Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

(Click on the image to enlarge)

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

(Click on the image to enlarge)

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Revolutions are funny things. They start out almost imperceptible. The final straw itself may be as inconsequential as a single voice in the crowd whose words unleash a tidal wave that sweeps aside the seemingly intractable old order forever.

Even as the cracks in the Eastern Bloc began to materialize in 1989, starting in June in Hungary, Nicolae and Elena Ceausescu’s Romania seemed impervious to the winds of change. They maintained a cult-like grip on power aided by the notorious and ubiquitous Securitate, the secret police.

On 21 December 1989 Ceausescu decided that the best way to quell a bubbling cauldron of unrest in Transylvania over the past several weeks was to appear, himself, with his wife Elena, above Bucharest’s Palace Square. Workers were bussed in and given red banners to wave in support of the regime. It was to be a show of force that would solidify the existing order.

After all, no one would dare challenge Ceausescu to his face.

As he confidently approached the microphone from the balcony and began mechanically repeating the tired old slogans of communism, suddenly a voice broke through with a high pitched scream, followed by an increasing din. The discordant sounds of protest rendered Ceausescu speechless and confused.

That second, when the false edifice of his rule was punctured and the impossibility of his position exposed, communist rule died in Romania.

America’s foreign policy has been a lot like the rule of Nicolae and Elena Ceausescu. Since President Reagan opened the door to the gang of “former” Trotskyites from New York who were hell bent on worldwide revolution while being ideologically driven by their absolute devotion to the state of Israel, US foreign policy has been dominated by an equivalent of Ceausescu’s Partidul Comunist Român.

Anyone who attempted to challenge the neocon dominance over US foreign policy was drummed out of society by the equivalent of Ceausescu’s Securitate. One by one, Pat Buchanan, Joseph Sobran, Sam Francis, the John Birch Society, Ron Paul, and any voice raised in opposition to neocon dominance over foreign policy was brutally attacked by the likes of William F. Buckley, Jr. and his minions of enforcers in the media and the think tanks, and the corridors of power and influence.

Trotsky is reputed – perhaps apocryphally – to have said that, “to oppose the state is to die a slow starvation,” and that is certainly true for any foreign policy analyst over the past 40-plus years who has spoken out against neocon dominance. No jobs, no publications, no way to be heard or even exist.

But suddenly that Berlin Wall has fallen.

Future history may record America’s “Ceausescu Moment” as November 6th, 2025.

The same mainstream/”alt” media and conservatism-industrial-complex that has refused to acknowledge Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk’s sharp turn against neocon, pro-Israel foreign policy have done their best to harness and re-direct the Charlie-less TPUSA back onto the foreign policy reservation. With a doubting Charlie conveniently gone, they assumed they could ascend the “Palace Square Bucharest” balcony, grab the microphone, and return America’s conservative youth to the “wisdom” of Bill Kristol, Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham, John Bolton, Dick Cheney, Mark Levin, and the rest of the blood-soaked dinosaurs.

However our own “high-pitched scream” that deflated Ceausescu came on November 6th not from a Mamdani “communist,” or from an “America-hating” Muslim, nor Hamas-devoted foreign student, nor tortured trans-genderist…or even a generic leftist.

No, it came from a corn-fed, conservative, earnest, American student at Auburn University in Alabama with the slow drawl of our great country’s 250 year history. In other words, the epitome of the Red, White, and Blue that burns in the soul of every American patriot.

The young man approached the open microphone and addressed President Trump’s son Eric and his wife Laura – ambassadors of the President’s claim to be the most pro-Israel Administration in US history – with a respectful set of questions.

I’d like to ask about your father’s relationship with Israel. He’s taken over $230 million from pro-Israel groups. In the summer even though the US advised against it, Israel attacked Iran and the US still bombed on behalf of Israel…Israel has not been a good ally to the US since the 1960s when they bombed the USS Liberty.

The crowd of CONSERVATIVE young Americans erupted into wild applause.

Israel is a nation where Christians are constantly under attack… We talk about America first and defending Christians, but how can we do this if we align ourselves with a nation that does not do that itself?

At this point the applause among TPUSA’s conservative youth was deafening.

Deer-in-the-headlights Eric Trump does a Ceaucescu, repeating the slogans of the old order and hoping their magic will still quell the restive population.

You have a nation chanting ‘death to America’ every single day on the streets of Tehran. You have a nation that will develop a nuclear weapon and that will use that nuclear weapon.

These are standard Benjamin Netanyahu talking points from 30 years ago. Laura looked like Elena. Arranging her perfect hair as the crowd remained silent at Eric Trump’s well-rehearsed applause lines. Silence. They’ve heard it all before and they have done their own research and know that these are neocon lies.

Guys: Iran wanted to destroy our way of live they wanted to hurt us they wanted to inflict real pain.

Silence. They’ve done their own research.

Eric then repeats the absurd claim that his father solved eight wars (involving countries whose names he cannot pronounce) and the silence continued. The bumper sticker slogans no longer worked with Charlie Kirk’s kids just as Ceaucescu’s slogans no longer worked with a Romania sick to death with it’s subservience to a dying Communist bloc.

