Posted originally on Feb 5, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |
Could Europe defend itself without America? In January 2026, NATO launched Operation Steadfast to answer that question. The operation is the largest exercise of the year, deploying around 10,000 troops from 11 member states across Central Europe. The plan involves the Allied Reaction Force, a rapid response element designed to test trans-Atlantic coordination in simulated high-intensity conflict conditions from land, air, sea, and cyber.
However, America is still assisting European NATO allies in carrying out Operation Steadfast through its financial backing. Greenland is not the reason for the exercise, as the plan was drafted last year. Brussels wishes for Europe to operate, vote, behave, and attack as a collective. Politicians claim broad “Europe-wide” threats from foreign nations to justify a stronger military alliance. Neocons believe they can eventually create a European army that will protect Brussels above all else.
The same politicians who push for European military power have been undermining capital through debt, regulation, and climate mandates that have destroyed the continent’s energy supply.
NATO was created during a period of high confidence in government following World War II. The alliance worked because the United States was economically dominant, politically unified, and willing to absorb the cost of global security. Europe, by contrast, redirected capital away from defense and into social spending, bureaucracy, and regulation.
Europe’s reliance on the United States through NATO delayed reform, encouraged dependency, and allowed politicians to sell the illusion that defense costs nothing. That illusion is now ending.
The ECM has been warning that the 2026–2032 window marks rising global conflict risk. Not because leaders want war, but because declining confidence removes the mechanisms that prevent it. Alliances fracture, miscalculations rise, and nations act in self-interest rather than collective stability. NATO is in the confidence erosion phase. Article 5 can only go forth if each member believes in the cause.
Posted originally on Feb 3, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |
The letter I received from Trump, dated January 15th, discusses foreign policy, not domestic economics. It also says thank you for writing. This refers to the Peace Plan i wrote back in 2025 I was asked to write. Most of what I stated in that plan appears to have been implemented, except for my recommendation to exit NATO, which the letter addresses. However, I specifically included how this war began and laid the blame on the Neocons for installing an unelected government in Kiev and ordering them to invade the Donbas to kill Russians, trying to draw in Putin. They succeeded, but they control the press, which has been putting out the bullshit that Putin invaded “UNPROVOKED” to get young, stupid men and women to volunteer for war with the rally-around-the-flag psychological ploy to wage World War III. I believe I have shaken the ground that the Neocons stand on, so if I suddenly die by suicide, you know who really did it.
Of course, the European press are saying that to surrender the Donbas, Ukraine will commit suicide. They love war so much and are willing to sacrifice the future of their family all for the Donbas which the original Minsk Agreement was to allow them to vote on the fate of their own future. Chancellor Merkel admitted that she negotiated in bad faith and never intended to honor that peace agreement. They wallowing in the mud of propaganda.
The Road to Peace is undoubtedly attainable. I urge everyone to read my Peace Proposal that details the intricacies of restoring global order. The importance of restoring peace is paramount. Without peace, we will be forced to endure World War III—the destruction and loss of life is unfathomable. Share this document with whoever is willing to listen.The core of the peace plan is as follows. Yet, it is essential to read the full proposal to understand why these solutions could restore peace and change the course of history.
A plausible scenario / Restoration Deal Package
Putting the above together, a possible realistic “Restoration Deal” (from Russia’s perspective) might look like this:
Russia agrees to end the Ukrainian War in return for the honoring of the Minsk Agreement, a freeze of conflict lines, and allow the Donbas to vote on their basic human right to decide their own fate
In return, the U.S. (and EU) lift key sanctions on energy, rare earth exports, and financial transactions in stages
Russia commits to independent oversight (by international monitors) of resource exports, pricing, and revenue accounting
What the U.S. might realistically demand
(and what Russia would have to give)
From the U.S. (and allies) side, the demands would likely include:
Full transparency, auditing, and verification (to ensure that Russia does not exploit the relief to fund further military aggression)
Oversight on technology transfers and security constraints
Guarantees that lifted sanctions are reversible if Russia reneges
Some quid pro quo on Ukraine: withdrawal, territorial concessions, ceasefire, no reparations payments for Ukraine
Human rights, protection of minority groups, recognition of international law norms, and any Ukrainians located in the Donbas should be compensated to vacate the region
Russia would effectively have to offer more than just trade goods—it would have to offer political concessions, oversight, and legal guarantees that would enable it to join the world economy as an equal partner
Would such a deal restore Russia’s economy?
