Research Undermines ‘Burn Fat to Lose Fat’ Claim in Obesity Treatment

Posted on by
Reply

glucose oxidation fat loss research

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola

November 06, 2026

Story at-a-glance

  • Animal research suggests that restoring glucose oxidation through the PDH enzyme — rather than burning more fat — may be a key driver of fat loss
  • Obese mice lost fat while preserving muscle once PDH activity was restored, pointing to a metabolic pathway that may support weight control
  • Human muscle studies show that people with flexible fuel switching burn fat during fasting and glucose after meals, while metabolically rigid muscle stays stuck and may favor fat storage
  • Fitness-focused interventions improve insulin sensitivity, likely by strengthening mitochondrial function and restoring proper timing between fat use and glucose handling
  • You can support this system by lowering dietary fat, increasing healthy carbohydrates, supporting PDH with key nutrients, and using strategic movement to rebuild metabolic flexibility

[…]

Restoring Glucose Oxidation Drives Fat Loss in Obese Mice

An analysis1 by bioenergetic researcher Georgi Dinkov unpacked the findings of a master’s thesis by Indiresh A. Mangra-Bala at the University of Alberta, which asked what happens to an obese body when you turn glucose burning back on?2 The work focused on pyruvate dehydrogenase (PDH), the enzyme that decides whether glucose enters your mitochondria to be burned for energy.

When PDH is shut down, your metabolism shifts into fat-storage mode. When PDH is restored, the entire energy system behaves differently. To test this, the thesis used dichloroacetate (DCA), a compound known for lifting the metabolic “brakes” that shut down PDH. DCA removes the block that forces your body to run on the wrong fuel.

[…]

• Obese animals were used to mirror real metabolic dysfunction — Male and female mice were fed a high-fat diet for 10 weeks until they developed obesity — a model designed to mirror the stubborn metabolic rigidity people experience in real life.

[…]

Once PDH was turned back on with DCA, the animals started losing weight in a favorable pattern: fat dropped, muscle stayed intact. The treated mice also ate and drank less, which may have contributed to the weight loss.

[…]

• Fat loss increased without sacrificing muscle, and glucose tolerance improved — Measurements showed that “most of that loss came from fat rather than from muscle.”3

[…]

• Simple nutrients may support this process without using DCA — DCA itself is an experimental compound that isn’t approved for treating obesity, and it has been linked to nerve damage and liver problems at higher doses or with long-term use, so it’s not something to try on your own.

Vitamin B1, magnesium, and niacinamide support PDH activity, and Dinkov suggests this combination could have produced effects similar to DCA’s, although the thesis didn’t test it.

[…]

• Lowering dietary fat may increase PDH activity — Fat intake directly influences the Randle cycle — the mechanism showing how excess fat blocks glucose oxidation by lowering the NAD+/NADH ratio. When your fat intake falls and your carbohydrate intake rises appropriately, PDH can reopen and your metabolism may shift toward higher energy production and easier fat loss.

[…]

Metabolic Flexibility Shapes How Your Muscles Decide What Fuel to Burn

Once you understand how restoring PDH reopens your metabolic engine, the next question becomes: Why do some bodies switch fuels with ease while others stay locked in stress mode? A commentary published in the Journal of Clinical Investigation explored why some people effortlessly switch between burning fat and glucose while others stay stuck in a sluggish metabolic pattern.4

[…]

• Muscle cells behaved very differently based on the fitness and metabolic health of the person they came from — Lean and aerobically fit adults in earlier research showed greater metabolic flexibility: Their muscles relied more on fat during fasting and shifted toward burning glucose when insulin rose. In contrast, obese and sedentary individuals showed a narrow, rigid pattern. In the lab, muscle cells from leaner, more insulin-sensitive men ramped up fat burning more when given extra fatty acids.

[…]

• Healthy muscle adapts quickly, while metabolically inflexible muscle does not — Muscle from fit individuals showed a high level of reliance on fat during fasting. When insulin entered the picture, their muscles suppressed fat burning and switched to glucose with ease.

[…]

• The presence of excess fatty acids disrupts fuel switching — Elevated fatty acids in the blood can blunt insulin’s ability to stimulate glucose oxidation, creating a pattern similar to what is seen in Type 2 diabetes.

[…]

• Even triglyceride storage inside muscle varies between individuals — Endurance-trained athletes often have high levels of intramuscular triglycerides, yet they burn through these stores efficiently thanks to superior mitochondrial capacity.

Their muscles treat fat as a high-quality reserve fuel. In contrast, sedentary individuals accumulate fat inside muscle cells but use it poorly, which is associated with insulin resistance. This contrast helps you understand why two people with similar muscle fat levels experience very different metabolic outcomes.

• Mitochondria may be a central player behind fuel choice — The ability to switch between fuels likely depends on how well mitochondria regulate specific enzymes that serve as decision points for glucose and fat entry into energy pathways. When mitochondrial function declines, these switches become sluggish. This suggests that improving mitochondrial performance can improve your metabolic flexibility.

People with metabolically inflexible muscle also show lower oxidative enzyme activity in their muscle tissue, but exercise training can improve this by strengthening mitochondrial performance. This means your muscle doesn’t just burn calories; it learns. The more often you move, the more responsive your fuel systems become, reinforcing a virtuous cycle that supports fat loss, stable energy, and metabolic ease.

Enhanced Fat Use During Fasting Strengthens Metabolic Health

[…]

This fits with the idea introduced earlier: real metabolic change begins when you repair impaired glucose handling, not when you chase fat as your primary fuel. Before digging deeper into the findings, it’s important to address a common misunderstanding around fasting and time-restricted eating (TRE). Many people assume that anything involving fasting automatically strengthens metabolism.

But fasting changes how your body uses energy in ways that deserve careful attention. Short fasting windows, like TRE, help some people feel lighter and more focused, but longer fasts often trigger stress responses that shut down healthy glucose metabolism.

[…]

• The study tested whether improving fitness changes how your body uses fat — Researchers examined how moderate physical activity combined with calorie reduction influenced fat oxidation and insulin-stimulated glucose disposal in obese adults. The goal was to see whether better use of fat during fasting improved insulin sensitivity, which is the body’s ability to move sugar out of the bloodstream efficiently.

[…]

After the intervention, the researchers measured glucose disposal during controlled laboratory conditions to determine how well insulin worked in their muscle tissue. Their findings revealed that these adults improved insulin sensitivity at a meaningful level, and the strongest predictor of that improvement was better fat oxidation during fasting.

• Fat oxidation increased significantly as fitness improved — The researchers reported a rise in fasting fat oxidation from 1.16 to 1.36 milligrams (mg) per minute per kilogram of fat-free mass, which reflects a shift toward using stored fat more efficiently when food intake is low. This shift meant that the proportion of total energy coming from fat increased from 38% to 52% during fasting.

