Migration – Strategic Culture Foundation

El Parlamento Europeo se empieza a quitar la venda de los ojos en materia migratoria

A A — Mon, 16 Feb 2026 16:01:21 +0000

El Parlamento Europeo ha aprobado definitivamente las enmiendas al reglamento sobre procedimientos de asilo, estableciendo una lista común de países de origen seguros y reforzando el concepto de terceros países seguros.

Únete a nosotros en Telegram , Twitter y VK .

Escríbenos: info@strategic-culture.su

Con 408 votos a favor de la lista de la UE y 396 a favor del nuevo marco relativo a terceros países, el Parlamento aprobó una revisión que agiliza los procedimientos y amplía las posibilidades de repatriación.

La nueva lista incluye a Bangladés, Colombia, Egipto, Kosovo, India, Marruecos y Túnez. Para los ciudadanos de estos países, las solicitudes de asilo podrán tramitarse mediante un procedimiento acelerado, a menos que el solicitante demuestre un riesgo personal concreto.

Los países candidatos a la adhesión a la UE también se considerarán seguros, con ciertas excepciones relacionadas con conflictos armados o tasas de reconocimiento superiores al 20 %.

Al mismo tiempo, se refuerza el concepto de tercer país seguro: un Estado miembro puede declarar inadmisible una solicitud de protección si el solicitante tiene una conexión con un tercer país considerado seguro, ha transitado por él o se beneficia de un acuerdo para tramitar su solicitud fuera de la UE. Un recurso no suspenderá automáticamente la repatriación. Este es un avance significativo para el sistema europeo de asilo.

Políticamente, esta votación marca un cambio significativo. El Partido Popular Europeo (PPE) logró la mayoría al aliarse con grupos de derecha (ECR, PfE y ESN), replicando así un patrón observado en otros temas. Aunque todavía no existe una mayoría estructural alternativa, la atención se ha desplazado. La cuestión migratoria ya no es el monopolio retórico de las fuerzas soberanistas; ahora está en el centro de la toma de decisiones europea.

En los últimos meses, la proporción de votos decisivos emitidos por grupos de derecha ha aumentado considerablemente. No se trata de una revolución institucional, sino de una normalización política. El PPE no rompe con el centro, pero ya no aísla a la derecha en cuestiones de control fronterizo, repatriación y procedimientos acelerados.

La adopción del Tratado de Estrasburgo no resuelve automáticamente la crisis migratoria europea, pero marca un punto de inflexión decisivo.

Durante años, el debate estuvo paralizado por un doble impasse: por un lado, la idea de que todo era inevitable; por otro, la convicción de que cualquier cambio de rumbo era jurídicamente imposible o moralmente inaceptable.

Hoy, este marco se está resquebrajando. La Unión reconoce la existencia de países de origen seguros, la posibilidad de acelerar la tramitación de las solicitudes de asilo y la mejora de la eficiencia de los retornos.

A partir de ahora, la cuestión ya no es si Europa dispone de las herramientas, sino quién tendrá la determinación de utilizarlas. Es en esta línea divisoria (entre la responsabilidad y la inacción, entre revertir el flujo migratorio y gestionarlo pasivamente) donde se medirá el destino político, demográfico y económico del continente.

Publicado originalmente por Geopolítica rugiente

Will Democrats help Trump defuse mass protests over ICE killings?

A A — Wed, 28 Jan 2026 11:47:34 +0000

The mass protests in Minneapolis against Trump’s immigration crackdown have the potential to spark a nationwide revolt.

Join us on Telegram , Twitter, and VK .

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The mass protests in Minneapolis against Trump’s immigration crackdown have the potential to spark a nationwide revolt. Protesters are calling for a national general strike.

The proximate cause of public anger is the lethal violence of federal police raids against immigrants. But that abuse has broadened to trigger a wider range of popular anger with and repudiation of the Trump administration’s increasingly dictatorial conduct.

Two American citizens have now been gunned down in the street by agents of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Patrol. Videos have shown masked agents manhandling peaceful protesters, ramming doors of homes armed with assault rifles and without warrants, and snatching families into detention centers.

Scenes across U.S. cities now resemble how American troops kicked down doors in Afghanistan, Iraq, and numerous other foreign places.

Video footage proves that senior Trump administration officials have been telling barefaced lies to justify the brutal violence and violation of basic human rights.

The latest victim was Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old U.S. citizen and intensive care nurse, who was shot in the back as he was pinned to the ground by a group of border patrol agents. Pretti was a licensed gun holder whose pistol was removed from his waistband by the agents, who then shot him 10 times at point-blank range in the back. It was a public lynching.

Kristi Noem, Secretary at the Department of Homeland Security, called Pretti a “domestic terrorist” who “brandished a semi-automatic weapon” at officers. Stephen Miller, Trump’s deputy chief of staff, claimed the nurse was intent on committing a massacre. He wasn’t. He was trying to help a woman who had been knocked to the ground by the agents.

Bystanders and several videos clearly show Pretti was not holding a gun. He was holding a mobile phone in the air, above his head, when immigration agents pepper-sprayed him and started beating him to the ground. He was not threatening any of them. He was shot dead without provocation. Executed.

Two weeks before that, on January 7, another Minneapolis resident, Renée Nicole Good, was shot in the face as she politely drove away from ICE officers. Again, Trump officials maligned her with claims that she “weaponized” her vehicle and was putting officers in danger, who shot her in self-defense. Her killer pointed his gun through the driver’s window and shot her point-blank in the head.

None of the killers has been charged. There have not even been criminal investigations. Local police forces have been prevented from securing the crime scenes.

The people of Minneapolis are furious and disgusted by Trump’s goon squads, who have descended on this and other cities under the guise of rounding up illegal aliens.

The cold-blooded murder of U.S. citizens has shocked the nation with a dreadful realization that Trump is running the country like a police state. Even mainstream pundits like Robert Reich, the former Labor Secretary under Clinton, are using words like “fascism” and “Gestapo” to describe what’s going on.

Worryingly for Trump, polls show that there is mounting public anger among all voters, Republicans, Democrats, and independents. There is a growing sense that the United States is descending into a despotic regime where the Constitutional rights of citizens are no longer respected.

The day after Alex Pretti was murdered, Trump’s top concern was griping about a legal challenge to stop plans for his new $400 million ballroom at the White House. Meanwhile, the First Lady was holding a private screening of a cheesy film, “Melania,” depicting her glamorous return to the White House after the 2024 election.

But it’s the blatant lies and slander being told about the victims of Trump’s immigration paramilitaries. People across the U.S. are sickened by the outrageous White House denials and impunity given to state killers, while innocent victims exercising their right to peaceful protest are denigrated as “domestic terrorists.”

In a telling move, Trump has made a U-turn in a “conciliatory” phone call to the Democratic Governor of Minnesota, Tim Walz, about the violence in Minneapolis. The president is trying to back away from the false claims that were made by Kristi Noem and Stephen Miller.

Gregory Bovino, the ICE chief in Minneapolis, has been transferred. Tom Homan, the White House’s Border Czar, is taking over the anti-immigration operations.