This is a genie that can no longer be put back into the bottle. Toothpaste out of the tube. The same social media harnessed early on by the US “regime change” operatives seeking to fulfil the neocon project has been captured by young American conservatives who are revolting against the destructive “Israel-first” party line of their boomer forebears and no underhanded sale of TikTok to pro-Israel fanatics will change the fact.

From this point on, like Ceaucescu, Trump’s people dare not address openly the number one youth movement of their ideological base. They dare not risk stop after stop being questioned by earnest young conservatives about America’s toxic and self-destructive supplication to the state of Israel. They will go back into Nicolae Ceaucescu’s bunker. Terrified of the very “America First” movement they have launched.

Student to Eric and Lara Trump at TPUSA event in Auburn: “I’d like to ask about your father’s relationship with Israel. He’s taken over $230m from pro-Israel groups… Israel hasn’t been a great ally to the US…they bombed the USS Liberty.”

*Crowd erupts in rapturous applause* pic.twitter.com/kDxXuO1Jbm

— Chris Menahan 🇺🇸 (@infolibnews) November 6, 2025

Original article: The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity

Únete a nosotros en Telegram , Twitter  y VK .

Escríbenos: info@strategic-culture.su

La guerra por encargo conducida por Estados Unidos contra Rusia se están expandiendo hacia territorios de la Unión Europea y de los estados miembros de la OTAN. Notoriamente pareciera que el bloque militar de la OTAN está en guerra consigo mismo.

Hungría condena a Polonia por su “psicosis de guerra” y apoyar el terrorismo de estado.

Esta semana dos grandes refinerías en Hungría y Rumania sufrieron poderosas explosiones en el mismo día lunes. El primer ataque ocurrió contra la refinería Petrotel Lukoil al norte de la capital rumana Bucarest, horas más tarde la gran refinería húngara de Százhalombatta al sur de la capital, Bucarest, fue volada. Aún no ha sido determinado qué causó las explosiones, pero la acción casi simultánea haría que accidentes técnicos fueran extremadamente poco probables. En otras palabras, estos incidentes serían actos de sabotaje terrorista.

El contexto es también altamente indicativo. En el mismo día la refinería rusa Rosneft situada en Novokuibyshevsk fue cerrada, se informa que debido a un ataque por aparatos aéreos no tripulados.

De este modo, los ataques han sido parte de una campaña dirigida por la OTAN para dañar la industria petrolera rusa.

También durante esta semana, el gobierno de Trump reveló provocativas sanciones contra las compañías petrolíferas y gasíferas rusas Lukoil y Rosnfet. El régimen de Kiev y sus aliados europeos de la OTAN han estado pidiendo a Trump aplicar más sanciones económicas como una nueva manera de presionar a Rusia para que termine la guerra de Ucrania. No obstante la realidad es que la guerra económica es solo otro armamento que apunta hacia la derrota estratégica de Rusia bajo el cínico mote de “hacer la paz”.

Esta semana la Comisión Europea endureció sus planes para acabar con todas las importaciones de gas ruso a la Unión Europea revirtiendo décadas de productivo comercio energético.

Hungría y Eslovaquia y en un nivel menor Rumania han quedado en veremos con la OTAN y la Unión Europea por su política de guerra por encargo contra Rusia. Estos países yacen bajo una intensa presión para suspender sus importaciones de petróleo ruso.

Durante meses recientes el régimen de Kiev dirigido por la OTAN ha aumentado sus ataques aéreos de largo alcance contra estructuras energéticas rusas. La petrolera Druzhba (Amistad) fue atacada durante el mes de agosto, lo cual interrumpió el suministro para Hungría y Eslovaquia.

Los gobiernos húngaro y eslovaco abiertamente han desafiado la campaña de presión insistiendo en que sus países no detendrán la importación de petróleo ruso, ellos sostienen que esta resulta vital para sus economías y sociedades. Los países interiores tendrían dificultades y altos costos al reemplazar el suministro ruso.

Lo que resulta notable acerca de las explosiones de esta semana es que la campaña de sabotajes ahora está apuntando hacia territorios de países europeos y no solo a la infraestructura rusa de suministro a estos países.

Lo que es aún más importante, es que las potencias europeas alineadas con la OTAN están respaldando los ataques contra Hungría, Rumania y Eslovaquia.

El Ministro de Exteriores de Polonia, Radosław Sikorski, le dijo esta semana a Hungría que él ducto Druzhba sería eliminado totalmente para acabar así con la maquinaria de guerra de Putin.

El Primer Ministro húngaro, Viktor Orbán, denunció a Polonia por su psicosis de guerra. Durante una concentración por la paz en Budapest esta semana, Orban declaró que: Hungría dirá NO a la guerra. No moriremos por Ucrania. No enviaremos a nuestros hijos al matadero por mandato de Bruselas.

