At least three people were killed instantly, while others were left stranded in international waters
The US has destroyed three alleged narco-trafficking boats travelling in a convoy in the eastern Pacific Ocean, killing a number of people aboard, as part of Washington’s growing pressure campaign against Venezuela.
The latest lethal “kinetic strike” was conducted in international waters on December 30, the US Southern Command announced on Wednesday.
The Pentagon claimed that prior to the strikes, US intelligence agencies had “confirmed the vessels were transiting along known narco-trafficking routes and had transferred narcotics between the three vessels.”
“Three narco-terrorists aboard the first vessel were killed in the first engagement. The remaining narco-terrorists abandoned the other two vessels, jumping overboard and distancing themselves before follow-on engagements sank their respective vessels,” it said.
On Dec. 30, at the direction of @SecWar Pete Hegseth, Joint Task Force Southern Spear conducted kinetic strikes against three narco-trafficking vessels traveling as a convoy. These vessels were operated by Designated Terrorist Organizations in international waters. Intelligence… pic.twitter.com/NHRNIzcrFS
The Pentagon said it “immediately notified” the US Coast Guard to launch a search and rescue operation, but the fate of those stranded remains unclear.
The latest strikes bring the total number of known boats destroyed to 33 and the number of people killed to at least 110 since early September, when the US launched Operation Southern Spear.
The “anti-drug” campaign launched by US President Donald Trump has drawn criticism internationally over the use of lethal force in international waters without a proper legal basis, which UN experts said could constitute “extrajudicial executions.”
In November, the US designated the Venezuelan Cartel de los Soles as a terrorist organization, alleging links to Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, an accusation which Caracas has rejected.
In December, Trump went further by declaring the Venezuelan government itself a foreign terrorist organization and ordering a blockade of sanctioned oil tankers entering and leaving the country.
Maduro has condemned the blockade as illegal under international law and has accused Washington of using the “war on drugs” as a pretext for a regime change operation to seize Venezuela’s natural resources.
Trump had also authorized the CIA to carry out covert actions inside Venezuela; the agency has reportedly carried out a secret drone strike against what the US president described as a “big facility” last week.
The federal probe was triggered by a YouTuber’s investigation of a massive Somali-run scam in Minneapolis
The US Department of Health and Human Services is halting federal child care funding to all states, pending proper paperwork, following a scandal over alleged widespread fraud in daycare centers in Minnesota, an agency official has told ABC News.
Federal funds will be released “only when states prove they are being spent legitimately,” the unnamed official stated on Wednesday, without providing details about the required documentation.
HHS spokesman Andrew Nixon clarified that even those “not suspected of fraudulent activity” have been asked to submit their “administrative data” for review.
Meanwhile, those “suspected” of fraud must provide additional records, including “attendance records, licensing, inspection and monitoring reports, complaints and investigations.”
“The onus is on the state to make sure that these funds, these federal dollars, taxpayer dollars, are being used for legitimate purposes,” Nixon told ABC News.
Previously, the HHS froze all child care payments to Minnesota after reports alleged the state had funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to fraudulent daycares over the past decade. It also demanded a comprehensive audit from Minnesota Governor Tim Walz.
The Democrat has defended his administration, while lauding the state’s diverse makeup and large Somali community, and accusing US President Donald Trump of plotting against him.
“This is Trump’s long game. We’ve spent years cracking down on fraudsters. It’s a serious issue – but this has been his plan all along. He’s politicizing the issue to defund programs that help Minnesotans,” Walz said.
The scandal was triggered by conservative influencer Nick Shirley’s investigation; he alleged a large-scale fraud scheme involving Somali-run childcare centers in a lengthy YouTube video, estimating over $110 million in fraudulent claims.
US Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem announced a “massive investigation on childcare and other rampant fraud.” FBI Director Kash Patel said resources had been “surged” to Minnesota, warning that these cases were just “the tip of a very large iceberg” and that the perpetrators could face “denaturalization and deportation.”
The temporary reprieve is set to last until late January, Belgrade has said
Serbia has secured a temporary exemption from US sanctions imposed on the nation’s only oil refinery, which is majority-owned by Russian energy giant Gazprom, Serbian Energy Minister Dubravka Dedovic has announced.