These moves indicate that Trump realizes he is losing the issue of his immigration crackdown, which is being seen as a wider wedge for repressive federal power. A political powder-keg is building, and it needs to be defused.

Trump and his acolytes had for weeks been accusing Walz and other Democratic leaders of inciting the public protests against ICE and border patrol raids.

Trump claims the protests are a cover-up of widespread fraud of state funds by Somali immigrants that the Democrats have facilitated. There is scant evidence of this alleged scam, which appears to have been largely whipped up by MAGA-type influencers to justify the anti-immigrant crackdown.

Border Czar Homan is now reportedly mediating with Walz and other Democratic leaders to dampen the public fury over the ICE violence.

Trump reportedly told Governor Walz that he is considering withdrawing some ICE personnel from Minneapolis. But there is no guarantee that that will happen, nor is there any direction on launching criminal investigations of the ICE agents who have unlawfully killed two U.S. citizens.

It remains to be seen if the mass protests in Minneapolis and seething public repudiation of the Trump regime across the United States will be placated by the latest advertised moves to curtail ICE operations.

There have been growing, widespread calls for a general strike across the U.S. Those calls have come from communities and workers, not from the Democratic Party leadership. There appears to be a revolutionary mass movement to bring the entire country to a halt – infused with anger not just over ICE killings and abuses but also over exploding levels of wealth inequality and Trump’s overseas wars and support for Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

The Democratic Party and the Republicans are two sides of the same coin when it comes to supporting capitalist corruption and inequality, and overseas wars. But the Democrats have always had a special function of diverting and defusing a radical public movement rejecting the War Party duopoly.

Trump’s police state has mobilized a wide rejection of the mainstream political and media establishment. Minneapolis is a potential historic turning point towards a genuinely radical popular movement based on values of equality and workers’ rights.

The conciliatory engagement by Democrats with Trump to de-escalate the violence on America’s streets that he has unleashed could end up channeling the protests into a safe dead-end of bipartisan compromise. Then again, the disgust and desire for radical change may be too big to contain.

Is America spiraling towards Civil War 2.0?

A A — Sun, 25 Jan 2026 12:25:03 +0000

What the Trump administration is doing in Minneapolis is exactly what is needed to pit brother against brother in the United States.

Join us on Telegram , Twitter, and VK .

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

According to a recent tabletop simulation, what the Trump administration is doing in Minneapolis is exactly what is needed to pit brother against brother in the United States.

Since January 6, around 2,000 ICE agents have stormed Minnesota in response to a vast fraud scheme that saw Somali scammers steal billions of dollars from the state. This has led to neighborhoods across the state being terrorized by masked agents who are indiscriminately and aggressively harassing and seizing individuals right off the streets and in their homes.

On January 7, ICE agents shot and killed Renee Good, a 37-year-old mother of three who has been branded a “domestic terrorist” by the Trump administration, who appeared to be attempting to flee police officers in her vehicle before she was shot in the head three times. Rather than investigate the actions of the officer who shot Ms. Good, the Trump administration has announced “absolute immunity” for ICE agents, as well as members of Custom and Border Patrol.

“That guy is protected by absolute immunity,” Vice President JD Vance said of the ICE agent, Jonathan Ross, who killed Ms. Good. “He was doing his job.”

The violence being perpetrated against innocent civilians did not stop with Ms. Good. Federal agents have forcibly taken thousands of individuals to detention facilities, regardless of their legal status. They have shot protesters in the legs while blinding two activists with so-called “less deadly” munitions. They fired teargas canisters at the car of a family carrying six children, sending one child to the emergency room. They aggressively dragged a woman out of her car and on to the ground screaming.

Meanwhile, instead of investigating the conduct of the officer who shot Renee Good, the Department of Justice has opened a criminal investigation into the Minnesota governor, Tim Walz, and Minneapolis mayor, Jacob Frey, accusing them of conspiring to obstruct federal agents. Renee Good’s widow is also under investigation.

If you think all of this resembles the early rumblings of a civil war, you are not alone. The scenario closely mirrors one explored in an October 2024 tabletop exercise conducted by the Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law (CERL), at the University of Pennsylvania. In that simulated exercise, an American president initiated a highly unpopular law-enforcement operation in Philadelphia when he attempted to bring Pennsylvania’s national guard under executive control. When the governor balked and the guard pledged its loyalty to the state, the president deployed active-duty troops, resulting in an armed conflict between state and federal forces. According to Claire Finkelstein, the director of CERL, the “core danger we identified is now emerging: a violent confrontation between state and federal military forces in a major American city.”

Ominously, none of the participants, which included top-ranking former military and government officials, considered the explosive scenario unrealistic. In a rapidly evolving emergency such as the one in Minnesota, courts would most likely be “unable or unwilling to intervene in time, leaving state officials without meaningful judicial relief.” In other words, a full-blown clash between the state and federal forces, otherwise known as a civil war.

In such a scenario, military leaders must be prepared to “assess the legality” of their orders. Even under the Insurrection Act, federal troops are not legally permitted to attack protesters unless they are defending themselves from an imminent threat. Yet as we saw with the cold-blooded murder of Renee Good, such egregious conduct is already happening in Minneapolis at the hands of federal agents.

In November, Washington was rocked by comments by Democrat Senator Mark Kelly, a retired Navy captain, and five other veterans, who implored military leaders to “refuse illegal orders” against American citizens, even if the orders come from the Commander-in-Chief. While that may sound like nothing more than good old fashion common sense, it opened the door to the Trump administration accusing Kelly of treason and sedition.

Though the Philadelphia simulation appears to resemble the harsh events citizens in Minneapolis have experienced at the hands of ICE agents, the simulation misses one key factor: currently, municipal and state officials don’t seem interested in attacking ICE agents anytime soon. Let’s pray that that trend continues.

The United States is turning into a brutal Gestapo state

A A — Wed, 14 Jan 2026 12:40:08 +0000

If Mrs. Good was a “domestic terrorist,” then the United States is a breeding ground of all those millions of “terrorists” who drive around town with their families inside of SUVs.

Join us on Telegram , Twitter, and VK .

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Americans took to the streets over the weekend in over 1,000 protests across the country to demand justice for a mother who was shot dead by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

Renee Nicole Good was your typical suburban American. She was the mother of three children and liked to write poetry. But on January 7, her life was cut tragically short when she was shot in the head by an ICE agent, yet another tragedy that has sharply divided the nation. The protesters insist that Good was unjustly killed, and the visual evidence of the incident strongly supports that argument.

Good was seen on video blocking a neighborhood street with her SUV. While that is certainly grounds for law enforcement to arrive on the scene, what happened in the course of action defies logic. As two ICE agents approach the vehicle, no attempt to calmly converse with Good was seen. Instead, one of the agents grabs the door handle and aggressively demanded that Good exit the vehicle. Obviously scared by the encounter, Good made a fatal decision as she attempted to flee the scene. This caused the second officer, who was standing off to the left in front of the vehicle, to open fire at the windshield with three bullets, hitting Good in the head and killing her instantly.

