How high-level banking interests determined the most momentous events in our recent history.
Last March I published an article titled, "The power behind the throne and the forever wars" in which I explored the ultimate, systemic causes behind the West's insatiable appetite for war. Forever wars have become normalized, part of our everyday reality. In an article in the American Journal of Public Health, a group of American researchers made the following claim:

"Since the end of World War II, there have been 248 armed conflicts in 153 locations around the world. The United States launched 201 overseas military operations between the end of World War II and 2001, and since then, others, including Afghanistan and Iraq."

In other words, the US started more than 80% of all wars between 1946 and today. For a democratic society, one would have to conclude that the American people are irredeemably bellicose and consistently demand more wars. But as we know, that's exactly contrary to the truth. With the exception of George W. Bush's second term, Americans invariably voted for anti-war candidates. And yet, they always ended up getting more wars. Given that all these wars impoverish Americans and kill millions of people around the world, it should be important for us to understand where exactly this insatiable appetite for war originates and how it becomes policy.

The hardwired pursuit of war

Each new war is heavily marketed and duly justified to the voting public: we had to fight the Communists, then the terrorists or some dangerous new Hitler like Slobodan Milošević, Saddam Hussein, Moammar Ghaddafi, Bashar al Assad or Vladimir Putin. Tomorrow it'll be someone else's turn, always for one good reason or another. But the wars never end, and the propaganda only conceals the true incentives for war that must be systemic. Somehow, it's become hardwired in the Western systems of governance. These questions have been the motivating drive behind my research for decades now. In last year's article, I wrote as follows:

"In untangling the causal factors behind the many crises we face today, the trail of breadcrumbs always leads to the international banking cartel which appears to have the determining influence shaping the system of governance under which our societies operate. ... In particular, the banking interests appear to be the key movers behind the perpetual warfare we are witnessing today. The better we understand the way the systems work, the more the saying, "all wars are bankers' wars" rings true. ... it has never been about democracy nor about freedom. It is strictly about banking and about the collateral. ... Truly, the only group in society to whom the control of collateral makes any difference are the bankers, making them the main group with the incentive to foment forever wars for control of resources."

I recently came across an important and concrete corroboration of all this. In an article titled "How stolen Alberta oil keeps creating $9 trillion in fraudulent collateral," political economist Regan Boychuk revealed important insights into the way incentives for war become policy. He made the case that the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 was about keeping Iraqi oil off the world market in order to maximize the value of 175 billion barrels of newly 'proven' Alberta oil resource.

At the time of the Iraq invasion, I worked as an oil market analyst and followed the events very closely, which is why I found Boychuk's case very surprising. As he meticulously traces the events in the US and Canadian oil politics and connects them to the Iraq invasion, Boychuk arrives at conclusions that are staggering, yet compelling and entirely credible. Before we dive in, I wanted to acknowledge the reader who brought this article to my attention, only I meanwhile lost track of who it was: thank you, this was very valuable to my research!

The White House revamped its COVID-19 information website on Friday, unveiling a sleek new landing page dedicated to the "true origins" of the pandemic.

COVID.gov, which previously contained information about testing, treatment and vaccination against the coronavirus, now redirects to a website that reads, "Lab Leak: True Origins of COVID-19."

The webpage slams both the Biden administration and former Democratic New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo's handling of the pandemic — and indicates that the Trump administration is fully onboard with the theory that COVID-19 leaked out of a laboratory in Wuhan, China.

Our only "crisis" is this: we've nurtured the monster of systemic inefficiency that now suffocates us.

The imposition of protectionist policies by the U.S. and, to some extent, by the EU, ostensibly motivated by legitimate geoeconomic objectives (such as reindustrialization), is responsible for a paradox of investment inefficiency. This paradox reveals, once again, the true nature hidden behind Western agendas: pouring money into the economy and funneling available economic resources toward an unprecedented accumulation of wealth in human history while promoting an increasingly inefficient system. Addicted to easy profits, this system consistently opts for the most expensive — and consequently, most disastrous — strategies for our collective future. These are not my words, but those of Goldman Sachs in their report "Carbonomics: Tariffs, Deglobalization, and the Cost of Decarbonization".