La voladura de estructuras energéticas civiles en Europa tiene antecedentes. Lo que está ocurriendo en Hungría y Rumania es una repetición de las explosiones de los gasoductos Nord Stream en el mes de septiembre de 2022 en que agentes de Estados Unidos y otros países de la OTAN llevaron a cabo cortando el suministro de combustible hacia Alemania.

Esta semana el Primer Ministro de Polonia, Donald Tusk, celebró el terrorismo del Nord Stream como un golpe legítimo contra Rusia “por invadir Ucrania.”

Ante lo cual, el Ministro de Exteriores de Hungría Péter Szijjártó replicó rechazándalo como un escándalo. Agregó que en Polonia si a Ud. no le gusta una infraestructura Ud. puede volarla. Con esto extendieron permiso por adelantado para los ataques terroristas en Europa… Esto es a lo que ha llegado el imperio de la ley en Europa.

Luego de los atentados del mes de agosto contra el gasoducto de Druzhba, el Ministro de Relaciones Exteriores de Hungría, acusó a la dirigencia europea en Bruselas de haberle dado al régimen de Kiev luz verde para realizar los ataques. La ausencia de una condena de parte de Bruselas contra Kiev fue notable.

Ahora la psicosis de guerra ha culminado en ataques terroristas en el propio territorio de los países europeos.

No existe duda alguna sobre quiénes son los culpables que están detrás de los ataques terroristas. Los ataques con aparatos aéreos no tripulados, podrían despegar desde territorio ucraniano. Pero la logística, la planificación y el apuntamiento requieren de la participación de la OTAN al más alto nivel, que como los ataques al Nord Stream y los actuales ataques profundos en territorio ruso. Las apuestas indican a la CIA y al MI6 y a sus encargados polacos y bálticos.

Otro factor es la oferta de parte de Hungría, para acoger una cumbre entre Trump y el presidente ruso Vladimir Putin para discutir el fin de la guerra por encargo. La cumbre fue suspendida esta semana, aparentemente por Trump. Justo cuando él anunció nuevas y duras sanciones contra la industria petrolera rusa. Pero la semana pasada cuando se propuso la reunión, las potencias de la OTAN fueron notificadas –de mala gana —sobre la iniciativa diplomática.

Szijjártó escribió, “Desde el momento en que la Cumbre de la Paz en Budapest fue anunciada, se hizo obvio que muchos harían lo imposible para detenerla antes que ocurriera. La elite pro belicista en sus medios siempre se comporta de esta manera ante los eventos que podrían decidir entre la guerra o la paz… Esta vez no sería diferente. Hasta que la cumbre se realice, una década de filtraciones, noticias falsas y declaraciones alegando que no ocurrirá

El Ministro de Exteriores podría agregar la oleada de tácticas de oposición —ataques terroristas — contra Hungría, Eslovaquia y Rumania y en cualquier parte o lugar donde el pueblo exija la paz. Y el fin de la psicosis de guerra.

La guerra por encargo que Estados Unidos ha instigado contra Rusia que Trump promovió desde su primer período fue siempre acerca de derrotar estratégicamente a Rusia incluyendo el uso de un escogido militar en Ucrania y la guerra económica La lógica de esta criminal estrategia incluye la voladura y el sacrificio de denominados aliados si se necesita ya sean que las economías de Alemania y europeas queden en ruinas, durante lo cual el Nord Stream fue cancelado y ahora las refinerías de petróleo de Hungría y Rumania. Y ¿Luego qué?

El otro siniestro suceso de esta semana, un hombre fue encarcelado por tratar de asesinar a Robert Fico el año pasado. Su atacante fue un pro ucraniano que atentó contra Fico por ser pro ruso.

La nefaria lógica de la experiencia de guerra de Estados Unidos conocida como SSTAN de manera absurda se auto declara defensora de la Alianza Occidental Transatlántica lo que significa que devora a sus propios cuando lo requieren sus prioridades estratégicas.

La OTAN está en guerra consigo misma y contra la paz en Europa. La larga y sucia historia de la Operación Gladio y el terrorismo de la OTAN en Europa están de la mano una vez más.

Traducción desde el inglés por Sergio R. Anacona

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The U.S.-led proxy war against Russia is expanding to the territories of European Union and NATO member states. Remarkably, it appears that the NATO military bloc is at war with itself.

Hungary is condemning Poland for “war psychosis” and supporting state terrorism.

This week, two major oil refinery installations in Hungary and Romania were hit by powerful explosions on the same day, Monday. The first occurred at the Petrotel-Lukoil refinery north of the Romanian capital, Bucharest. Hours later, Hungary’s premier refinery at Százhalombatta, south of the capital, Budapest, was blown up. It has not yet been determined what caused the blasts. But the near-simultaneous timing would make technical accidents extremely unlikely. In other words, the incidents were terrorist sabotage.

The context is highly indicative, too. On the same day, a Rosneft oil refinery in Russia’s Volga Oblast at Novokuibyshevsk was shut down, reportedly after a drone attack.

Thus, the attacks have to be seen as part of the NATO-directed campaign to cripple Russia’s oil industry.

Also, this week, the Trump administration unveiled provocative sanctions against Russian oil and gas companies, Lukoil and Rosneft. The Kiev regime and its European NATO allies have been calling for Trump to slap more sanctions on Russia. Trump has framed the escalatory economic measures as a way to pressure Russia to end the war in Ukraine. However, the reality is that economic warfare is just another weapon to bring about the strategic defeat of Russia under the cynical guise of “peacemaking”.

The European Commission this week tightened its plans to terminate all Russian oil and gas imports into the EU, reversing decades of productive energy trade.

Hungary and Slovakia, and to a lesser extent Romania, have remained at odds with the NATO and EU policy of proxy war against Russia. These countries have come under intense pressure to cut off their imports of Russian oil.

Over recent months, the NATO-directed Kiev regime has stepped up long-range air strikes on Russian energy infrastructure. The Druzhba (Friendship) pipeline was hit during August, which temporarily cut off supplies to Hungary and Slovakia.

The Hungarian and Slovakian governments have openly defied the pressure campaign, insisting that their countries will not stop importing Russian oil, which, they say, is a vital national interest for their economies and societies. The landlocked countries would find it difficult and costly to replace Russian supplies.

What is remarkable about this week’s explosions is that the sabotage campaign is now targeting the territories of European states, not just the Russian infrastructure supplying these states.

What is even more shocking is that the NATO-aligned European powers are backing the attacks on Hungary, Romania, and Slovakia.

Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski this week told Hungary that he hoped that the Druzhba pipeline would be taken out entirely “to stop Putin’s war machine.”

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán denounced Poland for its “war psychosis”. At a peace rally in Budapest this week, Orban declared: “Hungary says NO to war! We will not die for Ukraine. We will not send our children to the slaughterhouse at Brussels’ command.”

The blowing up of civilian energy infrastructure in Europe is not unprecedented. What is happening in Hungary and Romania is a repeat of the explosion of the Nord Stream gas pipelines in September 2022, which the U.S. and other NATO agents carried out to cut off Germany from Russian fuel.

This week, Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk celebrated the Nord Stream terrorism as a legitimate strike against Russia “for invading Ukraine.”

To which Hungary’s Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó responded by slamming it as “scandalous”. He added, “According to Poland, if you don’t like an infrastructure in Europe, you can blow it up. With this, they gave advance permission for terrorist attacks in Europe… this is what European rule of law has come to.”

After the August attacks on the Druzhba pipeline, Hungary’s foreign minister accused the European leadership in Brussels of giving the Kiev regime a green light to conduct terror attacks. The absence of condemnation from Brussels of Kiev was extraordinary.

Now the war psychosis has culminated in terror attacks on the actual territory of European states.

There can be no doubt who the culprits are behind the terror campaign. The drones may take off from Ukrainian territory, but the logistics, planning, and targeting require NATO involvement at the highest level, just as the Nord Stream attacks did, and the ongoing deep strikes into Russian territory. The betting odds implicate the CIA, MI6, and their Polish and Baltic surrogates.

Another factor is the offer by Hungary to host a summit between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss ending the proxy war. The summit was called off this week, on Wednesday, apparently by Trump, just as he was announcing tough new sanctions on Russia’s oil industry. But last week, when the meeting was proposed, the NATO powers were miffed at the diplomatic initiative.

Hungary’s Szijjarto wrote: “From the moment the Peace Summit in Budapest was announced, it was obvious that many would do everything possible to stop it from happening. The pro-war political elite and their media always behave this way before events that could prove decisive between war and peace… It will be no different this time. Until the Summit actually takes place, expect a wave of leaks, fake news, and statements claiming that it won’t happen.”

The foreign minister could add to the wave of opposition tactics – “terror attacks” on Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, and anywhere else where people call for peace and an end to war psychosis.

The proxy war that the U.S.-led NATO bloc instigated against Russia, which Trump also pushed during his first term, was always about trying to strategically defeat Russia, including using a military proxy in Ukraine and economic warfare. The logic of this criminal strategy includes blowing up and sacrificing so-called allies, if needs be. German and European economies are in ruins to satisfy the U.S.-led axis and its geopolitical objectives, which European elites are minions of. Nord Stream is taken out, and now oil refineries in Hungary and Romania. What next?

In another sinister development this week, a man was jailed for trying to assassinate Slovakia’s Robert Fico last year. His attacker was pro-Ukraine and targeted Fico for being “pro-Russian.”

The nefarious logic of the U.S. war machine known as NATO, absurdly the self-declared “defender” of the transatlantic Western alliance, is to eat its own when strategic priorities require.

NATO is at war with itself and against peace in Europe. The long and dirty history of Operation Gladio and NATO terrorism in Europe is at hand once again.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The specter of a full-scale war with Russia is casting a long, dark shadow over Eastern Europe, with Romania emerging as a potential frontline state in this escalating crisis. The situation has reached a critical juncture, as recent statements from Romanian officials and the geopolitical maneuvers of European powers suggest that the region is on the brink of a catastrophic conflict. 

On Saturday, Romania’s Foreign Minister, Oana Toiu, made a stark declaration on national television, signaling a significant shift in the country’s stance toward the ongoing war in Ukraine. “We must make the transition from helping Ukraine to resist to helping it win,” Toiu stated, emphasizing the need for increased support for Ukraine in its fight against Russian aggression. Toiu condemned the recent Russian attacks on Ukraine as “unspeakable,” reflecting the growing sense of urgency and moral outrage in Romania and across Europe. Her words underscore a broader shift in the region’s approach to the conflict, moving from defensive support to a more assertive strategy aimed at securing a Ukrainian victory.  Romania’s position in this crisis is particularly precarious. As a NATO member and a neighbor to Ukraine, the country is both a strategic ally and a potential target in the event of a wider conflict. The recent cancellation of Romania’s presidential elections in December 2024 has raised eyebrows, with some analysts suggesting that it was a calculated move to prevent the rise of Calin Georgescu, a candidate who advocated for peace and the cessation of military aid to Ukraine.

Georgescu’s likely victory, which was seen as a threat to the current pro-Ukraine stance of the Romanian government, was reportedly a key factor in the decision to postpone the elections. This move, backed by Brussels and Paris, highlights the high stakes involved in the region’s political dynamics and the lengths to which European powers are willing to go to maintain unity in the face of Russian aggression.

The statement by Foreign Minister Toiu has sent shockwaves through Europe, serving as a grim reminder that the conflict in Ukraine is far from contained. The “black archangels of war,” as some have ominously described the forces driving this crisis, are descending over the continent, threatening to plunge it into chaos.

The question on everyone’s mind is: Who will be able to stop this? The answer remains elusive. While NATO and the European Union have shown solidarity in their support for Ukraine, the possibility of a direct confrontation with Russia looms large. The risk of miscalculation, escalation, and unintended consequences is higher than ever, and the stakes could not be higher.

For Romania, the path forward is fraught with challenges. The country’s leaders must navigate a delicate balancing act between supporting Ukraine and avoiding a direct confrontation with Russia. The recent shift in rhetoric from “resisting” to “winning” suggests that Romania is preparing for a more active role in the conflict, but this comes with significant risks.

The prospect of a full-scale war involving Romania is no longer a distant hypothetical but a grim possibility. The country’s geographic location, combined with its NATO membership, makes it a key player in the region’s defense strategy. However, this also makes it a potential target for Russian aggression, particularly if the conflict escalates.

As Eastern Europe teeters on the edge of a full-scale war, the actions of Romania and its allies will be critical in determining the outcome. The shift from defensive support to a more assertive strategy reflects the growing recognition that the conflict in Ukraine is not just a regional crisis but a defining moment for Europe’s future.

The “black archangels of war” are indeed descending, and the question remains: Will Europe find a way to avert catastrophe, or will it be drawn into a conflict that could reshape the continent for generations to come? For Romania and its neighbors, the answer to this question will have profound implications, not just for their own security, but for the future of Europe as a whole.

Original article:  www.thediplomaticaffairs.com

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Whilst pointing the finger and claiming that Russia interfered with the first, initial round of Romania’s presidential elections in December of last year, the EU appears to have done the very same thing to get its own candidate to win.

Yet while there is little if any evidence to support the EU claims of Russian interference last year, when it looked like a populist leader would storm home, there is evidence to support a charge that the EU has more than simply meddled in Romania’s elections.

The recent allegations come from Pavel Durov, Telegram boss, who was arrested and held by the French authorities since last August. At the time it was reported that he had been detained by French police as France wanted to investigate child porn and international terrorists.

In fact, events have revealed that this was entirely untrue and the real reason was that the EU and France were both planning how to derail the populist candidate in the presidential elections in the same year.

Durov told Reuters that Nicolas Lerner, who leads the DGSE foreign spy agency in France, approached him and asked him to help with the dirty work.

“This spring at the Salon des Batailles in the Hôtel de Crillon, Nicolas Lerner, head of French intelligence, asked me to ban conservative voices in Romania ahead of elections. I refused,” Durov wrote on X late on May 18^th when the results came in.

“We didn’t block protesters in Russia, Belarus, or Iran. We won’t start doing it in Europe.”

The centrist mayor of Bucharest, Nicusor Dan, won Romania’s presidential election in what even Reuters have reported as a “shock victory” over George Simion, a hard-right, nationalist rival who had pledged to adopt a path inspired by U.S. President Donald Trump’s politics.

This desperate move by Macron is very telling as it shows a new low both for Paris and Brussels, with the latter particularly worried that its relevance is diminishing and with 3 EU member states acting as rebels on big decisions – Romania, Hungary and Slovakia – that there was a very real danger of the EU as we know it heading for the rocks. Something had to be done, something even quite underhand and illegal. It is unclear what the French spy chief actually did in Romania – as he arrived two days before the ballot – but on a technical level it is likely that the Romanians were swayed by fake news backed up by an artificial allusion on social media that Dan was way ahead in the polling – which would have swayed many to vote for him rather than Simion, the populist candidate.