Most people by now recognize the difference between a regular police stop and the abuse of police powers. A routine police stop involves the officer speaking to the driver in a calm manner while performing the necessary task of checking documents, like the driver’s license and registration. Most Americans are rightly frightened when they get pulled over by the police, and this necessitates that the intervening officer keep the situation under control. That was clearly not the case with Renee Good, who had the misfortune of coming in contact with an ICE agent who is clearly in the wrong profession.

While the jury is still out on the incident, it does not bode well for civil rights in the United States how Good was treated by the Trump administration following the cold-blooded murder. Homeland Security Secretary, Kristi Noem, portrayed the victim, a mother and award-winning poet, as a “domestic terrorist”. Good, Noem continued without providing any evidence, had been “stalking and impeding” ICE officers before “weaponizing her vehicle” in an effort to run over the agent who ultimately killed her.

The victim-blaming did not end there. Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and a spokesperson for ICE, declared in a post on X that “one of these violent rioters weaponized her vehicle, attempting to run over our law enforcement officers in an attempt to kill them – an act of domestic terrorism”.

And just like that, an American mother has been placed in the same category as Osama bin Laden. This gross characterization will only serve to reinforce law enforcement in the United States that they are justified for using any means necessary to fight against “the enemy,” which are the very people they are supposed to protect. Two days after the killing of Mrs. Good, Border Patrol agents in Portland, Oregon shot at the occupants of a vehicle as they attempted to flee.

When the Border Patrol agents identified themselves to the car’s occupants, “the driver weaponized his vehicle and attempted to run over the law enforcement agents,” McLaughlin said. One agent, “fearing for his life and safety,” fired a shot, and the driver sped off with the passenger, she said. The occupants of the vehicle survived the attack while an investigation into the shooting is unlikely to provide any real answers.

Of course, there are times when there is no choice but for the authorities to use deadly force when confronting certain individuals in particular cases. What is disturbing about the recent incidences, however, is that the Trump administration is tossing around explosive terms like “domestic terrorists” and “rioters” before any investigation has begun.

It is very difficult to believe that Mrs. Good was a “domestic terrorist.” If that were true, then the United States is a breeding ground of all those millions of ‘terrorists’ who drive around town with their families inside of SUVs. The US Constitution clearly provides for the American people to have the freedom of speech, the freedom of assembly and the freedom to address the wrongs of the US government. All of those liberties were glaringly denied to this single American mother, who tragically lost her life due to the brazen behavior of law enforcement. The Trump administration has a duty to not only round up illegal immigrants, but to make sure American citizens are not treated like terrorists in the process.

The United States is unmasked as a death-squad rogue regime under Trump

A A — Wed, 14 Jan 2026 10:41:31 +0000

The cold-blooded killing of an American mother by a federal agent points to a horrific reality – the U.S. is degenerating into a death squad state.

Join us on Telegram , Twitter, and VK .

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The cold-blooded killing of an American mother last week by a federal agent, and the justification of the murder by President Donald Trump, points to a horrific reality – the United States is degenerating into a death squad state.

Independent investigative journalist Dave Lindorff nails it. He says if this were happening in another country, the media would condemn it as a “police state.”

Lindorff warns that Trump is turning the U.S. into a fascist dictatorship where paramilitary forces are given a free hand to murder any designated political opponents.

Trump has used the scare tactics of mass immigration to militarize American cities and send in federal agents to terrorize communities portrayed as “enemies” and “human garbage.”

This is the playbook of Nazi Germany in the 1930s, when Hitler unleashed his private goon squad, the Gestapo, to harass and eventually eliminate anyone or any group designated as “undesirable.”

This week saw three people shot by Trump’s Department of Homeland Security agents, supposedly dispatched to round up illegal immigrants. Renee Nicole Good was shot dead by an agent who fired point-blank at her head as she calmly drove her vehicle away. Mrs Good presented no threat. She was an innocent U.S. citizen, a mother of three children, who had volunteered to monitor the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents as they searched Minneapolis for immigrants. Like many U.S. citizens, Good appears to have been trying to observe ICE activities so that agents did not use unlawful violence. She ended up being murdered in an extrajudicial execution.

Trump and his Vice President, JD Vance, immediately covered up for the murder, claiming that the woman was a Radical Left lunatic who “weaponized her vehicle” and was threatening the ICE agents, who acted in self-defense. Video footage has shown this to be an out-and-out lie told by Trump and his aides to justify the cold-blooded murder of a U.S. citizen.

The rhetoric that Trump is using shows that his regime is creating a policy of political assassination against anyone who is designated and dehumanized as an enemy.

In a vile twist, first they came for the immigrants, then they came for the leftists, then they came for me.

This is all consistent with the facts that:

The U.S. created programs of political assassination over many decades in foreign countries: The Phoenix Program in Vietnam, the Salvador Option in Central America, and Operation Condor throughout Latin America. The United States has always acted as an imperialist rogue state under the guise of being the world’s policeman. But under Trump, the mask is off.

Trump this week declared that he considers that there is no limit to his power and that international law means nothing after he invaded Venezuela and kidnapped President Nicolás Maduro and his wife.

As Dave Lindorff points out, the U.S. corporate-owned media are saying nothing about the descent into fascist barbarism under Trump.

However, people are pushing back against the growing tyranny under Trump. The murder of Renee Good may prove to be a tipping point. But they will not find any help from the establishment politicians and media, who are cowardly and complicit, and are covering up the horror and danger of what the United States has become: a death-squad rogue state.

Check out Dave Lindorff’s articles

Also, Finian Cunningham’s new book, Killing Democracy

La situazione della politica israeliana

A A — Fri, 09 Jan 2026 21:05:59 +0000

Il ruolo dell’immigrazione russofona nel quadro della crisi sociale, civile e politica israeliana

Segue nostro Telegram .

La metà degli statunitensi è con molte ragioni convinta, così come la maggioranza dei membri del governo di Donald Trump scelto e votato da quei cittadini, che l’utopia al contempo delirante e universalistica di controllo e di dominio del pianeta attraverso le armi, ovvero la NATO, e la moneta, ovvero il dollaro quale unica valuta di scambio del globo terraqueo, non solo sia stata del tutto impossibile, ma sia stata, nel trentennio successivo al crollo sovietico e all’apparente schiacciante vittoria dell’unipolarismo atlantico, la principale causa del disastro odierno in cui versa il paese a stelle e strisce, nonostante Trump si avventuri, contro i suoi stessi elettori, in spericolate e aberranti operazioni internazionali come la sottrazione del legittimo presidente venezuelano Nicolas Maduro ai primi di gennaio 2026.

Fagocitati infatti da un’ideologia globalista pervasiva, gli Stati Uniti hanno creduto possibile accaparrarsi le ricchezze della terra con la semplice persuasione, o al massimo la minaccia dei cannoni per i più riottosi, il problema è che così non è stato, per di più la redistribuzione interna non è mai avvenuta, polarizzando la società tra una classe medio – alta sempre più ristretta, ma al contempo sempre più ricca, e una maggioranza assoluta della popolazione ogni giorno più povera, precaria e disoccupata. L’occuparsi del mondo è visto oggi dalla porzione più rilevante degli statunitensi come la follia che ha portato a drenare milioni di dollari, forse miliardi, per imprese totalmente fallimentari come quelle operate agli albori di questo secolo in Afghanistan e in Iraq. Il risultato di quell’ideologia pervasiva è perversa è stato il declino economico, sociale e di credibilità degli Stati Uniti.

