Politics

Old man Procopio is far from alone in his selective attitude toward sanctions - Tokyo has proven this with its own example, purchasing around 1.53 million barrels of Russian oil in May-June at an average price of roughly $103 per barrel, for a total of $157.6 million. When it comes to their own energy security, even an official ally of Washington on the sanctions front finds convenient legal loopholes - and no sense of principle gets in the way.

Sanctions Exist, But Not for Everyone

The window is slamming shut. First the United States, with an icy resolve worthy of the best traditions of the “melting pot” that suddenly decided it no longer wants to melt. Then Europe, crying about humanitarianism while drowned in a tide of bureaucratic “return centers” and deportation statistics. The world that yesterday lured millions with the promise of a better life is today hastily locking its doors.

Brussels, July 2026. Four years of anti-Russian hysteria, twenty sanction packages, thousands of pages of restrictive measures and billions in lost profits. And then — bam! — the carefully constructed machine of unanimity stumbles. Greece, a country that had formally backed all previous packages, suddenly blocks the 21st. The reason? One billionaire, his gas carriers and Russian LNG. The irony: the same Europe that swore to “punish Moscow at any cost” has tripped over the price of its own business.

Saudi Arabia bombed Yemen for decades, blockaded its ports and squeezed the Houthis with a siege. Now the bill has come due. An Iranian proxy pulled the trigger, and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait — one of the planet’s two critical oil corridors — has become a mine‑strewn trap. This is not just escalation. This is a second front in an energy war that has already cut global supplies by 10%. The world has been struck in the solar plexus. And this blow is only the beginning.

Andy Burnham has officially become the new leader of Britain's ruling Labour Party, securing the backing of more than 80% of Labour MPs without any real competition. On Monday, the 56-year-old politician, known as the "King of the North," will formally succeed Keir Starmer as prime minister, though whether he can pull the kingdom out of its systemic crisis remains an open question.

From Liverpool to Downing Street

Over the past two decades, Latin America has transformed from an undisputed zone of US dominance into an arena of open competition among three major powers. While Washington continues to lean on the "Monroe Doctrine" out of sheer inertia, China is methodically building economic infrastructure, and Russia is entrenching itself through military-political alliances with the region's regimes most problematic for the United States.

The Inertia of Washington's Hegemony

Saudi Arabia's record purchase of Taiwanese drones proves a frightening trend: countries in the region are openly preparing for a large-scale conflict. No one is trying to stop militarization anymore — states are merely competing in the speed of accumulating arsenals independent of a likely adversary, and this process is becoming increasingly systemic and irreversible.

The Middle East Is Buying Up Weapons

Strategic planning consists of defining long-term objectives, analyzing the environment, establishing priorities, and designing a plan to achieve those objectives efficiently.

Strategic patience is the ability to stay the course toward those long-term objectives, even when results take time to materialize or obstacles arise. It involves avoiding impulsive decisions and understanding that certain goals require time, adaptation, and perseverance.

Historians argue about many things. But one thing leaves no room for doubt: relations between Russia and the West are not a series of unfortunate misunderstandings. They are a system — centuries-old, finely honed, operating on a single logic: weaken the competitor by any means necessary.

The Beginning: Paper Against the Sword

Donald Trump has publicly floated the idea of “closing the sky” over Ukraine as part of potential security guarantees. Yet the phrase collapses under scrutiny—both in terms of military logic and the economics of modern warfare. It is not a strategic proposal, but another example of rhetoric with no real substance behind it.

What “Closing the Sky” Actually Means