SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
united kingdom
Is This the Beginning or the End of a New Cold War?
We hope that Trump and European leaders can recognize the crossroads at which they are standing, and the chance history is giving them to choose the path of peace.
Mar 11, 2025
When European Union leaders met in Brussels on February 6 to discuss the war in Ukraine, French President Emmanuel Macron called this time “a turning point in history.” Western leaders agree that this is an historic moment when decisive action is needed, but what kind of action depends on their interpretation of the nature of this moment.
Is this the beginning of a new Cold War between the U.S., NATO, and Russia or the end of one? Will Russia and the West remain implacable enemies for the foreseeable future, with a new iron curtain between them through what was once the heart of Ukraine? Or can the United States and Russia resolve the disputes and hostility that led to this war in the first place, so as to leave Ukraine with a stable and lasting peace?
Some European leaders see this moment as the beginning of a long struggle with Russia, akin to the beginning of the Cold War in 1946, when Winston Churchill warned that “an iron curtain has descended” across Europe.
So are the new European militarists reading the historical moment correctly? Or are they jumping on the bandwagon of a disastrous Cold War that could, as Biden and Trump have warned, lead to World War III?
On March 2, echoing Churchill, European Council President Ursula von der Leyen declared that Europe must turn Ukraine into a “steel porcupine.” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said he wants up to 200,000 European troops on the eventual cease-fire line between Russia and Ukraine to “guarantee” any peace agreement, and insists that the United States must provide a “backstop,” meaning a commitment to send U.S. forces to fight in Ukraine if war breaks out again.
Russia has repeatedly said it won’t agree to NATO forces being based in Ukraine under any guise. “We explained today that the appearance of armed forces from the same NATO countries, but under a false flag, under the flag of the European Union or under national flags, does not change anything in this regard,” Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on February 18. “Of course this is unacceptable to us.”
But the U.K. is persisting in a campaign to recruit a “coalition of the willing,” the same term the U.S. and U.K. coined for the list of countries they persuaded to support the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003. In that case, only Australia, Denmark, and Poland took small parts in the invasion; Costa Rica publicly insisted on being removed from the list; and the term was widely lampooned as the “coalition of the billing” because the U.S. recruited so many countries to join it by promising them lucrative foreign aid deals.
Far from the start of a new Cold War, U.S. President Donald Trump and other leaders see this moment as more akin to the end of the original Cold War, when then-U.S. President Ronald Reagan and Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev met in Reykjavik in Iceland in 1986 and began to bridge the divisions caused by 40 years of Cold War hostility.
Like Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin today, Reagan and Gorbachev were unlikely peacemakers. Gorbachev had risen through the ranks of the Soviet Communist Party to become its general secretary and Soviet premier in March 1985, in the midst of the Soviet war in Afghanistan, and he didn’t begin to withdraw Soviet forces from Afghanistan until 1988. Reagan oversaw an unprecedented Cold War arms buildup, a U.S.-backed genocide in Guatemala, and covert and proxy wars throughout Central America. And yet Gorbachev and Reagan are now widely remembered as peacemakers.
While Democrats deride Trump as a Putin stooge, in his first term in office Trump was actually responsible for escalating the Cold War with Russia. After the Pentagon had milked its absurd, self-fulfilling “War on Terror” for trillions of dollars, it was Trump and his psychopathic Defense Secretary, General James “Mad Dog” Mattis, who declared the shift back to strategic competition with Russia and China as the Pentagon’s new gravy train in their 2018 National Defense Strategy. It was also Trump who lifted President Barack Obama’s restrictions on sending offensive weapons to Ukraine.
Trump’s head-spinning about-turn in U.S. policy has left its European allies with whiplash and reversed the roles they each have played for generations. France and Germany have traditionally been the diplomats and peacemakers in the Western alliance, while the U.S. and U.K. have been infected with a chronic case of war fever that has proven resistant to a long string of military defeats and catastrophic impacts on every country that has fallen prey to their warmongering.
In 2003, France’s Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin led the opposition to the invasion of Iraq in the United Nations Security Council. France, Germany, and Russia issued a joint statement to say that they would “not let a proposed resolution pass that would authorize the use of force. Russia and France, as permanent members of the Security Council, will assume all their responsibilities on this point.”
At a press conference in Paris with German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, French President Jacques Chirac said, “Everything must be done to avoid war… As far as we’re concerned, war always means failure.”
As recently as 2022, after Russia invaded Ukraine, it was once again the U.S. and U.K. that rejected and blocked peace negotiations in favor of a long war, while France, Germany, and Italy continued to call for new negotiations, even as they gradually fell in line with the U.S. long war policy.
Former German Chancellor Schröder took part in the peace negotiations in Turkey in March and April 2022, and flew to Moscow at Ukraine’s request to meet with Putin. In an interview with Berliner Zeitung in 2023, Schröder confirmed that the peace talks only failed “because everything was decided in Washington.”
