In the Sunday Gospel, Jesus cuts right through the modern Western tendency to place love in opposition with law, and law in opposition with joy. Jesus joins all three concepts and summons us to a new attitude.

I. Announcement of the Principle – Jesus says, As the Father loves me, so I also love you. Remain in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and remain in his love. I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and your joy might be complete.

Note how the Lord joins the three concepts of love, law, and joy. This is precisely the opposite of what Western culture does. The best that Western culture will admit of law is that it is a necessary evil; more routinely it is viewed as an unloving imposition by the powerful on the weak, the hierarchy on the laity, the (evil, oppressive, pharisaical) Church on decent people.

Whereas the modern world disconnects law from love, Jesus links them. How do we both experience and show God’s love? Jesus says that we do so by keeping His commandments. He sets forth a vision whereby we, having experienced God’s love, desire and rejoice in His commands. 

Again, this is quite contrary to modern notions. According to the modern world, a “loving” God has few or no rules. He merely affirms, encourages, accepts, and includes—or so goes the thinking. If someone is confronted by a moral truth that displeases them, their retort may be as simplistic as “God is love.” It implies that God does mind what we do since he is loving and merciful. It also confuses love with mere kindness. Kindness is an aspect of Love, but so is rebuke and correction. No loving parents will simply affirm bad behavior in their children. They will correct them, and, if necessary punish them because they love them. 

Jesus too is  surely loving, especially of sinners. He encourages us, he includes the outcast, and so forth, but He also speaks of sin and rebukes it. He embraces the sinner but directs him to “Sin no more.” He sets forth a demanding moral vision even as He shows mercy. In this Gospel, Jesus joins love and the law, saying that the law brings joy. They are not opposed. It is not an either/or, but a both/and. Jesus was not just the “affirmer in chief” who went about saying nothing but pleasant things. He, and his apostles who spoke for him, also speaks against anger, greed, malice, neglect of the poor, divorce, fornication, adultery, impure thoughts, homosexual acts, lack of faith, revenge, dishonesty, the sin of human respect, false and worldly priorities, and countless other matters.

II. Application of the Principle – The two greatest Commandments that summarize the whole law are to Love God and to love our neighbor. Hence,  to further connect the Law and the Love of God,  we should consider that when we love the Lord, and his love remains in us, that we will love what he loves and who he loves. Hence, with the Lord’s love in us we will love justice, chastity, forgiveness, generosity, and so forth. We will also come to love others more deeply, even those that trouble us. So there comes to us a deep love of the Commandments when we truly love God. We can say, “God has been good to me and I love him. If God wants it, I want it too. If God doesn’t want it neither do I.”  Hence, Jesus says, “If you keep my commandments, you will remain in my love.”

As for the love of neighbor, here too, the Commandments are essential. They foster a common moral vision that helps us to live together, protect the vulnerable (especially children) and live within accepted boundaries. Good fences make good neighbors and God’s commandments set proper limits and delineate expectations and rights for communal living. Accepting and living the Commandments brings blessings and averts a lot of trouble. We do not keep the Commandments merely for our own sake, but for our families, community, Church and nation. So, keeping the Commandments is a way of loving our neighbor.

Though some see the Commandments as prison walls, they are not. They are defending walls that keep the wolf and devourer, the devil, away.  This too is a way of showing love for our neighbor. What ever we can do to limit the devil’s influence is a blessing not only for us but for others.

III. The Animation of the Principle – In the today’s Gospel, not only does Jesus link love to the keeping of the commandments, but also says that the keeping of the commandments leads to joy: I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and your joy might be complete.

Of this, I am a witness. When I entered the Seminary nearly forty years ago I was poorly catechized (having been largely reared in the 1970s). I don’t think I could even have listed most of the the Ten Commandments. But as I entered I was amazed at the rich legacy of teaching, truth and wisdom that came from the Scriptures and the teachings of the Church I was studying. God’s truth and law made sense, it was practical, good, true and beautiful. I was animated, thrilled in my soul to learn of it and somewhat angry at how much was denied me in the crazy 1970s. In my life now, I rejoice to study God’s law and truth, to preach it and teach it to others. In it are contained saving truths, and truths that explain the purpose of our life. So many today live without real meaning, and they focus on passing things and fads. But God’s Law is tested and true. It has endured because it makes sense and works. I am mindful of the words of Baruch: Happy are we O Israel, for what pleases God is known to us! (Bar 4:4)

Indeed, O Lord, how I love your law! It is the joy and center of my life. It gives me understanding and purpose. It teaches me your wisdom and summons me to be the man you created me to be. Yes, Lord, it is my immense joy and privilege to proclaim your Law in the great assembly and joyfully announce your wisdom and your decrees. Keep me faithful Lord unto death. 

The Law of the LORD is perfect,
reviving the soul;
the testimony of the LORD is trustworthy,
making wise the simple.

The precepts of the LORD are right,
bringing joy to the heart;
the commandments of the LORD are radiant,
giving light to the eyes.

The fear of the LORD is pure,
enduring forever;
the judgments of the LORD are true,
and altogether righteous.

They are more precious than gold,
than much pure gold;
they are sweeter than honey,
than honey from the comb.

By them indeed Your servant is warned;
in keeping them is great reward.

Psalm 19: 6-11

The post On the Paradoxical Connection Between Love, Law and Joy – A Homily for the 6th Sunday of Easter appeared first on Community in Mission.

The meaning of the words ‘civil society’ changes depending on whether Washington is speaking about protests inside or outside the American border

The elites and mainstream media of the West are so addicted to double standards that spotting yet another one is hardly news. These are the people who have just given us genocide re-labeled as ”self-defense,” who abhor spheres of influence except when they are global and belong to Washington (with a sidekick role for Brussels), and who insist on the rule of law while threatening the International Criminal Court if it so much as dares look their way.

Yet there is something special about the latest case of Western ‘values’ schizophrenia, this time about the concept of ‘civil society’ in conjunction with two political struggles, one in the US and the other in the Caucasus nation of Georgia.

In the US, students, professors, and others are protesting against the ongoing Israeli genocide of the Palestinians and against American participation in that crime. In Georgia, the issue at stake is a proposed law to impose transparency on the sprawling and unusually powerful NGO sector. Its critics denounce this law as a government power grab and as somehow ‘Russian’ (which, spoiler alert, it is not).

The very different reactions to these two cases of intense public contention by the West’s political and mainstream media elites show that, for them, there are really two kinds of civil society: There is the ‘vibrant’ variety, with ‘vibrant’ an almost comically ossified cliche, used by the Washington Post Editorial Board, in EU statements, and by White House spokesman John Kirby, to name only a few. It is almost as if someone had sent around a memo on proper terminology. This vibrant, good kind of civil society is to be celebrated and supported.

And then there is the wrong kind of civil society, which must be shut down. US President Joe Biden has just expressed the essence of this attitude: “We are a civil society, and order must prevail.” This is, of course, a bizarre misreading of the idea of civil society. Ideally, its key features are autonomy from the state and the capacity to establish an effective counterweight, and even, if necessary, to offer resistance to it. Putting the emphasis on “order” instead is ignorant or dishonest. In reality, civil society makes no sense, even as an ideal, if it is not granted a substantial degree of freedom to be disorderly. A civil society that is so orderly as to disturb no one is a fig leaf for enforced conformism and – at least – incipient authoritarianism.

But let’s set aside the mundane fact that Joe Biden says things that display ignorance or duplicity. What is more important is that ‘order,’ in his usage, is a transparent euphemism: According to the New York Times, over the last two weeks, over 2,300 protesters have been arrested on almost 50 American campuses. Often, arrests have been made with demonstrative brutality. Police have used riot gear, stun grenades, and rubber bullets. They have assaulted students as well as some professors with massive aggression.

The most well-known individual case at this moment is that of Annelise Orleck, a professor at Dartmouth College. Orleck is 65 years old and attempted to protect students from police violence. In response, she was slammed into the ground in the worst MMA style, knelt on by beefy policemen, who clearly lack elementary decency, and dragged away with whiplash trauma, as if she had been in a serious car accident. Ironically (if that’s the word), Orleck is Jewish and, at one time, used to be the head of her universities program in Jewish Studies.

In another, extremely disturbing development, at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), a violent police crackdown – including use of rubber bullets – was preceded by a vicious attack by so-called pro-Israeli ”counter-protesters.” In reality, this was a mob out to inflict maximum harm on the anti-genocide protesters, who, a New York Times investigation has found, maintained an almost entirely defensive stance. University security forces and the police failed to intervene for hours, letting the “counter-protesters” run wild. That is a pattern every historian of the rise of fascism in Weimar Germany will recognize: First the SA mobs of the rising Nazi party had a free hand to assault the Left, then the police would go after the same Left as well.

