Image is sourced from this Economist article.

Most of the information in this preamble is from the Cradle; notably here, here, here, and here.


The features of an effective American war (proxy or otherwise) is that it is a) against opponents with much less military power than you; b) with very low American losses; c) with victories you can visibly show off from time to time to justify involvement, and d) with a profit margin beyond merely giving money to military corporations. The war against Yemen was none of those; airplanes tumbled off aircraft carriers, and the navy complained of the hardest fighting conditions in decades. Conquering Yemen for its resources was inconceivable given the terrain, lack of good intelligence, and the strength of Ansarallah, and all that seemed to be visibly harmed were empty patches of desert and civilians.

Apparently, the ceasefire last month merely stipulated that they stop attacking merchant vessels in the Red Sea; it said nothing about attacking Israel. Therefore, Yemen is absolutely free to create a new blockade of Israel by just striking their airports and seaports, and all Israel can seem to do is try and bomb them in retaliation, a futile strategy which has failed to produce a military or political change in Yemen for the last decade when many other countries have tried it. And if America directly attacks them in response to attacks on Israel, the ceasefire is off, and expensive equipment will continue to be lost.

Across the strait from Yemen is an interesting array of countries. Egypt’s position in this war is well-known, and Somalia is under a kind of US occupation under the guise of fighting terrorism (Trump withdrew most troops, but they were then sent back under Biden). The other three are Sudan, Djibouti, and Eritrea. All three are increasingly being drawn into the anti-imperialist camp, as they cooperate with Iran, Russia, and/or China. Sudan is undergoing a civil war, but the rebels fighting the government are famously backed by the UAE. Djibouti has refused to allow themselves to be a launchpad for US strikes on Yemen.

Eritrea has a fascinating history of flip-flopping between West and East over the past few decades, but has, since 2020, sided with the East. It was one of the five countries to oppose the 2022 UN resolution condemning Russia’s war with Ukraine. Eritrea sends two thirds of its exports to China, and Iran has reportedly supplied them with military equipment. If a stronger link could be reforged, then Iran would have significantly less trouble sending military technology to Ansarallah, and to other friendly groups throughout the region.

Naturally, the lidless eye of the imperial core is shifting its gaze onto Eritrea. Meanwhile, Ethiopia - a country that has experienced frequent conflict with Eritrea - is part of BRICS+ and their economy is increasingly reliant on China (as is most countries’ economies nowadays). If a permanent resolution between the two could be created, it would be a victory for themselves and the Resistance, and a defeat for America, which thrives on conflict and destabilization.


Last week’s thread is here. The Imperialism Reading Group is here.

Please check out the RedAtlas!

The bulletins site is here. Currently not used.
The RSS feed is here. Also currently not used.

Israel-Palestine Conflict

If you have evidence of Israeli crimes and atrocities that you wish to preserve, there is a thread here in which to do so.

Sources on the fighting in Palestine against Israel. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:

UNRWA reports on Israel’s destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.

English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news.
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.

English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.

Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict

Sources:

Defense Politics Asia’s youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don’t want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it’s just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists’ side.

Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.

Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:

Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.

https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR’s former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR’s forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster’s telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a ‘propaganda tax’, if you don’t believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.

Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:

Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.


  • QuillcrestFalconer [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    57 minutes ago

    he-admit-it

    Absolutely unreal.

    Right in front of the German chancellor Trump claims credit for ending Nord Stream 2, and suggests part of the calculus was to replace Russia as Germany’s gas supplier: nitter.poast.org/MyLordBebo/status/1930…

    “I’m the one who ended Nord Stream 2, going to a place called Germany, come to think of it. I’m sorry I did that. I ended Nord Stream 2, nobody else did. And then when Biden came in he immediately approved it… And by the way we have so much oil and gas you will not be able to buy it all.”

    You quite literally have the American president claiming credit for the largest act of sabotage of Europe’s strategic infrastructure since WW2, and you can bet 100% it won’t even be a story in EU media.

    https://xcancel.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1930853215010251184

  • Russian forces liberated another seven settlements this week (three in the Donetsk People’s Republic and four in Sumy oblast): https://tass.com/politics/1969869

    Plus, some recent combat footage for the weekend.

