023; and in the Netherlands a right-leaning coalition centered on Geert Wilders’s PVV initially elevated Dick Schoof as prime minister before collapsing in June 2025, shifting policy baselines.

At the level of public opinion, the picture is double-exposed: anxiety and attachment coexist. Eurobarometer data show more than six in ten EU citizens remain optimistic about the Union’s future even as doubts about direction simmer—fertile terrain for Trumpist narratives.

Conversion refers to resetting the rules of the economic game in ways that increase Europe’s dependence on U.S. markets, technologies, and regulatory gravity. The U.S. Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) has functioned as a magnet for green-industry investment—enticing capital with local-content provisions and direct production subsidies that Europe struggles to match. The EU’s response has included the Net‑Zero Industry Act (NZIA) and, on the security side, the European Defence Industrial Strategy (EDIS), both attempts to rebuild economic‑security muscle memory after a succession of external shocks.

Energy is the pressure point where conversion bleeds into submission. Since 2022, Europe has sharply increased its reliance on U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG), a pivot that stabilizes supply while deepening exposure to U.S. price dynamics and methane‑rule bargaining—a live transatlantic fight as of autumn 2025.

Submission entails redefining the transatlantic alliance hierarchy so that Europe occupies a lower rung—an orbiting dependency rather than a co‑author of strategy. Donald Trump’s 2024 remark that he would encourage Russia to attack “delinquent” NATO allies internalizes uncertainty inside European decision‑making and tethers EU security planning to the temperament of a single American election cycle.

The culture‑war front is the solvent that loosens Europe’s normative joints. U.S. conservative networks have invested in a transatlantic infrastructure: CPAC’s Budapest editions, the roving National Conservatism conferences, and the Patriots for Europe summit in Madrid, themed “Make Europe Great Again.” The result is alignment: a shared vocabulary, donors, and playbooks that normalize illiberal governance as a legitimate Western alternative.

Why would Washington export this model? Among other reasons, economic statecraft works better if Europe tracks Washington’s line. The revival of sweeping U.S. tariff regimes in 2025—including a 10% “universal” baseline tariff and subsequent sector‑specific hikes such as a 25% levy on imported medium and heavy trucks, underscores the leverage that comes from European compliance—and the cost of divergence.

The implications are sobering. If unchecked, Europe could see a gradual erosion of democratic legitimacy, a hollowing out of institutional cohesion, and a rising strategic dependence on U.S. economic and security cycles. The continent would retain elections and institutions but lose authorship—governing in the passive voice, with policies increasingly written elsewhere.

There is a path away from this undertow. First, rebuild trust at home by meeting citizens where fear is: cost‑of‑living, housing, migration governance, and the anxieties of a just green transition. Second, lock in economic sovereignty with real instruments: fully implement NZIA’s permitting acceleration; design an EU‑level funding spine that avoids subsidy fragmentation; and finish the economic‑security toolkit—outbound‑investment screening, export‑control modernization, and R&D protections—on a pan‑EU basis. The Commission’s 2023–2025 economic‑security package sketches the blueprint; the next step is political will and budgetary ballast.

Third, convert defence awakening into capacity: make EDIS real with joint orders, common standards, and long‑horizon contracts—so Europe can deter without waiting anxiously for Washington’s calendar.

Fourth, inoculate the information sphere without aping censorship: fund pluralistic media, regulate platform opacity, and counter U.S.-exported disinformation pipelines through transparency and civic education rather than panic. Culture wars thrive in silence and scorn; they recede when democracies argue better.

Europe’s problem today is not just an electoral or partisan contest; it is bound up with the identity and future of the Western order. What is unfolding is a “soft coup”—quiet, incremental, yet deep and foundational. The MAGA project’s genius is that it does not need tanks or treaties to win; it only needs European drift. The alternative is neither anti‑Americanism nor strategic naïveté; it is adulthood—choosing to be a polity with its own center of gravity, capable of friendship without subordination, solidarity without surrender.

The post Washington’s Soft Coup: How MAGA Politics Are Rewriting Europe appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

From CounterPunch.org via this RSS feed

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/41714298

Archived link

Freedom on the Net 2025: An uncertain future for the global internet (opens pdf)

Internet freedom: Advocacy group calls for 'countermeasures' to fight censorship amid persistent authoritarian repression, backsliding in democracies

A new report published by the advocacy group Freedom House found that governments around the world increasingly deploy advanced and widespread measures to control the digital sphere over the past decade and a half, relying on sophisticated censorship technology to suppress online dissent. As new technology and repressive tactics are exported around the world, investment in internet freedom—and the researchers, technical tools, and civil society organizations working to safeguard it—is sorely needed to preserve the promise of an open, global internet.

Key Findings

• Global internet freedom declined for the 15th consecutive year. Of the 72 countries assessed in Freedom on the Net 2025 , conditions deteriorated in 28, while 17 countries registered overall gains. Kenya experienced the most severe decline of the coverage period, after authorities responded to nationwide protests over tax policy in June 2024 by shutting down internet connectivity for around seven hours and arresting hundreds of protesters. Bangladesh earned the year’s strongest improvement, as a student-led uprising ousted the country’s repressive leadership in August 2024 and an interim government made positive reforms. China and Myanmar remained the world’s worst environments for internet freedom, while Iceland held its place as the freest online environment.