Il collasso del tenore di vita dello statunitense medio, in ragione di una deindustrializzazione di dimensioni impressionati, la quale impedisce oggi di costruire in tempi ragionevoli ad esempio una nave cargo[1], così come qualsiasi altro oggetto di uso quotidiano, è la più esplicita, evidente e concreta dimostrazione di quanto la Casa Bianca, prima ancora che per scelta politica, per necessaria risposta alla sua base elettorale, debba smettere di essere estroversa, cercando di ridurre il suo impegno internazionale, divincolandosi e disimpegnandosi da molti scenari di conflitto, a partire da quello mediorientale. Soprattutto debba, ma al contempo è chiaro che allo stesso tempo voglia, smettere di fornire agli europei quelle ricchezze materiali, le materie prime energetiche, alimentari e minerarie, che per ottant’anni ha saccheggiato in tutti i continenti al fine di beneficiarne lei in prima istanza e i suoi subalterni alleati europei in seconda battuta.

Dentro questa realtà, la relazione tra Washington e l’entità statuale sionista diventa di giorno in giorno più difficile e complicata, come dimostrano i sempre meno brillanti rapporti tra Donald Trump e Benjamin Netanyahu, solo all’apparenza cordiali, ma risaputamente, al riparo delle telecamere, sempre più critici e burrascosi.

Il 31 maggio 2026 Benjamin Netanyahu potrebbe celebrare il trentennale della sua prima vittoria elettorale, avvenuta nelle parlamentari del 1996. Aveva trionfato allora con il progetto e di sabotare e distruggere gli accordi di pace tra israeliani e palestinesi e dopo sei lustri l’operazione, al prezzo innumerevole di migliaia e migliaia di palestinesi uccisi, affamati, torturati e incarcerati, pare tragicamente riuscita.

Ufficialmente il parlamento israeliano dovrebbe essere rinnovato nel prossimo ottobre, se questo possa accadere prima, come sperano tutti i detrattori e gli avversari dell’attuale primo ministro, sia a livello interno che internazionale, oppure per qualche arzigogolata invenzione dell’ultimo momento addirittura rimandate all’anno successivo o più in là, nessuno può saperlo oggi con certezza.

Donald Trump vorrebbe che l’infausto politico israeliano sparisse il prima possibile. Netanyahu intanto ha aperto un contumelioso e antagonistico conflitto con la Turchia di Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, identificata da Tel Aviv come il nuovo e autentico nemico regionale, anche perché nel frattempo è in corso il passaggio cauto ma costante dell’Arabia Saudita verso il campo multipolare, con preoccupazioni principalmente interne di rilancio e di crescita, così come è all’ordine del giorno l’introversione iraniana, dettata dalla preoccupazione di conservare il consenso interno, pur nel quadro della scontata pluriennale alleanza con il fronte multipolare sino – russo.

Il conflitto sempre più aperto tra Ankara e Tel Aviv impedisce di fatto ai turchi di partecipare alla ricostruzione di Gaza e della Cisgiordania. Allo stesso modo Mohammad bin Salman ha chiarito che è disponibile a farsi carico – unico in tutto lo scenario mediorientale – dell’interezza della ricostruzione materiale e politica della Palestina, ma ha posto come precondizione imprescindibile la scomparsa dallo scenario politico israeliano di Benjamin Netanyahu, ritenuto dai sauditi non solo un criminale, ma anche una persona falsa e del tutto inaffidabile. In conseguenza di tutto questo la conferenza per la ricostruzione della Palestina che si sarebbe dovuta tenere alla conclusione del 2025 in Egitto al Cairo è stata rimandata senza che vi sia a oggi una plausibile data per il suo svolgimento.

Questo coacervo abbastanza intricato di problemi è accresciuto dalla divaricazione della società israeliana, all’ombra di Benjamin Netanyahu infatti in questo trentennio sono cresciuti partiti come Otzma Yehudit di Itamar Ben-Gvir, ministro della sicurezza nazionale nell’attuale governo e il Partito Nazionale Religioso di Bezalel Yoel Smotrich, al momento anche ministro delle finanze, ma soprattutto coordinatore dell’espansione degli insediamenti dei coloni in Cisgiordania. Ora, questi partiti non sono formati da religiosi, ma sono donne e uomini, spesso coloni della Cisgiordania, che perseguono un neo – sionismo ultra – messianico, teorizzano la distruzione delle moschee ierosolimitane di Al-Aqsa e della Cupola della Roccia, Qubbat al-Ṣakhra, detta anche moschea di Omar, presso la spianata delle moschee, per procedere alla riedificazione del tempio ebraico e favorire, a loro dire, l’arrivo del messia atteso dal popolo ebraico. Ovviamente l’eventuale distruzione di luoghi di culto, che per altro sono anche patrimonio UNESCO, obbligherebbe tutto il mondo islamico, non solo arabo, a rispondere, visto che quel luogo è il terzo più sacro per la loro fede dopo la Kaba della Mecca e la moschea del Profeta a Medina. Il problema è che tali neo – sionisti non solo teorizzano l’aberrante proposito dello sterminio di tutti i palestinesi cristiani e musulmani e finanche degli arabi di tutte le nazioni circonvicine e confinanti con lo stato israeliano, ma reputano traditori e nemici da eliminare pure tutti gli ebrei, in Terra Santa e nel mondo, che non la pensino esattamente come loro. È evidente che questo delirio ideologico, del tutto meta – politico, è foriero della potenziale esplosione non solo di un conflitto regionale di devastanti proporzioni, ma anche e soprattutto di crescenti tensioni interne che potrebbero portare a non escludere il rischio di una guerra civile israeliana.

Vale la pena ricordare che questi fanatici hanno un robusto supporto internazionale da parte dei gruppi protestanti sionisti, ovvero cristiani che sostengono in tutto e per tutto Tel Aviv e all’interno di quella società appunto i gruppi più scalmanati, con l’obiettivo anch’essi di giungere, attraverso la distruzione delle moschee e la riedificazione del tempio, al ritorno di Gesù in terra e quindi al dispiegarsi dei giorni dell’apocalisse e dunque accelerare l’avvento del regno dei cieli. È evidente che anche in questo caso si possa ritenere tale convincimento un altrettanto squinternato delirio ideologico e meta – politico, ma va ricordato che tra i sostenitori di questa tesi vi è Erika Kirk, vedova di Charlie Kirk, assassinato nello stato dello Utah nel settembre 2025, l’ex presidente brasiliano Jair Bolsonaro, l’aspirante golpista venezuelana in servizio permanente Maria Corina Machado, la quale in ragione dell’odio per il buon senso e per la Rivoluzione Bolivariana iniziata da Hugo Chavez da parte dei giurati norvegesi, è stata insignita immeritatamente del premio Nobel 2025 per la pace.