    Another collection of Russian drone strikes on Kiev regime military equipment and positions: https://s5.cdnstatic.space/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/strikes.mp4?_=2

    A Russian Iskander missile strike destroyed a German-built IRIS-T system’s launcher and radar: https://news-pravda.com/ukraine/2025/06/04/1394661.html

    Ukrainian anti-fascist partisans burned another Kiev regime military vehicle in Kharkov oblast: https://odysee.com/@Support4Z:b/📽️-A-🇬🇧-🇫🇷,--Our-Partisans-Brothers-burned-another-vehicle:b

  • hellinkilla [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I don’t follow international affairs stuff much closely and I’m for sure not a tactics and battles type of nerd. I don’t really get the whole concept.

    On the mainstream news I am always hearing that Russia has killed 10 or 20 people by bombing Ukraine.

    I don’t mean to sound heartless about deaths of anyone but is that the best they can do? Or are they slow walking the whole situation? Why haven’t they decisively won yet, or else given up? Can’t they capture or kill the top guys or take their families ransom or something?

  • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    The Economist now considers Xi the most powerful man on earth.

    https://archive.is/0W3ut

    How an agonising relationship with his dad shaped Xi Jinping

    The most powerful man on Earth had a grim childhood

    Full article

    BY THE TIME Xi Zhongxun was in his 70s, his teeth were failing him. Tough, chewy foods were a challenge so, during one family meal, he extracted some half-masticated garlic ribs from his mouth and gave them to his son to finish. Xi Jinping—by then in his mid-30s and a rising star in the Chinese Communist Party—accepted the morsel without hesitation or complaint. He took the remains of the ribs and swallowed them.

    Mr Xi was used to leftovers. As a boy, he would wash in his father’s bathwater. (The next morning the water would be used for a third time, to launder the family’s clothes.) He also understood the importance of deference, for Xi Zhongxun had taught him that children who did not respect their parents were doomed to fail as adults. Every lunar new year, Mr Xi would perform the traditional kowtow ritual, prostrating himself before his parent in a display of reverence. If his technique was off, his father would beat him.

    These stories are recounted in “The Party’s Interests Come First”, a biography of Xi Zhongxun by Joseph Torigian, an American scholar. Mr Torigian draws on a decade of research using Chinese, English and Russian sources, including official documents, newspapers, diaries and interviews. The book is valuable not only for its portrait of its subject—who was a major figure in the party’s history in his own right—but also for its insights into his progeny, now the supreme leader.

    As China’s unquestioned ruler, possibly for life, Mr Xi is arguably the most important person in the world. He will be wielding power long after Donald Trump has retired to Mar-a-Lago. Yet information about him is paltry. His every movement is choreographed by a fawning propaganda machine; in the accounts of his life, interesting details are expunged by overbearing censors. There are only a handful of ways to understand Mr Xi, which involve poring over party records or leaked speeches, learning about key moments in Chinese history that he lived through and studying the people who most influenced him. Few people have shaped Mr Xi more than his father. Xi Zhongxun’s relationship to the party and his thwarted ambitions offer clues as to what his son wants for China.

    Like many of his generation, Xi Zhongxun’s life was marked by tragedy. Born in 1913 into a family of peasants, he was an ardent believer in communism from a young age. His belief strengthened in his adolescent years, he said, as he witnessed “the tragic mistreatment of the labouring people”. He took part in violent student protests in 1928 and was imprisoned by the then anti-communist authorities. Xi Zhongxun’s parents died when he was a teenager: the result, he thought, of the stress caused by his jailing. Two of his sisters died of hunger.

    After the civil war, Xi Zhongxun rose fast through the party’s ranks and “entered the very top echelon of the government”, Mr Torigian writes. Then, in 1962, he was purged by Mao Zedong for supporting the publication of a novel Mao considered subversive. Four years later, China’s paranoid dictator launched the Cultural Revolution, unleashing frenzied gangs who killed between 500,000 and 2m people and displaced many more. Xi Zhongxun was kidnapped, held in solitary confinement and tortured. Around 20,000 people were targeted for having supported Xi Zhongxun, the author estimates, and at least 200 “were beaten to death, driven mad or seriously injured”.