• Half of the 18 countries with an internet freedom status of Free suffered score declines during the coverage period. Only two countries in this group received improvements. People in Georgia experienced the most significant decline in the Free cohort, followed by Germany and the United States, as the ruling Georgian Dream party enacted repressive measures targeting civil society. Authorities in Germany pursued criminal prosecutions against people who criticized politicians, while threats from far-right actors further encouraged self-censorship online. In the United States, growing restrictions on civic space threatened to stifle digital activism, marked by the detention of foreign nationals for nonviolent online expression.

• Control over online information has become an essential tool for authoritarian leaders seeking to entrench their regimes. Governments in the countries that suffered the most extreme declines over the 15 years of global deterioration in internet freedom—Egypt, Pakistan, Russia, Turkey, and Venezuela—intensified their control over the online environment in response to challenges to their rule. Authorities in these settings expanded restrictions on content, escalated surveillance of electronic communications, and imposed more severe penalties on those who expressed dissent online, particularly during protests and elections. The pattern illustrates how digital repression has proven essential for regime security in authoritarian states.

• Online spaces are more manipulated than ever, as authorities seek to promote favored narratives and warp public discourse. Of the 21 indicators covered by Freedom on the Net, the one that assesses whether online sources of information are manipulated by the government or other powerful actors has undergone the most consistent global decline over the past 15 years. Information manipulation campaigns have reshaped online spaces, with common methods including paid commenters who masquerade as ordinary internet users, news sites mimicking trusted outlets, misleading content generated by artificial intelligence (AI), and prominent social media influencers who post progovernment content without clear or formal affiliation.

The report also defines measures to combat censorship and improve internet freedom:

• Counter restrictions on freedom of expression: Governments should maintain access to internet services and digital platforms, as imposing outright or arbitrary bans on social media and messaging platforms unduly restricts free expression. Legal frameworks that address online content should uphold internationally recognized human rights and adhere to the standards of legality, necessity, and proportionality.

• Combat manipulation of the online environment: Governments should encourage a whole-of-society approach to fostering a high-quality, diverse, and trustworthy information space. Companies should invest in staff who work on public policy, access to reliable information, trust and safety, and human rights, and consistently adopt processes to ensure that engagement with government officials regarding online content does not undermine free expression and other fundamental rights. Across the board, support for independent media outlets and local civil society organizations that disseminate credible information is sorely needed.

• Counter disproportionate government surveillance and restrictions on privacy: Governments should ensure that surveillance programs are grounded in human rights principles and work together to create interoperable privacy regimes that comprehensively safeguard peoples’ data. Laws should include guardrails that limit the ways in which private companies can use personal data for AI development and in their AI systems. Companies should mainstream end-to-end encryption in their products, support anonymity software, and uphold other robust security protocols, including by notifying victims of surveillance abuses and resisting government requests to provide special decryption access.

...

Google: "Based on this feedback and our ongoing conversations with the community, we are building a new advanced flow that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn't verified. We are designing this flow specifically to resist coercion, ensuring that users aren't tricked into bypassing these safety checks while under pressure from a scammer. It will also include clear warnings to ensure users fully understand the risks involved, but ultimately, it puts the choice in their hands."

Thank god. I would've ditched Android for good if this went through, and while it sounds like it would be annoying for casual users to enable unverified apps, at least we can still install them.

A disturbing email released as part of the House Oversight Committee’s 20,000-page document dump on Wednesday revealed a chummy relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and Tom Barrack, a private equity investor who currently serves as the U.S. ambassador to Turkey.

Republicans on the House committee made the Epstein-related files public after Democrats on the committee released a handful of damning emails between the late sex offender and journalist Michael Wolff earlier in the day.

In the emails, Epstein asserts that President Donald Trump not only knew about the parade of young and underage girls he sexually exploited but had once spent “hours” with one of them.

In March 2016, Epstein emailed Barrack: “send photos of you and child. — make me smile.”

A disturbing email released as part of the House Oversight Committee’s 20,000-page document dump on Wednesday revealed a chummy relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and Tom Barrack, a private equity investor who currently serves as the U.S. ambassador to Turkey.

Republicans on the House committee made the Epstein-related files public after Democrats on the committee released a handful of damning emails between the late sex offender and journalist Michael Wolff earlier in the day.

In the emails, Epstein asserts that President Donald Trump not only knew about the parade of young and underage girls he sexually exploited but had once spent “hours” with one of them.

In March 2016, Epstein emailed Barrack: “send photos of you and child. — make me smile.”

Majority of Liberals wanted net zero gone
The shadow ministry met for about three hours on Thursday morning to set the path forward, a day after Liberal MPs and senators converged on Canberra for a mammoth net-zero-themed party room meeting.

Each of the 49 members present on Wednesday was offered five minutes to speak on the topic, and while there was no formal vote, Liberals all agreed that there were more people opposed to the target than in favour.

See - this is a serious problem: As a result of the party's shoddy stance on climate, despite the electorate making it crystal clear they want this, they're listening internally the few members who were elected - and not all the members who failed to be elected.

How can the party look at the success of the Teal movement, which is essentially 'Liberals who care about climate', and not see the picture being painted? Surely you should look at all the seats you didn't win and ask "why?"

Source https://www.mako.co.il/news-diplomatic/2025_q4/Article-9343ae054987a91026.htm

He's allowed to use all caps he's 200 years old and his wife is dead the russian govt wouldn't let him accompany the funeral to her hometown