Hürriyet - AB, Rusya'nın 'çöktüğüne' inanıyor: Kallas en büyük tehdidi açıkladı - 15 Şubat 2026

 Hürriyet

131.4K Takipçiler

AB, Rusya'nın çöktüğüne inanıyor: Kallas en büyük tehdidi açıkladı

Hikayeyi yazan: Hürriyet • 6 sa. •

Rusya'nın "çökmüş" durumda olduğunu öne süren Avrupa Birliği (AB) Dış İlişkiler ve Güvenlik Politikası Yüksek Temsilcisi Kaja Kallas, "Rusya'nın şu anda oluşturduğu en büyük tehdit, müzakere masasında savaş alanında elde ettiğinden daha fazlasını kazanmasıdır." açıklamasını yaptı.

Kallas, Almanya'da düzenlenen 62. Münih Güvenlik Konferansı'ndaki "Avrupalılar, toplanın! Daha zorlu bir dünyada yeniden söz sahibi olmak" başlıklı panelde konuştu.

Rusya'nın süper güç olmadığını, Ukrayna'daki savaşta 2014 sınırlarının ötesine neredeyse hiç ilerleyemediğini ve 1,2 milyon askeri kayıp verdiğini savunan Kallas, "Rusya çökmüş durumda. Ekonomisi paramparça. Avrupa enerji pazarlarından kopuk ve kendi vatandaşları ülkeyi terk ediyor. Rusya'nın şu anda oluşturduğu en büyük tehdit, müzakere masasında savaş alanında elde ettiğinden daha fazlasını kazanmasıdır." diye konuştu.

Kallas, Rusya'dan gelen çeşitli tehditlere karşı yeni bir Avrupa güvenlik stratejisi üzerinde çalıştıklarını belirterek, "Rusya, siber saldırılarla ekonomileri çökertmeye, uyduları bozmaya, denizaltı kablolarını sabote etmeye, dezenformasyonla ittifakları bozmaya, petrol ve gazı silah olarak kullanarak ülkeleri zorlamaya çalışıyor ve tabii ki nükleer tehdit de var." diye konuştu.

'RUSYA ORDUSUNUN DA BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ SINIRLANDIRILMALI'

Olası barış anlaşması kapsamında Ukrayna ordusunun büyüklüğünün sınırlandırılması halinde Rusya'ya da aynısının yapılması ve Moskova'nın Ukrayna'ya verdiği zararı karşılaması gerektiğini dile getiren Kallas, Rusya'nın "maksimalist taleplerinin minimalist yanıtla karşılanmaması" mesajını verdi.

Kallas, AB'nin barış müzakerelerinde masada olmaması konusunda şunları söyledi:

"Masada yer almıyoruz çünkü Ruslar askeri olarak elde edemediklerini diplomatik yollardan elde edebileceklerini düşünüyorlar. Müzakere masasında bunu diplomatik yollardan elde edebileceklerini ve Amerikalıların bunu onlara sağlayacağını umuyorlar. Biz Avrupalılar, bu konularda anlaşamayız. Ruslar da aslında ihtiyaç duydukları şeylerin veya Amerikalıların sağlayacağını düşündükleri şeylerin Avrupa'ya bağlı olduğunu anlayacakları bir noktaya gelecek. Bu yüzden, bizi masaya oturtun diye talepkar olmamalıyız, masaya oturduğumuzda neyi başarmak istediğimizi tartışmalıyız."

Barış müzakereleri kapsamında Ukrayna'ya çok fazla baskı yapıldığını ifade eden Kallas, "Sürdürülebilir bir barış istiyorsak, Rus tarafının da taviz vermesi gerekiyor. Onların ihtiyaç duyduğu yaptırımların kaldırılması, dondurulmuş Rus varlıkları gibi şeyler, Avrupa'nın kararı." şeklinde konuştu.

Kallas, ayrıca üye ülkelerin Ukrayna'nın AB üyeliği konusunda tarih vermeye hazır olmadığını belirtti.

'AVRUPALI OLMAYANLAR DA KULÜBÜMÜZE KATILMAK İSTİYOR'

ABD'nin Avrupa'da medeniyetin çöküşle karşı karşıya olunduğu eleştirileri hakkında konuşan Kallas, "Bazılarının söylediğinin aksine, 'duyarcı, çökmüş' Avrupa, medeniyetin yok olmasıyla karşı karşıya değildir. Aslında, insanlar hala kulübümüze katılmak istiyorlar ve sadece Avrupalılar da değil." ifadelerini kullandı.

Kallas, ABD'den gelen suçlamalara inanmanın çok zor olduğuna işaret ederek, "Basın Özgürlüğü Endeksi'nde ikinci sırada yer alan bir ülkeden (Estonya) gelip, bu listede 58. sırada yer alan bir ülkeden (ABD) basın özgürlüğüyle ilgili eleştirileri duymak ilginç." diye konuştu.

AB'ye üyelik için bekleyenlerin listesinin "oldukça uzun" olduğunu dile getiren Kallas, "Uzun süredir bekleyenlerin daha fazla beklemek zorunda kalmamasını umuyorum." diye konuştu.

AVRUPA ORDUSUNA 'ZAMAN KAYBI' DEDİ

Kallas, NATO'nun Avrupa ayağının ittifakla işbirliği içinde geliştirilmesi gerektiğini kaydederek, "Bence mükemmel bir işbirliğimiz var ve mükerrerlik oluşturmuyoruz. Bence bu da çok önemli." dedi.

Avrupa ordusu oluşturulması fikrini eleştiren Kallas, şunları aktardı:

"Yeni bir ordu kurmazsanız ve aynı anda hem Avrupa ordusunda hem de NATO'da yer alan tek bir ordunuz varsa, sorun şu ki, gerçek bir kriz anında, her şey komuta zincirine, kimin kime emir verdiğine, işlerin nasıl işlediğine bağlıdır. Eğer ordunun ait olduğu iki yer varsa, kriz durumunda bu durum bir ikilem yaratır ve bu son derece tehlikelidir. Bu nedenle benim çağrım, şu anda gerçekten acil olan, ordularımızı güçlendirmek gibi konulara odaklanmamız gereken bir zamanda, yeni şeyler hakkında konuşarak zamanımızı boşa harcamayalım."

AB GENİŞLEMESİ

Kallas, Avrupa'nın doğu ve güneyindeki komşu bölgelerinde istikrar sağlanmasının AB'nin öncelikleri arasında olduğunu belirterek, "Buradaki önceliğimiz, Rus emperyalizmine karşı panzehir olan genişlemedir." diye konuştu.

Genişlemenin jeopolitik tercih olduğunu ve AB'nin bunu tercih etmesi gerektiğini söyleyen Kallas, bir başka önceliklerinin de ticaret, savunma ve güvenlik alanlarında uluslararası ortaklıklar kurmak olduğunu kaydetti.

T..C. Dışişleri Bakanlığı: 15 Şubat 2026, İsrail Hükümetinin Batı Şeria’da Arazi Tesciline İlişkin Aldığı Karar Hk.

 T..C. Dışişleri  Bakanlığı: 

15 Şubat 2026, İsrail Hükümetinin Batı Şeria’da Arazi Tesciline İlişkin Aldığı Karar Hk.

İsrail hükümetinin işgal altındaki Batı Şeria’da egemenliğini dayatmayı ve yerleşim faaliyetlerini genişletmeyi hedefleyen son kararını en güçlü biçimde kınıyoruz.

Filistin halkını yurdundan zorla yerinden etmeyi ve İsrail’in yasa dışı ilhak adımlarını hızlandırmayı amaçlayan bu adım, uluslararası hukukun açık ihlalidir ve hükümsüzdür.

İsrail’in işgal altındaki Filistin toprakları üzerinde egemenliği bulunmamaktadır.

Netanyahu hükümeti tarafından işgal altındaki Batı Şeria’da yoğunlaştırılan yayılmacı politikalar, bölgede devam eden barış çabalarını baltalamakta ve iki devletli çözüm perspektifine zarar vermektedir.

Uluslararası toplumu, İsrail’in fiili durum yaratma girişimlerine karşı kararlı bir duruş sergilemeye çağırıyoruz.

Türkiye, 1967 sınırları temelinde, başkenti Doğu Kudüs olan, coğrafi bütünlüğe sahip, bağımsız ve egemen bir Filistin Devleti’nin kurulmasına yönelik çabaları desteklemeyi sürdürecektir.

euronews Munich Security Conference: Six quotes to take away from the world's biggest security conference US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, left, and Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz meet on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference, Germany, 13 Feb 2026, Copyright AP Photo By Alice Tidey Published on 15/02/2026 - 12:53 GMT+1•Updated 13:03

 euronews

Munich Security Conference: Six quotes to take away from the world's biggest security conference

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, left, and Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz meet on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference, Germany, 13 Feb 2026,

Copyright AP Photo

By Alice Tidey

Published on 15/02/2026 - 12:53 GMT+1•Updated 13:03

The annual gathering at the Munich Security Conference laid bare competing visions of the West. While Rubio called on Europe to help save a common civilisation, Kaja Kallas suggested Europe does not need saving.

The annual gathering brought together American, Ukrainian and European top diplomatic delegations, with the transatlantic relation in focus. The three days of talks underscored two competing visions of the West, what it represents and its values.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio called on Europe to help save the West as a common civilisation, while chief European diplomat Kaja Kallas pushed back saying the EU does not need saving. Meanwhile, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy urged Europeans to agree to a date so that Ukraine is "technically ready" to join the bloc in 2027.

Euronews listened to the speeches from the many world leaders and ministers that took to the stage to bring you the six quotes you must take away from this year's edition.

US has 'no interest in being polite and orderly caretakers': Rubio

"We do not want allies to rationalize the broken status quo rather than reckon with what is necessary to fix it, for we in America have no interest in being polite and orderly caretakers of the West’s managed decline," US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Saturday.

Context: European leaders were holding their breath before Rubio's speech, hoping it would not be a repeat of last year's blistering attack against the continent delivered in the same spot by Vice-President JD Vance, and as tensions remain high following the US President's recent threats to forcefully take control of Greenland.

While Rubio adopted a softer tone compared to Vance, his message ran along the same lines: the West is facing a civilisational decline by choice due ill-designed policies stemming from a climate "cult" and mass migration. And it needs saving.

What was different though was Rubio's call for Europeans to join in with the US, describing Washington as a "child of Europe", and affirming that its destiny "is - and always will be - intertwined" with Europe.

Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, said that she was "very much reassured" about ties with the US after hearing Rubio's address.