That is the real face of the “order” that President Biden and all too many in the West’s establishments endorse. But only at home. When it comes to the unrest in Georgia, their tone is entirely different. Make no mistake, there has been substantial violence – and what Biden would denounce as “chaos” if it happened in America – in Georgia. Indeed, while the US anti-genocide protesters have not been violent but disorderly (yes, those are very different things), the protesters in Georgia have used genuine violence, for instance, when they tried to storm the parliament.

Nothing remotely comparable has been done by the US anti-genocide protesters. Regarding the trespassing and causing public inconveniences that so agitate the US president, there has been plenty of that in the Georgian capital, Tbilisi. By Biden’s logic a protest must not even disturb or delay a campus graduation ceremony. What would that imply for blocking a central traffic node in the capital city?

Don’t get me wrong: The Georgian protesters report violent police tactics used against them as well, and, more broadly, the rights or wrongs of their cause, or the draft law they reject are beyond the scope of this article. I do believe they are used by the West for a geopolitical play Color-Revolution-style, but that is not the point.

The pertinent point here is, once again, staggering Western hypocrisy: A West that thinks trying to storm parliament is part of having a “vibrant” civil society in Georgia, cannot mass-arrest and brutalize anti-genocide protesters on its own campuses. That is, of course, also the message of Georgian prime minister Irakli Kobakhidze, who clearly has had enough of the absurdity.

In a resonant post on X, Kobakhidze objected forcefully to American “false statements” about the controversial draft law as well as, more importantly, US interference in Georgian politics in general. The prime minister, in essence and very plausibly for the non-naive, named and shamed Washington’s habit of trying out a “color revolution” at regular intervals. Finally, he reminded his American interlocutors “about a brutal crackdown of the students’ protest rally in New York City.” With that phrase clearly standing for the totality of police repression against young Americans who object to genocide, Kobakhidze turned the tables.

And that is, perhaps, the most intriguing take-away from this fresh but not unprecedented episode of the long-running saga of Western double standards. To find condemnation and suppression of almost entirely peaceful protests against genocide, while more violent protests against a law to regulate NGOs are being celebrated – that is shameful but not new. As before, geopolitics trumps ‘values.’

But ‘civil society’ used to be a key concept for projecting Western soft power by, in essence, subversion and manipulation. It was so useful because its ideological charge was so powerful that its mere invocation stifled resistance. Now, by displaying how it handles its own civil society at home, the West is ruining yet another useful illusion.

The IDF plans to enter Rafah and destroy Hamas battalions there regardless of hostage negotiations, according to Israeli source

The release of Israeli hostages being held captive by Hamas militants will have no effect on the IDF’s plans in Gaza, according to journalist Suleiman Maswadeh, who on Saturday cited an anonymous “political source” within the Israeli government.

During last year’s October 7 attack on Israeli territories near Gaza, Hamas militants killed some 1,200 people and took another 250 hostage. Since then, a number of the captives have been released but around 130 are still being held in the Palestinian enclave.

Writing on his X account, Maswadeh cited his source as stating that “contrary to publications, Israel will under no circumstances agree to the end of the war as part of an agreement to release our abductees.”

Furthermore, the unnamed official claimed that the Jewish state’s “political echelon” has decided that “the IDF will enter Rafah and destroy the remaining Hamas battalions there – whether or not there will be a temporary respite for the release of our hostage.”

The city of Rafah, located in southern Gaza near the border with Egypt, is currently home to an estimated 1.4 million Palestinians who have fled the northern reaches of the enclave. Aside from carrying out repeated airstrikes against what Israel claims are Hamas targets within the city, the Israeli government has also threatened to launch a ground invasion of the area, despite objections from the US and UN.

Maswadeh’s reporting coincides with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s statements earlier this week, when he stated that IDF troops will enter Rafah regardless of whether a ceasefire and hostage-release deal with Hamas is achieved.

“The idea that we will stop the war before achieving all of its goals is out of the question,” Netanyahu said in a statement from his office. “We will enter Rafah and we will eliminate Hamas’ battalions there – with or without a deal, to achieve total victory.”

Meanwhile, Netanyahu’s political rival and war cabinet minister Benny Gantz, has urged “official sources and all other decision-makers” to “act with restraint” and to wait for official updates, and “not to become hysterical due to political reasons.”

At the same time, Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz had previously promised to “suspend the operation” in exchange for the release of the captives.

Last week, Israel officially sent Hamas a ceasefire proposal which suggests a temporary cessation of hostilities to facilitate an exchange of several dozen hostages for Palestinian prisoners being held in Israeli jails.

The proposal has been described as “extraordinarily generous” by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who has urged Hamas to “decide quickly” and “make the right decision.”

Hamas, meanwhile, has demanded a permanent ceasefire and the withdrawal of all Israeli troops from the besieged Palestinian enclave.

The French president had previously laid out conditions for sending Western troops to aid Kiev

Emmanuel Macron’s statements about the possibility of sending Western forces into Ukraine have only escalated tensions and do not serve any other purpose, Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto said on Saturday.

His comments come after the French President stated in an interview with The Economist this week that his country could consider sending its troops to help Kiev “if the Russians were to break through the front lines” and if there was a “Ukrainian request” for such assistance. Macron also outlined his “strategic objective” of making sure Russia does not win in Ukraine, claiming such a development would threaten European security.

Speaking to the newspaper Corriere della Sera, Crosetto claimed that while he personally can’t judge the president of a “friendly country like France,” at the same time, he can’t understand “the purpose and usefulness of these declarations, which objectively raise tension.”

The minister also ruled out the possibility that Italy would ever send its forces to intervene directly in the Ukraine conflict. “Unlike others, we have in our system an explicit prohibition on direct military interventions, outside of what is provided by the laws and the constitution,” Crosetto explained. “We can only envisage armed interventions following an international mandate, for example in the implementation of a UN resolution.”

He further noted that aside from it being impossible to send Italian troops to Ukraine, doing so “would trigger a further spiraling of the conflict, which would not be of benefit above all to the Ukrainians themselves.”

“In short, the conditions for our direct involvement do not exist,” Crosetto said.

Macron’s latest hints at direct Western involvement on the ground in Ukraine have also been dismissed by other NATO countries, notably Hungary and Slovakia.

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto condemned the French president’s remarks, explaining that if a NATO member “commits ground troops, it will be a direct NATO-Russia confrontation and it will then be World War Three.”

Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico has also stressed that NATO has no justification to send troops to Ukraine because the country is not a member state and vowed that “no Slovak soldier will set foot beyond the Slovak-Ukrainian border.”

Meanwhile, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron has stated that while London plans to continue supplying Ukraine with weapons, which he said Kiev has the right to use against targets in Russia, actually sending any NATO soldiers to the country would constitute a “dangerous escalation.”

Moscow has repeatedly warned the West against sending its troops to Ukraine, stressing that it would be forced to attack them if they directly took part in the conflict. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova wrote on Telegram on Friday that “nothing will remain” of NATO forces if they are sent to the front line in Ukraine.

The FBI is being pressed by members of Congress to investigate the student protests, both for possible foreign financing and for students chanting “Death to America” — a phrase Fox News says is becoming a “key slogan” of the protests. 

There’s just one problem: students never said it. 

I’ve searched, scoured photographs, and waded through social media. There’s no evidence that any of the student demonstrators taking to dozens of college campuses in recent weeks to protest Israel’s war in Gaza said “Death to America.”

The rumor began with a single incident in which an anonymously authored pamphlet found at a University of Michigan encampment contained a passage saying, “Freedom for Palestine means Death to America.” 

That phrase was taken up by Fox News and a number of other news sites. 

“The slogan ‘Death to America’ is seemingly gaining steam among anti-Israel agitators, who have swept across the nation,” Fox News reported.

The claims of a Death to America theme have germinated in right-wing media outlets and even been echoed by more mainstream figures from smug commentator Bill Maher to the Atlantic Magazine, which warned that “every random protester who shouts ‘Death to America’…brings him [Donald Trump] closer to a return to the Oval Office.” Harvard President Emeritus Larry Summers has even called for “close investigations” of the funding sources of the recent protests on college campuses.

Though absent on campus, the one place the Death to America slogan is gaining steam is in Washington, where the hoax has been taken at face value.

Last month, five Republican congresspeople representing Michigan — which has a large Muslim population — sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland calling for an investigation into “Death to America” chants. 

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell also referenced the phrase in remarks on the Senate floor regarding higher education and judicial nominations. 

“Chants of ‘We are Hamas’ and ‘Death to America’ by students on college campuses are national security threats,” Senator Marsha Blackburn said on X (formerly Twitter). “Put any student who promotes terrorism on behalf of Hamas on the terrorist watchlist.”

As a member of the Senate Judiciary committee, which oversees the FBI, there’s little doubt that Blackburn’s statement reached FBI headquarters — and such ignorance and might even prod them to action. 

There’s already evidence that the Bureau is closely monitoring purported Israel-Hamas related threats.

FBI Director Christopher Wray in March revealed that the Bureau’s counterterrorism division was “urgently” investigating thousands of reported threats related to the Israel-Hamas conflict. Wray also said that “we expect that October 7 and the conflict that’s followed will feed a pipeline of radicalization and mobilization for years to come.” 

The White House also recently acknowledged the FBI’s involvement — not just in relation the conflict generally but colleges in particular. On Wednesday, White House spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre said that “the DOJ and FBI is going to continue to offer support to universities and colleges in respect to federal laws,” adding: “So, that is something that the DOJ and FBI is doing.”

Since 9/11 in particular, the FBI has maintained close contact with college campuses across the country under a little-known program called the Campus Liaison Initiative. The program designates an FBI agent (or member of a joint terrorism task force) from each of the Bureau’s 56 field offices to coordinate with campus public safety officers in addition to other school personnel at campuses across the country.

The White House, through its many campaigns against anti-semitism, extremism, racism, hate, disinformation, and foreign malign influence has constructed a patch quilt of offenses that to it demands action. It has already stated publicly that the Department of Justice and the FBI are in contact with college and university administrators, and those two agencies, along with the Department of Homeland Security, are already primed to investigate terrorism threats, specifically Hamas and Palestinian extremism on American soil. Investigations hover in the background, as much looking for federal offenses as responding to them. 

None of this is because there is any intelligence validating a controlling foreign hand or financing of the student protests. It is, in fact, the news media frenzy that is the most dangerous. Fox and other conservative outlets repeat the false allegation that the students are chanting “Death to America,” commentators and even members of Congress pick up the claim without checking, social media becomes saturated and the new reality emerges. 

I can imagine right now a meeting on Pennsylvania Avenue in which an official is asking some spy agency to “look into” the allegations. That leads to surveillance and infiltration and pretty soon you have the full force of the national security state involved — all because the news media got it wrong.

– Edited by William M. Arkin

Reprinted with permission from Ken Klippenstein’s Substack.

Subscribe and support here.

A power-sharing deal could be agreed in exchange for a normalization of ties with Saudi Arabia, West Jerusalem officials have told the paper

Israel could offer to share control over Gaza, after the war currently devastating the Palestinian enclave ends, with the US and a coalition of Arab nations, the New York Times has reported, citing officials.

In a report on Friday, the paper cited anonymous sources who claimed that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is avoiding detailed public discussions about Gaza’s post-war future, but that behind the scenes officials have been developing an “expansive plan.”

Three Israeli officials, and five people who have discussed the proposal with the Israeli government, told the NYT that the Jewish state would offer to share oversight of Gaza with the US and three Arab countries – Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

According to the sources, Israel would do so in exchange for a normalization of ties with Saudi Arabia.

Under the plan, local leaders in Gaza, who would be tasked with rebuilding the territory, reforming its education system and maintaining order, would to be appointed by Israel and the Arab nations in cooperation with Washington.

After seven to ten years, people in the enclave would be allowed to vote on whether to be absorbed into a united Palestinian administration that would control both the West Bank and Gaza, according to the proposal.

The NYT stressed that the plan does not specify whether this united administration would constitute a sovereign Palestinian state. Netanyahu has publicly rejected a two-state solution, despite such a path being supported by many world powers, including Israel’s key ally, the US.

The proposal also states the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) can continue to operate inside Gaza after the conflict with Palestinian armed group Hamas concludes, the officials said.

The NYT report comes amid intensified international efforts to persuade the sides to reach a ceasefire, which could pave the way for a permanent truce in Gaza.

READ MORE: Israeli troops killed by ‘friendly fire’ in Gaza – IDF

Israel launched its military operation in the Palestinian enclave in response to the October 7 cross-border incursion by Hamas, in which at least 1,200 people were killed and 250 taken hostage. According to Gaza’s health ministry, more than 34,622 Palestinians have so far been killed and 77,867 others wounded in the IDF’s airstrikes and ground offensive.

Denmark will also permit pregnancies to be terminated as late as 18 weeks after conception

The Danish government announced on Friday that it will permit women to have their pregnancies terminated until 18 weeks after conception instead of 12. The new legislation marks the first time the Nordic country has eased its abortion rules in 50 years.

Additionally, girls over age 15 will get the right to have an abortion without parental approval. The government lowered the age requirement to keep it in line with the country’s age of consent.

“Choosing whether to have an abortion is a difficult situation, and I hope that the young women can find support from their parents. But if there is disagreement, it must ultimately be the young woman’s own decision whether she wants to be a mother,” Marie Bjerre, Minister for Digitization and Gender Equality, said. 

Currently women under age 18 are allowed to get abortions, but only with parental consent.

The amended Health Act will enter into force on June 1 next year.

Denmark was among the first countries in Western Europe to offer abortions free of charge in 1973, but only permitted them until 12 weeks after conception. Now women will be able to terminate their pregnancies without paying for a longer period of time in Denmark than nearly anywhere else in Europe.

According to the Danish Health Data Authority, the number of terminated pregnancies in the country has not been increasing lately. In 2022 there were 14,700 medical abortions, compared to 14,500 in 2017. The number peaked in 1975, when they were first legalized, at 27,900.

MP Mette Thiesen, from the populist Danish People’s Party, lamented the changes, saying “a terrible day. It’s a terrible new law.” Addressing the Danish broadcaster DR, she explained there is a “very fine balance between the woman’s right to her own body, but also the right to life of the little life that lies in the mother’s womb.”

READ MORE: Macron leads the way to Western civilization’s suicide

In March, France became the first nation in the world to constitutionally guarantee that its women can terminate their pregnancies, making the ‘right to abortion’ in France ‘irreversible’.

He didn’t complain about worrying about sin as being rigid, backwards or obsolete. He encouraged examination of conscience and the devotion to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the reparation that is demanded of our forgiven sins. This is very traditional, Jesuit missionary zeal as it concerns the promotion of devotion to the Sacred Heart. 

READ THE STORY OF REPARATION FROM VATICAN NEWS HERE.

READ A COMMENTARY ON POPE FRANCIS’ NICE WORDS ABOUT PRIESTS, WITHOUT HIS IDEOLOGY OF DENIGRATING US HERE

What’s going on here? It’s a head scratcher. 

Such an investigation would “achieve nothing,” the Swedish Foreign Ministry told the agency

There is no need for an international investigation into the explosions on the Nord Stream 1 and 2 natural gas pipelines, Sweden’s Foreign Ministry has told RIA Novosti news agency.

Last week, China's deputy envoy to the UN, Geng Shuang, called for a probe into the September 2022 blasts that ruptured the pipelines, which were built to deliver Russian gas to Germany and the rest of Europe. Countries should work together on an investigation “to bring the perpetrators to justice in order to prevent the reoccurrence of similar incidents,” Geng said.

When asked about Beijing’s proposal by RIA Novosti on Friday, the Swedish Foreign Ministry insisted that “there is no need for an international investigation. It’s going to achieve nothing.”

“An investigation into the incidents was carried out by the Swedish authorities in accordance with the fundamental principles of independence, impartiality and the rule of law. Other national investigations are still ongoing,” the ministry stated.

Sweden conducted its own probe as the explosions on the Nord Stream pipelines occurred in the country’s exclusive economic zone. Germany and Denmark carried out separate inquiries. However, in February, the Swedish and Danish investigations were aborted. Stockholm said it had come to the conclusion that the case did not fall under Swedish jurisdiction, while Copenhagen concluded that “there was deliberate sabotage” of the pipelines, but found insufficient grounds to pursue criminal proceedings.

Russia is carrying out its own investigation into the Nord Stream blasts despite the refusal of Western nations to cooperate. Prosecutor General Igor Krasnov said earlier that Moscow had sent more than a dozen requests for legal assistance to Germany, Denmark, Finland, Switzerland and Sweden, but only received a single formal reply from Copenhagen.