The Petroleum Industry of Serbia (NIS) said early in December it was forced to suspend operations at its only refinery due to a shortage of crude oil, triggered by the sanctions.
The US imposed restrictions on the company early in October after repeatedly postponing the move for months.
NIS is a leading Balkan energy company with a major refinery located in Pancevo, near Belgrade, and a regional network of over 400 petrol stations. Russia’s Gazprom Neft is the largest shareholder with some 45%, with a further 30% held by the Serbian state.
The Serbian energy minister hailed the waiver as a major achievement that initially “seemed almost impossible” to get.
“NIS has obtained a license from US OFAC allowing it to continue operations until January 23. This means that the Pancevo refinery will be able to resume operations,” Djedovic stated, praising the country’s diplomats and their relentless efforts to get the crucial facility back online.
The announcement comes after Russia’s Ambassador to Serbia, Aleksandr Botsan-Kharchenko, confirmed that Gazprom Neft has been negotiating the sellout of its shares package to spare NIS from Washington’s sanctions. The diplomat made the remarks in an interview with RIA Novosti on Wednesday. The envoy refused to provide any further detail, stressing that he personally was not participating in the ongoing negotiations.
Reckless warmongering, political manipulation, and propaganda have all been parts of the EU’s march towards the abyss
To be fair to the dismal year on the way out, at least 2025 won’t be a hard act to beat. In particular, if last January anyone was recklessly optimistic enough to hope for the West to come to its senses about its catastrophic relationship with Russia and the war in and over Ukraine, they will have been largely disappointed. (Let’s not waste time on those who were still dreaming about actually defeating Russia: the clinically delusional and deliberately disingenuous are an unrewarding topic.)
It is true that the disappointment delivered by 2025 in this area has not been total. There has been one major positive – if still incomplete and reversible – development: After many abrupt twists and turns, Washington seems to have settled on a policy of “strategic stability” (in the language of the new National Security Strategy) with Moscow. This marks a possible path to mutually beneficial normalization, perhaps even a future détente. (I will plead the Trump Unpredictability Caveat here, though: if the American president and disrupter-in-chief flipflops again, don’t blame this author.)
But, at the same time, the almost 30 countries best labeled NATO-EU Europe, with politically rigid and ideologically zealous Germans in the lead not only in Berlin but Brussels as well, have found the single most perverse issue to finally assert some independence from their US overlords: stalling an end to the Ukraine War. This obstructionism has been so obvious that even (some) Western observers have started noticing it.
Though little noticed, this is actually a historic reversal. Silly pundits used to say that Americans are from Mars and Europeans from Venus. But now when even the traditionally ultra-bellicose Americans have finally been backing out of an ever-worsening confrontation between, in effect, the West and Russia, NATO-EU Europe’s odd – and unpopular – elites have resisted the prospect of peace.
Cut through the nauseatingly hypocritical “value” cant and the hysterical “Russia-is-coming-for-us-too!” nonsense, and the real reason for this resistance is obvious. Any peace anchored in reality (and thus with a chance to last) would inevitably have to reflect that Russia has long gained the upper hand on the battlefield over both Ukraine and its Western backers. And among the proudly not-quite-from-this-world leaders of NATO-EU Europe, having to accept reality is considered an insufferable affront.
Yet the NATO-EU Europeans’ rearguard action to keep peace at bay was not their only sensational mistake in 2025. At least two more are obvious.
First, let’s look at the ongoing transformation of NATO with a little bit of historical perspective: NATO’s first secretary general, Hastings Ismay, is said to have quipped that the Alliance’s purpose was “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.” That was as honest as it gets from a man in that position, and it certainly beats his non-entity successors, such as Mark Rutte and Jens Stoltenberg, on no-bullshit straight talk.
Historically speaking, it’s a curious and revealing fact that NATO kept sticking around when “the Russians” first took the initiative to end the Cold War and then dissolved their own Cold-War military alliance, the long-forgotten Warsaw Pact (officially, the ‘Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance’.)