These proposals will help stabilize and revive parts of the Russian economy, but it will take time to establish a full “restoration” since that is not possible in the short-term. Some likely outcomes:
Increased export revenues from resource and rare-earth deals
Inflow of foreign investment (if investor confidence returns)
Technology and capacity rebuild via joint ventures
Partial reintegration into global financial systems (banking, capital markets)
Pressure/drive for domestic reforms (if tied to the deal)
If Trump stops listening to these losers who have never won a single war to date yet have created the largest perpetual rolling debt for their personal hatreds. Perhaps we stand a chance for peace. In these meetings with Zelensky, Trump must abandon Europe and the Neocons and be the real peacemaker. Zelensky must be stripped of his arrogant, greedy power.
My ultimatum would be simple
(1)You will honor the Minsk Agreement and allow the people of the Donbas to vote on their human right to remain as part of Ukraine, which hates their very existence and has engaged in ethnic cleansing.
(2) If Zelensky refuses, I will impose sanctions on Ukraine, and NO American company will be allowed to invest in Ukraine to cut off his trillion-dollar rebuild dream to become the richest billionaire of Ukraine.
(3) If NATO or the EU refuses to honor the very agreement that they signed, the US will withdraw from NATO.
(4) We cut a deal with Russia, allowing American companies to enter joint ventures in Russia to exploit the rare earths and resources with a joint guarantee that their investments will be safe.
(5) All sanctions of Russia are to be lifted, including the Magnitsky Act, with the sole exception of sanctions that were against individual spies.
(6) Agree to do a joint venture in the Arctic and Antarctica for natural resources and accept Putin’s proposal for a tunnel to Alaska.
Bottom line
(1) Drop all Sanctions
(2) Allow Joint Venture in Russia Jointly Guaranteed
(3) Agree to establish free trade zones
(4) Allow the Tunnel from Russia to Alaska
(5) EU must honor the Minsk Agreement or the USA exits NATO
(6) Ukraine must allow elections and must honor the Minsk Agreement or executive order prohibits all investment in Ukraine by any American company directly or indirectly
(7) If the Donbas votes to separate as in Czechoslovakia and in the Balkans, then they are to recognized by the United Nations or US withdraws all support for the United Nations.
Economic decline produces tensions, and this is what we are witnessing on a global scale, primarily due in part to the crisis in sovereign debts that nations are increasingly finding more difficult to service. The risk of a sanction producing war is far greater during an economic contraction, especially when Russia looks at this as a confrontation with NATO rather than Ukraine.
Posted originally on Feb 3, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |
In a recent interview, Donald Trump claimed he could “very easily solve” the United Nations’ financial problems by requiring member states to pay their dues, much as he pressured NATO allies to increase defense contributions during his first term. Trump would not be able to do this with funds, as that is not the true nature of the problem. The core of the institution has rotted; global powers no longer have strong confidence in the United Nations.
Yesterday, I wrote about theUnited Nations warning that it was facing an “imminent financial collapse. I argued that when institutions fail to adapt to shifting power dynamics, they collapse under their own contradictions. That is exactly what we are witnessing now.
The UN’s financial crisis is not primarily about $4 billion in unpaid dues. Rather, it’s about the loss of legitimacy and mutual trust among sovereign states. The UN is a creature of consensus and shared obligations, but the financial obligation has fallen on the US, and the American people no longer wish to foot the bill. This is precisely why there is a rising tide of nationalism, as people demand that their politicians and taxes stay within the domestic realm.