    His family suffered, too. They were forced to denounce Xi Zhongxun; one of his daughters committed suicide. A teenager at the time, Mr Xi was branded a “capitalist roader” (ie, a traitor) because of his father’s disgrace. On one occasion the young Mr Xi was forced to wear a heavy steel cap and subjected to public humiliation. A crowd ridiculed him, shouting slogans including “Down with Xi Jinping.” His mother joined in the jeering.

    Mr Xi was thrown in prison, where he slept on an icy floor during the winter. “My entire body was covered in lice,” he wrote. One time, Mr Xi managed to escape and make his way home. He begged his mother for some food. Not only did she refuse, she also reported him to the authorities, fearful that she would be arrested otherwise. Crying, Mr Xi ran out into the rain.

    What doesn’t kill you

    The anguish did not stop there. In 1969, aged 15, Mr Xi was “sent down” to the countryside with millions of other young people exiled from the cities. He lived in a cave in a desolate part of the country, where girls were sold into marriage for a dowry calculated by their weight. “Even if you do not understand, you are forced to understand,” he later recalled of that time. “It forces you to mature earlier.”

    Why did both men stay committed to a party that had caused them so much pain? Mr Torigian suggests the answer may lie in “What Is to Be Done?”, a novel of 1863 by Nikolai Chernyshevsky, a Russian journalist. In the story a young man named Rakhme sleeps on a bed of nails to strengthen his will. Mr Xi imagined that he was Rakhme as he endured those cold floors, lice, rainstorms and blizzards. Both father and son may have been influenced by a Bolshevik political culture that glamorised “forging”—the idea that suffering strengthens your willpower and dedication to the cause.

    Throughout his life, Mr Xi has been loyal to two groups that demand absolute obedience: the family and the party. Both were often “unfairly” strict, Mr Xi has said, yet this did not dent his loyalty. Mr Torigian shows how Mr Xi balances dedication and realism. “If I were born in the United States, I would not join the Communist Party of the United States. I would join the Democratic Party or Republican Party,” Mr Xi once told Abe Shinzo, Japan’s prime minister at the time. Abe concluded that Mr Xi joined the party not because of ideology, but as a way to gain power.

    After Xi Zhongxun was rehabilitated under Deng Xiaoping in the late 1970s, he was put in charge of Guangdong province and began to liberalise the local economy. When Mr Xi became general secretary of the party in 2012—the top job in China—many expected him to be an economic reformer like his father. But the assumption that Mr Xi was any kind of liberal was wrong: he is not interested in creating an open and free country. He believes in restoring China’s greatness and thinks that, to this end, the party should use any means necessary. His experience of injustice has not taught him that arbitrary power is undesirable; only that it should be wielded less chaotically than it was under Mao, by someone wise like himself.

    In a little over a decade, Mr Xi has become the most autocratic Chinese leader since Mao. His regime ruthlessly represses dissidents at home and activists abroad; it enforces a stifling political conformity, forcing many to study “Xi Jinping Thought”. Such methods are justified, he thinks, because he sees himself as a man of destiny, with a duty to generations past and future. He often speaks of himself as a protector of Chinese civilisation. “Whoever throws away those things left behind by our ancestors is a traitor,” he told Ma Ying-jeou, a former president of Taiwan.

    That attitude is apparent in Mr Xi’s Taiwan policy, which bears his father’s influence. Towards the end of his career, Xi Zhongxun was put in charge of unification with Taiwan. The party had ambitious dreams of reclaiming the island, which has been self-governing since China’s civil war ended in 1949 and the losing side, the Kuomintang (Nationalist Party), retreated there. But Xi Zhongxun died in 2002 with this aspiration unfulfilled.

    His son yearns to fulfil it. Mr Xi has made it plain he wants to take back Taiwan. Those who rule China must remember that “The territory left by the ancestors must not shrink,” he said in 2012. When or how he may try to seize Taiwan—through war, a blockade or other means—is unclear.