Instead of following suit, NATO set out on a course of over-reach and expansion. Between the early 1990s and the present, the alliance has furiously provoked Russia by blunt bad faith and ceaseless enlargement. It has also cast about globally for pretexts for prolonging its existence, often at the cost of ordinary people caught in the crossfire of its regime-change and country-devastation operations or, as in the case of Ukraine, as pawns of a failed proxy war.
But then, NATO’s real main purpose has never been to protect (Western) Europe from Moscow but to keep it dependent as well as subordinated to Washington and to protect US grand strategists from their worst nightmare coming true: game-changing cooperation between Europe, in particular Germany, and Russia. As a result, by 2025 the alliance’s new, post-Cold War essence seems to be “keep the Europeans poor, the Americans in charge, and the Germans paying (and down, too, of course).”
To be fair to 2025, this is a much longer story. But the NATO summit in The Hague last June marked a milestone no less than the radical break with good-faith parliamentary procedures and solid budget politics engineered in Berlin in March. If The Hague was where the new spending goal of altogether 5% of GDP on defense and defense-related infrastructure became official, then Berlin had already shown the way into a policy of reckless debt in the name of a badly unbalanced policy that seeks national security only in re-armament and rejects diplomacy and the search for compromise. That this policy also includes a massive fresh Arrow-3 air defense deal with Israel, while the latter is committing genocide, adds extreme moral vileness to the economic insanity.
The financial self-cannibalization would be bad enough. But things are even worse, which brings us to the EU in particular. If historians will remember the 2025 performance of what once started as a (Western) European peace project for anything except the EU’s continued support for genocidal apartheid Israel, its massive attacks on freedom of speech, privacy, and the rule of law, and its total failure to protect Europe’s economy and its people from US tariff and trade assaults, then it will be the EU’s escalating metamorphosis into a crusading cult in the style of resentment-rich eastern European nationalism, targeting not simply Russia but its own populations.
On one side, the EU is doing what the most fanatical national governments and NATO are doing as well: shoveling ever more money into the arms industry and its notoriously wasteful entrepreneurs, including trendy disruptive types. From consulting contracts to “drone wall” schemes, the EU is continuing and explosively amplifying a tradition of waste and graft that can be traced back easily to its current de facto boss’s Ursula von der Leyen scandalous days as German defense minister more than a decade ago (not to speak of her Covid swamp contributions…).
Yet what is really original about the EU’s share in driving us ever closer to self-destructive war is something else, namely its massive contribution to cognitive warfare and propaganda. While that too is a busy field, where NATO and national European governments compete fiercely for who can frighten their people the most, there is something special about the EU. It is clearly striving for a leadership role in “cognitive security,” which is a euphemism for a license to propagandize your own, based on accusing the other guy – here, Russia, of course – of cognitive aggression.
What makes the EU such an especially detrimental force in this area are two things: First, it has already developed a whole set of ideological rationalizations for manipulating its own citizens, marked by catch-phrases such as “resilience,”“pre-bunking,” and even “cultural warfare.” Second, it makes no secret out of its intention to learn from the experience of Ukraine – that is, under Zelensky – an aggressively authoritarian regime. And a regime that von der Leyen and friends would love to see join the EU as soon as possible. An ‘EU Commissioner for Cognitive Resilience and Cultural Defense’ from Ukraine may well lurk in our common dystopian future. Unless we, the Europeans, learn to take our continent back.
From Russian achievements to Western failures, our editorial team and lead authors bring you the events, analyses, and scandals that defined the year – and set the stage for 2026
As 2025 comes to a close, RT’s editorial team wishes to thank our readers for following our coverage throughout the year. Your engagement makes it possible for us to deliver news, analysis, opinions, features and perspectives that challenge the mainstream narrative and highlight the stories that truly matter.
RT’S and our top writers bring you a full account of 2025 – including the years military, economic, and scientific achievements, pivotal shifts in diplomacy, and the missteps and failures that have taken place over the past 12 months. From cutting-edge weapons and energy megadeals to NATO’s empty war rhetoric and hidden scandals, our coverage collects the stories the gatekeepers and globalists want you to forget – and the developments that will shape 2026.