High Representative Kallas rejected a narrative of a Europe Union that needs rescuing.

"Contrary to what some may say, a woke, decadent Europe is not facing civilisational erasure" in a reference to a controversial US national security strategy document published last year calling on report to reverse course of key policies from climate to migration.

Europe's absence from peace talks is 'big mistake': Zelenskyy

“Europe is practically not present at the table. It's a big mistake to my mind. And it is we, I think, we Ukrainians who are trying to bring Europe fully into the process so that Europe's interests and voice are taken into account. This is very important," Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Saturday.

Context: Europe has been sidelined from the peace talks that were started last year after Trump renewed Washington's contact with Moscow. Bilateral talks between Ukraine and Russia are brokered by the US in locations away from the Europe.

This is despite the fact European countries are now the largest donor of military and financial assistance to Ukraine and that they're expected to shoulder the brunt of the security guarantees following a ceasefire - although they're asking for a US backstop.

Talks in Europe to appoint a special envoy for the talks have been ongoing for nearly a year but there appears to be no clear favourite. French President Emmanuel Macron has recently tried to renew contact with Moscow dispatching his top diplomat to Russia.

The meeting yielded few results.

Yet, as Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda said on Saturday during a panel in Munich, these efforts hardly matter because "Putin is not willing to talk with us and Washington is willing to let that happen".

Zelenskyy told journalists the same, suggesting Putin would try to divide and rule a "very coordinated" Europe, although he commended Macron for being transparent about the talks and the nature of it. The French President told the Munich Security Conference that Europe will have to fully redesign its security framework facing an aggressive Russia.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy delivers a keynote speech at the Munich Security Conference, in Germany on 14 Feb 2026. AP Photo

World order as we know it ‘no longer exists’: Merz

"But I'm afraid we have to put it in even harsher terms: This order, as flawed as it has been even in its heyday, no longer exists," German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said on Friday.

Context: Russia's ongoing full-scale invasion of Ukraine, China's unfair trade practices and bullying behaviour and the US's increasingly dismissive behaviour towards long-standing allies and multinational institutions are completely reshuffling the geopolitics stakes.

For Merz, the rules-based international order that emerged after WWII in which the West spoke with one voice under the leadership of the US is over and "big power politics", with its "harsh, and often unpredictable rules", has now returned.

He warned that in this new era, Europe's "freedom is no longer a given" and that it will "need to show firmness and determination to assert this freedom."

France in dialogue with Germany on nuclear umbrella: Macron

"We have engaged a strategic dialogue with Chancellor Merz and (other) European leaders in order to see how we can articulate our national doctrine" on nuclear deterrence, French President Emmanuel Macron said on Friday.

"This dialogue is important because it's a way to articulate nuclear deterrence in a holistic approach of defence and security. This is a way to create convergence in our strategic approach between Germany and France," he added.

Context: Nuclear deterrence - which the US largely provides for Europe - is among the topics increasingly being discussed as Europe rethinks its nuclear doctrine for the first time since the end of the Cold War. The overhaul is partly driven by doubts over Washington's future commitment to European security.

Trump has accused Europe of not doing enough for its own defence, issued threats to use military force to take Greenland from NATO ally Denmark,and made clear the US wishes to partially pull its assets back from Europe to pivot towards other threatres.

While Germany seems to be looking at the offer from Paris seriously, other EU countries are not so convinced. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, who has positioned himself as the anti-Trump progressive voice, used his speech at the Munich Security Conference to warn against nuclear rearmament.

He said nuclear deterrence is "a far too costly and risky" way of avoiding conflict and that "a system that requires zero mistakes and constant correction to avoid total destruction is not a guarantee, it's a gamble."

French President Emmanuel Macron addresses the audience during a session at the Munich Security Conference in Munich, Germany, 13 Feb 2026. AP Photo

Trump’s ‘desire’ for Greenland ‘exactly the same’: Danish PM

"No, unfortunately not. I think the desire from the US President is exactly the same," Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said on Saturday when asked about whether tensions around Greenland had been fully de-escalated following NATO mediation.

Context: Trump said last month he was ready to forcefully take control of the sprawling Arctic island, threatening tariffs on several European nations that had sent a few dozens troops to Greenland. The row sparked a diplomatic flurry and fears that the NATO alliance was about to collapse.

An agreement for a "framework for a future deal for Greenland" struck between Trump and NATO chief Mark Rutte led to de-escalation with the US, Greenland and Denmark since engaged in trilateral talks last month. NATO allies have meanwhile agreed to launch an enhanced vigilance activity in the High North, called Arctic Sentry.

Frederiksen reiterated from Munich that she will not compromise on territorial integrity, calling it a "red line" but stressed that "there are other things" the US, Denmark and Greenland can do together, such as extending the US military footprint on the island.

Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen meanwhile described the pressure on his island as "unacceptable" and the current trilateral process as "the first right step". He added that Greenland is ready to do its part and is "committed to be part of the alliance".

EU mutual defence clause should be revised: Von der Leyen

“I believe the time has come to bring Europe’s mutual defence clause to life. Mutual defence is not optional for the EU. It is an obligation within our own Treaty – Article 42(7)," European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on Saturday.

Context: The EU has launched an €800 billion programme to boost its defence readiness before 2030 in the face of a possible attack from Russia and doubts over the US commitment to NATO's collective defence under Article 5.

The bloc's Article 42.7 states that "if an EU country is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other EU countries have an obligation to aid and assist it by all means in their power" but is largely seen as less powerful than its NATO equivalent.

Washington's powerful military might serves as a powerful deterrence for the alliance.

Von der Leyen said Article 42.7 would only carry weight if it is built on trust and capability, and the terms of the clause are still seen as loosely defined.

In her defence-focused speech, she also called for faster decision-making in EU for defence-related issues and for more partnerships with third partners, especially the UK.

Five Thoughts About Marco Rubio's Munich Security Conference Speech In the hotel where it happened. - Daniel W. Drezner - Feb 15 , 2026

 Five Thoughts About Marco Rubio's Munich Security Conference Speech

In the hotel where it happened.

Daniel W. Drezner

Feb 15

READ IN APP

 

The hard-working staff here at Drezner’s World will publish a more holistic take on the Munich Security Conference (MSC) experience tomorrow. Today, however, I want to focus on U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s speech, which was scheduled for the conference’s premier time slot.

Drezner’s World is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Upgrade to paid

In 2025, JD Vance’s vitriolic anti-European diatribe shocked the MSC audience, and it’s safe to say that this year’s attendees were steeled for a similar message from Rubio.

Here’s what they actually got:

So, what to make of Rubio’s address? Here are five thoughts, in order from the least to most important takeaways:

First, big speeches are not Rubio’s best mode of communication. Rubio’s past record of “big speech” moments suggest an erratic track record at best. This speech will feed that reputation further.

Maybe it was jet lag or that he hadn’t rehearsed or previewed the speech, but Rubio’s delivery was a bit rough. He stumbled over a few passages and mispronounced “archetype,” for example. He does much better in mediated conversations. Indeed, right after the MSC speech, he was more relaxed and more crisp during the few minutes he sat down with Wolfgang Ischinger (scroll to the 23-minute mark of the video above) than in the delivery of speech itself.

Yes, he got a standing ovation, but that was partially because his retinue followed the by-now familiar Trump trope of rising immediately after he his speech ended so that it would induce others to stand up.¹ In the overflow room I was in, there was not a love for the speech.

There was a smidgen of relief, however, because…

Second, it was a better, friendlier speech than JD Vance’s. Is that an extremely low bar? Sure — but Rubio cleared it! DW Chief International Correspondent Richard Walker said, “Rubio’s message was much warmer in its tone, it was really trying to pull on European heartstrings to try and create a sense of common purpose, to create, almost, a unified theory that links security to a different idea of ... the West. A lot of people [sat MSC] do seem to be relieved that it wasn’t guns blazing like JD Vance.” Furthermore, Rubio did not make the same attacks on European free speech policies that Vance did, nor did he meet with the AfD party afterwards.²

Rubio’s speech was crafted to be friendlier to the European audience. He opened by noting, “we gather here today as members of a historic alliance, an alliance that saved and changed the world.” In a subtweet of Vance and Trump, he acknowledged, “we Americans may sometimes come off as a little direct and urgent in our counsel.” He made a solid joke about German immigrants “dramatically upgraded the quality of American beer” that went down well. His biggest applause line was when he said, “for us Americans, our home may be in the Western Hemisphere, but we will always be a child of Europe.” He closed by noting, “America is charting the path for a new century of prosperity, and that once again we want to do it together with you, our cherished allies and our oldest friends.”

Little wonder Ischinger said immediately afterwards that, “I’m not sure you heard the sigh of relief through this hall when we were just listening to what I would interpret as a message of reassurance, of partnership.” Or, as one American CEO put it to me, “it was the best we could have hoped for.”

That said, the sighs of relief were short-lived, because…

Third, Rubio’s speech was just JD Vance’s speech with a human face. DW’s Walker also noted that, “when you listen closely to what Rubio was saying there was an awful lot of the kind of Trumpian view of nation that was going right through [the speech].” And he’s right. These sections in particular highlighted the Trump administration’s “my way or the highway” approach to international relations:

We can no longer place the so-called global order above the vital interests of our people and our nations. We do not need to abandon the system of international cooperation we authored, and we don’t need to dismantle the global institutions of the old order that together we built. But these must be reformed. These must be rebuilt.

For example, the United Nations still has tremendous potential to be a tool for good in the world. But we cannot ignore that today, on the most pressing matters before us, it has no answers and has played virtually no role [to solve problems in Gaza, Iran, Ukraine, and Venezuela.]

In a perfect world, all of these problems and more would be solved by diplomats and strongly worded resolutions. But we do not live in a perfect world, and we cannot continue to allow those who blatantly and openly threaten our citizens and endanger our global stability to shield themselves behind abstractions of international law which they themselves routinely violate.

This is the path that President Trump and the United States has embarked upon. It is the path we ask you here in Europe to join us on. It is a path we have walked together before and hope to walk together again….

We do not want our allies to be weak, because that makes us weaker. We want allies who can defend themselves so that no adversary will ever be tempted to test our collective strength. This is why we do not want our allies to be shackled by guilt and shame. We want allies who are proud of their culture and of their heritage, who understand that we are heirs to the same great and noble civilization, and who, together with us, are willing and able to defend it.