“When I’m no longer around to settle wars, the U.N. can,” Donald Trump said, acknowledging that he won’t always be the one intervening in global conflicts. “It has tremendous potential. Tremendous.”
Now, the UN has international respect and the ability to function based on SHARED interests. The United Nations was never designed to be a global government; it was a forum for negotiation among sovereign powers. It worked as long as the major powers had a shared interest in maintaining stability. But that shared interest has eroded.
The West is fracturing internally, with the US and Europe increasingly at odds on security, economic policy, defense obligations, and industrial strategy. Countries are less willing to fund an institution they no longer see as effective, fair, or aligned with their interests. Expectations regarding payment compliance are rooted in a bygone era when the UN’s agenda broadly aligned with American and Western strategic leadership. That alignment is gone.
Posted originally on Jan 28, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |
The idea that Europe always tries to conquer Russia is a common historical fact. To be accurate, there have been several major conflicts initiated by European powers against Russia, driven by specific geopolitical, ideological, and strategic reasons. It’s not a constant effort by a monolithic “Europe,” but rather a series of distinct invasions from different Western powers at different times; the goal has always been to capture Russian wealth. They consistently rewrite history to justify their endless greed to conquer Russia. The truth about the January 1863 Uprising against Russia, it was the Polish-Lithuanian Army that invaded and even occupied Moscow until the Russian people staged an uprising to take their country back.
Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, Lithuania’s President Gitanas Nauseda, and Poland’s President Karol Nawrocki met to commemorate the 1863 January Uprising against Russian rule. They have declared their hatred for Russians and boldly stated “Russia will ALWAYS be a threat.”
The January Uprising is a central symbol of Polish resistance and the fight for independence, and its memory is honored for its heroism and sacrifice. However, this is also a one-side revision of history.
The January Uprising of 1863 was not a war, it was a major Polish-Lithuanian rebellion against the Russian Empire that ended in a decisive defeat for the rebels. What they omit from their history books is the blunt fact that the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth invaded Russia during a period of profound crisis known as the Time of Troubles (c. 1598-1613). This was not a single, clear-cut war but a complex series of interventions and campaigns driven by Polish-Lithuanian ambition to conquer Russia for its wealth taking advantage of internal Russian instability. So to be historically correct, they sought to conquer Russia, lost, were then occuppied, and celebrate this 1863 uprising as if they were the victims of an invasion they launched and lost.
The Dimitriads (1605-1612) This refers to Polish-backed campaigns by pretenders to the Russian throne, known as False Dmitrys. False Dmitry I (1605-1606) with the support of Polish magnates, invaded Russia, gained support from disaffected Russians, and briefly seized the throne in Moscow. His rule ended with his assassination.
False Dmitry II (1607-1610) was a second pretender, also backed by Polish-Lithuanian forces and Cossacks, set up an alternate court near Moscow. His campaign further destabilized the country.
Then came the Polish-Muscovite War (1609-1618). As the chaos continued, King Sigismund III Vasa of Poland-Lithuania shifted from covert support for pretenders to an open, royal invasion with the goal of conquering Russia and placing his son (or himself) on the throne.
The Polish-Lithuanian army besieged and captured the key fortress city of Smolensk (1609-1611) after a long and brutal 20-month siege. A decisive Polish-Lithuanian victory over a much larger Russian-Swedish army took place at the Battle of Klushino in 1610. This opened the road to Moscow.
Polish Occupation of Moscow the took place 1610-1612. Following Klushino, a group of Russian boyars invited the Polish prince Władysław IV Vasa to become Tsar, on conditions including his conversion to Orthodoxy. Polish-Lithuanian troops entered and garrisoned the Moscow Kremlin. However, King Sigismund insisted he should be Tsar, negotiations broke down, and the occupation turned into a hostile siege from within the Kremlin itself.