The year the US rewrote its own playbook on Ukraine
2025 marked the moment when US policy on Ukraine stopped being ideological and became transactional. Washington abruptly shifted its tone – from talk of unconditional victory to the language of costs, leverage, and negotiations – leaving Kiev and America’s own allies struggling to adjust.
Ivan Timofeev, program director of the Valdai Club, traces this pivot back to a deeper change in how the United States now sees its role: less as the engine of a unified Western front, and more as a power willing to step back, recalibrate, and even mediate when the price of confrontation rises too high.
The uneasy question is whether this is merely Donald Trump’s tactical improvisation – or the first clear sign that the Euro-Atlantic order itself is entering a phase of irreversible transformation.
The year that finally saw a real peace process on Ukraine – and how the battlefield shaped it
The main outcome of the year is that a real peace process on Ukraine has finally begun. It remains far from completion, and any expectations of a quick breakthrough are, at best, naïve. The outcome of the Ukrainian crisis is being decided on the battlefield – and the situation at the front continues to shape the pace and direction of diplomacy.
Issues that until recently seemed insoluble are falling away. Ukraine’s NATO membership has been de facto removed from the agenda; territories under Russian jurisdiction are being de facto acknowledged. Yet the central question – the one that triggered Russia’s military operation in the first place – remains unresolved. Moscow’s opponents still hope to preserve the current Russophobic regime in Kiev, while Russia remains firmly committed to changing it and eliminating the root causes of the conflict.
Resolving this question is a challenge for the coming year, 2026. And like all the others, it can only be settled on the battlefield. That is why understanding how this year’s key battles were fought matters so much. Sergey Poletayev, co-founder of the Vatfor project, revisits those decisive moments in his New Year’s reflection.
The year America stopped managing the world and started claiming its backyard
One of the most enduring myths of the post–Cold War era finally collapsed: the idea of the United States as a disinterested global manager. Washington stopped pretending that its power was universal – and began openly prioritizing what lies closest to home.
Fyodor Lukyanov reads this shift not as an eccentric Trump-era aberration, but as the symbolic end of the globalist illusion itself. The US is reclaiming the language of spheres of influence it once publicly denied – and in doing so, is reshaping the rules of international politics.
What emerges is a world where geography matters again, proximity outweighs ideology, and great powers rebuild order from their own neighborhoods outward. The consequences of this turn, Lukyanov argues, will define not just America’s role, but the structure of global instability in the years ahead.
2025 was a year of bold moves and growing agency for Africa, with Russia-Africa relations taking center stage. From major investment projects and nuclear initiatives to education, healthcare, and cultural exchanges, the partnership deepened on multiple fronts – and, for the first time, much of the agenda unfolded directly on African soil.
Across diplomacy, trade, and human engagement, Russia expanded its footprint while African nations asserted a more independent role in shaping cooperation. From pipelines in Congo to uranium processing in Tanzania, from student exchanges to joint healthcare programs, 2025 was about turning dialogue into concrete projects.
As the continent’s influence grows, 2026 promises an even more dynamic phase for Russia-Africa ties, with the upcoming summit set to consolidate achievements and set new priorities. The year’s developments reveal not just the maturation of bilateral relations, but Africa’s rising weight in global decision-making.
The year diplomacy went public: Trump, war fatigue, and the end of the old rules
2025 also revealed just how much the old rules of diplomacy have crumbled. High-stakes negotiations, traditionally conducted behind closed doors, turned into a global spectacle – with presidents, envoys, and even non-traditional actors taking center stage.
Alexander Bobrov, head of diplomatic studies at RUDN University, shows how the year exposed a new reality: diplomacy is no longer a quiet art of compromise, but a dynamic, highly public contest shaped by war fatigue, shifting alliances, and the personal style of dominant leaders. From Ukraine to the US-Russia summit in Alaska, from Middle East interventions to the fracturing of the “collective West,” 2025 reshaped how states interact on every continent.
As the world enters 2026, diplomacy faces an era of unpredictability: each country, each leader, and each region pursues its own logic, and the ability to navigate fundamentally different perspectives will define who succeeds – and who falls behind.