Distilled to its essence, this is the exact same message Vance was sending last year: Europe needs to get its shit together and embrace the definition of Western civilization that Trump and his coterie embrace or get out of the way. Or, as Foreign Policy’s Rishi Iynegar and John Haltiwanger put it, “[Rubio] Rubio also dedicated much of his address to reiterating points Vance made a year earlier… much of it was old wine in a new bottle, slightly more chilled.” Most Europeans were unpersuaded by the friendlier tone — including some of Trump’s friendlier counterparts in the region.

Will Europeans be willing to follow where Trump is leading? Well, besides Trump’s profound unpopularity, the thing is…

Fourth, Rubio’s speech was logically contradictory when it wasn’t explicitly pro-imperialist. Trump supporters likely suspect that I, as an East Coast academic, am just trotting out the “i” word as a reflex action. And fair enough — but read this section and tell me any other way to interpret it:

For five centuries, before the end of the Second World War, the West had been expanding – its missionaries, its pilgrims, its soldiers, its explorers pouring out from its shores to cross oceans, settle new continents, build vast empires extending out across the globe.

But in 1945, for the first time since the age of Columbus, it was contracting. Europe was in ruins. Half of it lived behind an Iron Curtain and the rest looked like it would soon follow. The great Western empires had entered into terminal decline, accelerated by godless communist revolutions and by anti-colonial uprisings that would transform the world and drape the red hammer and sickle across vast swaths of the map in the years to come.

Against that backdrop, then, as now, many came to believe that the West’s age of dominance had come to an end and that our future was destined to be a faint and feeble echo of our past. But together, our predecessors recognized that decline was a choice, and it was a choice they refused to make. This is what we did together once before, and this is what President Trump and the United States want to do again now, together with you.

Rubio’s speech was quite clear in asserting the superiority of Western civilization and bemoaning the fact that Europeans might have absorbed the idea that other civilizations have value.

Furthermore, Rubio’s definition of civilization was grounded exclusively in Christianity and white European heritage. Rubio referenced Christianity three times in the speech — never Judeo-Christian, just Christian. And after a brief aside about the rule of law, Rubio’s discussion of European contributions to Western civilization are limited to cultural greats like Mozart and the ethnic contributions of Germans, Spaniards, Italians, English, and Scotch-Irish to the settling of America.

In doing so, Rubio completely elides any discussion of, you know, the classical liberal tradition of Montesquieu or John Locke or Adam Smith or John Stuart Mill. Rubio can’t embrace that tradition because he is way too busy bashing mass migration. A failure to understand the roots of civic nationalism in Western civilization, however, is to deny a key comparative advantage — its ability to absorb others from across the globe. It’s an even cruder reductionism of “civilization” than Samuel Huntington’s version, and that’s saying something.

Asserting the superiority of a civilization while denying the very elements of the civilization that make it dynamic is the logical contradiction at the heart of Rubio’s weird speech.³

In the end, however….

Fifth, one could probably throw Rubio’s speech immediately into the rubbish pile. I say this not to be mean, but rather to echo a mantra I heard repeatedly at Munich: in 2026, actions speak louder than words. Nothing that Rubio said erases the dovish U.S. posture towards Russia, Trump’s appetite to colonize Greenland, or various U.S. efforts to weaponize European dependence. More telling than Rubio’s MSC speech was his decision to skip a key meeting with European leaders to discuss Ukraine, canceling at the last minute. Europeans continue to call for “de-risking” from the United States.

In other words, not much has changed because of Rubio’s speech — and that’s my fundamental take.

More Munich thoughts tomorrow!

Thanks for reading Drezner’s World! This post is public so feel free to share it.

POLITICO America’s charm offensive in Munich masks harder line on Europe The message itself is uncompromising: Join Donald Trump’s campaign to reshape the world for Washington’s benefit, or get out of the way. By Felicia Schwartz and Jack Detsch 02/14/2026 04:46 PM EST

 POLITICO

America’s charm offensive in Munich masks harder line on Europe

The message itself is uncompromising: Join Donald Trump’s campaign to reshape the world for Washington’s benefit, or get out of the way.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio walks to a meeting of G7 foreign ministers at the Munich Security Conference in Munich, Germany, Feb. 14, 2026. | Alex Brandon/AP

By Felicia Schwartz and Jack Detsch

02/14/2026 04:46 PM EST

MUNICH — Trump administration officials have taken a markedly warm — even friendly — approach to European allies this weekend at the Munich Security Conference. But the message itself is uncompromising: Join Donald Trump’s campaign to reshape the world for Washington’s benefit, or get out of the way.

The U.S. sent more than half a dozen senior officials to the annual global confab of government officials and security professionals. It was, in some ways, a rare instance of the Trump administration engaging with the exact types of multinational institutions that it has excoriated over much of the last year.

Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby earned praise in the corridors of the grand Bayerischer Hof hotel for conciliatory remarks that called for the U.S. and its allies to work together to secure Europe. Secretary of State Marco Rubio received a standing ovation when he said in his Saturday speech to the conference: The U.S. and Europe “belong together.”

But between the backslapping in the hallways and swigs of mai tais at Trader Vic’s, a tiki bar inside the Bayerischer Hof where former Sen. John McCain once held court with bipartisan delegations, European officials vented. The tone from the U.S. had changed, attendees said, but the perception that the Trump administration would like to see a Europe whiter and more right-leaning had not.

Officials understand the U.S. message is join us, and “if you’re not, we go alone,” a European official said. “Of course, we want to be with the U.S.” While the U.S. wants to dispose of the so-called rules-based international order, “for us the rules-based part is very important.”

Such concerns didn’t bother the delegation, representing an administration that has only been further emboldened after Trump’s attack on Iran last year, its capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and a recent threat to seize Greenland.

Rubio on Saturday participated in a G7 meeting. But he snubbed a gathering with European allies on Ukraine Friday evening, citing scheduling constraints. U.S. Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker said the U.S. wanted to express urgency this year but “not throw everybody into a panic.”

“We just need to, every single day, chop wood and carry water, ignore all of the political noise,” he said Saturday in an interview at the POLITICO Pub in Munich.

But Rubio’s marquee speech fell flat to many on the sidelines. More than a dozen European officials expressed concern that few of America’s policies toward Europe have changed despite Rubio’s promise of a “common destiny” with transatlantic allies. And some who had fashioned themselves as model allies by spending billions to boost their arsenals with U.S. weapons were still wondering when their long-promised arms would show up.

“The underlying message was the same: We don’t want weak allies, don’t defend the old order,” said one former European official, who like others, was granted anonymity to speak candidly about a close ally. “If the smallest common denominators the Americans can find are our common history going back to Columbus, narrow national security interests and common civilization, that alone shows how far apart Europe and the U.S. are drifting.”

While many Europeans found parts of Rubio’s speech to love, he did not exclude reference to the MAGA culture wars some in the administration are pushing on the continent.  Finnish Prime Minister Alexander Stubb, a European leader known to have one of the best rapports with the president, said Europe would not embrace such ideals.

“MAGA means anti-EU. It means anti-liberal world order. It means anti-climate change. That’s the ideological undercurrent” guiding U.S. foreign policy, he said in a Saturday interview in the POLITICO Pub.

Behind closed doors, American officials were more candid about their antagonism. Colby, for example, told an audience at a private side event at Munich that the U.S. shared interests, but not values with Europe.

“He expressed readiness to work together, but a clear message that Europe must step up, and that we have moved from a ‘value-based world’ to an ‘interest-based’ world,” said one of the participants.

The sidelines of the conference last year were filled with ashen-faced European diplomats stunned by Vice President JD Vance’s harsh criticism of the continent’s democracies. This weekend in Munich, there was at least the appearance of healing.

After Rubio’s speech, diplomats who had been holding their breath waiting for another American browbeating took time out of back-to-back bilateral meetings to smoke cigarettes and play chess in the courtyards of the conference’s two connected hotels. Even U.S. officials, who kept their European colleagues at arms’ length last year, were a fixture in the hallways and on the sidelines.

Watch: The Conversation

Play Video48:09

Fetterman on ICE, Israel and identifying as a Democrat | The Conversation

Whitaker, the U.S. ambassador to NATO, spent much of his time at the conference at the POLITICO Pub, hobnobbing with his colleagues from allied nations and setting up an impromptu office in a cabana. He had a cordial run-in with Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen in a patio between the connected hotels making up the conference grounds.

But the happenings at this annual forum are not likely to resonate much in Washington. Trump’s advisers want to see him focus more on domestic issues. And Vance’s team told European officials he would not attend the gathering as vice presidents usually do to focus more on the administration’s domestic agenda, one diplomat said.

Other European officials at the conference said Washington’s strategic messaging could not obscure its approach to the continent since Trump returned to power.

“I’m worried about denial,” Alice Rufo, French deputy defense minister, told reporters, referring to the national security strategy released late last year suggesting Europe’s civilizational decline.”We need to read the [U.S. administration’s] documents. They are very clear.”

While Rubio hit the right notes, his travel on Sunday and Monday to Hungary and Slovakia — EU and NATO countries which have drifted in a more nationalist and pro-Russia direction — sends a strong message.

“Marco Rubio comes with a conciliatory tone, but then he goes to Hungary and Slovakia. What kind of a signal is that?” a European lawmaker said.

Some European officials, though, said Rubio delivered a stern message the continent needed to hear.

“It is a milder way of telling us that the time of unicorns riding bicycles across rainbows laced with tofu and almond milk is over,” an EU official said. “This is not simply about being reassured or not. It is about whether we want to live in reality or in an artificial la la land of big announcements.”

Laura Kayali, Jacopo Barigazzi and Paul McLeary contributed to this report.

--------------------------------

 Most Read

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) says 'Greenland is behind us'

Lindsey Graham to allies: Get over Greenland

‘South Texas will never be red again’: Home builders warn GOP over Trump’s immigration raids

Republicans worry shutdown will overshadow Trump’s State of the Union

Meet the YOLO Republicans: Lawmakers with nothing to lose are threatening Trump’s grip on Congress

Is This Where Trump’s NATO Ideas Are Coming From?