    What is clear, though, is that his family’s suffering has shaped Mr Xi’s dark view of politics. “For people who rarely encounter power and who are distant from it, they always see these things as very mysterious and fresh,” Mr Xi once said. “But what I saw was more than the surface of things. I didn’t just see the power, flowers, glory and applause. I also saw the cowsheds [where people were confined during the Cultural Revolution] and the fickleness of the world.” Mr Xi’s formative years made him clear-eyed and cynical, hardened and imperious. The worldview he learned from his father will affect not only 1.4bn Chinese people, but the whole of humanity. ■

    I’m particularly fond of that last line

    The worldview he learned from his father will affect not only 1.4bn Chinese people, but the whole of humanity.

  • Redcuban1959 [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Before his death, Pope Francis donated the popemobile to be turned into a mobile clinic to help Palestinian children in Gaza. Israel won’t even let that enter Gaza.

    • Telegram
  • Redcuban1959 [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    10 hours ago

    South Korea: Lee Jae-myung officially took office as the country’s new president, following his victory in a snap election triggered by the impeachment of former President Yoon Suk-yeo. President Lee Jae-myung nominated Kim Min-seok, a veteran lawmaker from the Democratic Party, as his candidate for Prime Minister.

    • Telesur
  • companero [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Pro-Russians are very upset about last night’s disproportionately small response to Ukraine’s provocations. Normally I could see where they’re coming from, but now it’s a bit different.

    Andrey Belousov’s appointment as Russia’s Minister of Defense one year ago marked a turning point in the war. The media constantly asserted that, since his background was that of a technocrat economist, his task would be to optimize the rate of attrition, ensuring that Russia would prevail in the end, after many more years of the meat grinder. Well, they’re not too far off, but there is some nuance.

    Bakhmut and Krynky were the peak of attrition warfare in this conflict. Since then, both sides have adapted to reduce losses while still accomplishing their goals. Kursk was likely Ukraine’s last big hurrah of wasting their own resources. Now they flexibly hold lines with the bare minimum number of troops, while Russia slowly chips away with motorcycle attacks. Neither side suffers noteworthy attrition anymore.

    Okay, so if Russia continues to steadily capture territory, why not just keep this going until Ukraine vanishes from the map? Well, Ukraine and the West recognize that it’s a losing prospect for them, and they are not bound by international law. Now we see suicide bombings, terror attacks on trains, and so on, while the world turns a blind eye. It’s going to get worse the longer this goes on. What happens if they start making or “acquiring” dirty bombs?

    So what option does that leave Russia? Well… to end the war. One way or the other. Putin is graciously offering a final chance for a reasonable peace deal. Trump genuinely wants out so he can focus on other things, and of course, the Pivot to Asia. But he will need to pressure Ukraine to accept the deal, and it’s unclear if he will.

    If negotiations fail to achieve peace before a certain deadline, overwhelming military force must be used to eliminate the threat, permanently. No “hostile rump state, armed to the teeth” will be allowed to persist. It will be a combination of massive annexations and regime change. Russia has been preparing for this scenario at least since Belousov’s appointment. His task was to keep up the pressure while building an entire new army on the side, complete with the best equipment and fresh, motivated soldiers. There are various articles from Western sources noting how Russia has been stockpiling equipment, most notably modern tanks and missiles, and don’t forget Russia’s enormous military recruitment campaign.

    All this to say: tit-for-tat strikes don’t really matter anymore. This is the endgame. If you want huge missile strikes, probably just wait a few months.

  • cinnaa42 [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    Three security incidents in Gaza this morning, including one in which at least 6 IOF were killed. The most recent is described by Hebrew sources as “extremely serious”.

  • grandepequeno [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    New Musk tweet:

    Is it time to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80% in the middle?

    Would he himself do it and if so would it actually break the 2 party system this time like Reform (but less successful)? Obviously you can’t expect Mr “big things coming” to follow through on anything though.

    Competitive 3 way races where democrats get 3rd place are probably easier for a socialist party to surpass them though.

  • vegeta1 [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    17 hours ago

    The funny part is the amount of power they gave doge with all the databases they access makes them a national security risk i-cant