A Russian national uprising, led by Kuzma Minin and Prince Dmitry Pozharsky, formed a militia and besieged the Polish garrison in the Kremlin. In November 1612, the starving Polish forces surrendered, ending the occupation. This event is now commemorated in Russia as National Unity Day.
The war officially ended with the Truce of Deulino (1618), which granted the Commonwealth significant territorial gains, including the Smolensk region. However, the primary goal of placing a Polish king on the Russian throne had failed.
The Polish invaded Russia during a civil war. The Commonwealth exploited Russia’s internal collapse (dynastic crisis, famine, peasant uprisings). It ultimately failed yet the Commonwealth gained territory, the core ambition of political control over Russia was defeated by a national uprising.
In Russia, this period is remembered as a patriotic struggle against foreign invaders. In Poland, it is seen as the zenith of the Commonwealth’s power and a “lost opportunity” to dominate Eastern Europe.
This invasion was a pivotal moment that deepened the long-standing rivalry between the two powers, setting the stage for future conflicts (like the Smolensk War and The Deluge) and contributing to a mutual distrust that shaped Eastern European history for centuries.
To this day, celebrating the January Uprising of 1863 is a revision of history for Russia has NEVER invaded Europe even once, whereas there have been five attempted conquests of Russia sll based on the fact that to this day, Russia is still the richest country on Earth from a natural resource perspective. In 1917, Russia had the largest gold reserves in the world. Someone hid them so the Communists would not get them, and they have never been found since.
The German Emperor Wilhelm II Imperial Government actually feared that Russia would enter World War I. The rising communist movement in Russia was anti-war. Germany saw a chance for victory in Europe if it kept Russia out of the war. Hence, Germany supported the Communist anti-war sentiment of the Bolsheviks in Russia. Germany permitted Vladimir Lenin (1870-1924) to travel in a sealed train wagon from his place of exile in Switzerland through Germany, Sweden, and Finland to Petrograd. Since the start of the February Revolution in Russia, Lenin was trying to figure out a way to get back into Russia. Germany aided his return assuming he was anti-war and would thus keep Russia out of World War I. Lenin returned to Russian on April 16th, 1917. Within months of arriving, Lenin led the October Revolution in Russia and the Bolsheviks seized power and indeed Russia withdrew from the world war. According to Leon Trotsky, the October Revolution would not have succeeded without Lenin.
The West has been abscessed with Russia for centuries. They are painted as evil and the excuse always changes. Before Gorbachev, it was that Russia was Communist and wanted to spread communism and conquer Europe. Communism collapsed all by itself, but the claim that Russia wants to still invade Europe remains. It does not matter who is the head of state in Russia, they will always change the narative to justify the conquest of Russia no matter what.
As one of our readers from Poland noted, the October 26th 2023 turning point was the precise day that President Duda called for a new Polish parliament to convene after the October 15th elections. Our models show a Directional Change in 2027 and that volatility in Poland was due to start rising here in 2026 all the way into 2034.
Europe seems to have a death wish because the EU experiment is failing. Instead of addressing the issues, they prefer to live in the past, assume they can conquer Russia and the 6th time will be the charm, celebrate with $75 trillion in assets, free gas for all, and the EU will rise to lead the world, which is why Carney is taking Canada into the arms of the EU.
Posted originally on Jan 27, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |
Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, Lithuania’s President Gitanas Nauseda, and Poland’s President Karol Nawrocki met to commemorate the 1863 January Uprising against Russian rule. Even though 163 years have passed, politicians still believe that Russia is an enemy that could attempt to conquer their land at a moment’s notice. The Europeans simply cannot help themselves. They NEVER learn from history, and that is why history keeps repeating itself. Kyiv Post ran an article with the headline “Russia and Its Leaders Will Always be a Threat to Europe” that basically sums up the mindset that has been driving this entire conflict from day one.