The year of the Russia’s military power’s transformation
The last 12 months became a landmark for Russia’s military capabilities, combining cutting-edge strategic systems with asymmetric tactics to reshape the battlefield. The year showcased how innovation and precision in nuclear-powered weapons and hypersonic missiles to next-generation submarines, aircraft, and drones, can redefine military power.
Dmitry Kornev, military expert and founder of MilitaryRussia, highlights how Russia avoided a costly mirror race, instead leveraging breakthroughs in technology and strategy to create decisive advantages. Ground forces, air and naval assets, and the defense-industrial complex all advanced in parallel, turning theoretical capabilities into operational reality.
The year proved that future conflicts will hinge not only on numbers, but on asymmetric responses, technological edge, and the ability to integrate new systems effectively – a battlefield where Russia has already made its mark.
The year Ukraine’s political framework began to crumble
The year marked a turning point for Ukraine’s political landscape and the beginning of the end for Zelensky’s carefully constructed authority. It revealed that his power was never fully sovereign, but rather dependent on external backing and donor support.
Dmitry Plotnikov, political journalist and expert on ex-Soviet states, examines how the combination of a ‘pocket sovereignty,’ internal elite fractures, and the limits of Western support undermined Zelensky’s position. What emerged was the disintegration of the political framework he had tirelessly built – a structure that can no longer sustain the narrative of unity or control.
The war no longer unites; political stability has become an illusion. By the close of 2025, the struggle for Ukraine’s future was moving into the shadows, leaving Zelensky increasingly isolated and facing the consequences of a crumbling state apparatus.
Western analysts have long predicted the collapse of the Russian economy, yet 2025 has shown resilience under significant strain. Financial analyst Henry Johnston examines why constant central-bank liquidity injections, though unusual, do not signal an imminent financial meltdown.
Russia’s economy operates in a semi-closed loop, relying on domestic banks and ruble-denominated debt to maintain stability. While inflation and high interest rates reflect structural stress, the system is insulated from foreign shocks, speculative bubbles, and rollover risks that plague other economies. In short, resilience persists, even under wartime conditions.
The year proved forecasts of Russia’s collapse wrong
By the end of 2025, Russia’s economy had defied external expectations. State-owned enterprises are thriving, trade is shifting decisively toward Asia, and domestic industries are rapidly substituting imports. Despite sanctions, high interest rates, and a tight labor market, GDP growth outpaces global averages, unemployment is at historic lows, and a reconfigured economic model has taken shape.
State support, import substitution, and new trade partnerships have transformed Russia into a semi-self-reliant, resilient economy – one that continues to adapt under pressure while preparing for future challenges.
The year when India and Russia turned sanctions into strategic gains
2025 became a defining year for the Russia-India partnership, as both nations turned sanctions, tariffs, and regional tensions into opportunities to deepen trade, defense collaboration, and strategic alignment. Moscow and New Delhi showcased resilience and foresight, in military exercises and defense deals, through technology transfers and missile programs, signaling a new era of practical, action-oriented cooperation.
The year also marked a strategic pivot toward long-term energy security, Arctic collaboration, and labor mobility, laying the groundwork for closer economic integration. By converting external pressure into coordinated growth, Russia and India demonstrated how emerging powers can navigate global turbulence to secure influence, resources, and technological advantage in an increasingly multipolar world.
2025 marked a turning point for the Middle East, as long-standing barriers to direct confrontation collapsed and the region entered a new era of multi-layered, high-intensity conflict. Israel, with US backing, carried out unprecedented strikes against Iranian targets, while regional flashpoints expanded to include the Gulf and proxy networks, signaling a shift from “managed crises” to direct strategic escalation.
Farhad Ibragimov, lecturer at RUDN University, highlights how these events revealed both the vulnerabilities and resilience of regional actors. Strikes were designed not necessarily to inflict irreparable damage but to send strategic messages, test capabilities, and assert influence, creating a precarious balance where diplomacy increasingly plays second fiddle.
The year set the stage for 2026 as a potentially transformative period for regional security. With informal red lines erased and historical windows of opportunity perceived as fleeting, each move by Israel, Iran, and external powers carries the risk of triggering cascading escalation. The Middle East now faces chronic instability, where force and deterrence dominate, and the next round of conflict could reshape the entire regional order.