With then-U.S. President Joe Biden still blocking new negotiations in 2023, one of the interviewers asked Schröder, “Do you think you can resume your peace plan?”
Schröder replied, “Yes, and the only ones who can initiate this are France and Germany… Macron and Scholz are the only ones who can talk to Putin. Chirac and I did the same in the Iraq War. Why can’t support for Ukraine be combined with an offer of talks to Russia? The arms deliveries are not a solution for eternity. But no one wants to talk. Everyone sits in trenches. How many more people have to die?”
Since 2022, President Macron and a Thatcherite team of iron ladies—European Council President von der Leyen; former German Foreign Minister Analena Baerbock; and Estonia’s former Prime Minister Kaja Kallas, now the E.U.’s foreign policy chief—have promoted a new militarization of Europe, egged on from behind the scenes by European and U.S. arms manufacturers.
Has the passage of time, the passing of the World War II generation, and the distortion of history washed away the historical memory of two world wars from a continent that was destroyed by war only 80 years ago? Where is the next generation of French and German diplomats in the tradition of de Villepin and Schröder today? How can sending German tanks to fight in Ukraine, and now in Russia itself, fail to remind Russians of previous German invasions and solidify support for the war? And won’t the call for Europe to confront Russia by moving from a “welfare state to a warfare state” only feed the rise of the European hard right?
So are the new European militarists reading the historical moment correctly? Or are they jumping on the bandwagon of a disastrous Cold War that could, as Biden and Trump have warned, lead to World War III?
When Trump’s foreign policy team met with their Russian counterparts in Saudi Arabia on February 18, ending the war in Ukraine was the second part of the three-part plan they agreed on. The first was to restore full diplomatic relations between the United States and Russia, and the third was to work on a series of other problems in U.S.-Russian relations.
The order of these three stages is interesting, because, as Secretary of State Marco Rubio noted, it means that the negotiations over Ukraine will be the first test of restored relations between the U.S. and Russia.
If the negotiations for peace in Ukraine are successful, they can lead to further negotiations over restoring arms-control treaties, nuclear disarmament, and cooperation on other global problems that have been impossible to resolve in a world stuck in a zombie-like Cold War that powerful interests would not allow to die.
It was a welcome change to hear Secretary Rubio say that the post-Cold War unipolar world was an anomaly and that now we have to adjust to the reality of a multipolar world. But if Trump and his hawkish advisers are just trying to restore U.S. relations with Russia as part of a “reverse Kissinger” scheme to isolate China, as some analysts have suggested, that would perpetuate America’s debilitating geopolitical crisis instead of solving it.
The United States and our friends in Europe have a new chance to make a clean break from the three-way geopolitical power struggle between the United States, Russia, and China that has hamstrung the world since the 1970s, and to find new roles and priorities for our countries in the emerging multipolar world of the 21st Century.
We hope that Trump and European leaders can recognize the crossroads at which they are standing, and the chance history is giving them to choose the path of peace. France and Germany in particular should remember the wisdom of Dominique de Villepin, Jacques Chirac, and Gerhard Schröder in the face of U.S. and British plans for aggression against Iraq in 2003.
This could be the beginning of the end of the permanent state of war and Cold War that has held the world in its grip for more than a century. Ending it would allow us to finally prioritize the progress and cooperation we so desperately need to solve the other critical problems the whole world is facing in the 21st Century. As General Mark Milley said back in November 2022 when he called for negotiations between Ukraine and Russia, we must “seize the moment.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
At Least 32 Casualties in Fiery North Sea Collision Between Oil Tanker and Cargo Ship
Advocates expressed concern for wildlife as emergency crews completed rescue and firefighting efforts.
Mar 10, 2025
This is a developing story... Please check back for possible updates...
British emergency workers on Monday were responding to a collision between an oil tanker and a cargo ship off the eastern coast of the United Kingdom in the North Sea.
At least 32 casualties were "brought ashore in Grimsby," a port town in Lincolnshire, reportedThe Guardian, and the two ships were believed to be a U.S.-flagged tanker called the MV Stena Immaculate and a cargo vessel called the Solong, which was headed for Rotterdam in the Netherlands.
Photos and videos posted on social media showed the vessels on fire and surrounded by thick black smoke.
The oil tanker collision in the north sea is really significant - major damage to both ships Seems like a cargo tanker just flat-out rammed at full speed into the side of the stationary (www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRPj...) 49,7629 tonne capacity on the oil ship (!) www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/03...
[image or embed]
— Ketan Joshi (@ketanjoshi.co) March 10, 2025 at 8:58 AM
Martyn Boyers, chief executive of the Port of Gimsby East, told the BBC that a "massive fireball" was seen erupting around the time of the collision.