That improvement occurred alongside a 19% increase in VO2 max, a measure of aerobic fitness. The connection between greater fitness and improved fat use suggests that muscles that burn fat more efficiently at the right time also tend to respond better to insulin.

• Insulin sensitivity improved at an impressive rate — Glucose disposal increased from 6.70 to 9.51 mg per minute per kilogram of fat-free mass, representing a 49% improvement in how effectively insulin moved glucose into muscle cells. Participants also lost body fat, but the shift in fat oxidation was the factor most closely tied to the improvement in how their bodies handled glucose.

[…]

• Improved metabolism likely reflects changes inside the muscle itself 

[…]

Better mitochondrial performance during exercise also encourages healthier glucose uptake, reinforcing insulin sensitivity. This creates a positive loop where your body becomes better at switching between fuels throughout the day.

Over the 16-week period, repeated aerobic activity appeared to train muscle tissue to prefer fat during fasting and respond more effectively to insulin afterward.

[…]

Restore Your Metabolism by Fixing How Your Cells Use Fuel

You deserve a path that works with your biology instead of against it and addresses the root problem: your cells aren’t using glucose efficiently. When glucose oxidation slows, your metabolic rate drops, your fat storage rises, and your energy sinks.

The good news is that you have direct control over the signals that turn this system back on. These steps give you a clear plan to support PDH activity, improve glucose oxidation, and support steady, sustainable fat loss without the crash-or-burn approach that failed you in the past.

1. Lower your dietary fat intake so your cells stop blocking glucose oxidation — If you eat a high-fat diet, especially from seed oils, your system can end up stuck in the Randle cycle, which restricts glucose from entering your energy pathways. By lowering your fat intake and choosing healthy fat sources like tallow, ghee, and grass fed butter, you may help free up PDH to work properly. This shift allows your body to burn sugar cleanly, which may support fat loss.

2. Increase your carb intake to support mitochondrial energy production — If your gut is compromised, start with fruit or white rice before moving into cooked vegetables and other starches as your gut tolerates them. Carbs are protein-sparing and are essential for optimal mitochondrial adenosine triphosphate (ATP) production, your body’s energy currency.

Gradually increase your carbs until you reach a stable range that supports your energy — usually around 250 grams per day for most adults. You may notice that your body temperature rises, your mood improves, and your cravings weaken because your cells are getting the fuel they need.

3. Support PDH with nutrients that activate glucose oxidation — If you’ve struggled with low energy or slow fat loss, supporting the PDH activity with vitamin B1, magnesium, and niacinamide may help. Vitamin B1 acts as a cofactor for PDH and may also inhibit pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase (PDK), which itself inhibits PDH. Thus, B1 indirectly supports energy production by keeping PDH active.

Niacinamide converts to NAD+ in your body, thereby affecting the NAD+ to NADH ratio, which is key for metabolic processes. For magnesium, I recommend finding a dose that works for you. Increase magnesium citrate until your stools loosen, then back off slightly and switch to glycinate or malate. This combination may strengthen your ability to burn glucose efficiently.

4. Use movement strategically to reinforce metabolic flexibility — If you’re sedentary or only doing high-intensity workouts, shift your strategy. Moderate movement, especially walking and strength training, signals your muscle cells to improve their glucose handling. Aim to walk about an hour a day. Even 20 to 30 minutes of walking after meals can help your mitochondria shift their fuel patterns and may add to the fat loss benefits of better glucose oxidation.

5. Strengthen your metabolic environment so PDH stays active and glucose oxidation remains steady — If your metabolism feels sluggish or your energy dips throughout the day, stabilize your environment in ways that directly support the PDH pathway. A simple starting point is sunlight exposure, which boosts cellular energy production and may help your body shift toward cleaner glucose use.

If you’re still eating seed oils, avoid intense midday sun until you’ve been off them for four to six months. Reduce seed oils aggressively because excess linoleic acid (LA) can interfere with normal mitochondrial function and disrupt your fuel selection signals.

If you still feel stuck after correcting your diet, low-dose pharmaceutical-grade methylene blue from a compounding pharmacy may support mitochondrial energy transfer at just 5 mg once daily. It’s essential to emphasize that the appropriate and legal way to use methylene blue is through a prescription from a qualified physician.

If you’re contemplating the use of methylene blue for your health, I strongly encourage you to consult with your doctor to determine if it’s suitable for your specific needs and circumstances. These steps strengthen the foundational conditions your body needs to keep PDH active and your metabolism flexible, making fat loss easier and more predictable.

[…]

Via https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2026/11/06/glucose-oxidation-fat-loss-research.aspx

Failure of Both the Republicans and Democrats to Create Credit for Reindustrialization?

Posted on by
Reply
By Miguel Santos García
November 05, 2026

Until the structural incentives that favor financial returns over productive investment are confronted directly, US economic policy will continue to find it easier to inflate existing assets…

***

The failure of both Republican and Democratic administrations to direct the nation’s money-creation capacity toward reindustrialization rather than financial asset inflation is not a story of insufficient ambition or poor messaging but of structural capture that neither party has been willing or able to confront. The machinery of US credit creation has been wired for decades to serve the balance sheets of the financial sector, and every attempt to redirect it toward factories and supply chains has run into the same wall of institutional incentives that reward asset speculation over productive investment. This pattern held across such different political coalitions because of specific mechanisms that defeated each party’s industrial ambitions and the deeper financial logic that neither has challenged.

The Democratic Party’s most ambitious reindustrialization effort, the legislative package comprising the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Inflation Reduction Act, and the CHIPS and Science Act, deployed subsidies and tax credits on an unprecedented scale, yet it operated entirely within the existing financial architecture rather than transforming it. Between 2021 and 2024, announced investments in the North American battery and electric vehicle supply chain surpassed two hundred fifty billion dollars, and the Biden administration could point to genuine commitments from legacy automakers and battery manufacturers establishing facilities across the Midwest and South.

The problem was that these subsidies flowed through corporations whose own incentives remained oriented toward shareholder returns and short-term profitability rather than the patient, long-horizon capital formation that genuine industrial reconstruction demands.

Two-thirds of the Inflation Reduction Act’s energy-related funds were expected to go to corporations, and the executives who had spent the previous three decades offshoring manufacturing were cast not as adversaries but as the privileged partners through whom reindustrialization would be achieved.

This approach assumed that subsidizing the private sector would naturally produce industrial capacity, but it ignored the degree to which the financialized corporation has been restructured precisely to avoid the fixed commitments and lower margins of manufacturing. The results were visible in the electric vehicle sector, where the Ford F-150 Lightning’s entry price rose from roughly forty thousand dollars at launch to nearly fifty-five thousand by early 2024, as battery costs failed to decline and consumer demand fell short of the projections that had justified the investment. The subsidies had created activity, but they had not created a durable industrial base, because the investment decisions remained governed by the same calculus that had produced deindustrialization in the first place.