2025 proved to be a year of tangible Russian achievements across science, industry, and international partnerships. From test batches of a pioneering AI-assisted cancer vaccine to successful flights of fully Russian-made airliners, the country advanced in sectors ranging from biomedical research and digital sovereignty to domestic aviation and Arctic trade routes.
Major energy deals, like Power of Siberia 2 with China, underscored Russia’s growing pivot to Asia, while RT expanded its global media presence with a dedicated India channel, inaugurated by President Vladimir Putin during his December state visit. Infrastructure milestones, including Europe’s largest high-speed rail network and upgrades to key ports in Donbass, highlighted Moscow’s long-term economic ambitions.
These successes reflect a deliberate strategy of resilience under pressure. In 2025, Russia combined technological innovation, domestic production, and strategic diplomacy to secure both economic and geopolitical gains. Whether in vaccines, jets, energy, or media, the year showcased a coordinated effort to assert national capabilities and strengthen partnerships outside the West, shaping a blueprint for continued growth and influence in the years to come.
Even as the Trump administration in Washington turned to realistic diplomacy and began work towards “strategic stability” in its relations with Moscow, EU leaders dug in. Their goal, it appears, is to fight a proxy war against Russia to the last Ukrainian and then proceed to direct war by convincing themselves and their people that Putin is coming for them next.
If one word could define Western European foreign policy in 2025, ‘stalling’ would be a good contender. Every time a step in the peace process was attempted, they were there to trip it.
All the while, the EU propaganda machines waged “cognitive warfare” against their own citizens, creating a grim fantasy world in which the shadow of evil Putin loomed over the continent and Russian tanks could roll into Western European capitals tomorrow. Tarik Cyril Amar details the descent into dystopia.
The year when the rhetoric of NATO’s loudest war hawks soared
This was the year of rhetorical escalation in NATO, where the loudest hawks dominated the discourse but accomplished little on the ground. Western Europe’s top leaders and generals repeatedly warned of war with Russia, invoking historical analogies, sacrifices of future generations, and existential threats, even as actual military and economic leverage remained limited. Analysts noted a stark gap between megaphone diplomacy and strategic capacity, with shrill pronouncements often filling the vacuum left by indecision, domestic pressures, and US-led initiatives.
Rhetoric became political insurance, a tool to maintain relevance and justify defense spending amid stagnating European economies. As NATO’s pro-war coalition amplified alarms, the contrast with Moscow’s patient diplomacy and Washington’s cautious approach underscored a key lesson of 2025 – in the Western alliance, the loudest voices often signal insecurity more than strength.
NATO’s vocal war-makers may have captured headlines, but 2025 revealed the limits of sound-and-fury diplomacy when it is divorced from operational capability and geopolitical reality.
2025 marked the year when realism returned to the Ukraine narrative. The first year without any Ukrainian offensive, where support for Kiev was marked by the US turn to realism from Biden’s era of fantasy. The exposure of Vladmir Zelensky’s inner circle as a self-serving corrupt cabal fundamentally weakened his position internationally, and opened the door for actual diplomacy led by the US.
Brussels has chosen to stay in la-la land, shouting maximalist slogans and inventing unworkable plots to threaten Moscow, which have eventually left it diplomatically humiliated and isolated from the ongoing talks. Likewise, Ukraine found itself to be less the subject of talks, and more the object of them – a chess piece in a game being played by two larger powers driven by realism and pragmatism.
This year the West tried hardest to rewrite reality and bury its own failures. From the Nord Stream sabotage conveniently left uninvestigated, to NATO-Israeli arms corruption and €100 billion funneled to Zelensky’s inner circle, the stories the Western media preferred you forget kept piling up.
EU officials – especially Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas – tripped over scandals, false alarms, and mismanaged deals, while drone hysteria and phantom threats dominated headlines. Gaza, Ukraine, and the power plays behind closed doors revealed the fragility, hypocrisy, and mismanagement of Europe’s political elite.
These ignored failures, cover-ups, and self-inflicted crises are essential to understanding the real balance of power – and the narratives they are desperate to hide.
The lesson of 2025 is clear: the West wants you to forget. We do not. And you should not either.