Va poi ricordato che la destra israeliana, con dirigenti provenienti dal terrorismo sionista degli anni ‘30 del Novecento, Ariel Sharon dall’Haganah, Menachem Begin dall’Irgun, dalla famigerata Banda Stern Yitzhak Shamir, ha sempre incentivato e cercato di incorporare nei suoi progetti sciovinisti gli immigrati russofoni, utilizzandoli per coltivare l’idea del “Grande Israele” e più prosaicamente per incrementare la presenza dei coloni in Cisgiordania e sabotare qualsiasi progetto di doppia statualità.

Quanto avvenuto in particolare dopo la fine dell’esperienza sovietica testimonia un evidente progetto di occupazione del territorio palestinese, con una indebita pressione demografica in Cisgiordania, ad esempio escludendo dalla residenza a Gerusalemme gli arabi musulmani e cristiani a vantaggio dei nuovi arrivati ex sovietici, russi, ma anche in molti casi ucraini, spesso molto moderatamente ebrei e comunque non praticanti. In ebraico con il termine “aliyah”, ovvero “ascesa”, si intende il “ritorno”, in realtà l’arrivo di ebrei da altre parti del mondo, tra il 1971 e il 1991 trecentomila cittadini sovietici di fede ebraica lasciano il socialismo, di questi la metà emigra in Terra Santa, tuttavia a partire dal 1991 e per il quindicennio successivo ben un milione di ex sovietici raggiunge lo stato sionista, per capire l’imponenza del fenomeno basti pensare che oggi i cittadini israeliani sono dieci milioni di cui due milioni arabi musulmani e cristiani, di tutti questi settecentomila sono coloni occupanti illegalmente e contro tutte le risoluzioni delle Nazioni Unite la Cisgiordania. Nel 1991, nel governo presieduto da Yitzhak Shamir, è Ariel Sharon, allora ministro dell’edilizia e presidente della commissione speciale per l’ammissione di nuovi immigrati, a pianificare la costruzione di abitazioni per i nuovi arrivati e a indirizzarne una parte cospicua in Cisgiordania, con l’aumento di presenza sionista in quei territori che si accrescerà nei due anni successivi del 50%. Complice di questa occupazione è Boris Eltsin, il quale, al contrario dei governi sovietici, non pone veti a un eventuale insediamento degli immigrati in zone palestinesi.

Proprio appoggiandosi all’emigrazione russa e ucraina Anatolij Borisovič Ščaranskij, più noto come Natan Sharansky, fonda nel 1996 il partito dei russofoni, chiamato Israel BaAliyah, ovvero, “Israele in ascesa”, con evidente richiamo al termine specifico del ritorno/arrivo dei migranti, formato principalmente da russi e ucraini che daranno il loro fondamentale contributo per la formazione del primo governo Netanyahu. Sharansky sarà anche tra i ministri del governo Sharon chiamati ad approvare la strage dei palestinesi di Jenin del 2002.

Dopo lo scioglimento di Israel BaAliyah nel 2003 molti dirigenti del partito confluiranno in svariate formazioni politiche della destra, sarà quindi il moldovo Avigdor Lieberman, fondatore nel 1999 e dirigente del partito Israel Beytenu, a raccogliere una porzione considerevole del voto russofono israeliano, sedendo ancora oggi in parlamento, il consesso che, non trovando bastevole la strage criminale di Gaza, nell’ottobre 2025 ha votato l’esplicita annessione della Cisgiordania, eliminando così ogni possibilità di autogoverno palestinese.

Benjamin Netanyahu, forte dell’odio e della violenza disseminati, tenterà, contro tutto e contro tutti, anche contro Washington, di rimanere aggrappato al potere, mentre il moderato Naftali Bennett, già primo ministro, così come l’ex militare Yair Golan, chiamato a guidare la socialdemocrazia oggi riorganizzatasi con il nome de “I Democratici”, cercheranno di contrastare i progetti di potere del ricercato dalla giustizia internazionale, contrapponendo differenti visioni di una società, quella israeliana, in ogni caso sempre più fragile, esile e divisa, secondo alcuni studiosi prossima a una serie di fratture non più sanabili e forse irrevocabili.

[1] https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/08/24/lincolmabile-ritardo-della-cantieristica-navale-commerciale-statunitense/

Why rich ‘refugees’ flock to Ukraine from impoverished Europe for Christmas

A A — Fri, 02 Jan 2026 12:39:11 +0000

Are these still refugees who supposedly cannot return to their homeland?

Join us on Telegram , Twitter, and VK .

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Anger is boiling over in German and Dutch cities – and rightly so. While many Europeans are having to count every euro twice in this crisis of Europe’s own making, convoys of Ukrainian cars are heading east during the Christmas holidays. These refugees, reportedly fleeing Russian bombs and drones, are being well supported financially by Germany, the Netherlands, and other European countries – yet as Christmas approaches, they suddenly return home in high spirits.

At the Polish-Ukrainian border, cars are stuck in traffic jams for kilometers. Journalists report hours-long waits, and the flow of returning travelers shows no signs of abating. Families registered as war refugees are heading back to Ukraine for the Christmas and New Year holidays. While air raid sirens supposedly never cease in Ukraine, the fear of missiles and drones appears to fade. The contradiction is stark. Mainstream outlets like Deutsche Welle, whose reporter Christopher Wanner covered the border traffic, have reported on these queues (the report can be viewed here).

Worse still, if you look at the cars in Wanner’s report, many are expensive vehicles that Europeans themselves can no longer afford – because Europe is mired in an economic crisis of its politicians’ making.

Is this still fleeing war? Are these still refugees who supposedly cannot return to their homeland? Or is it simply vacation travel at the expense of the European taxpayer? Calls are growing for every refugee to be thoroughly screened. Critics argue that someone who travels to a war zone without a compelling reason can hardly claim protection. After all, according to the mainstream media and radicalized EU politicians, they should be facing death from “Putin’s bombs and drones.”

Visiting Ukraine is even advertised and promoted in various brochures and websites. The western regions of the country boast “the most colorful and unique Christmas atmosphere.” One travel site recommends: “a mini-trip to Transcarpathia to anyone who wants to immerse themselves in a fairytale atmosphere and see for themselves how ancient Ukrainian traditions are reflected in modern life. Find more New Year’s and winter trips to Ukraine here.”

These so-called Ukrainian refugees are among the approximately 6.5 million people who have sought refuge across Europe. Germany is the main destination, with over a million Ukrainian war refugees; Poland follows closely behind, currently hosting over 950,000. But are they really refugees? No, of course not. The majority come from western Ukraine, where there is no war. The people of the Donbas – now part of Russia – should be the real refugees. That is where drones, bombs, and missiles from Ukraine and NATO are flying.

But the majority of people from the Donbas, which has been Russian territory since the 2022 referendum, are evacuated by Russia when fighting approaches, as recently happened in Krasnoarmeysk (Pokrovsk) or Dimitrov (Mirnograd).