The Trump administration’s approach, by contrast, relied on tariffs and immigration restriction as levers to force production back onshore, and it encountered an even more immediate set of contradictions. The tariffs imposed in 2025 did not produce a manufacturing boom but rather coincided with the disappearance of nearly one hundred thousand manufacturing jobs, while construction spending in the manufacturing sector declined steadily.

The reason was perverse in its simplicity. Tariffs raised the cost of imported components and raw materials without providing any offsetting mechanism for domestic producers to obtain credit for expansion, so manufacturers faced higher input costs and greater uncertainty rather than a clearer path to profitability. The Computer and Communications Industry Association warned that the administration’s tariff policies would increase the cost of building semiconductor fabrication facilities and the broader artificial intelligence supply chain by four hundred fifty billion dollars between 2026 and 2030.

Meanwhile, the administration’s immigration restrictions directly undermined the workforce available for the plants it claimed to be promoting. A Stanford professor who had formerly served as chief scientist at TSMC found that only seventeen percent of his former doctoral students now worked at companies that actually fabricate microchips, with the remainder choosing design firms, consultancies, or other industries offering better pay and working conditions. The semiconductor workforce gap was estimated at one hundred fifty-seven thousand people, and without targeted intervention the shortage would delay fabrication plant startups, yet the administration’s political coalition treated the immigration that could fill those positions as a threat rather than a solution. Tariffs without credit direction and workforce policy without immigration produced cost inflation and delay, not reindustrialization.

Beneath these contrasting failures lies a common structural condition that Michael Hudson’s work describes with precision. Two distinct actors create the financial resources in question, and the article’s argument turns on keeping them separate. The Federal Reserve creates reserves, which are the liabilities it holds against the assets it purchases, and private banks create credit, which is the lending that actually finances investment. In the contemporary US system, the banks do not create credit for industrial capital formation; they lend against assets that already exist, for the purpose of inflating the prices of real estate, stocks, and bonds. This is not a policy choice that can be reversed by electing different officials, because it is built into the incentive structure of privately owned banks whose profits derive from asset-price appreciation and interest extraction rather than from financing new production.

When the Federal Reserve conducted quantitative easing after 2008, it purchased government bonds and mortgage-backed securities from banks, flooding the financial system with reserves, and those reserves flowed overwhelmingly into the same asset markets that the banks already served. The intended wealth effect was supposed to trickle down into spending and investment, but the actual result was a recovery concentrated in equity prices and housing values while manufacturing employment remained depressed and the real economy received little benefit.

Hudson’s analysis explains that interest charges and fees siphon off corporate income and consumer purchasing power, making industrial production uncompetitive and unprofitable, and that the only politically feasible way to redirect credit toward productive purposes is to place money creation and bank credit creation under government control. Neither party has been willing to contemplate this socialization of credit, because doing so would directly threaten the financial sector that funds political campaigns and supplies the personnel who staff regulatory agencies.

The persistence of quantitative easing and bailouts as the default response to economic distress, rather than directed credit for industry, reflects a deeper political economy in which the financial sector’s interests are structurally privileged over those of manufacturers and workers. When the banking system seized up in 2008, the government and Federal Reserve intervened massively because the collapse of major institutions threatened the entire economy, and the tools deployed were designed to stabilize the financial plumbing rather than to rebuild the industrial base.

Reindustrialization, by contrast, requires sustained fiscal policy and credit guidance that is subject to political negotiation, can be reversed by the next administration, and demands a level of state capacity that the United States largely dismantled over four decades of neoliberal governance.

[…]

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/why-couldnt-trump-nor-democrats-create-credit-reindustrialization-rather-than-qe/5945226

Dr. Jeff Barke Exposes Hidden Risks of PENTACEL 5-in-1 Vaccine for 6-Week-Old Infants: 5 Deaths Reported in Trials

Posted on by
Reply

Pentacel Vaccine, 5/Pack | Dealmed Medical Supplies

Lioness of Judah Ministry

Five vaccines in one shot for six-week-old infants. Dr. Jeff Barke exposes the deadly trial results and dangerous ingredients you aren’t being told about.

In this critical breakdown, Dr. Jeff Barke shines a light on the reality of the PENTACEL 5-in-1 vaccine, a cocktail of five vaccines forced on infants as young as six weeks old.

The clinical trial record is damning: researchers failed to include an inert placebo group, leaving parents with no honest comparison for safety.

Instead, the data reveals a disturbing pattern of serious adverse events. During these trials, 3.9% of infants suffered significant injuries, ranging from pneumonia and asthma to seizures and encephalopathy, and tragically, five infants died.

Dr. Barke outlines the toxic reality of the ingredients, including formaldehyde, aluminum, and bovine calf serum, while detailing warnings from the Institute of Medicine regarding paralysis.

This is a must-watch for every parent waking up to the dangers of the current pediatric immunization schedule.

PENTACEL 5-in-1 Vaccine…approved for 6 week old infants. 4 dose series includes aluminum, polysorbate 80 & formaldehyde. No safety study against a placebo & 5 infants died during clinical trials.

‘Institute of Medicine’ cautions it causes guillain barre syndrome paralysis.

Ingredients

Diphtheria

Tetanus Toxoid
Pertussis
Polio
HIB
Polysorbate 80
Streptomycin
Glutaraldehyde
Formaldehyde
Aluminum
Vero African Green Monkey Kidney cell line
Neomycin
Polymyxin B
Bovine Calf Serum
MRC-5 Human Lung

Institute Of Medicine Review

Tetanus Toxoid Vaccine causes both Brachial Neuritis & Guillain Barré Syndrome. Brachial Neuritis causes paralysis of the shoulder/arm & Guillain Barre’ Syndrome causes paralysis of the entire body & carries the same symptoms as polio.

Risk Of Apnea

SIDS can be called ‘Aluminum Adjuvant Apnea.’ Aluminum Adjuvants cause apnea, affecting & stopping the breathing center of the brain. The infant, without warning, will stop breathing & the death will be classified as SIDS.

Clinical Safety Trial Studies

Clinical trials were all run without an inert placebo. One group received the Pentacel 5-in-1 vaccine. The other group received the 4-in-1 Quadrivalent vaccine with added HIB. Both groups received the same 5 vaccines. There was no placebo group to compare vaccine injuries.

Safety Trial Deaths & Adverse Events

Across all safety studies, 3.9% of infants suffered an SAE serious adverse event, such as pneumonia, asthma, bronchiolitis & gastroenteritis. Of these adverse event injuries, 5 infants died. The reported ‘causes of death’ was SIDS & Neuroblastoma. 8 infants suffered seizures. 2 cases of encephalopathy were documented.

Post Marketing Adverse Events

Cyanosis, Apnea, Anaphylaxis, Meningitis, Screaming, Inconsolable Crying, Depressed Nervous System.