Filed Under: 

European UnionMarco RubioForeign AffairsDonald TrumpNATO

Oksıjen SEDAT ERGİN 13.02.2026 04:30 - 1970’lerden Kürtlerin ortada bırakıldığı bir hikaye

 Oksıjen 

SEDAT ERGİN

13.02.2026 04:30

Sedat Ergin

Makaleyi sesli dinle

• 22:44

1970’lerden Kürtlerin ortada bırakıldığı bir hikaye

ABD, İran ve İsrail, 1970’li yılların ilk yarısında Iraklı Kürt lider Molla Mustafa Barzani’nin Saddam Hüseyin’e karşı silahlı direnişine destek veriyorlardı. Ancak koşullar değişince bu destek çekildi ve Barzani birden Saddam Hüseyin ile karşı karşıya kaldı. Dönemin Dışişleri Bakanı Henry Kissinger’ın “Yenilenme Yılları” başlıklı hatıratında yazdığına göre, Barzani 1974 yılında ABD Başkanı Nixon’a iki seçenekli bir öneri sundu: A) Bağımsız devlet altyapısı için yıllıkda 360 milyon dolarlık yardım, bu olmazsa B) Özerklik seçeneği için 180 milyon dolarlık bir destek

Bağdat’taki rejime karşı gerilla savaşı yürüten Molla Mustafa Barzani’nin 1974 yılında ABD’ye yaptığı yardım talebine ilişkin öneri iki seçenekliydi. Birinci seçenek için 180 milyon dolar, ikincisi için 360 milyon dolar rakamını yazmıştı önerisinde.

Birinci miktar “özerklik”, ikincisi ise “bağımsızlık altyapısı” seçeneklerinin karşılığıydı.

Dönemin ABD Dışişleri Bakanı ve aynı zamanda Başkan Richard Nixon’ın Ulusal Güvenlik Danışmanı olan Henry Kissinger’a bakılırsa, Barzani’nin masaya seçenek olarak getirdiği özerkliğin içeriğini aslında bağımsız devletten ayırabilmek mümkün değildi.

Bu bilgi, 1999 yılında yayımlanan ve Kissinger’ın hatıratının üçüncü cildini oluşturan “Yenilenme Yılları” (Years of Renewal) adlı kitabında yer alıyor.

Kissinger, “Kürtlerin Trajedisi” başlıklı bölümünde 1974 yılı mart ayında geçen bu hadiseyi aynen şöyle anlatıyor:

“16 Mart tarihinde Barzani bize önerdiği strateji için iki seçenek sundu: Tam özerklik için 180 milyon dolar; bağımsızlık açısından ‘uygun’ diye nitelediği bir altyapı için 360 milyon dolar.”

Ancak bu miktarlar o tarihte ABD, İsrail ve İran’ın Barzani’ye yapmakta oldukları toplam yardımın çok üstündeydi: “ABD hiçbir şekilde Barzani’nin talep ettiği miktarı sağlayabilecek durumda değildi. İstediği asgari rakam bile ABD’nin yürüttüğü bütün örtülü operasyonların toplam bütçesinin üzerindeydi.”

Molla Mustafa Barzani, Kürdistan Demokrat Partisi’nin (KDP) kurucusu olarak uzun yıllar Irak’taki silahlı Kürt hareketinin liderliğini yaptı. Partinin bugünkü başkanı Mesud Barzani’nin babası.

Ayrıca, Kissinger’a göre işin siyasi boyutu da riskli görünüyordu, şu nedenle:

“Barzani’nin Kürt özerkliği anlayışının İran Şahı ve Türkiye tarafından desteklenmesi mümkün değildi.”

Gelgelelim, ABD açısından Sovyetler Birliği’nin Irak’taki Baas rejimine askeri yardımlarını artırmasının yol açtığı tehdidin dengelenmesi gerekiyordu. Bunun yolu da karşı ağırlık olarak Iraklı Kürtlere desteğin güçlendirilmesinden geçiyordu.

Bütün mesele yapılacak artışın ölçüsündeydi. Burada ABD ile birlikte İran ve İsrail de denkleme giriyordu. Çünkü Iraklı Kürtlere yardım bu üç aktörün mali külfeti belli ölçülerde paylaştıkları bir işbirliği mekanizması içinde yürütülüyordu.

Barzani’nin 1974 yılındaki bu talebinin nasıl yanıtlandığı konusuna geçmeden önce biraz geriye gidelim ve ABD-İran-İsrail üçlüsünün o yıllarda Iraklı Kürtlerin Barzani kanadına verdiği desteğin arka planına ve bunun gerisinde yatan o dönemdeki büyük jeopolitik hesaplara bakalım.

Bundan yarım yüzyıl kadar önce geçen bu hadise, bugün de Suriye bağlamında canlı bir tartışma konusu olan -Kürtler ve dış destek- meselesini değerlendirirken bizlere belli kalıpların tekrarını çağrıştıran tarihi bir arka plan sunuyor. Her ne kadar farklı bir zaman kesitinde, komşu bir Arap ülkesinde ve farklı koşullarda geçse de…

Henry Kissinger 1969-1975 arasında ABD Başkanları Nixon ve Ford’un Ulusal Güvenlik Danışmanı, 1973’ten 1977 başına kadar Dışişleri Bakanı olarak görev yaptı. Bir dönem iki görevi birlikte yürüttü (Getty Images)

İran ve İsrail’in Barzani’ye desteği 1960’larda başladı

İran’la başlayalım. Bu ülkenin Irak’taki en büyük Kürt topluluğunu oluşturan Molla Mustafa Barzani’nin liderliğindeki gruba desteği 1960’ların ilk yıllarında başlıyor. İran’ın desteğinin gerisinde, Kürtleri Irak’taki rejime karşı bir baskı kartı olarak kullanma hesabı yatıyor.

İran, öncelikle Irak’la olan sınır anlaşmazlıkları karşısında Barzani’yi bir pazarlık kartı olarak elinde tutuyordu. Bu çerçevede tehdit olarak baktığı Irak’ı güçten düşürebilmesi için de kuvvetli bir kozdu. Barzani’nin Irak’ın kuzeyindeki dağlık bölgelerinde yürüttüğü silahlı direniş, Bağdat’ı sürekli kuzeye birlik kaydırmak zorunda bırakıyor, Irak’ın geri kalan bölgelerindeki askeri gücünü aşağı çekiyordu.

İsrail’e gelince, o da 1960’ların ortalarından itibaren MOSSAD üzerinden Barzani’yi destekliyordu. Bu destek İsrail’in bölgede Arap olmayan unsurları destekleme şeklindeki geleneksel devlet politikasının bir uzantısıydı. İsrail, Kürtleri her zaman tehdit olarak baktığı Irak’ı zayıflatabilmek açısından ideal bir müttefik olarak görüyordu.

Kuşkusuz gerek İsrail gerek İran’ın Barzani’ye desteği, bu iki ülkenin en önemli müttefiki olan ABD’nin bilgisi dışında değildi. Ancak ABD’nin bizzat kendisinin Irak’ta bu iki müttefikinin yanında aktif bir şekilde devreye girmesi ve istihbarat örgütü CIA’yi sahaya çıkarması 1970’li yılların başında oldu.

ABD’yi ikna eden aktörlerden biri İran Şahı Muhammed Rıza Pehlevi’ydi. Kissinger’ın yazdığına göre, Şah önce Kasım 1971 ve ardından Mart 1972’de Başkan Nixon’a Barzani’ye yardım için işbirliği talebinde bulunmuştu.

Bu arada aynı yıl sürpriz bir aracı da devreye girecekti. “28 Mart’ta da Ürdün Kralı (Hüseyin) Barzani’den Nixon’a doğrudan bir çağrının iletilmesine aracılık etti” diye yazıyor Kissinger.

İsrail ise kaynak talep etmese de ABD’ye Irak’a dönük kaygılarını ve “Kürt bölgesinin özerkliğinde yarar gördüğü” yolundaki görüşünü iletiyordu daha o yıllarda.

Muhammed Rıza Pehlevi, 1941 yılından ülkeyi terk ettiği 1979 yılı başına kadar toplam 37 yıl süreyle İran Şahı olarak tahtta oturdu (Getty Images)

“Iraklı Kürtleri destekleyerek Bağdat’taki rejime zorluk çıkarttık”

Kissinger’ın yazdıklarına bakılırsa burada dönüm noktası, dönemin Başkanı Nixon’ın 1972 yılı mayıs ayı sonunda Tahran’a yaptığı gezide İran Şahı ile görüşmesi oldu. Nixon, buluşmada Şah Rıza Pehlevi’ye “Orta Doğu’daki güç dengesinin Sovyetler Birliği lehine değişmesine izin vermeyeceklerini” bildirdi.

Kitaptaki aktarıma göre Şah’ın kaygısı, Sovyetler’in Bağdat’ta Baas Partisi, komünistler ve Kürtlerden oluşan bir koalisyon kurması ihtimaliydi. Şah’a bakılırsa, “Bu takdirde Kürt meselesi Komünistler için değerli bir unsur (asset) haline gelebilirdi.”

Kissinger, “Nixon Şah ile diyaloğunun sonucu olarak şu kararı aldı” diyerek, anlatımına şöyle devam ediyor:

“Nixon, Amerikan desteği olmadığı takdirde Bağdat’taki hükümete karşı sürmekte olan Kürt ayaklanmasının çökeceğine kanaat getirdi. Hem İran ve Ürdün gibi müttefiklerin moralini iyi tutmak hem de bölgesel güç dengesine katkıda bulunmak için bir şekil altında Amerikan katılımını sağlamak gereği vardı.

Amacımız, Iraklıların kendi rejimlerini dayatmalarının maliyetini yükseltmek, Kürtlerin pazarlık gücünü artırmak ve böylelikle Bağdat’ı, Irak’ı komşularının güvenlik kaygılarına ve Kürt azınlığın özerkliğine daha saygılı bir politika izlemeye sevk etmekti. Amerikan katılımının kilit rol oynayacağına inanılıyordu. Bu adım, (Kürt direnişine) maddi katkıda bulunan ve ABD ile ilişkilerine de büyük önem atfeden diğer aktörlerin (İran, İsrail) zaman zaman çatışan amaçları arasında bir uyum sağlayacak, onların Kürtleri terk etmelerini de engelleyecekti. Ancak bu değerlendirmenin çok iyimser olduğu sonradan anlaşıldı.”

Kissinger'ın kitabında "Kürtlerin Trajedisi" başlığını taşıyan bölüm, Kürt nüfusun Ortadoğu'da yoğun olarak yaşadığı coğrafyayı gösteren bir haritayla açılıyor

Nixon’dan Barzani’ye yılda 5 milyon dolar

Tam bu noktada zor bir ikilemle karşı karşıya kaldıklarını anlatıyor Kissinger. Harekete geçilmeseydi Irak’a karşı koalisyon dağılacak, Kürtler de Saddam Hüseyin’in insafına terk edilecek ve aynı zamanda Körfez ülkelerinin morali bozulacaktı.

Buna karşılık harekete geçmenin riski de az değildi. Çünkü bu takdirde Sovyetler Birliği de Irak’a yardımı artırma yoluna gidebilirdi.

Kissinger, sonuçta kesinlik arz eden konjonktürel tehlikenin, daha uzun vadeli görülen riske kıyasla ağır bastığını belirtiliyor ve nihayetinde ABD Başkanı’nın aldığı kararı şöyle aktarıyor:

“Nitekim Başkan Nixon, bu doğrultuda 1 Ağustos 1972’de gizli programın yürürlüğe konulmasını öngören bir başkanlık direktifini imzaladı. Bu çerçevede ABD, 1973 mali yılında Kürtlere doğrudan destek için ayda 250.000 dolar, mühimmat için ayrıca 2 milyon dolar, toplamda 5 milyon dolar tahsis etti. Şah daha büyük bir miktarda katkıda bulundu. İsrail, Britanya ve İran’ın yardımlarıyla birlikte Kürtlere sağlanan toplam destek ayda 1 milyon dolara ulaşıyordu.”

Kissinger ekliyor: “Soğuk Savaş standartlarına göre bu, büyük çaplı bir çaba sayılamazdı.”

Ancak bu operasyon tam bir gizlilik içinde yürütülecekti. “Yasal bir hükümete karşı etnik bir grubu desteklediğimiz ve İran ile İsrail de dahil olduğu için operasyonun örtülü olması gerekiyordu, diplomasi ile açık güç arasındaki gri alan…”

İsrail Kürtleri dağdan düz araziye indirip Saddam’la savaşa sokmak isteyince, ABD frene basıyor

1973 yılına gelindiğinde Peşmerge grupları ile Irak ordusu arasındaki çatışmaların yoğunlaşmasıyla Barzani’nin taleplerinde de artış başlar. Mart ayına gelindiğinde CIA’in talebiyle yardımın artırılması gündeme gelir. Başkan Nixon, Kissinger’ın da desteklediği bu artışa onay verir. Bu arada, İran Şahı’nın desteği de yılda 30 milyon dolara ulaşmıştır.

Bununla birlikte her seferinde Barzani’ye ABD tarafından iletilen mesaj, bu yardımların kullanılmasında “sahada savunma odaklı çerçevenin dışına çıkılmaması” gereğidir. Amaç, çatışmaların bir tırmanmayı tetiklemeyecek bir eşikte tutulmasıdır. Bu nedenle Peşmergelere ağır silahlar verilmemekteydi.

Bu kadarıyla da en azından başlangıç döneminde hedeflenen sonuç sağlanmıştır. Nitekim 1972 ekim ayında CIA’den gelen bir rapor “Kürtlerin Baas ordusunun üçte ikisini kilitlediğini” belirtmiştir.

1973 yılı Ekim ayında İsrail ile Mısır-Suriye arasında yaşanan savaş, İsrail’in bir fırsatçılığına da sahne olur. İsrail, savaşın sürdüğü sırada Barzani’yi savunma konseptinin dışına çıkarmak ister.

Kissinger bu hadiseyi şöyle anlatıyor:

“15 Ekim tarihinde, Orta Doğu Savaşı’nın dokuzuncu gününde, İsrail’in Mısır’ın Sina’ya dönük hamlesini püskürttüğü sırada Barzani’den ivedi kayıtlı bir mesaj aldık. Barzani, İsrail’in irtibat subayının düz araziye çıkarak bir taarruza girişmeleri yolunda yaptığı tavsiye hakkında görüşümüzü soruyordu. Bize Tel Aviv’den böyle bir talep ulaşmamıştı. Barzani’nin mesajı CIA üzerinden gelmişti. CIA’in yeni direktörü William Colby, savaşın yayılmasına karşı olduğunu kayda geçirmek için zaman kaybetmedi. Kürtlere danışmanlar ve askeri malzemenin çoğunu sağlamakta olan İran Şahı’na danıştığımızda, o da Colby’nin görüşünü destekledi. Kürtlerin özellikle düz arazide saldırı harekatlarına göre donatılmadıklarını, İsrail’in önerisinin ‘Kürt Kartı’nın tümden kaybedilmesi riskini taşıdığını söyledi.

Ben de bu görüşteydim. Buna ek olarak, Kürtleri İsrail’in taktik tercihlerine bağlamanın ve böylelikle zaten kuşatılmış olan Kürtlerin diğer Arap ülkelerinin de gazabını üzerine çekmelerinin akıllıca olmayacağını düşündüm. Nixon’un onayıyla 16 Ekim’de Barzani’ye şu mesajı çektik:

‘İsraillilerin size önerdiği taarruz harekatının sizin açınızdan uygun olmadığını - tekrar, uygun olmadığını - değerlendiriyoruz.”

Henry Kissinger’ın anı üçlemesini tamamlayan Years of Renewal, Richard Nixon yönetiminin son dönemleri ile Gerald Ford başkanlığını (1974–1977) ele alıyor

Sovyetler Irak’a yeni silahlar verince Barzani’ye yardımlar artıyor

Mısır lideri Enver Sedat’ın savaşın ardından Sovyetler Birliği’nden uzaklaşarak ABD ile yakınlaşmaya girmesi, Sovyetler’in bunu dengelemek üzere Irak’ta Saddam Hüseyin’e desteğini güçlendirmesini beraberinde getirir. Moskova’nın Irak’a ilk kez ağır topçu kategorisine giren silahlar vermeye başlaması önemli bir dönüm noktası olur. Şu nedenle ki, bu silahlar, Irak ordusunun Barzani’ye karşı bütün stratejisinin değiştirmesinin önünü açacaktır.

Önceki stratejide Irak ordusu yaz aylarında kuzeydeki dağlık bölgelere gelerek Barzani’nin Peşmerge gruplarına karşı harekata girişmekte, buna karşılık kışın yaklaşmasıyla birlikte düz araziye çekilmektedir. Ancak 1973’ü 1974’e bağlayan kışta, Irak birlikleri yaz harekatında yerleştikleri mevzileri terk etmeyip aksine tahkim etme yoluna gitmesi bütün oyunu değiştirir.

Bunun anlamı şudur: Yaz geldiğinde Irak ordusu dağlık alandaki harekatı Kürt bölgesinin içinde daha derin bir hattan başlatabilecektir. Irak, böylelikle Kürtlerin sahada kontrol altında tutmakta olduğu tahkimatlı alanı yıpratma savaşı yoluyla geriletmeyi hedeflemektedir. Amerikan tarafının değerlendirmesine göre, burada kaygı verici olan, Sovyetler’den gelen ağır topçu silahlarının daha önce aşılamaz görünen Kürt mevzilerinin kuşatma altına alınabilmesini mümkün kılmasıdır.

Aktörler arasında yeni bir durum değerlendirmesi yapılır. İran Şahı, Kürtlerin yenilmesinin Irak’taki denge çarklarından birinin kaybolmasına ve bu ülkedeki Sovyet nüfuzunun artmasına yol açacağını düşünmektedir.

İsrail Başbakanı Golda Meir, bizzat Kissinger’la görüşmesinde Kürtler için ek yardım talebinde bulunur.

Bu noktada Barzani de (yazının girişinde konu edilen) özerklik için 180 milyon dolar, tam bağımsızlık altyapısı için 360 milyon dolar yardım tutarındaki iki seçenekli teklifle ABD’nin kapısını çalar. Barzani, bu yardım sağlandığı takdirde Irak ordusu ile çatışma eşiğini yükseltmeye hazır görünmektedir.

ABD yönetimi içindeki tartışmada CIA yardımın artırılmasına karşı çıkar. Buna karşılık Kissinger daha kontrollü bir artıştan yanadır. Kissinger, bunun gerekçesini “Bütün gözlemciler Irak’ın yeni stratejisi ışığında mevcut programın savunma amaçlı bile yetersiz kaldığı hususunda görüş birliği içindeydi” diye açıklar.

Kissinger’ın önerisiyle Barzani’ye tahsis edilen yıllık destek 5 milyon dolardan 8 milyon dolara çıkarılır. İran Şahı da yıllık yardım miktarını 30 milyon dolardan 75 milyon dolara yükseltir. İsrail ve Birleşik Krallık’ın yardım miktarları aynı kalır.

Kissinger'ın Barzani’ye çizdiği strateji: “Saddam'ı ne yensin, ne de yenilsin…”

Yardım programı başladığında 1972 yılında CIA direktörü olan Richard Helms’in 1973 yılında Tahran’a büyükelçi gönderilmesi dikkat çekici bir görevlendirmedir. Kissinger, Helms’e İran Şahı ve Barzani’ye iletmesi için şu talimatı gönderir:

“Gördüğümüz kadarıyla ABD’nin çıkarları şu şekildedir:

A) Kürtlere Bağdat hükümeti karşısında haklarının tanınmasını müzakere edebilmek için makul dayanak oluşturacak bir kapasite kazandırmak,

B) Mevcut Irak hükümetini kilitlenmiş durumda tutmak,

C) Irak’ı kalıcı bir şekilde bölmemek. Çünkü bağımsız bir Kürt bölgesi ekonomik açıdan yaşayabilir olmayacaktır. ABD ve İran’ın, (gelecekte) ılımlı liderlik altındaki bir Irak ile iyi ilişkilere kapıyı kapatmak gibi bir niyetleri yoktur.”

Görüleceği gibi Kissinger’ın Barzani’ye çizdiği strateji, Kürtlerin Bağdat karşısında ne zafere ulaşabilecekleri ne de yenilecekleri ama Saddam Hüseyin’e pekala hayatı zorlaştıracakları kontrollü bir aralık içinde tutmayı amaçlıyor.

Bu arada zaman zaman Barzani’yi frenleme ihtiyacı da ortaya çıkıyor. Örneğin Barzani, 1974 Eylül ayında Kerkük’teki petrol kuyularına saldırıya geçme önerisinde bulunduğunda, petrol krizini daha da ağırlaştırmamak için bu önerinin kabul edilmediğini anlatıyor Kissinger.

Ancak Kissinger’in İsrail’in Washington’daki büyükelçisi Simha Dinitz ile birlikte geliştirdikleri ilginç bir formül devreye girer. 1973 savaşında İsrail, Mısır ordusundan çok miktarda Sovyet silahı ele geçirmiştir. Bu Sovyet silahlarından 28 milyon dolar değerinde kayda değer bir miktar Kürtlere transfer edilir. Karşılığında aynı değerde Amerikan silahı İsrail ordusuna sağlanır.