“Policies backing a ‘reset’ with the Russian Federation are disappearing, but one thing remains unchanged: whether it’s Tsarist Russia, Bolshevik Russia, or Vladimir Putin’s Russia, our countries, now independent, still face the same threat from the Russian Federation,” Poland’s President Nawrocki said. He added: “The countries of central and eastern Europe were not wrong in their opinions about the Russian threat, even at a time when western Europe was still focused on climate policy or letting in illegal immigrants.”
This is the same propaganda cycle that we have seen for centuries. You demonize the opponent, you claim they are inherently aggressive, you declare that they will “never change,” and then you justify endless war spending, suppression of dissent, and total economic destruction at home. President Nawrocki admitted that Europe will always view Russia as a threat, regardless of who is in charge.
The real threat is Europe’s leadership, which is dragging the continent into an economic depression. Every time they push sanctions, weaponize trade, and centralize power in Brussels, they accelerate the capital flight and the collapse in confidence. People do not understand that wars are not just fought with weapons. They are fought with capital flows. Once confidence breaks in government, money moves. That is why gold rises when people are trying to get OUT of the system. They are trying to escape the arbitrary rule of government and the risk of confiscation, capital controls, or banking restrictions. Europe is walking right into that trap again.
And of course, once they create this narrative that “Russia will ALWAYS be a threat,” then there is no room for peace. You cannot negotiate with someone you claim is permanently evil. That is the entire point. If peace breaks out, then the excuses for authoritarian policy at home disappear. The budget scams get exposed. The censorship ends. And the public begins asking why they were sacrificed for a political agenda.
This is why I have warned that the war cycle is rising into 2026. War becomes the tool of last resort for governments that have destroyed their own economies and need an external enemy to blame. It is not about defending Ukraine. It is about preserving a system that is collapsing under sovereign debt, energy shortages, and political corruption.
Posted originally on Jan 27, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |
China’s President Xi Jinping praised India for its friendship as India celebrated its 77th Republic Day. Xi exclaimed that China-India relations are of “great significance for maintaining and promoting world peace and prosperity,” as he praised their alliance, adding, “dragon and the elephant dancing together.”
The two nuclear powers share a 2,400 mile border that has been the culprit of disputes over the years. In 2020, a heated fight at the border led to the deaths of 20 Indian and four Chinese soldiers. Both sides increased their military presence along the Himalayan border, but after five years, the nations realigned based on trade, the great peacemaker.
India is not Europe. It is not beholden to a centralized power source. India still thinks in terms of nationhood, sovereignty, and survival. That is why it is rising. It will not destroy itself to satisfy some international bureaucrat or climate agenda. That puts India in a unique position in the emerging multipolar world.
China also understands something Europe does not–you cannot fight on too many fronts. We have countless historical examples. Napoleon did not lose because he lacked courage. He lost because he expanded too far, opened too many fronts, and logistics collapsed. Empires do not die from one battle. They die from overstretch, internal division, and loss of confidence. China does not want a major escalation with India while it is already managing Taiwan tensions, trade wars, and internal economic strains. China does not need another neighboring enemy.
India will benefit from this shift because it is being viewed as an alternative manufacturing base and a political counterweight. That does not mean India is “anti-China.” It means India is becoming strategically indispensable. China does not want India firmly locked into the Western sphere, and India is benefiting from remaining neutral.
Posted originally on Jan 27, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |
QUESTION: The Kremlin refuses to end the war in Ukraine unless the Donbas region is surrendered. Zelensky has previously stated he will not hand over the Donbas region to Moscow. This looks like what you have said. No resolution. Are we headed into more warfare in February/March?
DG
ANSWER: Zelensky is a piece of shit and that’s a complement since he is far worse than that. He does not represent Ukraine and he takes his orders from the EU and NATO. Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia broke apart according to ethnic regions. The Minsk Agreement was the answer and I will remine everyone that Ukrainians hate the Russian people no different than Hamas vs Israel or Iran.