What is interesting is that Macron took the lead on this when he is not at all the EU bloc’s chief diplomat. When the going gets tough, it seems the tough gets going and this can be the only explanation of the EU’s incumbent top diplo Kaja Kallas being a spectator to this plot which EU chiefs are barely denying. We have arrived at a new era of rock bottom governance both on a national level and on an EU one and dirty tricks like election interference has now become a norm for the EU and its big guns. They will literally stop at nothing to secure their own power and keep the lights on in Brussels and the Romanian elections are proof of this although the populist movement in Europe will only be strengthened by this craven move as now European voters can see the EU for what it is: a failed project.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

If, within a country living in the Western orbit, the will of the people prevails over political pressure, what can happen? This is the first question to ask about recent events in Moldova.

The situation in the country, as Stephen Karganovic has brilliantly reported, is quite tense. The Moldovan government, led by Maia Sandu — considered close to the interests of the collective West and re-elected president last autumn in circumstances deemed by many to be highly irregular — is now in a state of political instability, which cannot be attributed to Russian interference (as some Western journalists have claimed), but rather to the regime’s structural inability to address the deep social and ethnic problems afflicting the country, which, due to its geographical position, is a key point for NATO and the European Union’s advance towards the East, as well as a vital logistical base for supporting the Ukrainian government. Despite this, the Moldovan population, regardless of ethnicity, is increasingly sceptical of a political elite that appears increasingly tied to external interests. This sentiment is also evident in neighbouring Romania, where recent presidential elections (which were highly controversial) seem to confirm a similar dynamic. In this context, the power of the pro-Western Moldovan elite appears inherently precarious and requires constant distraction of public opinion, often through the construction of artificial external threats.

The numerous allegations of plots and attempts at destabilisation that have been raised by the Moldovan authorities over time have never gone beyond vague statements. None have ever been subjected to a regular trial, where credible evidence would have had to be presented. This dynamic closely resembles the characteristics of psychological operations carried out by Western secret services with the aim of keeping local governments in a state of dependence and constant alert.

The most important thing to bear in mind is that Moldova, together with Romania, is one of the countries chosen by NATO to serve as an operational base and command centre for the eastern front.

Maia Sandu, described by some as the “Zelensky of Chişinău”, has adopted an increasingly rigid and provocative line towards the eastern region of the country, fuelling internal tensions and dividing Moldovan society. The communities of Gagauzia and Taraclia, in particular, are showing a growing desire for secession, while discontent is growing among Russian-speaking Moldovans.

At the same time, Moldova’s process of rapprochement with NATO has intensified, despite opposition from the majority of the population: according to 2024 polls, 62% of Moldovans oppose joining the Alliance, while over 70% would prefer to maintain a position of neutrality. Despite this, joint military exercises with US, Polish and Romanian forces took place near Transnistria, with foreign helicopters flying over Chişinău and restrictions imposed on PMR vehicles. These actions are accompanied by measures limiting the use of the Russian language in the country.

In 2023, Ukraine also strengthened its military presence in the Odessa region, deploying 4,000 soldiers near Transnistria, coinciding with an official visit by the Ukrainian foreign minister to Chişinău. Despite the difficult economic situation, with a steady rise in the prices of essential goods, the Moldovan government had already approved substantial military spending.

Faced with the escalation and growing isolation of the separatist region, the Transnistrian parliament officially requested Russia’s help, appealing to the Duma, the Federation Council, the OSCE, the UN, the EU and other international organisations to take concrete measures to protect the PMR. Moscow responded by accusing the Moldovan government of erasing everything Russian, blocking negotiations in the 5+2 format and exerting strong economic and political pressure on the region. The Kremlin rightly described Chişinău’s policy as a direct derivation of Western strategies.

A political battle

On 15 May, Moldova set a great example of how to react to the soft power of globalist lobbies in the region, so powerful in Romania, the geographical neighbor, where Soros has had a historic presence since before the collapse of the USSR, by managing to prevent the continuation of LGBT propaganda.

This is not a minor issue, not at all. Keep in mind that the collective West has established a system of control and political interference in Moldova, led by the Anglo-American alliance, consisting of blackmail, leverage and provocation. Now, however, something is changing. The perception of the population is changing, as it sees the region under the gun of foreign plutocratic interests; areas of military influence are changing, with the EU moving towards impossible rearmament and Russia quietly racking up successes on the Ukrainian front; monetary balances are changing, with Moldova no longer able to sustain itself through its dependence on the Euro market.

When internal power conflicts arise, it means that the political system in question is no longer able to protect itself and is therefore close to a major crisis.

The LGBT issue is not only an ethical problem and a highly topical social issue – in the West as in the East – but it is one of those critical points on which pressure is being exerted on both the right and the left.