Bu dönemde Washington cephesindeki kritik bir gelişme Başkan Nixon’ın Watergate skandalı üzerine 8 Ağustos 1974 tarihinde istifa etmesi ve yerine yardımcısı Gerald Ford’un geçmesidir.

Ve Şah, Saddam ile anlaşmayı tercih ediyor

Yardımın artırılması tartışmasında CIA’den kuvvetli itirazlar gelmektedir. Örgütün en önemli endişesi gizlice sürdürülen destek programının açığa çıkması ihtimalidir. İran Şahı da ABD’den beklediği destek gelmediği takdirde kendisi yardımı artırmak zorunda kalacaktır. Kissinger’e göre buradaki açmaz, bu ek yardımın İran ordusunun gücünde zafiyete yol açabilecek olmasıdır.

Gelinen noktada İran Şahı yeni bir muhasebe yapmaya başlar. Kissinger’a göre Şah, yardımı artırması halinde hem Irak’la açık bir savaşa girmekten hem de uzun bir sınır paylaştığı Sovyetler Birliği’ni karşısına almaktan çekinmektedir. Sovyetler Birliği ile çatışma durumuna ilişkin ABD’den kesin güvenceler alabilmesi de mümkün değildir. ABD Sovyetler Birliği ile detant (yumuşama) dönemine girmiştir.

İran Şahı, 18 Şubat 1975 tarihinde Zürih’te Kissinger ile yaptığı görüşmede kendisine Saddam Hüseyin ile müzakereye oturma niyetini açar.

Kissinger’ın daha sonra Başkan Ford’a yaptığı bilgilendirmeye göre, Şah görüşmede “Irak’ta komünist bir merkezi hükümet idaresi altında özerk bir Kürt devletini kabul edemeyeceğini” belirtir. Ayrıca, “Iraklıların İran sınırında bazı hadiseleri tetikleyerek Kürt meselesinin uluslararası bir nitelik kazanmasını sağlayıp konunun BM Güvenlik Konseyi’ne getirilmesine yol açabileceklerini, bu durumun işleri daha da zorlaştıracağını” söyler.

“Bu nedenle Irak’la Kürtler konusunda bir anlayış doğrultusunda hareket etmeye niyetli görünüyor” notunu düşer Kissinger. Şaha “Kürtlerin çöküşünün bütün bölgeyi istikrarsızlaştıracağı yönündeki önceki uyarılarını hatırlattığını” da kayda geçirir.

Böyle de olsa yaptığı itirazların “akademik” kaldığını sonradan kendisi de kabul etmektedir. Şu nedenle:

“Kürtler artık gizli bir program üzerinden ayakta kalamayacakları için mücadelenin sürdürülebilmesi, İran’ın ABD tarafından desteklenerek açık bir şekilde müdahalede bulunmasını gerektiriyordu. Yapılan hesaplamalar bunun için iki İran tümeni ve yıllık 300 milyon dolarlık bir bütçeye ihtiyaç duyulacağını gösteriyordu. İranlıların bizim medyamızdan Çinhindi’ndeki (Vietnam, Kamboçya, Laos) duruma bakmaları bile ABD kamuoyunda bu yönde bir politikaya destek olmadığını görmeleri için yeterliydi.”

Kissinger, bunun üzerine 22 Şubat 1975 tarihinde İsrail büyükelçisi Dinitz’e İran Şahı ile görüşmesini aktarır ve şöyle der:

“Kürtlerin işinin bittiğinden korkuyor. OPEC toplantısında Iraklılarla müzakerelere başlayabilir.”

Şah’ın yaptığı acımasız ama anlaşılabilir bir hareketti

Bu temastan üç hafta kadar sonra İran Şahı, Cezayir’deki OPEC toplantısı sırasında görüştüğü Irak lideri Saddam Hüseyin ile anlaşmaya vardığını açıklamıştır.

“Şah, 6 Mart tarihinde yaptığı açıklamayla bizi şoke etti. Bu fiilen Kürtleri terk etmek oluyordu. Şah, İran-Irak sınırını çizen Şattülarap Nehri üzerinde aldığı tavizler karşılığında Irak sınırını kapattı ve Kürtlere sağladığı bütün yardımı durdurdu” diye yazıyor Kissinger.

“Şah’ın hareketi insani düzeyde acımasız ve savunulamaz nitelikteydi. Ancak İran’ın güvenliği açısından soğukkanlı bir tahlil yapıldığında, acı verici olduğu kadar anlaşılabilirdi. Kürtleri ancak İran’ın açık bir müdahalesi kurtarabilirdi; bu da Barzani’nin 1974’te talep ettiği 360 milyon doları bile aşan bir maliyet anlamına gelirdi. Üstelik Çinhindi’nden çekilmekle meşgul olan ABD açısından yeni bir cephe açmak düşünülemezdi.”

Kissinger Cezayir Anlaşması’nın ertesinde İran Şahı’na kendi ifadesiyle “mesafeli” bir mesaj göndererek şöyle der:

“Ülkenizin çıkarlarına en iyi neyin hizmet edeceğine karar vermek kuşkusuz majestelerinin takdirindedir. Bizim politikamız her zaman olduğu gibi İran’ı yakın ve sağlam bir dost olarak desteklemek olacaktır. Irak-İran ilişkilerinin evrimini ve Irak’ın bölgeye ve Sovyetler Birliği’ne dönük politikasını büyük bir ilgiyle izleyeceğim.”

“Kürt liderlerin yardım çağrılarına cevap veremedim, söyleyecek bir şeyim yoktu”

Bu gelişmeden en çok rahatsızlık duyanlar, Kuzey Irak’ta sahada Kürtlerle birebir çalışmakta olan CIA ajanlarıdır. Kissinger, “Colby’nin (CIA Direktörü) sahadaki temsilcileri bu kadar umursamaz bir tutuma tanık olmayı içlerine sindiremediler” diye yazıyor.

Ve Şah’ın sınırı kapatmasıyla birlikte Saddam Hüseyin’in Kürtlere karşı topyekun saldırısı başlar. Bu harekat binlerce Peşmerge ve sivilin ölümüyle sonuçlanır. Ölü sayısı konusunda 6 bin ile 20 bin arasında değişen çelişik rakamlar veriliyor. Ancak 600 binden fazla Iraklı Kürt’ün yer değiştirmek zorunda kaldığı, 230 bin kişinin Irak ordusunun misillemesinden çekinerek İran’a sığındığı o döneme ilişkin kayıtlar arasındadır.

Kissinger’ın anlatımına göre, “Bütün bu olaylar yaşanırken sahadaki CIA temsilcileri çevrelerinde gelişen trajedi karşısında kendilerini bir anda çaresizlik içinde buldular.” Kissinger, Orta Doğu’da mekik diplomasisiyle meşgulken Kürt liderlerden yardım çağrılarını ileten pek çok mesaj aldığını, bunlara yanıt verilmediğinde sitem dolu notlar geldiğini yazıyor.

“Bu umutsuz çağrılara cevap vermememin nedeni, söyleyebileceğim hiçbir şeyin olmamasıydı. Nitekim bu mesajları yazanlar (CIA) da İran sınırı kapandığında hiçbir acil yardımın mümkün olmadığını çok iyi bilmekteydi” diyor Kissinger ve ekliyor:

“Kürt krizi, yirmi yıl sonra daha da geçersiz gerekçelerle yeniden yaşanacağı üzere, üzücü bir şekilde sona erdi: elverişsiz coğrafya, komşu ülkelerin ikircikli tutumları ve Kürt toplumunun kendi içindeki uzlaşmaz hedefler...”

Yoksa hepsi jeopolitik bir hamle miydi?

Kissinger kitabının bu bölümünün sonunda ciddi bir muhasebe de yapıyor. “Bir vaka incelemesi olarak Kürt trajedisinin değerlendirmesinde” şunları söylüyor:

“Başarı için gerekli kaynakları çeşitli nedenlerle yaratamadık; buna rağmen geri çekilmenin sonuçlarıyla yüzleşmekten de kaçındık… Yirmi yıl sonrasından bakıldığında bile alternatifleri, izlediğimiz yoldan daha cazip değildi. Eğer 1972’de Kürt operasyonunu üstlenmeyi reddedip Iraklıları dikkatlerini Körfez’e yoğunlaştırmalarında serbest bırakmış olsaydık, özellikle Ekim 1973 Orta Doğu Savaşı sırasında ve sonrasında bölge diplomasisinin seyri oldukça farklı olabilirdi.”

Ve şöyle bitiriyor:

“Kürt halkı için -tarihin ezeli mağdurları- bu elbette bir teselli değildir.”

Henry Kissinger’ın cephesinden bakıldığında, bütün operasyon galiba jeopolitik bir hamleden ibaretti… Irak’ı belli bir zaman kesitinde Orta Doğu denkleminden düşürecek bir hamle… •

Let's agree to disagree - Constantine Capsaskis Newsletter Editor - 15 February 2026

 

Let's agree to disagree

Constantine CapsaskisNewsletter Editor

 15 February  2026 

Welcome to the weekly round-up of news by Kathimerini English Edition. Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis met with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Ankara this week.

The meeting, held within the framework of the sixth Supreme Cooperation Council between the two countries, saw the two leaders reiterate and stress their commitment in keeping channels of dialogue between Greece and Turkey open.

Mitsotakis noted that any bilateral differences should be managed “with composure and responsibility”, stating that disagreements should not lead to tension. This was echoed by Erdogan who noted that disputes in the Aegean and the East Mediterranean, “while complex, are not unsolvable if there is willingness for dialogue”.

However, despite the reported positive atmosphere of the meeting and the assessment of the Greek government that it was “one of the most substantive [meetings] in recent years”, there seems to have been very little convergence between the two sides on many of the pressing issues.

Mitsotakis, notably, brought up the issue of Turkey’s longstanding threat of war against Greece should the latter choose to extend its territorial waters to 12 nautical miles, as laid out in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (which Turkey is not signatory to). “It is time to remove any threat from our relations. If not now, when?”, he asked.

The two leaders also disagreed on the issue of Greece’s Muslim minority in Thrace, which Erdogan referred to as the “Turkish minority in Western Thrace”, something Mitsotakis rejected, in line with Greece’s longstanding position on the matter. He stated that in the Treaty of Lausanne, the minority is stated to be religious in nature, and not ethnic.

Other open issues include the delimitation of maritime zones and the referral of the issue to the International Court of Justice, with Greece again standing firm that this is the only issue to be resolved, and Greece’s continued close co-operation with Israel.