"They must have sent a mayday out—luckily there was a crew transfer vessel out there already," said Boyers. "Since then there has been a flotilla of ambulances to pick up anyone they can find."
Boyers toldSky News that "a haze and a smog" had been reported off the coast on Monday.
"It's been very foggy, and the fog has never lifted. So I would imagine that at that time, when the accident took place, that there would have been fog," said Boyers. "Having said that all these vessels now... they've got every, every bit of kit that's known to man about how to navigate and radars and everything. So it's a very, very unusual and tragic accident."
His Majesty's Coastguard, the U.K. maritime agency, reported that an alarm was raised about the crash about 10 miles off the coast of East Yorkshire at 9:48 am local time.
The Solong appeared to have struck the oil tanker when it was anchored, according to tracking data.
The BBC reported Monday morning that all members of the Stena Immaculate crew had been accounted for and were safe; it was not clear whether there were still people in the Solong's crew who still needed to be located.
Climate campaigners have warned against continued oil extraction in the North Sea; in January, advocates celebrated as grassroots campaigners and groups won a lawsuit stopping two fossil fuel projects by Shell and Equinor from moving forward there.
David Steel, manager of the Isle of May National Nature Reserve, noted that the disaster happened just as seabirds' breeding season is about to begin.
"Seabirds pouring back into the North Sea as they head to colonies down east coast," said Steel, "and this is a breaking headline we didn't need today."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Starmer Condemned for Pushing 'Cringeworthy' Trade Deal With Lax Tech Regulations
"A tech trade deal with Trump would roll out the red carpet to tech billionaire oligarchy," said one critic.
Feb 27, 2025
Rights campaigners in the United Kingdom on Thursday greeted the news that British Prime Minister Keir Starmer had formally invited U.S. President Donald Trump to the U.K. for a state visit with a call for critics to "take to the streets" as they did during Trump's first term, as advocates condemned Starmer for "cozying up to a dangerous and megalomaniac U.S. president."
"This is the latest embarrassing step in Starmer's attempts to toady to Trump and provide a cloak of respectability to Trumpism," said the Stop Trump Coalition. "The British people reject Trumpism and all those in power who appease Trump. History will not be kind to this club of Trumpism cheerleaders."
Nick Dearden, director of the anti-poverty campaign group Global Justice Now, added that critics plan to "welcome" the U.S. president "in the traditional manner" after Starmer presented Trump with an official invitation from King Charles.
Starmer invited the president during his first meeting at the White House since Trump was elected to serve a second term in November, which came as a bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers introduced legislation to authorize comprehensive trade talks between the two countries regarding "tariff and nontariff barriers affecting any industry, product, or service sector."
Ahead of the meeting, Starmer told reporters that his message to Trump would be "really simple, that there is no more important relationship for the United Kingdom [than the U.S.], in defense, in security, in trade, in tech, in finance, and so much more."
"We are reforming permitting, getting things built, reducing barriers to investment and growth. And we're open for business, open for investment, and we're determined to help U.S. innovators thrive in the United Kingdom," said Starmer. "So my message is we want to work with you, we want to welcome you to Britain, we want a new partnership, because our history shows that when we work together, great things happen."
The comments were indicative of Starmer's push for cooperation with the U.S. on artificial intelligence and other "advanced technologies," which the new British ambassador to the U.S., Peter Mandelson, has dubbed a plan to "Make Our Economies Great Again," or MEGA.
Dearden called the proposal "cringeworthy" ahead of Starmer's meeting.
"We need to stop this," he said. "A tech trade deal with Trump would roll out the red carpet to tech billionaire oligarchy."
Global Justice Now earlier this month denounced Starmer and Trump for refusing to join 60 international signatories in supporting a declaration backing "inclusive and sustainable" AI at a summit in Paris, with U.S. Vice President JD Vance saying the Trump administration objected to "excessive regulation" of technology and critics suggesting the U.K. Labour government was attempting to curry favor with Trump.
Dearden said last week that any trade negotiations with the U.S. were likely to see Trump "pushing the demands of Big Tech oligarchs who want to avoid tax and regulation in the U.K."
"People in the U.K. don't want to see a wrecking ball taken to our regulations, standards, and public services, especially when we'e talking about new technologies like AI where we're only just beginning to get to grips with the dangers," said Dearden.
The U.K. is pushing to avoid the tariffs Trump has threatened for Canadian, Mexican, and E.U. imports. Trump said earlier this month that he believed differences with the U.K. on trade "can be worked out." He said Thursday that the tariffs targeting Canada and Mexico are set to take effect next week.
Dearden warned last week that with trade talks taking place behind closed doors, "tech titans" will be empowered "to make their demands away from the public gaze."
"Any potential for a Trump trade deal," he said, "must be taken off the table immediately."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular