GET ACCESS TO CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

€225/250$ FOR 10 ISSUES

SUBSCRIBE or PURCHASE

Doomed to make the same mistakes

Nations are in very many aspects just like individual people: some are stronger, some are weaker, some are capable of controlling others, and some are prone to falling prey to such control. Nations seem to be like individual people also in this respect that they appear never to learn from the past or that they appear never to draw inferences from the mistakes made by others.

Yes, stronger nations tend to control weaker nations. Still, just as it is among individual people, a weaker partner is not doomed to being controlled by a stronger partner. You become controlled mainly because you let yourself be controlled. Similarly, you become cheated because you let yourself be cheated. Within the European Union it is such small nations like Hungary and Slovakia that do not toe the EU party line. They are small, and yet they are following reason more than ideology. They are small, and yet they know how to defend their own interests. On the one hand we have much bigger countries and their leaders have brought them to utter ruin.

Look at Ukraine. It has let itself be used as a tool at the hands of the collective West. It has put all its trust in the seemingly all-powerful Western world and it has lost miserably. The best proof that Ukraine has been and continues to be the West’s instrument (against Russia) is the fact that whether the hostilities are prolonged or are about to be stopped depends entirely on either the United States or the European Union. The decision-making lies outside Kiev. The talks that are held at present over the war in Ukraine are the talks between Moscow and Washington, with Kiev acting as a supporting actor at best. The fact that Ukraine decided to wage war with Russia was in turn the result of the diktat on the part of the European Union, and the Biden administration. Now the United States wishes to end the war, the European Union wishes to continue the conflict till 2029. Ukraine appears to have absolutely no say. It has been serving two masters and now when these masters have divergent interests, Kiev is falling between two stools. The question is, could Ukraine’s leaders not have envisioned it long ago? Of course they could. A cursory knowledge of recent history of their own country would have been enough, let alone common sense.

Before the outbreak of the Second World War Ukraine was split between the Soviet Union (the greater part) and Poland (a much smaller part). Ukrainian chauvinism was particularly rampant in the Polish part because the Polish government was not so ruthless as its Soviet counterpart and because it is in the westernmost part of Ukraine where national sentiment is the strongest. This part was outside Russia the longest. Ukrainians let themselves be used and abused many times in their history, but we want to call the reader’s attention to the events occurring in the run-up to the Second World War, during the same war and in the wake of it. Strange that present-day Ukrainian leaders did not have a similar reflection, strange that they did not want to learn from the recent past of the nation.

Just as the tensions between the Third Reich and the Polish Republic grew in the 1930s, Ukrainian nationalists operating on Polish territory saw a ray of hope: they dreamed about Germany weakening Poland and helping them gain independence of Warsaw. Germany, sure enough, was more than willing to employ Ukrainian national sentiment and Ukrainian readiness to fight against the Poles. Germans launched a project of creating clandestine Ukrainian military units. It was planned that they would sabotage the Polish war effort once the hostilities between the Third Reich and the Polish Republic erupted. Then war broke out. Germany launched an all-out assault on Poland, which gave rise to the beginning of what later would be termed Second World War. The Polish state was swiftly subdued, the Polish government collapsed and fled abroad, while the armed forces were defeated and dispersed, with some of the soldiers and officers working their way to other countries, with some others of the soldiers and officers being taken prisoner of war, with still some others – going underground and continuing the fight. The campaign was so swift that the Ukrainian clandestine unit did not manage to participate in it, though there were some 400 instances of Ukrainian saboteurs thwarting the Polish war effort. With Poland defeated, one might think, the hour of Ukrainian independence or at least autonomy had eventually arrived. Alas!

It had been a few days prior to the outbreak of the hostilities that the Third Reich and the Soviet Union struck a deal (Ribbentrop-Molotov) partitioning Polish territory between the two aggressors. Neither of the signatories to this deal included in his plans Ukraine’s independence. The whole of Polish Ukraine was incorporated into the Soviet Union and joined to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. That was not precisely what Ukrainian nationalists had hoped for.

Even if Germany had conquered the whole of Poland and had occupied all of its territory, would they have carved out a chunk of it and allowed Ukrainians to have an independent state? What kind of state would that have been? Landlocked, small, with few natural resources, wedged between mighty Germany and the mighty Soviet Union. This Ukrainian state would have had to act as dictated to by Berlin. Think for comparison about the then Slovakia, a country – a nation – that with the aid of the Third Reich gained independence from Czechia only to become fully dependent on Germany.

We don’t even need to think about what if Germany had conquered the whole of Poland because three years later as the Third Reich attacked the Soviet Union all prewar Polish territory was occupied by Germany. Did Berlin think about creating a Ukrainian state, even one with limited autonomy? Hell, no! A part of Western Ukraine was joined by the German authorities to the General Government (German: Generalgouvernement), which was the administrative region under German rule recognized by Berlin as (occupied) “Poland”. So, territories around the city of Lvov became again part of Poland, even if occupied by Germany. And these were the territories with the strongest Ukrainian national sentiment! Neither did a Ukrainian state emerge later on although Ukrainians served the Third Reich hand and foot, even forming in 1943 the notorious 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Galician) made up of Ukrainians, which fought on the eastern front. Did Ukrainian leaders draw inferences? Did they learn a lesson? Far be it from them! They continued to serve their perceived protectors and their perceived benefactors.