In May 2014, precisely on target, the Ukrainians began to attack Russians on the street, beating them and killing them. They wanted all Russians dead, and the Western Press turned a blind eye. The hatred in Ukraine of non-Ukrainians goes back to the ethnic cleansing they engaged in when they were Nazis. They hate Russians, along with all other minorities they hate and do not trust. The Donbas moved to separate after the Ukrainian were killing ethnic Russians on the street. If Russia surrendered the Donbas to Zelensky, they will carry out a massive genocide. He has already outlawed their religion, their language, and ordered that Christmas will no longer be in January. The Western press refuses to tell the truth and as such, they are paid to ensure we get war.
When we look at the blood war between Ukraine and Russia, we will reach a very critical turning point June 13th, 2026. Dmitry Medvedev said that Russia was very close to considering to nuke Ukraine last December when Zelensky attempted for a 3rd time to assassinate Putin.
President Trump has responded to the threats by Iran to kill him personally. As he said, such an act would warrant the total obliteration of a country that violated international law. Zelensky sent drone to try to kill Putin when flying in his helicopter. He knows that would set in motion World War III. Yet Zelensky continues to assassinate Russians whenever he get the chance and NATO cheers him on as they cannot wait to start war.
The target on NATO Agression is September 2nd, 2026. NOBODY seems to want peace. That is simple, Ukraine MUST honor the Minsk Agreement it signed, allow the people of the Donbas to vote on their own future. They surely will not want to be part of Ukraine which has been the mother-country of ethnic cleansing.
It was Kiev that started this war NOT Russia. They declared everyone in the Donbas to be a terrorist because they moved to separate after the Ukrainians were slaughtering Russians in Odessa. Anyone who thinks this is being a Putin supporter, grab your gun, go to Ukraine and defend the people would support.
The EU signed a peace deal and lied to Russia never intending to honor it. Merkel admitted that publicly that they would buying time for Ukraine to build an army to start World War III.
Before Russia crossed the border to defend the Donbas, he told Zelensky to his face that honoring the Minsk Agreement was paramount.
Our computer has gone flatline on Ukraine. It will NOT survive as we know it. Zelensky is lining his pockets and is sacrificing Ukraine at the direction of the Neocons. The Ukrainian people are just pawns on a chessboard for NATO. Nobody gives a second thought about the Ukrainian people.
Why Trump’s Art of the Deal Cannot Work in a Blood Feud
Trump thinks he’s negotiating a real estate deal. He sees territorial disputes over the Donbas, security guarantees, and NATO membership as “very thorny issues” that can be resolved through compromise. Get both sides to give a little, split the difference, shake hands, move on. The problem is you cannot negotiate with a Ukrainian. Sorry, I have tried. I even had two employees in Ukraine one on each side. You cannot reason. If you brought a bottle of vodka to dinner in Kiev and it was Russian, they regarded that as an insult and you were lucky if they did not smash it over your head and this was all before 2014.
This isn’t a real estate negotiation. This is even more than a regime survival. This is a deeply engrained blood feud. This has escalated to the point that the West does NOT appreciate the seriousness here. Putin isn’t fighting now just for the Donbas. He’s fighting to stay politically alive. Accepting a peace deal that leaves Ukraine in control of the Donbas invites WWIII. If Putin were forced out of Ukraine, this will be Coup #3 and then you will get a Russia Neocon who would have no problem engaging in WWIII knowing this is not about Ukraine, this is about the destruction of Russia. Coup #1 took place in 1964 after Khrushchev was forced to backdown after the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. Then Coup #2 was against Gorbachev after fears he might accept the deal to join NATO. Putin is NOT a hardline Neocon nor is he a Communist. That is why Boris Yelstin turned to him for the Communists had filed a motion to impeach him trying to stage Coup #3 to take Russia back to the USSR.