Russian President Vladimir Putin and other officials suggested previously that the pipelines were targeted by the US or on Washington’s behalf.

Nations, as well as people, can be unsung heroes. They can suffer and be heroic in their suffering. Poland is such a nation. Hemmed in by neighbors that have all too often been enemies—and, as often as not, conquering enemies—Poland’s whole history has been shaped by suffering. It has been besieged and attacked by the Russians in the east and the Prussians in the west, and by the Swedes in the…

Source

The former US president has repeatedly criticized many member countries for not paying enough in light of threats from Russia and China

Donald Trump is eyeing plans to push the NATO members to ramp up defense spending from 2% to 3% of GDP if he is re-elected in November, The Telegraph reported on Friday, citing sources close to the former US President.

Trump has reportedly been considering an increase for some time but was further persuaded by the arguments of Polish President Andrzej Duda, a source close to the ex-president told the media. The two met for talks in New York last month.

Duda has repeatedly called for a boost in defense spending across the alliance, arguing that 3% is needed to defend against “growing threats,” including from Russia.

Trump’s is “evolving towards 3%, especially after speaking to Duda” and that’s “not including money for Ukraine,” the anonymous source said.

Trump’s encounter with Duda also reportedly played a role in convincing him to lift his opposition to a long-delayed aid package which included $60 billion for Kiev.

In February, Trump came under fire from the White House and top Western officials for suggesting he would not defend NATO allies who had failed to spend enough on defense and would even encourage Russia to attack them. In March, US intelligence agencies warned that America was facing a “fragile world order” amid Russian and Chinese threats.

NATO’s 32 members have agreed on a target of spending at least 2% of GDP on defense. Last year’s NATO estimates have shown that only 11 are spending that much, including its largest contributor, the US, as well as the UK, Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, Greece, Hungary, Finland, Latvia, Slovakia and Denmark.

Belgium and Spain spent 1.2%, while Luxembourg, which has the smallest budget for defense compared to its GDP, spent just 1%. Only Poland, the US and Greece spent more than 3%.

On Tuesday, Timo Pesonen, the EU’s top defense official, said “while the NATO allies are increasing their budget to at least 1% of GDP,” some member states “speak about 3% already.” His remarks came days after NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said allies “must go further” than 2%.

A source close to Trump, quoted by The Telegraph, said he also has a detailed plan for how to end the war peacefully which won’t be made public before the election. 

Republican presidential nominee previously said he will be able to negotiate peace because he knows the leaders of both countries, but hasn’t elaborated. “There is a plan, but he’s not going to debate it with cable news networks because then you lose all leverage,” the source said.

Slovakia has nothing to do with the conflict between Moscow and Kiev, Robert Fico has said

NATO has no justification to send troops to Ukraine because the country is not a member of the bloc, Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico has said.

His remarks followed French President Emmanuel Macron’s interview with the Economist earlier this week, in which he again refused to rule out a potential deployment of soldiers to Ukraine. The question of deploying troops from the US-led bloc to Ukraine would arise “if the Russians were to break through the front lines” and if Kiev requested help from the US-led military alliance, he said.

Fico told the Slovak parliament on Thursday that statements such as Macron's bring the world closer to World War Three.

“Ukraine is not a NATO member state,” he reminded the French president. Macron does not speak for the whole bloc and his words about the possible deployment of troops to Ukraine are “no one else’s businesses, but France’s,” the prime minister added.

"Slovakia has nothing to do with the war in Ukraine, and let me send a clear message to the whole of Slovakia: whoever might ask us, no Slovak soldier will set foot beyond the Slovak-Ukrainian border,” Fico pledged.

British Foreign Secretary David Cameron said on Friday that a NATO member committing troops to Ukraine would be a “dangerous escalation.” Hungary’s Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has echoed the Slovak prime minister’s words, warning that such a move could lead to World War Three.

Since becoming prime minister of Slovakia – an EU and NATO member – in October 2023, Fico has reversed the previous government’s policy of supplying weapons to Ukraine and insisted there should be a diplomatic solution to the conflict between Moscow and Kiev.

Moscow has repeatedly warned the West against sending troops to Ukraine. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova wrote on Telegram on Friday that “nothing will remain” of NATO forces if they are sent to the frontline.