However, the meeting between the two leaders was also accompanied by several bilateral meetings at ministerial level, with ten Greek ministers accompanying the prime minister to Ankara. As a result, several agreements were signed between the two sides to advance the “positive agenda” in bilateral relations.

They include an initiative to promote investment and encourage a new ferry line to link Thessaloniki and Izmir, to pursue and enhance joint action on earthquake preparedness and response, as well as the signing of a memorandum of understanding on cultural co-operation between Greece and Turkey.

Global Research - Donald Trump Has "Killed His Presidency". Make America Great Again (MAGA) is Dead Timothy Alexander Guzman, February 1, 2026

 

Donald Trump Has "Killed His Presidency". Make America Great Again (MAGA) is Dead

Timothy Alexander Guzman, February 1, 2026

Donald Trump has officially killed his presidency and the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement or what’s left of it. Despite Trump’s remaining support from MAGA cult loyalists in his second term, it’s undeniable that he betrayed all of the people who voted for him. The promises he made to his supporters to end wars, fix the economy, create jobs, fight the deep state and restore the long-awaited Constitutional Republic were not kept. Trump often claimed that he would be committed to the rule of law and that law and order will be the norm once again, but it all turned out to be a lie.

How did Trump gain the trust of the American people?

Trump was a real estate “tycoon” who inherited millions from his father, a television personality in The Apprentice and a promoter for big-name boxing and UFC title fights and beauty pageants, many events were held in his casinos (before they went bankrupt) made him sort of a household name. Trump was also mentioned in over 100 Hip-Hop songs because of his wealth and some of his so-called “accomplishments.’ But what made Trump’s celebrity status grow was his divorce from his ex-wife Ivana in late 1980’s and early 90’s, which was good for celebrity gossip tabloids. 

In a way, you can say that Trump was and still is an entertainer, he knows how to entertain the masses. Trump’s support among mainstream media networks such as Fox News, NewsMax and the New York Post and far-right social media influencers such as the Paul brothers, Megyn Kelly, Steve Bannon, Fox news maniac Mark Levin, Alex Jones, etc. all helped get the word out that Trump was going to be their savior and that he was going to “Make America Great Again” and so on.

Trump had a way of relating to people with his comical theatrics when he was on the campaign trail criticizing his political opponents from both sides of the aisle. So, it’s understandable why people began to like him as someone who can be entertaining to watch as well as someone who they can believe in since he was “not” part of the establishment especially after the numerous promises he made to make life better for the average US citizen. 

Trump made a pledge to fight the deep state, that he was going to bring peace and prosperity around the world by ending forever wars.  That you were going to have cheap gas and healthcare, that he was going to reduce your grocery and utility bills.  However, since Trump got into office, he imposed disastrous economic policies that have made US citizens barely unable to afford anything because of his reckless tariffs, tax cuts for multi-national corporations and his wealthy friends, and approved spending bills that added trillions to the national debt reaching close to $40 trillion. 

Trump was supposed to order the arrests the high-profile sex predators in government and beyond, he was supposed to release the Epstein files, the full John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr files (the files he released on JFK & MLK were “nothing burgers” with some parts that were redacted or with insignificant new details) and so on. Trump has continuously blocked the release of the Epstein files since his name and some of his friends are in the files. 

In other words, Trump has basically embarrassed his base of voters to the point that some of them are ashamed of even admitting that they were fooled. Some believe that Trump never lied, that situations change and like that old saying, that ‘a man’s gotta do what a man gotta do.’ But in reality, its more like what Mark Twain once said,

“It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.”

But there are some who still go along with whatever he says or does. Some MAGA supporters have suddenly become pro-war and anti-freedom, but I guess they want to save face or just follow their president no matter what he does. 

It sort of reminds me of those who followed a cult leader by the name of Jim Jones, who led more than 900 of his followers to a mass murder-suicide in an agricultural commune in Jonestown, Guyana, a small village established by the People’s Temple cult back in 1978.  I know it sounds like an exaggeration, but if they still support Trump even after his complete betrayal, then it doesn’t seem too far off to believe that they would follow him off a cliff.     

The Kidnapping of Nicolas Maduro and the Road to World War III

Endless wars have become more wars and some of those who remain in the MAGA movement are on board. In his foreign policy, Trump has committed numerous war crimes by authorizing the bombing of several countries including Iran, Syria, Somalia, Yemen, Venezuela and Nigeria and everything else in-between, but Trump still claims he ended several wars and that he should have received a Noble Peace Prize. Talk about George Orwell rolling in his grave.    

Trump claims that he ended several wars which is complete nonsense. However, what Trump and the mainstream media, especially the right-wing media including Fox news and Newsmax forget to mention is that Trump bombed several countries in the first year of his second term. World War III is coming although Trump constantly claims that he is a “Peace President,” but he has betrayed his base including the independents who basically voted him into office to end wars, not start new ones.

What the lawless Trump regime has done in Venezuela is clearly a war crime and everyone involved in the operation to kidnap a sitting president in the middle of the night including Marco Rubio, Pete Hegseth, John Ratcliffe, Pam Bondi, etc. are all war criminals who will one day, face justice. More than 100 Venezuelans and Cubans were murdered in the operation to kidnap Maduro including civilians and his security detail. 

They used the excuse of Fentanyl being shipped in from Venezuela to orchestrate regime change, but we all know that Venezuela was not involved in “dealing drugs,” ironically, Trump pardoned the former Honduran president Juan Orlando Hernandez who was convicted of importing 400 tons of cocaine and weapons into the United States. 

The attack on Venezuela was for oil and other natural resources, but it was also to stop China, Russia, Iran and the threat of the BRICS alliance of influencing Latin America that would eventually dethrone the US dollar. 

Will the US run Venezuela as Trump claimed?         

In the aftermath, Trump had a Saturday morning press conference from his Mar-a-Lago home in Florida and said that

“we will run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition” he continued “we can’t take a chance that someone else takes over Venezuela who doesn’t have the interests of Venezuelans in mind.”  

A war against Venezuela is still “on the table.” However, one of the main ideas for the Department of War is that the US military needs Venezuela’s oil to keep the war machine going especially when they are planning to wage an all-out war on Iran who will no doubt shut down the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important sea passages for oil exports that travel from the Persian Gulf to the rest of the world.

The US military needs abundant oil supplies to feed the war machine because Iran and the rest of the Middle East including Hezbollah, Yemen and the resistence in Palestine and Iraq will be major targets for the Trump regime which is full of neocons who want the US and its closest ally, Israel to remain the sole hegemonic powers that cannot be challenged.      

But it does not stop there, Trump has so far made threats to invade Greenland, attack Colombia, Mexico (targeting “drug cartels”) and Cuba and every other country who does not follow the rules of the US-based world order. Where does this go from here? Obviously, it’s heading to a world war led by a “peace” president who believes that he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize.

The Rise of MAGA Cult Fascism

What do you get when government agents wear masks without showing their ID’s or badge numbers who arrest people for not carrying “papers” and put them in unmarked cars and are sent off to a “holding facility”? Sounds like Hitler’s Nazi Germany or Augusto Pinochet’s Chile, but its the United States of America under Trump’s Gestapo. To be fair, it was both political parties, the Democrats and Republicans who contributed to the development of ICE which stands for U.S. Immigration and Custom’s Enforcement by continued funding and political support. The Republicans were uneasy about Obama’s brownshirts, or Biden’s Covid tyranny that forced people in the US to wear face masks, or to take the Covid vaccine while on a government-sanctioned lockdown.

Conservatives or the current MAGA movement were in general, correct to be upset on how the Democrats were enforcing rules by force. MAGA argued that all of the things that the Democrats were doing was unconstitutional and that it could lead to tyranny.

To be clear, the Covid lockdowns was a drill for a future lockdown, but this time with ICE in the picture and whatever other tyrannical agency they will create in the future can now involve federal agents going ‘door to door’ for whatever reason which is an unconstitutional action against US citizens.

However, as soon as Trump was elected for a second term, it seems that the constitution that protected the right to free speech, the right to bear arms under the 2nd amendment, freedom of the press, etc. was thrown out the window.

Now MAGA changed its tune. There are MAGA supporters who still support Trump’s actions no matter what he does which includes ICE agents arresting illegal immigrants whether innocent or not. The Guardian reported that the Trump regime has started a ‘wartime recruitment’ drive to hire so-called “conservatives” or those who are military enthusiasts with $100 million for television advertisements:

US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has reportedly planned a $100m, one-year media blitz for what it’s calling “wartime recruitment”, targeting conservative radio show listeners, gun rights aficionados, military affairs followers and men’s interests enthusiasts – among others in the Maga-verse – for jobs in the Trump administration’s next phase of its mass deportation campaign

If you think that a cult within MAGA don’t exist, this story will prove that it does.

A wife and mother was taken into custody because of a minor crime she committed in the past, but her husband Arthu Sahakyan, still supports Trump, you just can’t make this up.

Fox news affiliate station in Los Angeles published the insanity back in July, ‘California husband says he’ll continue to support MAGA movement after wife taken into federal custody’ said that

“An Iranian woman who has expressed support for President Donald Trump was detained by federal agents outside her home in Diamond Bar, California“ it continued “Trump is not trying to do anything bad,” said Arthu Sahakyan. “We understand what he’s doing. He wants the best for the country. I’m just trying to make the best of it. I don’t want any families to go through this. If they are, I apologize for what they’re going through because it’s hard.”

The report said that

“Home surveillance video shows federal agents outside Sahakyan’s home Monday. His wife, Arpineh Masihi, can be seen going inside their house to say bye to their four children. “She came and kissed the kids and that was it,” said Sahakyan. “That was the last time we saw her.”

Sahakyan’s wife was born in Iran and has been living in the US since she was 3 years old but her green card was revoked over a minor conviction related to theft. The DHS released a statement on her behalf:

“On June 30, ICE arrested Arpineh Kamal Masihi, a criminal illegal alien from Iran. She was convicted of burglary and sentenced to two years in prison in 2008. Following her criminal conviction, she was placed into immigration proceedings. A judge issued her a final order of removal on June 24, 2009. She had more than 15 years to self-deport and leave the U.S. Under President Trump and Secretary Noem, if you break the law, you will face the consequences. Criminal illegal aliens are not welcome in the U.S”

But her husband, Mr. Sahakyan still supported Trump despite the real possibility that his wife will get deported.

Why the MAGA cult supports masked up federal agents with no ID badge even with what happened in Minneapolis when an ICE agent shot and killed Renee Good is because they say ICE agents are receiving death threats to themselves and their families, but that is a lame excuse.