Link To PENTACEL 5-in-1 Vaccine Package Insert For Physicians

Via https://lionessofjudah.substack.com/p/this-is-terrifyingdr-jeff-barke-exposes

Eisenkot secures majority backing to form Israeli government as Netanyahu faces ouster

Posted on by
1

 

(Photo credit: Avshalom Sassoni/ Flash90)

The Cradle

NOV 6, 2026

Gadi Eisenkot moved closer to becoming Israel’s new prime minister on 6 November, as 67 of the Knesset’s 120 lawmakers recommended him to receive the mandate to form Israel’s next government following last week’s elections, Israeli media reported.

As Israeli president, Isaac Herzog has the authority to decide who receives the mandate. He has been in talks with the political parties regarding their recommendations and will issue a decision on Sunday.

The candidate backed by a majority of Knesset members is ordinarily given the mandate.

Eisenkot received recommendations from his own Yashar party, as well as from the opposition parties in his coalition: B’Yachad, led by Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid; The Democrats, led by Yair Golan; and Yisrael Beytenu, led by Avigdor Liberman.

Crucially, parties representing Palestinians with Israeli citizenship, the Joint List and United Arab List, also recommended Eisenkot, saying their goal is to oust Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

For his part, Netanyahu received 46 recommendations, including from his Likud Party, Religious Zionism led by Bezalel Smotrich, Otzma Yehudit led by Itamar Ben Gvir, and the Ultra-Orthodox Shas party.

In an unexpected move, United Torah Judaism, an Ultra-Orthodox party traditionally aligned with Netanyahu’s bloc, declined to recommend either candidate and said it was “not committed to any bloc.”

Despite receiving fewer recommendations to form a government, Netanyahu could retain his position as prime minister if he is able to negotiate the formation of a national unity government with Eisenkot, who has stated he does not wish to form a governing coalition with the Palestinian-Israeli parties.

Fellow opposition leader Liberman also refuses to form a government with non-Jewish parties, as does Netanyahu.

In televised remarks at the end of the ​talks, Herzog said that while the “results of the consultations may appear clear,” there were “mutual vetoes between the blocs and within the blocs themselves” that make it ​difficult to determine who would best succeed in forming a government.

Once nominated by Herzog, the candidate will have 28 ​days to try to form a government, with a possible 14-day extension.

Netanyahu will remain prime minister in a caretaker government until a new coalition is ​formed. If no candidate can form a coalition, fresh elections must be held.

In last week’s Knesset elections, Netanyahu’s religious-nationalist coalition won 53 seats.

Eisenkot’s coalition of Jewish opposition parties won 48 seats, while Israeli-Palestinian parties won an unprecedented 19 seats.

Meanwhile, Netanyahu continues to assert, without evidence, that Israeli-Palestinian ​parties “stole the ⁠vote.”

Israel’s Central Election Committee rejected Netanyahu’s claims, saying on Wednesday that the election’s integrity had not been compromised.

Netanyahu’s allies, including National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, have called ​for the immediate arrest and interrogation of Israeli-Palestinian party leaders.

[…]

Via https://thecradle.co/articles/eisenkot-secures-majority-backing-to-form-israeli-government-as-netanyahu-faces-ouster

Bahrain’s American shield becomes its greatest liability

Posted on by
Reply
Photo Credit: The Cradle

Mawadda Iskandar

Nov 6, 2026

Neither the subsequent war nor the Iranian strikes on Bahraini territory since March 2026 have shaken Manama’s public commitment to Washington. On 4 October, Bahrain’s Ambassador to the US, Abdullah bin Rashid Al-Khalifa, declared that the partnership had passed the test of Iranian attacks through close coordination with Washington.

US Ambassador to Bahrain Stephanie Hallett likewise reaffirmed Washington’s defense commitments, pointing to extraordinary consultations involving the US, Britain, and Bahrain under the Comprehensive Security Integration and Prosperity Agreement (C-SIPA).

The damage to American military facilities has cast doubt on those assurances. With Bahrain burdened by debt, disrupted industry, and renewed protests, the monarchy may find that its most important ally has also made it a target.

The Fifth Fleet takes the hit

The war exposed the vulnerability of American military installations across the Gulf. Among the most consequential targets was Naval Support Activity Bahrain, headquarters of the US Fifth Fleet and a central hub for American naval operations in West Asia.

The installation supports US Central Command (CENTCOM) and enables the rapid resupply of forces operating across the region. Its position in Bahrain gives Washington a forward logistics and command center close to the Strait of Hormuz, but also places the facility within reach of Iranian missiles and drones.

Iranian strikes damaged the headquarters, satellite communications facilities, warehouses, and other buildings. The damage disrupted operations at a base Washington had long considered indispensable to its regional military presence.

American personnel were evacuated following attacks in the opening days of the confrontation. Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Daryl Caudle subsequently indicated that the Navy did not expect to return in the foreseeable future, while Acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao announced a review of whether the damaged installation should be repaired.

With the Bahrain facility out of action, the US Navy relied more heavily on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, approximately 2,200 miles away. Supplies now had to travel farther to reach American forces in the Gulf.

The disruption to supply lines was felt beyond Bahrain. The aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln reportedly faced delays in receiving supplies, compounding concerns over crew fatigue after months at sea and the difficulties of sustaining US naval operations across the region.

Bahrain has paid a price for hosting the fleet. The base was meant to deter attacks on the monarchy, but its presence drew Iranian fire to the island, while Manama had little say in Washington’s decision to go to war.

The limits of US protection

Bahrain hosts American forces but has little influence over how Washington uses them. Iranian retaliation can reach the kingdom whether or not its rulers approve of another attack on Tehran.

[…]

Iranian academic Mohammad Marandi has similarly warned that infrastructure in countries hosting American forces could face retaliation if Iranian facilities are attacked, naming Bahrain alongside Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, and Kuwait.

Bahrain’s own military capabilities offer little reassurance. Despite spending approximately $1.47 billion on defense in 2025, equivalent to around 3.1 percent of GDP, Manama remains overwhelmingly dependent on American weapons.

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), the US accounted for 97 percent of Bahrain’s major arms imports between 2020 and 2024, a period during which the kingdom’s arms imports surged by 898 percent compared with the preceding five years.

US systems dominate its arsenal, including F-16 fighter jets and Patriot air defenses. Bahrain ordered 16 F-16 Block 70 aircraft, while its Patriot procurement included 60 PAC-3 and 36 GEM-T missiles.

Despite its reliance on American weapons, Bahrain has no guarantee of US military intervention. The C-SIPA, signed in 2023, provides for closer security cooperation and consultations but stops short of NATO-style mutual-defense guarantees.

Iranian missile and drone attacks have also taken a heavy toll on the region’s interceptor stocks. Bahrain faced roughly 700 missiles and drones, while more than 2,800 were launched at the UAE. Military analysts have warned that shortages of Patriot and THAAD interceptors could leave Gulf states increasingly vulnerable in another round of fighting.

Speaking to The Cradle, Dr Ibrahim al-Aradi, director of the political bureau of the February 14 Coalition, warns that:

“Renewed war will expose Bahrain to consequences beyond its capacity to confront, given its dependence on western military and political support and the absence of sufficient guarantees to protect American bases.”