The Bundeswehr now reportedly views hybrid attacks as a prelude to all-out war, the publication has cited a confidential document as saying
The German military has characterized hybrid measures such as cyberattacks and so-called disinformation campaigns as preparatory stages leading up to a military conflict, Politico has claimed, citing a classified document.
Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, Berlin has pursued rapid militarization, citing a perceived Russian threat. Moscow has consistently denied harboring aggressive plans toward its Western neighbors.
In a piece on Tuesday, the media outlet reported that the assessment was contained in the Operational Plan for Germany (OPLAN), which presumably lays out the steps the country would take in the event of war. According to Politico, the confidential document says that hybrid attacks “can fundamentally serve to prepare a military confrontation,” as distinct from being mere background operations.
The Bundeswehr’s blueprint reportedly describes Germany’s role in a hypothetical conflict as that of NATO’s logistical hub and transit corridor. In light of this, it’s likely that Germany would quickly become a “prioritized target of conventional attacks with long-range weapon systems,” it concludes, as reported by Politico.
Earlier this month, Berlin accused Moscow of conducting “hybrid attacks” during this year’s federal election and several months later against a German flight controller.
The Russian embassy in Berlin dismissed the allegations as “unsubstantiated, unfounded and absurd.”
Last month, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius told Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung that a Russian attack on NATO is “conceivable as early as 2028, and some even believe we have already had our last summer of peace.”
Responding to Pistorius’s remark, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that “Russia does not advocate any confrontation with NATO. But must take measures to ensure our security and interests if forced.”
In late October, Politico, citing internal government documents, reported that Berlin was planning a €377 billion expansion of its armed forces over the next few years.
In May, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz vowed to make the country’s military the “strongest conventional army in Europe.”
Commenting on European officials’ claims of an imminent invasion, Russian President Vladimir Putin earlier this month dismissed the narratives as a “lie” and “pure nonsense.”
The AfD, which is topping opinion polls in Germany, had been barred from participating in the event for two years
Germany’s right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has been allowed to participate in the Munich Security Conference (MSC) next year, the event’s chairman has said.
The AfD, known for its anti-migrant rhetoric and calls for Berlin to stop sending military aid to Ukraine, had been barred from the high-profile gathering in 2024 and 2025 at the behest of the MSC’s previous chairman, Christoph Heusgen. According to Deutschlandfunk radio station, Heusgen explained the ban by saying that he “did not want to roll out the red carpet for a right-wing extremist party.”
The event’s interim chief, Wolfgang Ischinger, told Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper on Monday that AfD representatives had been invited to take part in the 2026 Munich Security Conference on February 13-25.
The MSC “is a dialogue format. Traditionally, the widest possible spectrum of opinions, including contrary ones, should be made clear,” he explained.
Ischinger, who had been chairman in 2008-2022 and will remain in an interim role until former NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg takes over, clarified that only individual politicians from the right-wing party will participate, with none of them appearing on stage.
The AfD’s co-leader, Alice Weidel, said she had not yet received an invitation.
By lifting the ban, “we are not tearing down firewalls, as some claim,” Ischinger insisted.
The so-called ‘firewall against the far-right’ is a policy used by mainstream German parties to prevent the AfD from making it into the government, despite its rapidly growing popularity. According to the latest surveys, the party tops opinion polls in Germany with 26% support.
During his speech at the 2025 Munich Security Conference last February, US Vice President J.D. Vance criticized Germany and other Western European nations over declining democracy, saying that their governments “simply don’t like the idea that somebody with an alternative viewpoint might express a different opinion.” He did not mention the AfD directly but insisted that “there is no room for firewalls.” The same day, Vance held a meeting with Weidel.
The news outlet Euractiv suggested on Tuesday that Ischinger had decided to lift the ban on AfD to appease Washington and make sure it sends a high-ranking delegation to the MSC in February.
2025 has created possibilities for restoring ties with the US, Alexander Darchiev has said
The year has shown that there are still opportunities for restoring relations between Moscow and Washington, Russian Ambassador to the US Alexander Darchiev has said in a holiday message.