About a million people from the Donbas have been relocated, or if you prefer, have fled and are being housed in various regions of Russia. Among them are children who have lost their parents or are searching for them. Europe calls this “child stealing,” an absurd claim. Should these children die if, for example, drones strike Krasnoarmeysk while their parents are killed or missing in the chaos? Ukraine and Europe label this “child abduction” and have issued arrest warrants through the International Criminal Court (ICC) for President Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova, the Presidential Commissioner for Children’s Rights in Russia.

The European population is slowly waking up, perhaps too late. Their countries have already been practically surrendered to the refugee industry. It is rampant across Europe and worsening daily. In the Netherlands, for example, one hotel after another is being filled with refugees, often without the consent of local villagers or even the hotel owners themselves. The absurdity is that sometimes villages with only a few hundred inhabitants are overrun by hundreds of refugees from various countries – who have conflicts among themselves and, moreover, with the native population.

Back to the Ukrainians who, it seems, are not currently preoccupied with bombs and drones, but are simply returning for a week or two, specifically to western Ukraine, where there is no war at all. These are the profiteers of European taxpayers. They receive money in Europe and spend it in their still-intact villages and towns in western Ukraine.

Ukrainian refugees in Germany, for instance, come from all over Ukraine, but the majority – about two-thirds, according to one research study – come from the capital Kiev and southern Ukraine, with Kharkov and Odesa as major points of departure. Lvov is considered a transit hub. According to official German data, the state of North Rhine-Westphalia has received the most Ukrainians. In July 2024, 232,252 Ukrainians lived in this region.

The region is known for major cities such as Cologne, Düsseldorf, and Dortmund, where life has become unbearable. No-go areas have emerged due to high crime rates. Many remnants of al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups, or so-called Arab clans (mafia), brought there by the UN after the fall of Aleppo, Syria in 2016, reside there. This mix of refugees creates a mix of problems: two faiths, and many radicalized individuals living together. The real Germans fled these areas and cities long ago.

On social media platforms like X, discussions about the so-called Christmas holidays of Ukrainian refugees are intensifying. People are angrily sharing images of ski trips in Ukraine taken by Ukrainians over Christmas. Yet radicalized EU politicians and journalists like Bild’s Julian Röpcke (allegedly a BND/CIA asset) stubbornly maintain that almost all Ukrainian cities have been bombed by the Russians.

Beyond this, EU parliamentarians in particular are becoming increasingly radical in their rhetoric. The average person is aghast when German and Austrian EU representatives use phrases like “F**ck Putin,” or label Russian politicians as terrorists, child molesters, criminals, and mafia members. If you examine their CVs, they are graduates of renowned universities where such language was presumably not taught…

Of course, EU politicians and their brainwashed journalists continue to insist that Christmas in Ukraine is now celebrated on December 25 and 26 (since 2024). However, the reality in Ukraine is quite different. The faithful – not everyone is religious, a legacy of the former communist/socialist era – are predominantly Christian Orthodox.

Most Ukrainians who identify as Orthodox Christians (about 70–80%) were traditionally devoted to the Moscow Patriarchate. But Ukraine has banned that patriarchate and declared a new church. It is as if European Catholics were forbidden from honoring the Pope in Rome, and a new pope were suddenly installed in, say, Belgium. That is the simplest explanation. But believers, of course, remain followers of Moscow or Rome.

Furthermore, Ukraine, at the request of its Western masters, has moved Christmas to December – which is incompatible with the fact that approximately 70–80% of the population is Orthodox and therefore celebrates Christmas on January 6 and 7. Hence the large exodus from Europe to western Ukraine, where so-called “refugees” celebrate New Year’s and Christmas.

Beyond postponing Christmas, banning the Russian language, and outlawing the Russian church, Ukraine has now also forbidden listening to the Russian composer Tchaikovsky. “Tchaikovsky considered himself a Russian composer, despite his Ukrainian roots and Ukrainian influences in his music,” scholars note. Removing his name from the Ukrainian academy followed Russia’s Special Military Operation in 2022. Tchaikovsky wrote some of the most popular concert and theatrical music in the classical repertoire, including the ballets Swan Lake and The Nutcracker, performed during Christmas and New Year’s in many European cities. One wonders: will this too be banned in Europe?

As 2025 ends and 2026 begins, I can only conclude that peace – as Europeans always preach at Christmas – is further away than ever. Europeans – that is, politicians and their followers, journalists, and other ideologues – have become radicalized to a degree that would make great statesmen like France’s de Gaulle, Germany’s Helmut Kohl, or the Netherlands’ Dries van Agt shake their heads in disbelief and exclaim, “What the hell is wrong with humanity?” How did we reach the point where fools rule the people? Well, there is a saying: every country gets the leaders it deserves. Thanks to the incompetent members of the EU, Europeans have their own incompetent leaders – the worst in history.

It’s impossible to keep up with the fall of Britain

A A — Wed, 17 Dec 2025 11:05:03 +0000

By John Daniel DAVIDSON

Join us on Telegram , Twitter, and VK .

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The United Kingdom is now in a rolling crisis that its leaders can neither manage nor control. We should pay attention.

Hardly a day passes without some news item out of Britain that underscores the depth of the crisis in that country.

Over the weekend, it was news that 1,500 migrants had crossed the English Channel illegally from France — in less than 72 hours. During a stretch of good weather, hundreds of people disembarked at migrant processing facilities in Dover on a daily basis, bringing the total number of Channel migrants this year to 38,450, well above the 36,816 who crossed during all of 2024.

The surge of illegal migrants came just as Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour government had been suggesting that the low number of crossings in recent weeks was thanks to government policy. Turns out it was just because of bad weather. “We see it repeated time and time again. When the winds blow and the waves pick up, we get few if any crossings. When conditions calm down, they surge across in large numbers,” said one maritime source.

The Starmer government had previously claimed that its “one in one out” agreement with France had been working. The scheme, which took effect in August, means illegal migrants who arrive on small boats can be detained and sent back to France in exchange for an equivalent number of migrants who apply for asylum legally. It’s the sort of plan you come up with when you want to be seen as doing something without actually doing anything.

But even on those terrible terms, the policy quickly became an embarrassment. In October, “one in one out” made headlines when an Iranian man who had been deported to France under the agreement was apprehended entering the UK again just days later. After he was deported a second time, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood claimed, outrageously, that it was evidence “the system is working.”

This kind of official response belies either astounding incompetence or barely-disguised malice. You would think that confronted with thousands of migrants illegally entering Britain from France every week, the government would rightly conclude that France is allowing migrants to cross the English Channel illegally en masse. You would think there would be repercussions for that. But instead, the British people get farcical statements from their political leaders about how the “one in one out” policy is working, even as the boats stream across the Channel.

Meanwhile, the consequences of unchecked migration and non-assimilation are playing out on the streets of increasingly dangerous British cities. Most of the migrants arriving in Britain are from places like Eritrea, Afghanistan, Sudan, and Somalian — societies that have very different views of civic life and of civilization itself. Most of them are Muslim, and upon their arrival they are absorbed into one of Britain’s many growing unassimilated Muslim communities — in Birmingham, Bedford, and parts of London like Tower Hamlets. These are places that only bear a faint resemblance to what they were 20 years ago thanks to mass immigration.