Aradi notes that Iran refrained from striking certain sensitive sites during the confrontation, including the King Fahd Causeway linking Bahrain to Saudi Arabia. He believes this restraint spared Manama considerably greater damage.

He warns that such restraint cannot be assumed in another war. If Washington fails to protect its bases, or Bahrain’s Gulf neighbors revise their calculations, the monarchy could find itself dangerously isolated.

A war Bahrain cannot afford

Bahrain was already struggling with some of the Gulf’s weakest public finances when the war began. Years of deficits and borrowing had left the government little room to absorb attacks on the industries that fund its budget.

Oil and gas account for approximately 70 percent of government revenue. Damage to refining and disruption to exports therefore reach directly into the state treasury.

The Sitra refinery, with a capacity of approximately 405,000 barrels per day (bpd), was among the principal targets. On 9 March, state-owned Bapco Energies declared force majeure following an attack on the complex, disrupting a major source of export earnings.

The war also struck Aluminium Bahrain (Alba), one of the world’s largest aluminum smelters, with annual capacity exceeding 1.6 million tons. Shipping disruptions had already forced production cuts before its facilities suffered direct damage. The company subsequently reported a sharp decline in output and sales volumes during the first half of 2026.

The damage extended into the kingdom’s digital infrastructure. Iranian strikes hit Amazon Web Services facilities, affecting a regional cloud computing hub that supports businesses and digital services across the Gulf.

In its October outlook, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) projects an 11.3 percent contraction in Bahrain’s economy in 2026, while government debt continues to exceed annual economic output.

Foreign exchange reserves have also suffered heavily. Central bank reserves fell from approximately $4.8 billion at the outbreak of war to around $1.5 billion three months later, before recovering partially by September.

Manama has sought to contain the fiscal damage through a consolidation program announced in December, including higher public service charges, increased fuel costs for businesses, new corporate taxation, and reductions in administrative spending.

Falling refining income, interrupted shipping, and weaker tourism have made those measures harder to impose. Higher fees and prices would also shift more of the war’s cost onto Bahraini households and businesses.

Manama looks for another rescue

Unlike its wealthier Gulf neighbors, Bahrain has limited reserves to cushion a prolonged economic shock. Its sovereign wealth fund, Mumtalakat, holds assets estimated at approximately $18 billion, but much of that wealth cannot be readily converted into cash.

The island kingdom is also unusually exposed to disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz. Saudi Arabia can redirect part of its oil exports through the East–West Pipeline to the Red Sea, while the UAE has access to Fujairah and Oman possesses ports opening onto the Arabian Sea.

Bahrain’s deteriorating finances have also prompted credit rating downgrades. Fitch downgraded Bahrain to B in February, while Moody’s changed its outlook to negative in April, maintaining its B2 rating.

That leaves Manama looking again to its neighbors. In 2018, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Kuwait pledged approximately $10 billion to shore up Bahrain’s finances.

Ziad Daoud, chief emerging markets economist at Bloomberg Economics, has suggested that another Gulf bailout is increasingly likely, noting that markets anticipated assistance even before the war.

Manama has reportedly held discussions with neighboring states over fresh support, with Abu Dhabi expected to play a prominent role. An April currency-swap arrangement with the UAE also provided a potential $5.4 billion financial backstop.

Fresh Gulf money could ease the immediate pressure, but it would not erase years of accumulated debt. It could also bring demands for further spending cuts and fiscal reforms.

[…]

He points to public debt exceeding 160 percent of GDP and the kingdom’s growing dependence on its Gulf neighbors to avoid financial collapse.

For Aradi, King Hamad’s decision to thank the UAE without mentioning Saudi Arabia also suggests a change in the regional relationships on which Manama increasingly depends.

Can Bahrain still count on Riyadh?

For decades, Saudi Arabia has served as the Al-Khalifa monarchy’s principal regional patron, exercising decisive influence over Bahrain’s security and economic stability.

That relationship was most visibly demonstrated in 2011, when Riyadh led a Gulf military intervention to support the monarchy against the popular uprising. Approximately 1,200 Saudi troops entered Bahrain as part of the Peninsula Shield Force, helping the authorities suppress the protests.

Saudi influence extends deeply into Bahrain’s economy. Manama receives revenues from the jointly operated Abu Safah oil field, relies on Saudi crude supplies for the Sitra refinery, and depends on the King Fahd Causeway as its only land connection to the Arabian Peninsula.

Bahrain’s decision to join the Abraham Accords in 2020 brought it closer to Abu Dhabi and Tel Aviv, opening direct political and security channels with Israel.

The move coincided with widening differences between Riyadh and Abu Dhabi. While the UAE expanded its partnership with Israel, Saudi Arabia restored diplomatic relations with Tehran in 2023 and subsequently sought to limit the risks of another regional confrontation.

Manama has drawn closer to Abu Dhabi, Washington, and Tel Aviv without reducing its dependence on Riyadh.

Bahrain’s hosting of American military bases and normalization with Israel leave it exposed to Iranian retaliation, while its limited resources make Saudi financial and security support essential in the event of another prolonged confrontation.

[…]

The military and economic costs of the Yemen war have placed further demands on Saudi resources, potentially limiting Riyadh’s ability to provide Bahrain with financial and security assistance during another confrontation with Iran.

Bahraini Foreign Minister Abdullatif al-Zayani has called for restoring diplomatic relations with Iran and demanded that Gulf states participate in any negotiations or regional arrangements involving Tehran.

Yet Bahrain’s close military and security ties with Washington and Tel Aviv complicate any attempt to improve relations with Tehran.

Bahraini opposition figure and political activist Ali al-Fayez tells The Cradle that the monarchy’s future will depend heavily on the outcome of the confrontation.

He believes Bahrain cannot return to its previous position regardless of which side prevails. A US-Israeli victory, he argues, would preserve Al-Khalifa rule but reduce the monarchy to “a facade and a functional instrument,” surrendering political, economic, and security decision-making to Israel.

Fayez also warns that the authorities would continue reshaping Bahraini society through political naturalization and cultural changes associated, in his view, with the Abraham Accords.

An Iranian victory alongside its regional allies, he argues, could instead open the way for a new security order shaped by the region’s peoples, including Bahrainis.

For Fayez, Bahrain’s future is tied to the wider struggle over West Asia’s political and security arrangements, including the possibility of changes to regional alliances and borders.

The streets stir again

As the monarchy struggles with the fallout from the war, its crackdown on domestic opposition has intensified. Since the war began, Bahraini authorities have escalated arrests and prosecutions targeting Shia clerics, activists, and citizens accused of supporting Iran.

According to the Bahrain Forum for Human Rights, authorities carried out 825 arrests between January and August 2026, while a separate Human Rights Watch (HRW) report documented the revocation of citizenship from at least 69 people, including children.

The crackdown has fallen heavily on religious scholars. Mass trials and judicial proceedings target 69 defendants, including 60 Shia clerics. Rights monitors documented that among the 56 defendants currently in detention, there are 47 clerics, most of whom were arrested during the 9 May raids.

The authorities have accused some detainees of links to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), allegations that opposition groups say are being used to criminalize religious and political activity.

In recent weeks, protests have spread across Shia-majority villages and suburbs surrounding Manama. Demonstrators have erected roadblocks and confronted security forces, while police have deployed tear gas and sound grenades.

[…]

Via https://thecradle.co/articles/bahrains-american-shield-becomes-its-greatest-liability

CIA Still Runs 12 Secret Border Bases In Ukraine, Even As Trump Breaks With Zelensky

Posted on by
2

Zero Hedge
Nov 05, 2026

Journalist Aaron Maté told Judge Andrew Napolitano on Tuesday that the CIA is still “running, if the New York Times is to be believed, 12 secret bases inside of Ukraine,” and still controlling Ukrainian intelligence agencies it “effectively rebuilt from scratch after Yanukovych was overthrown in 2014.” He made the claim in an interview for Napolitano’s Judging Freedom podcast, recorded on Election Day, Nov. 3, in an episode titled “CIA and MI6 vs Trump in Ukraine.”

Maté’s source for the bases is a February 2024 New York Times investigation, which as Ukrainska Pravda summarized it, described a CIA-supported network of spy bases built over about eight years, including 12 secret locations along the Russian border, with a partnership dating to 2014.

“How pervasive is the CIA in Ukraine today?” Napolitano asked. To which Maté replied:

“Well, it’s so pervasive that it was the one that orchestrated this drone campaign against Russian energy facilities that Trump recently started opposing. It was Trump’s CIA that came up with that and was helping Ukraine do that. And Trump was on board with it until he needed something to sell voters on ahead of the midterms, whereas war on Iran was causing such a spike in energy prices.”

Maté said Trump has since pulled back and criticized Volodymyr Zelensky, “the CIA, as far as I know, is continuing its operations as normal,” and that it is “still helping out with targeting” and “still providing intelligence.”

The Billionaire Question

Napolitano then said that Alastair Crooke had told him the CIA has financial resources from outside the U.S. government, and asked whether the CIA in Ukraine is being funded by anyone other than the Treasury. Maté said that when an agency wants something done off the books, “you’ll get a friendly billionaire or, you know, or some or a friendly corporation to do the work for you,” calling it “intelligence tradecraft going back a very long time.”

He put George Soros “at the top of the list” of billionaires involved in Ukraine: “Already in 2015, Soros’ foundations were saying that they’d spent $181 million on Ukraine since the fall of the Soviet Union.” The figure checks out as a 2015 number. An Atlantic Council piece from Dec. 14, 2015 said Soros “has provided over $181 million in support of almost 17,000 civil society initiatives in Ukraine.” The Soros-founded International Renaissance Foundation, which dates to April 1990, now puts its total at about $380 million.

“Given that some of those dollars went to groups that were involved in the uprising that overthrew Yanukovych, you know, you have to wonder if some of that was linked to Western intelligence,” Maté said, adding, “It might be something like we’ll never know.” He raised eBay founder Pierre Omidyar as another example, tied to a report that named Maté a leading spreader of Syria disinformation and was funded by an Omidyar foundation. “Maybe, or maybe this was done at the behest of the intelligence agencies that I was exposing,” he said. “Who knows how this works?” It is speculation, offered as such.

CIA And MI6 Vs. The White House

Napolitano asked whether the CIA and MI6 are “working at cross-purposes to the White House,” given that the White House wants the war to end and the agencies want it to continue. Maté said it depends on what is meant by the White House, because “there’s not one coherent policy.” He pointed to JD Vance and Tulsi Gabbard on one side, and Marco Rubio, Mike Waltz and former envoy Keith Kellogg on the other, and said Rubio gutted the Kushner-Witkoff peace plan “after a brief freakout on Capitol Hill.” On Trump’s stated aims of a peace deal and a new Ukrainian leader, he said “absolutely the CIA and the MI6 are at cross purposes.”

Earlier, Maté said Zelensky’s refusal to compromise reflects a “small clique of ultra-extremists” inside Ukraine, and that Washington’s promised Patriot missiles are due, in his telling, in the fourth quarter of 2030. We could not confirm that date, and recent reports on Patriot deliveries describe delays, not a 2030 schedule.

Trump’s “99%” In Israel

Late in the interview Napolitano played a clip of Trump saying in May: “I’m at 99% approval rating in Israel. Can you believe it? In fact, if people ever got tired of me in the U.S., I’ll move to Israel and become prime minister.” The remark is not new:

Maté’s reaction: “It might be true about his approval rating, and it’s irrelevant because he’s giving them so much cash and military equipment.” Napolitano noted Trump’s U.S. approval at 33% in the figures he cited.

Via https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/aaron-mate-cia-still-runs-12-secret-border-bases-ukraine-even-trump-breaks-zelensky

The ‘Musk selloff’ deepens as Tesla and SpaceX face $450 billion two-day wipeout

Posted on by
2

Illustration of Elon Musk in front of a SpaceX facility and rocket launch, overlaid with a rising financial graph.

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has become a major political donor, contributing more than $445 million in the 2026 election cycle. Photo: MarketWatch photo illustration/Getty Images, iStockphoto

Investors worry a divided Washington could derail ‘Elon, Inc.’

By William Gavin

Shares of Tesla and Space X were down by 11% and 8%, respectively, in recent action on Thursday, underscoring both broader concerns in the technology sector and worries about their business opportunities going forward in the aftermath of the 2026 U.S. midterm elections.

Across the past two trading days, Tesla has erased $221 billion in market capitalization and SpaceX has lost $229 billion in value, according to Dow Jones Market Data.

CEO Elon Musk is feeling the pain alongside the average investor. According to Forbes, Musk’s net worth now stands at about $788.2 billion, down 9.3% on Thursday.

Garrett Nelson, an analyst at CFRA, told MarketWatch that the Democrats’ takeover of the U.S. House and Senate in the midterm elections is “compounding” fears around the massive artificial-intelligence spending plans of Tesla and other large technology companies.

Nelson added that concerns are particularly pronounced for companies doing business in states like Texas, where Democrats had major victories, and where SpaceX and Tesla are headquartered. Tesla operates a supercomputing cluster in Texas, though SpaceX’s data centers are based in Mississippi and Tennessee.

Several newly elected Democrats, including Texas Gov.-elect Gina Hinojosa, have expressed opposition to new data centers. A few dozen ballot measures related to data centers were put before voters this week, according to Redbud Consulting. But so far, data-center advocates have won just a single measure, the firm said.

Political opposition could incentivize SpaceX to move more quickly to put data centers in orbit, a goal key to the company’s future and valuation, according to KeyBanc analyst Mike Leshock. Musk on Wednesday wrote that space-based data centers were “looking pretty appealing right now.”