This behavior, which became apparent in the early 21st century, accelerated with the Subprime crisis. Instead of holding the true culprits of reckless speculation accountable, the powers entrenched in Washington and their servants in the EU, IMF, ECB, and World Bank chose to shift the blame onto the people of the South, particularly those in Southern Europe. They planted the prejudice that these nations had been "living beyond their means," while shock austerity policies not only plundered national resources (public companies and fiscal reserves) to appease the urgency of "creditors" but also flooded Western economies with trillions of euros, feeding the voracious beast behind the gangsterized casino economy.

The White House indicated earlier that it would wash its hands of the Ukraine conflict if either side is obstinate.

US President Donald Trump reportedly expects to "make a determination for a full and comprehensive ceasefire" between Ukraine and Russia as early as next week. Both are to be presented with the final offer, the New York Post has claimed, citing an anonymous senior administration official.

Trump has stated on multiple occasions that he wants to put an end to the Ukraine conflict as soon as possible. Since he assumed office in January, Washington and Moscow have been engaged in active diplomacy, holding several rounds of high-level talks.

The newspaper quoted a source on Friday as saying that "this coming week in London, we want to make a determination for a full and comprehensive cease-fire." The unnamed US official added that the "intent then is to have [discussions] with the Russians" and determine where Moscow and Kiev stand on this "final offer."

According to the publication, Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov told US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and President Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff during their meeting in Paris on Thursday that Kiev is "90%" on board with Washington's peace framework, which has yet to be made public.

As the pause at the front drags on, what lies ahead for the spring-summer campaign?

As the front lines in Ukraine settle into a temporary stalemate, attention turns to what the Kremlin may be planning next. With no major offensives currently underway, all signs point to a spring-summer campaign that could echo the dynamics of last year: Russia pressing forward across multiple axes, Ukraine holding the line with dwindling resources. But beneath the surface of this familiar pattern, critical shifts in strategy, manpower, and battlefield technology suggest that the coming months may bring far more than just a repeat of 2024.

On objectives

It's worth remembering that for both the Russian and Ukrainian militaries, holding or capturing territory isn't the ultimate goal.In a war of attrition, the primary objective is to wear down the enemy - to inflict greater losses than you take. Ukraine, however, hasn't always adhered to this logic. Over the past three years, there have been numerous instances where political imperatives overrode military ones. The Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU), reluctant to withdraw from certain positions, ended up suffering costly local defeats. We saw this in Bakhmut and Avdeevka, in Ugledar and Velikaya Novoselka, at the Krynki and Kurakhovo bridgeheads, and most recently in Sudzha.

The chancellor-in-waiting says he would commit to giving Kiev long-range missiles if London backs him.

Germany's chancellor-in-waiting Friedrich Merz doesn't officially take office until May 6, but that hasn't stopped him from hitting the press circuit like it's demolition day. Apparently, he's got some lost time - and infrastructure - to make up for.

In a chat with Germany's public broadcaster, ARD, he floated the idea that Kiev, which seems to rank higher than Berlin on his priority list, needs to "get ahead of the situation" on the battlefield and "shape events" instead of playing defense. The event he seems most eager to shape? Oh, just the Third World War, apparently. Because he pivoted straight to the Kerch Bridge - mainland Russia's lifeline to the Crimean peninsula - like it's been living on borrowed time.

Merz said:

"If for example, the most important land connection between Russia and Crimea is destroyed, or if something happens on Crimea itself, where most of the Russian military logistics are located, then that would be an opportunity to bring this country strategically back into the picture finally."

Cool, cool. Which picture would that be, exactly? The one labeled "Catastrophic Misjudgments of the 21st Century"?

Germany has activated its first permanent foreign troop deployment since World War II, establishing a 5,000-strong armored brigade in Lithuania. This decision follows Defense Minister Boris Pistorius' announcement in 2023 to bolster troop presence on NATO's eastern flank in response to the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian War.