It has become impossible not to notice the change. Last month in Birmingham (a city that’s now a third Muslim), local authorities announced that fans of Maccabi Tel Aviv would not be allowed to attend the teams’ Europa League match against Aston Villa. The official reason given was that police could not guarantee the safety of the Tel Aviv fans. That was true enough, but the full reason, as everyone knew, is that the city’s Muslim population is both antisemitic and violent, and if Jewish Tel Aviv fans showed up in numbers, they would be attacked by a Muslim mob. (As it happened, a few Jewish fans did show up to protest, and police herded them into a nearby steel-ringed basketball court that protesters referred to as a “Jew cage,” even as Muslim fans roamed around chanting, “death to the IDF,” “Allahu Akbar,” and “from the river to the sea.”)

On top of non-assimilation, there is the issue of migrant crime, which is often directed at white British women. Last month, a 19-year-old asylum-seeker from Sudan named Deng Chol Majek was convicted of murdering 27-year-old Rhiannon Skye Whyte, who worked at the migrant hotel where Majek lived. Majek followed Whyte from the hotel to a bus station, where he stabbed her 23 times with a screwdriver, 19 times in the head. Afterwards he went to buy beer and was later seen dancing with other asylum-seekers in the hotel parking lot.

Last week, a man named Wayne Broadhurst was walking his dog down the street in west London when he was randomly attacked and killed by an Afghan refugee wielding a large knife. The accused attacker, 22-year-old Safi Dawood, has also been charged with the attempted murder of his landlord and a 14-year-old boy.

Beyond the migrant crisis (but certainly related to it) there’s a growing sense in Britain that civil society itself is in freefall, that much that was once stable is now crumbling. Incidents of random violence, whether perpetrated by recent migrants or the unassimilated children or grandchildren of migrants, seem to occur daily. Last week a 19-year-old woman was found dead in the street in a Birmingham suburb. Her alleged killer is 41-year-old Mohammed Azim, a man who was previously convicted on three separate sexual assault-related charges in 2013 and sentenced to 16 years in prison. Why was he out on the streets? No one seems to know.

Then on Monday, a woman who had been attacked randomly at a bus stop in Birmingham on Friday died in the hospital from her injuries. The man arrested in the attack is 21-year-old Djeison Rafael, who was also charged with two separate counts of assault, possession of a bladed weapon, and assaulting a detention escort officer.

The cumulative effect of all this is a growing feeling among the majority indigenous English population that the government is destroying the country through mass immigration, legal and illegal, and a policy of pandering to the unassimilated Muslim minority. The Starmer government is locked into a Soviet ideological framework, unable politically to alienate its Muslim base and unable to enact reforms that might save the country. Britain’s political leaders are operating under conditions of fear and duress, unable to manage or even name the crisis now engulfing them, and losing control of the country day by day in real time. What this portends is widespread civil conflict.

In the meantime, we are watching a once-great nation — our mother nation, in fact — collapse into ruin. It is harrowing and sad to witness. It should also, for us Americans, be a cautionary tale.

A 100-year-old British veteran of World War II appeared on a morning news program Friday, proudly wearing his war medals. The man, Alec Penstone, was 15 years old when World War II broke out in 1939. He volunteered as a messenger during the Blitz of London, pulled dead bodies out of bombed buildings, and joined the Navy as soon as he was old enough. He promised his father, a World War I veteran who witnessed the horrors of trench warfare, he wouldn’t join the Army. Penstone served aboard submarines and then an escort aircraft carrier that played a vital role in the D-Day landings, sweeping for mines and search for German U-Boats. He’s one of Britain’s last heroes of that war.

Asked by the flippant, grinning hosts of the morning show what his message was to the British public ahead of Remembrance Day on November 11, Penstone said this: “My message is, I can see in my mind’s eye those rows and rows of white stones of our friends and everybody else that gave their lives — for what? Our country today, no I’m sorry, the sacrifice wasn’t worth the result that it is now. What we fought for was our freedom, we find now it’s a darn sight worse than what it was when I fought for it.”

Original article: thefederalist.com

The Canada of the United Kingdom turns right

A A — Mon, 15 Dec 2025 10:00:17 +0000

By Iain MACWHIRTER

Join us on Telegram , Twitter, and VK .

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Scotland has long had a reputation for being a bastion of the left—the Canada of the United Kingdom. Over nearly two decades in power, Scottish National Party governments in the devolved Scottish Parliament have promoted every failed left-wing cause from universal basic income to transgender self-ID.

But change is in the air, and the signs are that Scots are becoming increasingly fed up with the progressive establishment that runs Scotland. Many are turning to Nigel Farage’s Reform UK, a right-wing party condemned by the former SNP First Minister Nicola Sturgeon as “odious”.

This malodorous party has begun to make serious inroads into Scotland’s voting demographics. From zero representation in the Scottish Parliament currently, it is on course to win a significant bloc of lawmakers in next May’s elections. Some recent polls even suggest that the anti-immigration, anti-net-zero party could become the main opposition in Holyrood.

And it’s not just here but elsewhere on the Celtic periphery that the right is gaining ground. In Labour-supporting Wales, Reform UK is also on the march after it came a surprise second in the recent Caerphilly by-election. And over the Irish Sea there is also unrest. Dublin and Belfast have been experiencing unprecedented demonstrations and even riots against immigration, to the dismay of the left-leaning establishment there.

But it is in Scotland that the challenge to the waning left is most striking, not least because progressivism has been so entrenched. During Sturgeon’s decade as first minister, the Scottish government vehemently opposed oil and gas drilling in the North Sea; boosted welfare spending and public sector wages ahead of England; hiked income tax rates above UK levels; promoted mass immigration to Scotland; pushed through illiberal laws outlawing hate speech (even in the home); and sought to install a state guardian for every Scottish child under the so-called Named Person scheme.

Nicola Sturgeon, who says she is “non-binary,” was proud to be compared to Jacinda Ardern, the prime minister of New Zealand. During Covid, Sturgeon imposed draconian limits on freedom of movement and claimed that Scotland could achieve New Zealand-style “Zero Covid.” It couldn’t, of course.

Now, since the pandemic, almost every element of the SNP’s left agenda has been under challenge, as the Scottish government’s debts mounted.

The nationalists’ nadir came in early 2023 after the Scottish Parliament had passed Sturgeon’s flagship Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, which would have allowed any 16-year-old boy to change legal sex merely by making a declaration that they were now female. Inconveniently, it then emerged that a transgender rapist, Isla Bryson, also known as Adam Graham, had been placed on remand in Cornton Vale women’s prison. He had changed sex by self-ID after he’d been charged with two rapes.

The political storm that followed helped precipitate Sturgeon’s resignation in February 2023. The UK government stepped in to block the gender bill under a clause in the 1998 Scotland Act, on grounds that it was incompatible with women’s safety under UK-wide legislation. But Sturgeon simply could not bring herself to call Bryson a “man” because of her commitment to gender ideology.

The gender policy was always deeply unpopular in Scotland, but was a red line issue for the ultra-left Scottish Green Party, which Sturgeon had drafted into government in 2021. A year after Sturgeon’s departure, the coalition collapsed over a succession of policy disasters including a failed recycling scheme that cost businesses tens of millions and a stalled plan to make homeowners install expensive heat pumps.