The tech-heavy Nasdaq-100 NDX was off 5.7% in recent action on Thursday, while the PHLX Semiconductor Index fell 10.1%, on pace for its biggest decline in more than six years, according to Dow Jones Market Data.

Via https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-musk-selloff-deepens-as-tesla-and-spacex-combine-for-450-billion-two-day-wipeout-d300ab4f

Rep. Thomas Massie Plans to Reintroduce Articles of Impeachment Against Hegseth Unless He Resigns

Posted on by
2

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) announces articles of impeachment against War Secretary Pete Hegseth (September 15, 2026)

 

by

War Secretary Pete Hegseth may face an vote before the next Congress is seated, as some Republicans, led by Rep. Thomas Massie, are planning to vote on an impeachment resolution after a stunning midterm loss that is widely attributed to the Iran war. 

Massie previously introduced articles of impeachment against Hegseth back in September.

CNN is reporting that some GOPers are expecting the latest impeachment resolution to pass in the House as Republican lawmakers turn on Hegseth.

Trump has defended Hegseth, telling reporters on Tuesday that he is not considering firing him.

“No, I think he’s doing a very good job,” Trump said.

Asked if Hegseth should replace Marsha Blackburn in the Senate after her successful run for Governor in Tennessee, Trump said again, “I think he’s doing a very good job.”

Still, Trump said, “I actually think he’d be very popular if he did that, but I haven’t heard that at all.”

CNN reported on Wednesday, “House Republicans are expected to vote to directly repudiate the defense secretary in a matter of days. Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, the famously anti-Trump GOP lawmaker, told CNN he plans to trigger a vote to impeach Hegseth when returns next week — and multiple GOP sources said they expect it to pass.”

Massie further rebuked Trump for planning to continue the war against Iran, telling CNN, “You don’t screw up this badly an election with just one issue.”

“It was completely avoidable if they’d just broken out of the cultish following of Donald Trump,” he added.

“There is one contingency in which I won’t reintroduce the articles of impeachment: Hegseth resigns,” Massie confirmed on X.

This comes as Democrats have already marked Hegseth as one of their top targets come January, when the Democratic controlled House and Senate are seated.

Via https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/11/it-begins-rep-thomas-massie-says-he-plans/

Who really runs Ukraine? Follow the men doing the recruiting

Posted on by
2
Who really runs Ukraine? Follow the men doing the recruiting
RT composite.

Sergey Poletaev

5 Nov, 2026 

The Azov detention scandal raises questions about forced recruitment and the limits of Kiev’s authority.

Clashes outside a secret prison in Petropavlovskaya Borshchagovka, a suburb of Kiev, revealed the dark side of modern Ukraine: its well-established system of abduction, torture, and human trafficking.

This system is beyond the control of the Kiev authorities and of law enforcement; it has become a self-sustaining sector of the economy. While everyone is aware of its existence, many choose to remain silent, fearing they might become its next victims.

What happened?

Let’s briefly recap the events. On the evening of November 1, reports appeared on social media that people were being illegally held in the basement of a private house in Petropavlovskaya Borshchagovka, near Kiev. Apparently, a few local youths managed to climb over the fence and deliver a phone into the basement, allowing the captives to record a message.

The message revealed that there were dozens of people in the basement (various reports mentioned from 17 to 40 people) with four in critical condition, and one with a broken spine.

The following day, November 2, a crowd of relatives and concerned citizens gathered outside the house. An ambulance arrived, and the nurse demanded to be allowed inside. Meanwhile, the police present at the site did nothing. This detail is crucial, so keep it in mind.

In addition to the police, Commander of the National Guard of Ukraine Aleksandr Pivnenko arrived at the site. However, he was unable to enter the house and was eventually chased away by the crowd. Soon thereafter, Kirill Budanov, Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, arrived.

Budanov entered the house with one of the protesters and emerged with a beaten 14-year-old boy, one of the captives. How the boy ended up inside remains unclear.

Then, four severely wounded men were brought out of the basement, followed by the remaining captives. These were told to get into a bus, and were about to be transported to an unknown location. However, the crowd intervened, and the people got out of the bus and dispersed.

Later that night, after Budanov had left, so-called ‘titushky’ (masked thugs) arrived on the scene. They wielded clubs, fired shots into the air to disperse the crowd, and resorted to violence. A reporter from the Ukrainian Independent Information Agency (UNIAN) sustained abdominal injuries during the clashes.

The dragon bares its teeth

While addressing the crowd (in Russian, by the way), Budanov made several statements, which can be summarized as follows: we know there are many basements like this across the country; we’re going to address the problem; today we did a lot, we saved lives; thank you all.

Let’s pause for a moment – these are the official remarks from one of the highest-ranking officials in Ukraine, an influential security forces figure and former head of Ukraine’s Main Intelligence Directorate.

Whom did he save the people from? Who are these enemies that are torturing people while both the police and the government are powerless to intervene?

To understand the situation, we need to go back two years. By 2024, the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) were facing serious challenges in recruitment: even with increased pay rates, there was a shortage of personnel. The old Soviet-era draft system wasn’t able to recruit the necessary number of people.

Starting on October 1, 2024, at the initiative of the General Staff of the AFU, the Ukrainian Cabinet of Ministers allowed commanders to enlist volunteers directly into military units without going through Territorial Centers of Recruitment. On November 25, then-Commander-in-Chief of the AFU Aleksandr Syrsky signed a directive mandating that each brigade establish its own recruitment unit.

At the time, Ukrainian propaganda hailed this as a progressive move: out with bureaucracy! Units would compete for recruits by offering better conditions and higher pay, effectively eliminating forced conscription.

Reality painted a different picture, however. In effect, the state handed over the power of coercive mobilization to private entities. Some commanders adapted quickly and began collaborating with local authorities.

The situation was profitable for both sides: city officials met their recruitment quotas, while “recruiters” in unmarked buses snatched people off the streets, gaining unlimited control over human resources without any oversight.

Human trafficking

Have you ever wondered what happens to the Ukrainian men who are grabbed off the streets and ‘busified’, i.e. forcefully conscripted?

One might think they’re taken to a government facility, registered, perhaps handed an official summons, and then sent to a centralized training camp where they receive basic combat training and a military specialty.

In reality, private ‘busification’ units have no real ties to the state and operate without any government oversight.

The unfortunate people caught on the streets end up in basements like the one stormed on Tuesday. There, they fall completely under the control of ‘recruiters’: they can be dispatched to the front, sold to a similar neighboring ‘unit’ (a market estimated to involve tens of thousands of people annually), or held captive for ransom. The latter practice is alarmingly common, with ransoms typically ranging from $5,000 to $20,000.

All of this occurs with the state’s approval, as the aforementioned directive from Syrsky allows direct recruitment into brigades. This is happening in the rear, and civilian police have no authority over military operations. This explains the inaction of law enforcement during the incident in Borshchagovka.