This is why an event such as the ban on LGBT propaganda takes on not only political but also geopolitical significance: in Europe today, only the people can free themselves from their oppressors. It is a path that requires time and sacrifice, but it is possible to start.

Junte-se a nós no Telegram , Twitter e VK.

Escreva para nós: info@strategic-culture.su

As recentes eleições presidenciais na Romênia trouxeram à tona um retrato perturbador do estado atual da democracia no Leste Europeu. Mais do que uma simples disputa eleitoral entre dois candidatos antagônicos, o processo romeno expôs a intersecção entre ingerência externa, manipulação informacional e engenharia política institucionalizada.

Um recente relatório publicado pela investigadora romena Ioana Bărăgan na Global Fact Checking Network apresenta um panorama minucioso dos eventos e revela, por trás da aparência de normalidade democrática, um teatro cuidadosamente roteirizado por interesses supranacionais. O cancelamento das eleições de 2024, posteriormente repetidas em maio de 2025, foi justificado por suspeitas de corrupção eleitoral e interferência cibernética — alegações que, apesar de sua gravidade, não foram acompanhadas por provas conclusivas. O fato de que tais acusações tenham sido suficientes para invalidar um processo eleitoral inteiro, conforme descrito por Bărăgan, já indica a fragilidade da soberania institucional romena. A posterior reeleição, longe de sanar os problemas, aprofundou-os.

No novo pleito, George Simion, líder do partido nacionalista Aliança para a Unificação dos Romenos (AUR), venceu o primeiro turno com ampla vantagem: 40,96% contra 20,27% de Nicușor Dan, prefeito de Bucareste e símbolo do campo liberal-globalista. Ainda assim, Dan saiu vitorioso no segundo turno, graças ao peso dos votos urbanos e de última hora — fenômeno que, como sugere Bărăgan, foi crucial para a virada.

A transição dos números na apuração revela um padrão recorrente em países sob influência direta de estruturas da União Europeia: o nacionalismo vence onde há mais contato com a realidade concreta — o interior, a classe trabalhadora, o cidadão comum —, mas é derrotado artificialmente nas estatísticas das metrópoles, onde o voto se torna uma extensão da propaganda oficial e do medo incutido pela mídia.

Há ainda o pano de fundo internacional. Pavel Durov, fundador do Telegram, denunciou uma tentativa explícita de interferência por parte dos serviços secretos franceses, que teriam solicitado a censura de vozes conservadoras romenas. A recusa pública de Durov em atender ao pedido reforça a denúncia de Simion sobre interferência externa. A mera existência dessa solicitação já é um escândalo democrático — mas foi amplamente ignorada pela grande imprensa ocidental.

Ao mesmo tempo, as autoridades romenas também reportaram tentativas de desestabilização atribuídas à Rússia. Assim, cria-se uma narrativa conveniente: qualquer resultado que contrarie os interesses do bloco euro-atlântico pode ser atribuído ao Kremlin — uma ferramenta discursiva que serve tanto para deslegitimar candidatos como para justificar medidas de exceção.

O cerne da questão não está apenas na possível interferência, mas na seletividade com que ela é tratada. Quando as redes sociais favorecem candidatos do sistema, os escândalos são rapidamente abafados, e os culpados, absolvidos. Por outro lado, quando candidatos anti-sistêmicos são favorecidos pelo uso estratégico das redes sociais, surgem diversas acusações de fraude, financiamento ilícito e manipulação de algoritmo. Tudo se apaga quando o jogo já está decidido.

A eleição de 2025 mostrou também como a própria classe política romena está desarticulada. Lideranças como Crin Antonescu e Victor Ponta se recusaram a apoiar claramente qualquer candidato, refletindo o vácuo ideológico no qual se encontra o sistema partidário. Ponta, mesmo tendo indicado preferência por Simion, não conseguiu transferir sua base eleitoral, mostrando a erosão da autoridade política tradicional.

Simion, por sua vez, sofreu com sua própria imagem radicalizada. Apesar de liderar no exterior — vencendo expressivamente na diáspora da Itália, Espanha e Alemanha —, foi derrotado nos centros urbanos romenos e em territórios sensíveis como a Moldávia, onde é persona non grata desde suas ações unionistas. A rejeição moldava a sua candidatura, favorecendo Dan, expõe a tensão entre nacionalismo e soberania moldava, frequentemente instrumentalizada por elites transnacionais para deslegitimar projetos de reunificação.

O papel da União Europeia e dos Estados Unidos também não pode ser ignorado. Como lembra Bărăgan, declarações como a do vice-presidente norte-americano JD Vance, criticando a fragilidade institucional da Romênia, foram ignoradas pelas lideranças romenas, que preferiram reafirmar sua submissão ao eixo euro-atlântico. A Comissão Europeia, por sua vez, iniciou uma investigação seletiva sobre o uso do TikTok nas eleições — mas sempre com foco no “perigo russo”, nunca nos mecanismos internos de manipulação.