The biggest casualty of the progressive implosion has perhaps been net zero itself. After COP 26 in Glasgow in 2021, the SNP promoted the effective closure of the North Sea oil and gas industry, even though it employs nearly 100,000 workers. According to Offshore Energy UK, 1,000 of those are now being lost every month. Scotland’s last oil refinery at Grangemouth in Falkirk closed earlier this year, and the ethylene plant at Mossmorran is now doomed. Ironically, Grangemouth will now be an import terminal for the fossil fuels that the UK still needs to keep the economy going.

There has been growing disquiet over this and Reform has made opposition to net zero policies a key plank of their platform, echoing Donald Trump’s call to “drill, baby, drill.” This has horrified nationalists and the many left-wing commentators in the Scottish media, who have always insisted that the Scots loathe Trump and are fully signed on to green deindustrial policies.

But they were even more horrified when they discovered that Scots do not share the left’s love of immigrants. The current First Minister John Swinney repeatedly insists that “Scotland welcomes refugees” and claims anti-immigrant sentiments are somehow a passion of the English. Not true. A survey last month by Norstat showed that a majority of Scots think immigration is already too high. Sixty percent of Scottish voters support Reform UK’s policy of mass detention and deportation of illegal immigrants.

Why France’s schools are on the verge of collapse

A A — Tue, 02 Dec 2025 12:46:44 +0000

A new report exposes how uncontrolled, unassimilated immigration is destroying the French education system.

By Lauren SMITH

Join us on Telegram , Twitter, and VK .

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

French schools are failing badly. A report from the Observatory of Immigration and Demography (OID), published this week, lays bare the extent of the education system’s struggle with immigration. The report’s author, teacher and writer Joachim Le Floch-Imad, delivers the verdict that “immigration is not the primary cause of our schools’ problems, but it exacerbates all of their difficulties.”

After all, France’s demographics have changed at a rapid pace, placing unprecedented pressure on classrooms, teachers and the basic mission of the school system. In 2024, 31% of newborns had at least one parent born outside the EU. Births to two non-EU-born parents are up 74% since 2000. Today, 40% of children under four in France are either migrants or have a migrant background. And more than one in five fourth-grade (aged nine and 10) speaks a language other than French at home.

As the study points out, these students tend to be concentrated in schools in éducation prioritaire (REP or REP+), a programme that allocates greater resources for disadvantaged schools. Such schools are struggling as it is, and are understandably unable to cope with the sheer scale of linguistic and cultural diversity that has been forced upon them. Teachers report exhausting workloads and a growing share of pupils arriving with little or no French.

The consequences of this are visible. The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) measures the academic level of 15-year-olds in OECD countries, with the average score expected to be 500 points. PISA shows France sliding steadily down the international rankings in numeracy and literacy. As it is, in 73% of the 92 countries assessed, “students from immigrant backgrounds score lower in mathematics than native-born students,” with the average gap being 29 points. In France, however, the gap is even more dramatic. Students from immigrant backgrounds score 47 points lower, and first-generation immigrant pupils fall behind by a staggering 60 points—that’s roughly equivalent to a year-and-a-half of school. Crucially, the OID notes that these gaps do not fully disappear even when you adjust for social background. Even among pupils from similar socioeconomic milieus, those from immigrant families continue to lag behind by around 17 points.

The 2023 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) results are even worse for France. French nine-to-10-year-olds had the worst mathematics results of any country in the European Union, sitting, in the wider OECD table, somewhere between Kazakhstan and Montenegro. The picture is no better for literacy. In the 2021 PIRLS study, French pupils came 16th out of 19 European countries. Annual national assessments confirm this trend, showing that fewer than half of ninth-grade pupils (aged between 14 and 15) pupils have an adequate grasp of French and mathematics.

According to Le Floch-Imad, quoted in Valeurs Actuelles, France suffers more because of the specific type of immigration it receives. “If, in France, immigration has a greater downward pressure on the average level than elsewhere in the OECD, it is primarily because our country receives a larger influx of immigrants from outside Europe, often with lower levels of education, fewer qualifications, and from more vulnerable socioeconomic backgrounds, particularly from North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa.”

This is all bad enough. But the situation is compounded by the systemic reluctance to talk about what the data show. Despite France’s schools being in such a dire state, discussion of this is sorely missing from public discourse. In particular, the idea that a rapidly growing immigrant population might be partially to blame for academic underachievement is still treated as strictly taboo. As Le Floch-Imad notes, the impact of immigration on education remains a “blind spot” in public debate, even though more than three-quarters of French people now say they want stricter immigration policy. In the education world, the official rhetoric is still stuck in the mindset of viewing immigration as an ‘opportunity’ for France, celebrating the supposed cultural enrichment brought by migrant pupils while refusing to confront how mass, extra-European inflows have helped to deepen the school system’s crisis. The report explicitly calls for reckoning with these facts, without stigmatising individual children.

This silence surely stems from a fear of being branded as ‘racist’, ‘xenophobic,’ or ‘Islamophobic.’ Teachers are, understandably, reluctant to draw attention to the fact that many new arrivals and even children whose families have been in the country for multiple generations are unwilling to integrate—thus feeding into a cycle that sees children continue to fail. To make matters worse, this omertà is easily exploited by Islamists, who have a concerning and growing influence over the French education system. As the OID report notes, schools have become a “strategic target” for radicals to “impose their political and cultural codes, cultivate resentment among young people, and subvert society.” A state-commissioned report on the Muslim Brotherhood earlier this year confirms this fear, warning that the movement is pursuing a long-term strategy of “entryism” into French society. Islamists use associations, mosques and schools to spread political Islam and undermine secular values. Education was identified as one of the priority fields, with dozens of establishments and networks flagged as being in its orbit.

Research suggests that these attitudes are becoming deeply embedded in younger generations. Among high school pupils, 65% of Muslims reportedly place the laws of their religion above the laws of the French Republic, compared with 30% of Catholics. Muslim children are also increasingly willing to prioritise religious explanations for the world over scientific ones. One recent survey shows that 81% of Muslims aged between 18 and 24 believe that “when religion and science disagree on the question of the creation of the world,” religion is “usually right.”

All this makes French schools a breeding ground for ethnic divisions and conflicts. A poll from earlier this year found that, among all pupils, 16% would refuse to form certain relationships with Jewish students. That number rises to 52% for children whose parents were born outside of Europe. Even more shockingly, 71% of students who had witnessed antisemitic violence and whose parents were born outside of Europe believed the violence to be a positive act. That such views risk becoming normalised shows that France’s problems go far beyond just academic underachievement. A lack of proper integration threatens to destabilise French society.

France cannot afford to keep looking the other way. The basic function of any state-run school system is to transmit the values, history, shared knowledge, and language of the nation. Current levels of uncontrolled, and mostly unassimilated, migration means that schools are failing to do the bare minimum. The OID’s report is a warning that should be heeded both within France and across Europe. This problem will not go away on its own. As it stands, things are set to get a lot worse before they can get any better.

Original article: europeanconservative.com