Vox reported on other crimes committed by ICE agents:

Wrongly arrest a US citizen at gunpoint and without a warrant, and parade him out of his house in his underwear in freezing weather.

Take a 5-year-old child into custody and, according to a Minneapolis-area school district, attempt to use him as “bait” to detain others.

Pepper-spray a man already detained by federal agents in the face at close range.

And bring federal criminal charges against three Minneapolis-area activists after they interrupted a church service in St. Paul, Minnesota, over the weekend (in addition to digitally manipulating an arrest photo)

And that is just in Minneapolis.

There has been other violent incidents conducted by Trump’s personal army. The Independent reported on a ICE detention officer who sexually abused a Nicaraguan woman for months:

A former detention officer at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Louisiana has pleaded guilty to sexually abusing a Nicaraguan woman over several months while she was imprisoned. Federal prosecutors called it a “romantic relationship.”

David Courvelle, 56, entered a guilty plea in federal court Monday. He was charged with a single count of sexual abuse of a ward or individual in federal custody, which carries a maximum prison sentence of 15 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.

According to court documents, Courvelle worked as a contract detention officer at the South Louisiana ICE Processing Center between January 1 and July 30. The facility is operated by private prison contractor Geo Group Inc., ICE’s largest contractor.

This is just the begining of a Police State in action, but the MAGA cult seems to enjoy watching human beings abused by federal agents.

It does not end here because ICE agents will soon target everyone else including anti-war and anti-Israel protesters, gun owners, journalists, bloggers, anti-vaccine skeptics, Non-GMO activists, and many others who are resisting government tyranny.

This is a dangerous precedent set up by a deranged US President who is continuing the establishment’s goal to create a militarized police state that will target everyone.

Masked federal agents with no badge numbers that will continue to break into people’s homes without legal warrants, ready to kidnap them at gunpoint will face a resistance. So expect violence to increase as time goes by, so unfortunately, it will get ugly.

Mass Layoffs, Tariffs and Farmers Going Bankrupt: An Economy in Decline

From mass layoffs including those in the manufacturing sector due to tariffs to bankrupting farmers, the US economic decline has accelerated under Trump. Another interesting fact about Trump’s economic policies is that he is not releasing the jobs report since he fired the last director of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Erika McEntarfer, who was appointed by the former President, Joe Biden. So why did he fire her? Because she released jobs report numbers that he did not like and that was making him look bad.

A few days into his second term, Trump had warned the world through a video conference hosted by the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland that new U.S. tariffs in “differing amounts” will be imposed on all countries. Reuters ‘Trump to global firms: Manufacture in USA or face tariffs’ published Trump’s own words when he said that

“My message to every business in the world is very simple: come make your product in America and we will give you among the lowest taxes of any nation on earth,” Trump told a panel of business executives.” 

Months later, that all seemed to be a farce since thousands of manufacturing jobs continue to disappear. CBS news, ‘The U.S. is losing thousands of manufacturing jobs, analysis finds’ which detailed the data produced by the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank who tracks unemployment rates said the following:

For all of 2025, manufacturing employment in the U.S. has sunk by a total of 33,000 jobs, according to Labor Department figures. Most of those job losses have been among companies that make durable goods, such as cars, household appliances and electronics. The drop comes as hiring overall has slowed sharply in recent months, with employers adding only 22,000 jobs in August, well below forecasts. 

The number of manufacturing jobs in the U.S. has declined for the past six decades, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. In 1960, manufacturing represented about 34% of total employment, while the number of jobs in the sector peaked in 1970 at 19.5 million. As of August this year, 12.7 million Americans were employed in manufacturing, while the industry lost 87,000 jobs in 2024, data shows 

The labor market continues to shed all types of jobs at high rates. 

According to the CATO institute, a non-Partisan libertarian think tank published, ‘Trump’s Trade Wars Harm Farmers and Taxpayers’ which was critical of Trump’s tariff war:

American farmers are again facing significant losses from President Donald Trump’s quaint obsession with tariffs. Once again, American taxpayers may be forced to pay for the damage. In a social media post earlier this month, President Trump told “the Great Farmers of the United States” to “Have fun!” when the administration imposes more tariffs on April 2. The president of the American Soybean Association responded, “Farmers are frustrated. Tariffs are not something to take lightly and ‘have fun’ with.”

Indeed, soybean farmers were one of the biggest victims of Trump’s costly trade policies in his first term. Following retaliatory Chinese tariffs on American soybeans, exports to the soybean farmers’ largest foreign market dropped by 77 percent, according to the US Department of Agriculture. Of the $27 billion in total reduced US agriculture exports from mid-2018 to the end of 2019, soybeans represented 71 percent of the lost value

Trump’s economic policies in his second term are seen as even more chaotic in the eyes of US trade partners:

With Trump back in the White House and his trade actions even more erratic and belligerent, foreign importers of US goods are seeking more dependable alternatives. Soybeans are just an example. Chinese importers are looking to South America as an alternative for chicken and pork and may turn to Australia for sorghum, barley, and wheat. It’s also not just Chinese importers. Other countries on Trump’s harassment list, including Canada and Mexico, are targeting US agricultural products for retaliatory tariffs and eyeing diversifying their sources of imports. 

At the same time, American farmers staring down reduced access to foreign markets are also facing higher production costs due to the US tariffs on imported agricultural inputs.Steel and aluminum tariffs mean higher prices for farm equipment. Canada is by far the largest supplier of potash to the US, which means higher fertilizer prices

People said that Trump was a successful businessman in New York City before he decided to jump into politics, but the fact remains, he was a failed businessman.  Here is Trump’s past bankruptcies as reported by the Huffington Post:

Trump’s business failings — and the number of lawsuits he currently faces — are laid bare in damning detail in the S-4 registration statement that Digital World Acquisition Corp., the special-purpose acquisition company that is merging with Trump’s Trump Media & Technology Group Corp. to take it public, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Monday.

Trump’s lengthy history of bankruptcies, it states:

Entities associated with President Trump have filed for bankruptcy protection. The Trump Taj Mahal, which was built and owned by President Trump, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1991. The Trump Plaza, the Trump Castle, and the Plaza Hotel, all owned by President Trump at the time, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1992. THCR, which was founded by President Trump in 1995, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2004. Trump Entertainment Resorts, Inc., the new name given to Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts after its 2004 bankruptcy, declared bankruptcy in 2009. While all of the foregoing were in different businesses than TMTG, there can be no guarantee that TMTG’s performance will exceed the performance of those entities

One thing can be said, you might have some success in the NYC real estate market by “closing deals,” but it does not mean that you will be successful in international finance and trade.  Both are completely different, it’s like managing a candy store in a NYC neighborhood, then you are chosen to run a major food corporation, it’s apples and oranges.  

Trump, the Protector of Pedophiles

The Epstein Files is the straw that broke MAGA’s back. Many Trump supporters were angry that the Epstein Files were never released, so they eventually abandoned the MAGA movement. Trump had made a campaign promise to release the Epstein files, but on February 21st, his US Attorney General, Pam Bondi was asked by Fox News about an Epstein “client list,” and she clearly said that they “sitting on my desk right now to review.”

On February 27th, Pam Bondi invited a group of conservative online influencers to Washington and were provided with binders that read, “The Epstein Files: Phase 1” for a publicity stunt to show the people they were on top of the Epstein files, but that was clearly to deceive the American public.  On March 3rd, Bondi told Fox news “and it’s a new day. It’s a new administration, and everything’s going to come out to the public. The public has the right to know, Americans have a right to know.”

Then on July 6th, according to a report by Axios,

“President Trump’s Justice Department and FBI have concluded they have no evidence that convicted sex offender and disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein blackmailed powerful figures, kept a “client list” or was murdered, according to a memo detailing the findings obtained by Axios” 

On July 7th, an article published by Fox news, ‘Bondi under siege after DOJ reveals no Epstein client list’ reported that

“Fox News’s Peter Doocy asked White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt about Bondi apparently confirming in February that a nonpublic list of Epstein’s sex-trafficking clients existed.”

Karoline Leavitt’s response was in defense of Bondi as she claimed that “She was saying the entirety of all of the paperwork, all of the paper, in relation to Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes, that’s what the attorney general was referring to, and I’ll let her speak for that.”

Then on July 8th, Trump got angry at reporters for asking questions about Epstein and asked, “Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein? This guy’s been talked about for years.” He was focused on the deadly floods that occurred in Texas during that time, “I mean, I can’t believe you’re asking a question on Epstein at a time like this.” Trump obviously thought that the Epstein Files case would be forgotten since his DOJ and FBI claimed that there was no evidence of a “client list” or that Epstein was murdered in his jail cell. 

In my opinion, the way Trump reacted is clear, his name and the names of his close friends are all over the Epstein files.

On July 23rd, CNN reported that Bondi had briefed Trump back in May that his name was in the Epstein files,

“When Attorney General Pam Bondi briefed President Donald Trump in May on the Justice Department’s review of the documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein case, she told him that his name appeared in the files, sources familiar with the discussion told CNN.”  

Let’s be clear, Trump and his team all know that his name was in the files from the start.  He lied to the public.

Then former Republican Congresswoman and a former Trump supporter, Majorie Taylor Greene was interviewed in a New York Times Magazine profile,

“This September, Greene spoke with several of Epstein’s victims for the first time in a closed-door House Oversight Committee meeting. She knew that the women had paid their own way to come to Washington. She saw some of them trembling and crying as they spoke. Their accounts struck her as entirely believable.” 

The NY Times mentioned Greene’s threats to expose some of the people in the files and the aftermath with Trump,

“After the hearing, Greene held a news conference at which she threatened to identify some of the men who had abused the women,” so it was clear that Greene wanted the Epstein files released.  But here is where Trump’s lie is exposed even more, “Then the President Donald Trump told Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene this year that he opposed the release of the Epstein files because his “friends will get hurt.”

Why is Trump so hesitant to release the Epstein files? It’s because Trump and many of his powerful friends are in the client list.  The Trump regime’s actions and words do find them guilty as charged, but until those Epstein files are released without any redactions, Trump and his friends are still technically ‘innocent until proven guilty.’

In a recent visit to a Ford Rouge plant in Dearborn, Michigan, a worker, TJ Sabula called Trump, a “Pedophile Protector” and Trump responded by saying F**k you and gave him a middle finger.

In the current state of affairs in the US under President Trump, we all can say that Trump lied and MAGA died, is there any other way to put it?

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.

Timothy Alexander Guzman writes on his own blog site, Silent Crow News, where this article was originally published.

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

All images in this article are from the author