It is amazing to me how the press keep cheering the idea of defeating Putin. They cannot see the big picture nor can they contemplate what would be the next step. Russia does have Moscow ringed with Neutral Missiles. For those who do not know that a Neutron bomb is, let me explain it. A neutron bomb is a type of nuclear bomb, but it’s a special design that optimizes one effect (radiation) while minimizing others (blast and heat). Even if you are in a bunker, a neutron bomb generates such intense radiation that it would penetrate shelters, buildings, and even reach into a bunker killing the people inside without causing major damage to the structure. However, what this would also do is actually neutralize an incoming nuclear missile. It would fry all electronics.
Besides Russia’s hypersonic missiles, it also has the Shkval (VA-111 Shkval) rocket torpedo. It travel inside a bubble within water. The “bubble” is the key to its incredible speed. This is known as Supercavitation. Instead of trying to move through dense water, the Shkval creates a giant, continuous gas bubble (a cavity) around its entire body. This reduces the friction with a Gas Generator. The nose of the torpedo has a cavitator. As it moves, a gas generator (usually burning fuel) expels hot gas through this nose, creating and maintaining the bubble.
Inside this bubble of gas, the torpedo experiences dramatically reduced hydrodynamic drag—essentially, it’s flying through a gas envelope rather than plowing through water. This allows it to reach speeds impossible for conventional torpedoes. It is know to have Reported Speeds of 200 knots and possibly greater (approximately 230 mph or 370 km/h). This is 4-5 times faster than a standard Western torpedo (which typically travels 40-50 knots). Its propulsion instead of a propeller is a solid-fuel rocket engine for its initial sprint, then a liquid-fuel ramjet for sustained speed in later models.
The Western press make it sound that Russia is weak, and we can take them with zero causalities with one arm tied behind our back. Putin is NOT a Neocon. Replace him and you will get a Neocon who will be as irresponsible our our Neocons who have no regard for human life. They think this is a video game of Maro Brothers and they have to win at all costs, which is everyone else’s children – never their own.
Posted originally on Jan 20, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |
The Board of Peace was established in November 2025 to champion the Gaza-Israel ceasefire. Donald Trump will act as the first chairman and has begun inviting nations to join, including Russia. The headlines are reacting as if this is some radical, unprecedented concept.
I have said repeatedly that the real objective for decades has never been “defense.” It has been control. NATO was transformed from a Cold War alliance into a political weapon, and once you turn something into an instrument of power, you can no longer negotiate honestly because your entire structure depends upon having an enemy. That is why every peace proposal gets attacked by the very people who claim they want peace. Their careers, budgets, and political relevance depend on conflict.
Here is what the press will not tell you. Russia was asked to join NATO in the 1990s. I have seen the declassified documents from the Clinton Administration and provided them in my book, The Plot to Seize Russia. Russia was offered the chance to join NATO. That was viewed internally as a surrender to the United States, and it fueled political backlash inside Russia. Yeltsin standing on the tank was not some Hollywood moment. It was the turning point where Russia’s internal struggle over its future collided with how the West was positioning itself behind the scenes.
The West had a window where it could have ended the Cold War properly. Instead, it pivoted into expansion, not because it was “necessary,” but because it was profitable and politically useful. They wanted a unipolar world. They wanted Russia down permanently. They wanted Europe locked into dependence. And now they stand there shocked that Russia will not play the role of obedient subordinate.
The Board of Peace is a public relations attempt to manage a crisis that has spiraled beyond anyone’s control. The bankers, the politicians, and the bureaucrats are all trapped. Europe is collapsing economically, and war has become the only policy tool they have left to distract the population from the failure of their fiscal mismanagement, their censorship, their energy suicide, and their endless taxation.