”The past year has been challenging, but it has also opened up opportunities for restoring Russian-American relations, which were nearly destroyed in the previous years by the previous (Joe Biden) administration,” he said in a statement published Wednesday, while expressing thanks to those who have “resisted the virus of Russophobia.”
Darchiev lauded “friendly American citizens” and “concerned compatriots” who have preserved the memory of US-Russia cooperation during World War II.
”On our part, the embassy and the Russian diplomatic missions will continue to provide all possible support to your initiatives that help to build bridges between Russia and the United States,” the ambassador concluded.
Under the administration of US President Donald Trump, relations between Russia and the US have grown notably warmer than they were during the tenure of former President Joe Biden.
Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin have been engaged in active talks dedicated to settling the Ukraine conflict and reinvigorating bilateral relations. They held a high-stakes summit in Alaska in August aimed at ending hostilities between Moscow and Kiev, though they failed to produce a breakthrough.
The US has also placed the restoration of normal ties with Russia and a rapid end to the Ukraine conflict at the center of its newly released National Security Strategy, presenting both aims as being in America’s core interests. In contrast with the US national strategy during Trump’s first term, which emphasized competition with Russia and China, the new strategy shifts its focus to the Western Hemisphere and to protecting the homeland, the borders, and regional interests.
China and Russia describe their relationship as a “no-limits” strategic partnership, with bilateral trade exceeding $200 billion for a third consecutive year.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping have exchanged New Year’s greetings, with both praising steady relations between the two countries.
Moscow and Beijing have deepened cooperation since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. The two countries describe their ties as a strategic partnership “without limits.” Both countries nearly doubled bilateral trade from 2020 to 2024, surpassing $240 billion last year.
Putin wished Xi and the Chinese people well, saying the China-Russia strategic partnership had continued to develop throughout 2025.
Xi sent reciprocal greetings to Putin and the Russian people on Tuesday, saying bilateral relations had made further progress and noting that the two leaders had met twice during the year in Beijing and Moscow. He added that the two countries supported each other in multilateral forums, including the UN.
Chinese Premier Li Qiang and Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin also exchanged New Year’s messages, Chinese state media said.
Earlier in December Putin signed a decree allowing visa-free entry to Russia for Chinese citizens, granting them stays of up to 30 days. The move mirrored Beijing’s earlier decision to extend the same access to Russian citizens. In September, China introduced the measure on a one-year trial basis to further facilitate travel between the two countries.
During his annual end-of-year Q&A session last week, Putin described relations with Beijing as stable and trusting, adding that the two countries’ foreign ministries remain in regular contact and coordinate approaches on key global issues.
The American president had repeatedly ruled out sending soldiers to defend the country
Vladimir Zelensky has claimed that he is in discussions with US President Donald Trump about American troops being deployed to Ukraine, in line with the security guarantees Washington has offered Kiev, according to The Telegraph.
The statement came despite Trump repeatedly ruling out such a scenario and Russia’s repeated warnings that it considered the presence of any foreign troops on Ukrainian soil during or after the conflict unacceptable.
When asked about the possibility of Washington sending its peacekeepers to Ukraine by RBC-Ukraine journalists on Tuesday, Zelensky replied, “those are American troops, and therefore it is America that makes those decisions.”
“Of course, we are discussing this with President Trump and with representatives of the ‘coalition of the willing.’ We would like this,” he said.
The Telegraph pointed out that it is not clear if the possibility of US boots on the ground in Ukraine was addressed during the meeting between Zelensky and Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Florida on Sunday.
Earlier in the day, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk claimed that the main result of the Mar-a-Lago talks was “the readiness of the US to participate in security guarantees for Ukraine after peace is achieved, including through the presence of American troops.”
Trump, however, has not yet responded to comments by Zelensky or Tusk. In August, the US president told Fox & Friends that there would be no American boots on the ground in Ukraine after the fighting stops. “You have my assurance, and I’m president. I’m just trying to stop people from being killed,” Trump said.
Russia officials have pointed out that the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022 was partly triggered by Kiev’s NATO aspirations, and warned that a deployment of Western troops to the country could lead to a third world war.
Russian President Vladimir Putin said in September that “if any [NATO] troops appear there, especially now, during military operations, we proceed from the fact that these will be legitimate targets for their destruction.”