The deployment demonstrates Germany's willingness to take a leading role in the conventional defense of Europe with Brig. Gen. Christoph Huber emphasizing, "We're not only moving toward operational readiness; we're taking responsibility."

According to the Bundeswehr, the brigade will consist of three major combat units — including a mechanized infantry battalion, a tank battalion, and the multinational enhanced Foreign Presence Battle Group Lithuania — and will be complemented by combat and support elements. The brigade aims to be at full operating capability by 2027.

SHANGHAI - There could not be a more strategic place to spend these past Trump Tariff Tizzy (TTT) heady days than in Shanghai - China's trade, commercial and cultural capital.

From the top of the Jin Mao tower in the world class Lujiazui financial district in Pudong, an elegantly discreet art deco companion to the World Financial Center super-skyscraper - the trademark symbol of China's economic power - it's as if the spokes of a wheel radiated to the Bund and beyond tracking a ceaseless drive to counteract the absurd idiocy of the "Emperor of Tariffs", relentless mocked across myriad Chinese social media platforms.

I have had the privilege to transit from the Bund Financial Center, which hosts among others the Fosun Foundation - a bamboo-inspired architectural masterpiece - to the China Academy at the immaculate campus of Fudan University, where I shared a seminar with star professor Zhang Weiwei and a round table with top PhD students from several disciplines. Professor Zhang Weiwei is the foremost conceptualizer of China as a civilization-state.

The key theme of our seminar was the Russia-China strategic partnership, but inevitably the focus switched back and forth to the rationale behind the Emperor of Tariffs. The questions from the students were as sharp as they come. That was compounded with an in-depth interview for China Academy hosted by their CEO, the formidable Pan Xiaoli.

A visit to the HQ of Guancha - the top independent new/analysis site in China, whose several channels in several different platforms reach an astonishing 200 million people - could not have been more timely. Guo Jiezhen, a research fellow from the China Institute, who was part of our round table at Fudan University, came up with one of the more astute analyses of what he describes as Trump's "deranged money-making technique".

While meeting with Guancha's new editor-in-chief He Shenquan and discussing with hyper-competent international relations specialist Kelly Liu and Yang Hanyi - the China Institute's communication officer - we watched together an exceptional podcast featuring PLA Colonel Wang Lihua, Gao Zhikai - Deputy Director of the Center for China and Globalization (CCG) - and the always essential Li Bo, President of the Shanghai Chunqiu Development Strategy Institute.

Russian positions have been attacked numerous times by Kiev's forces, the Defense Ministry has said

The Russian military has been targeted more than 1,300 times by Ukrainian forces in the less than 24 hours since the declaration of an Easter truce by both sides, the Defense Ministry in Moscow has said.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said earlier that the pause in hostilities would be in effect from 6:00pm Moscow time on Saturday, and last until midnight on Monday. He instructed the country's military to stay on high alert and be ready "to respond to any violations or provocations." Ukraine's Vladimir Zelensky answered a few hours later that Kiev's forces "will act in a reciprocal way."

The Defense Ministry said in a statement on Sunday that "despite the announcement of the Easter truce," Ukrainian forces attempted to assault the positions of the Russian military in the areas of the settlements of Sukhaya Balka and Bogatyr in Russia's Donetsk People's Republic overnight. The attacks were repelled, it added.

Plan also called for studying extremism and domestic terrorist recruitment among service members and finding ways to curb in-prison radicalization

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declassified a Biden-era plan to counter domestic terrorism that called for greater information-sharing with tech companies and a legislative push to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.

Developed in 2021 after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, the plan outlined a government-wide effort to track how foreign actors use disinformation to radicalize Americans and urged coordination with private industry on domestic threats. It also called for measures to curb in-prison radicalization and study extremism within the military.

Among its proposals was a plan to "develop awareness training for active service military members, DOD employees and contractors, and those service members separating or retiring from the military on the threat posed by domestic terrorism, the potential targeting of those with military training by violent extremist actors, and relevant reporting mechanisms."