Trump’s instinct here is not wrong: peace comes from aligning interests, not moral posturing. If you want to stop wars, you have to remove the incentive structure that rewards war. Bringing Russia into a broader security framework is not a “gift” to Russia. It is a way to remove the excuse for escalation. It is what should have happened decades ago. But the Neocons cannot allow that because the moment there is peace, the public starts asking where all the money went, why their standard of living is falling, and why government debt has exploded to levels that cannot be sustained.
Europe claims Russia is the threat, yet they have been pushing NATO to Russia’s border for decades while pretending it was “defensive.” If Russia had placed a military alliance on the US border, Washington would have responded the same way. This is not complicated. It is human nature and geopolitics.
The world is moving into a Sovereign Debt Crisis. That is the real backdrop to all of this. Governments are desperate because they cannot fund themselves honestly anymore. They will use war to justify capital controls. They will use war to justify surveillance. They will use war to justify anything. That is why the trend is becoming far more hostile globally. This is not about one man, one country, or one election. It is the cycle of government itself. Confidence rises and falls, and when confidence collapses, governments always reach for force.
If Trump is serious about a new peace structure, it will not be popular among the establishment because it threatens the entire war machine. And if Russia joining NATO is even discussed, it will expose the biggest lie of the last 30 years — that this was ever about defense rather than domination. They had the chance in the 1990s. They rejected real peace then, because peace did not
Posted originally on Jan 20, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |
Trump is requesting that Board of Peace member states pay $1 billion for permanent membership. This kind of blunt, transactional policy is misread by those who believe peace should come without a price tag, but it exposes the core hypocrisy that has infected NATO and the entire post-war alliance structure.
For decades, Europe has behaved as if the United States is some endless ATM that exists to underwrite its defense, its bureaucracy, and its political fantasies. They lecture the world about morality, human rights, and “shared values,” while simultaneously refusing to pay their own bills. NATOhas become the perfect example. The United States supplies the overwhelming share of the money, the hardware, the logistics, and the risk, while Europe holds press conferences and tells America what it “must” do. That is not an alliance.
The press will portray this $1 billion idea as extortion. There is no such thing as collective security without collective contribution. If a country wants a seat at the table permanently, wants access to intelligence, protection, diplomacy, crisis response, and the prestige of being “in the club,” then they should have skin in the game. Otherwise, what you get is what we have now where countries demand war because they know someone else will pay for it.
Members can participate for three-year stints without the lump sum, but a lifetime membership is bought at a fixed price. That is far more honest than the current arrangement, where membership becomes a permanent entitlement, and the bill gets dumped on the United States through political pressure. At least this is transparent. Pay for permanence or rotate in and out.
The real issue here is that NATO was never designed to be a welfare system. It was created in a very different era, and like every bureaucracy, it evolved into something that exists for its own survival. Once an institution has payrolls, pensions, contractors, and political status, it will find reasons to continue forever. That is why NATO has expanded rather than dissolved after the Cold War. That is why there is always a new “existential threat.” If there is no enemy, there is no justification for the budget.
Trump treats alliances like contracts. Contracts require terms, enforcement, and payment. The Europeans want the benefits of an American security, but they do not want the obligations. That is why they always scream “America First” as if it is some crime to defend your own national interest.
But Europe cannot pay. That is the underlying reason for the entire crisis. They are sinking under socialism, overregulation, and endless taxation. Their energy policy has been economic suicide. Their debt is rising while their economies stagnate. Their demographic trend is collapsing. They have built a model where productive people are punished to subsidize bureaucracies and political promises that can never be honored. And the establishment now seeks war because it distracts the people, justifies emergency powers, and provides an excuse for confiscation.
The media will claim this makes diplomacy exclusive or pay-to-play. But diplomacy is already pay-to-play. It always has been. The difference is that now the payment is explicit rather than hidden through backdoor pressure, debt issuance, and American taxpayers financing Europe’s defense while Europe spends money on welfare programs and lectures America about climate taxes. When an alliance becomes a one-way street, it will not last. Trump is simply forcing the accounting that everyone else has refused to do.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 