Estimates suggest that in some regions of Ukraine, up to 80% of recruitment targets are met outside of government Territorial Centers for Recruitment and Social Support. The pattern is simple: abduction on the street – captivity in basements – storming or ransom.

Another problem is deserters. Typically, local police don’t pursue deserters; if someone runs away from the front and manages to get home, local police generally don’t bother to catch him.

However, they could turn such a person over to local brigade recruiters, who would track him down, imprison him in a basement, and subject him to punishment as a warning to others. Many of those held captive in the Borshchagovka basement were captured deserters.

Backbone of the economy

This system involves massive amounts of money. Every recruit is entitled to government payments: up to 300,000 hryvnias as a one-time payment and up to 100,000 hryvnias per month while on the front.

The personnel lists are poorly monitored; mobilized individuals have their bank cards confiscated, and their access to bank accounts is restricted, so the people caught on the streets never see the money.

This creates a shadow fund in each brigade, which is then used to buy people on the slave market – sourced from the basements of neighboring brigades.

An additional intimidation tactic involves family members. When a man ends up as a captive, he is told that his family will have big problems if he speaks out. The forcibly mobilized men are officially regarded as second-class citizens; the term ‘ukhilyanty’ (Ukrainian slang for draft dodgers) is a product of official Kiev propaganda. As a result, it is the obligation of the ‘real defenders of the homeland’ to apply all the abovementioned brutal measures against these individuals.

Not all brigades and their ‘recruitment units’ are equally ‘effective’. The largest such conglomerate is Azov, which has been formally split into the 1st and 3rd Corps of the National Guard.

Affiliation with the National Guard shouldn’t fool anyone: since 2015, Azov has remained loosely controlled by the state, and the system of “direct recruitment” in the 1st and 3rd Brigades predates the directive from Syrsky.

From 2015 until 2022, Mariupol served as the operational base for Azov fighters, whose most notorious achievement was the private prison known as the ‘Library’ where prisoners were referred to as

Today, Azov operates as a vertically integrated holding company, with war on the front merely a side endeavor. Its main activities include human trafficking, business extortion, and private security services.

Essentially, Azov functions as a state within a state, partaking in a fully-fledged sector of the economy involving hundreds of thousands of people. It wields a legal right to violence, and is beyond the control of both its direct authorities and the Kiev government.

The house in Borshchagovka belonged to Azov, which is why the police did nothing; it’s also why they barred the head of the National Guard (Azov’s formal boss) from entering.

Azov fighters, momentarily distracted from their street hunts and racketeering, showed up that evening in masks to assault the crowd.

That’s exactly why Budanov said that the authorities know about many such basements and (read between the lines) can’t do anything about them. The only thing he could do was to leverage his personal influence to gain access to a particular basement.

Damage control

Budanov’s authority didn’t last long, however. Later that evening, on November 2, Denis Prokopenko (known as ‘Redis’), commander of the 1st Corps of the National Guard and one of Azov’s leaders, released a statement accusing the protesters of sabotage and tarnishing the military’s image. Of course, there was no mention of torture.

The next day, this became the official position of the Kiev authorities: Budanov announced that a female medic had been detained (the ambulance nurse), and 100 other people were under suspicion.

Shortly after, the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) opened three criminal investigations. Charges include hindering the operations of the AFU, spreading information regarding the location of the defense forces, and inciting public disorder. An internal review of the 1st Corps of the National Guard found no violations.

And that is no longer surprising. The ‘recruiters’ – not just from Azov but from all 150 brigades of the AFU – have become the real power in Ukraine’s rear. Neither the police, nor the territorial defense units, nor the formal authorities can stand against them. Together with the whole country, they find themselves hostages to this unchecked force. Like Budanov, they can only resort to pleading and negotiating – only to comply with whatever demands are set forth the next day.

A small incident in an obscure suburb of Kiev has revealed the extent of decay within the modern Ukrainian state. It has shown who truly holds power in the country – power beyond the control of the police, Budanov, or even Zelensky.

The events in Borshchagovka have illustrated the tsunami of anarchy that will engulf Ukraine once this force devours the remaining vestiges of the state.

Via https://rt-english.com/russia/648483-who-really-runs-ukraine/

Melania Trump hosts Russian and Ukrainian envoys at White House

Posted on by
Reply

Melania Trump hosts Russian and Ukrainian envoys at White House (VIDEO)
US First lady Melania Trump during a meeting with Russian and Ukrainian representatives at the White House, November 5, 2026, in Washington. ©  AP Photo/Alex Brandon

RT

5 Nov, 2026

Representatives of Russia and Ukraine are meeting at the White House in Washington, DC for talks hosted by First Lady Melania Trump.

The meeting follows a temporary humanitarian ceasefire in Alyoshki, a city in the Russian region of Kherson, coordinated with the first lady’s involvement.

The White House announced the gathering on November 3, describing it as an “extraordinary moment in American history.”

Russia is represented by Human Rights Commissioner Yana Lantratova and Special Presidential Envoy Kirill Dmitriev, according to Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.

Ukraine has sent Human Rights Commissioner Dmitry Lubinets and David Arakhamia, the head of the ruling Servant of the People parliamentary faction, according to Ukrainian media reports.

Melania Trump called for cooperation between Moscow and Kiev to extend beyond the temporary ceasefire in Alyoshki, describing the humanitarian arrangement as a precedent for advancing peace in the region.

Dmitriev thanked Melania Trump “on behalf of President Putin” for her involvement in the humanitarian operation, describing her role as crucial. He also presented the First Lady with a painting by an 11-year-old girl from Alyoshki who had relocated with her family to the Russian city of Tuapse. The drawing bore the words “I love Melania.”

The presidential envoy also said that humanitarian efforts had helped reunite 34 children with their families in Russia and Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin has supported initiatives proposed by US President Donald Trump, including prisoner exchanges, the release of American detainees, and other humanitarian measures, Dmitriev said.

The White House said Melania Trump independently initiated contact between the two countries and helped secure the temporary ceasefire in Alyoshki and the surrounding area.

The six-day truce, which expired on Sunday, allowed Russian and Ukrainian humanitarian teams to deliver food, water, medicine, and other essential supplies and evacuate residents. Nearly 800 people were evacuated, according to Melania Trump.

Officials from both sides oversaw the evacuations, with civilians offered the choice of relocating to another city in Russia or traveling to Ukraine via Russia and Belarus. Evacuees and Russian officials interviewed by RT described months of hardships of living under shelling, which they attributed to Ukrainian forces.

Lantratova said on November 2 that discussions were underway on organizing regular humanitarian missions to Alyoshki with the first lady’s mediation, potentially allowing aid deliveries every month.

The meeting comes ahead of another round of US-mediated negotiations between Moscow and Kiev, scheduled for November 10-11 in Abu Dhabi.

Via https://rt-english.com/news/648478-russia-ukraine-melania-trump-meeting/