O que se desenha, portanto, é uma democracia tutelada, onde os cidadãos votam, mas não decidem. As instituições existem, mas servem a uma agenda exógena. Candidatos são permitidos desde que não ameacem o consenso transnacional. O processo eleitoral é mantido como forma, mas esvaziado de conteúdo soberano.

Como bem pontuado por Bărăgan em seu artigo, o caso romeno mostra que o futuro da democracia na Europa Oriental depende cada vez menos dos eleitores e cada vez mais dos algoritmos, dos comissários de Bruxelas e das agências de inteligência do Ocidente. É uma lição amarga — mas necessária — para todos os que ainda acreditam que soberania popular e integração europeia possam coexistir.

Crisis in Romania clearly reveals the new direction of European democracy.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The recent presidential elections in Romania have brought to light a disturbing portrait of the current state of democracy in Eastern Europe. More than a simple electoral contest between two opposing candidates, the Romanian process exposed the intersection of external interference, informational manipulation, and institutionalized political engineering.

A recent report by Romanian researcher Ioana Bărăgan, published in the Global Fact Checking Network’s website, provides a detailed overview of the events and reveals that, behind the appearance of democratic normality, there is a carefully scripted performance driven by supranational interests. The cancellation of the 2024 elections—later repeated in May 2025—was justified by suspicions of electoral corruption and cyber interference. These allegations, serious as they may seem, were not supported by conclusive evidence. The mere fact that such accusations were enough to annul an entire electoral process, as described by Bărăgan, already points to the fragility of Romanian institutional sovereignty. The subsequent rerun election did not resolve these issues—it only deepened them.

In the new election, George Simion, leader of the nationalist Alliance for the Unification of Romanians (AUR), won the first round with a wide margin: 40.96% against 20.27% for Nicușor Dan, the mayor of Bucharest and a symbol of the liberal-globalist establishment. Nevertheless, Dan was declared the winner in the second round, largely due to last-minute votes from urban areas—a phenomenon that, as Bărăgan suggests, was crucial to the reversal.

The shift in vote counts reveals a recurring pattern in countries under the direct influence of EU structures: nationalism wins where there is stronger contact with everyday reality—rural areas, the working class, the average citizen—but is artificially defeated in the metropolitan statistics, where voting becomes an extension of state propaganda and fear incited by the media.

There is also the international backdrop to consider. Pavel Durov, founder of Telegram, publicly denounced a direct attempt at interference by French intelligence services, who allegedly requested that he censor conservative Romanian voices. Durov’s refusal to comply reinforces Simion’s claims of external meddling. The very existence of such a request is, in itself, a democratic scandal—but it was largely ignored by the mainstream Western press.

At the same time, Romanian authorities also reported destabilization attempts attributed to Russia. This creates a convenient narrative: any outcome that contradicts the interests of the Euro-Atlantic bloc can be blamed on the Kremlin—a rhetorical device used both to delegitimize opposition candidates and to justify exceptional measures.

The heart of the issue lies not only in the possibility of interference but in the selectivity with which it is addressed. When social media platforms favor establishment-aligned candidates, scandals are quickly silenced and the perpetrators absolved. Conversely, when anti-establishment candidates benefit from strategic use of these platforms, a flood of accusations emerges – ranging from fraud to illicit financing and algorithmic manipulation. Yet, everything fades once the game is settled.

The 2025 election also revealed the chaos within Romania’s own political class. Leaders such as Crin Antonescu and Victor Ponta refused to clearly support either candidate, reflecting the ideological vacuum within the party system. Even though Ponta signaled preference for Simion, he failed to transfer his voter base – demonstrating the erosion of traditional political authority.

Simion, for his part, struggled with his radicalized image. Despite leading abroad – with significant victories in the diaspora from Italy, Spain, and Germany – he was defeated in Romania’s urban centers and in sensitive regions like Moldova, where he is persona non grata due to his unionist activities. Moldova’s rejection of his candidacy, benefiting Dan, underscores the tension between Romanian nationalism and Moldovan sovereignty – often instrumentalized by transnational elites to discredit reunification projects.

The role of the European Union and the United States cannot be ignored. As Bărăgan reminds us, statements like that of U.S. Vice President JD Vance, who criticized Romania’s institutional weakness, were ignored by Romanian leaders who chose instead to reaffirm their submission to the Euro-Atlantic axis. The European Commission, meanwhile, launched a selective investigation into TikTok’s role in the elections—but with emphasis solely on the “Russian threat,” never on internal mechanisms of manipulation.

What emerges is a tutelary democracy, where citizens vote but do not decide. Institutions exist, but serve an external agenda. Candidates are allowed only as long as they do not challenge transnational consensus. The electoral process is preserved as a form—but emptied of sovereign substance.

As Bărăgan aptly states in her article, the Romanian case shows that the future of democracy in Eastern Europe depends less and less on voters, and more and more on algorithms, Brussels commissioners, and Western intelligence agencies. It is a bitter—but necessary—lesson for those who still believe that popular sovereignty and European integration can coexist.