Ukrainian nationalist leaders and ideologues along with the commanders of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army were somehow tolerated by Berlin during the war and by Bonn after it. Tolerated, yes, that’s the word for it. The leader of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists – Stepan Bandera – ultimately found refuge after the war in West Germany. It is noteworthy that during the war he was arrested by the Germans for a time, including in… the Sachsenhausen Concentration Camp! Why? His political aspirations concerning creating a Ukrainian state were too high… Bandera wanted to serve Germany, to ally Ukrainians with Germany and those were his wages… And yet, he was to be used further after the war in the political combat between Washington and Moscow. Did he learn his lesson? As if! He could be used again after the war but at the same time his war record and the record of the deeds of his followers was such that his presence and political activity in Germany was not particularly palatable to his new German masters. The world got word about the numerous massacres that his subordinates and his followers perpetrated during the war against tens of thousands of Polish, Jewish and Russian civilians. So he became more of a political and moral burden, and as such was not protected enough by West German services. The effect was that a Soviet agent could track him down and eliminate him in broad daylight in Munich. No hint.

It is relatively recent history. It was some eighty years ago that Ukrainians let themselves be used against Poland and then against the Soviet Union by Germany. The result? Germany lost the war, Poland emerged from the war without any part of Ukraine, while the whole of Ukraine was incorporated into the Soviet Union. Was that what Ukrainian nationalists had been dreaming of? Not really. Is it not similar today? Ukraine let itself be used by the collective West against Russia. After three years of devastating war, Russia is emerging victorious, the United States seeks to wash its hands of this war, while the European Union puts a bold face on its political, economic and military impotence. Ukraine? Ukraine has suffered enormous losses. Millions of people have been killed or physically and psychologically mutilated, millions of people have left the country for good. The economy is ruined, the state territory has shrunk, white the country’s debt has skyrocketed. Today even Yulia Tymoshenko, known for her passionate hatred of Russia, was shocked as she heard Germany’s defence minister Boris Pistorius say that war in Ukraine ought to last till 2029 to allow the European Union to prepare for a conflict with Russia. Even Yulia Tymoshenko awakened to the realization that Ukraine had been used as a tool to weaken Russia, that Europeans or Americans do not care two hoots about how much Ukrainian blood has been spilled, is being spilled and is going to be spilled.

Ukraine sustained enormous losses because Kiev’s leaders wanted to join NATO and because they thought that Russia would be intimidated by the West and do nothing to prevent Ukraine from becoming a member of this alliance. Ukraine’s leaders sacrificed millions of people and territory and billions of dollars to join a military alliance. They could have stopped the war in its tracks during the Istanbul talks, but they preferred to trust in the collective West, they preferred to part with commonsense. Now it is clear to everybody and anybody that Ukraine is not going to join NATO. What was this war for then? There seems to be virtually nothing whatsoever that Ukraine might gain from the three years of suffering, the three years of bloodshed, the three years of sacrifice. The country’s leaders preferred to obey Ursula von der Leyen and Boris Johnson, to act at the behest of Joe Biden and Jens Stoltenberg rather than serve and spare their own nation, rather than look for guidance into recent history. What a bitter outcome! What a bitter lesson. Yet, a lesson that will not be learned. You may rest assured that in a few decades’ time precisely the same mistake will be made by Ukrainians and – for that matter – by any other nation whose leaders wish to please their Western overlords more than to work for the benefit of their own people. Look at the Baltic states. Tiny though they are like mice, their leaders are as bellicose as tigers. So it goes.

Two explanations for such policymaking on the part of the leaders of such small nations can be offered. Either they are patriotic but deprived of the faculties of reasoning (in which case why they are leaders in the first place?) or they are placed as governors by the stronger states, governors who do not care about their nations, governors whose families and bank accounts are outside their own countries, governors who can always rely on a safe landing promised to them by those from whom they take their orders.

The Trojan Horse of Sudzha

Almost 16 kilometers in darkness, four long days, with little oxygen, with little food or water, almost suffocating from the remnants of methane. Four long days of marching, half-bent, inside a disused gas pipeline with a diameter of merely 170 cm. Man after man after another man, five hundred of them, tenaciously pressing forward. High spirits, excitement of adventure, and the awareness of being part of something grand. Four long days, kilometer after kilometer, gasping for breath, sharing the little food that they have and the little water that they are supplied with. They reach the proverbial end of the tunnel but it is not the the end of their trail. What follows are Jonas-like two days of wait, two days of lying low in the whale’s maw. Their emergence from the maw must be coordinated with the efforts of the comrades in arms operating in the open. They can hear the pounding of the guns, they can hear the movement of the tanks and that of the armoured vehicles. A thought that their presence might be detected prematurely by the enemy sparks anxiety in their minds. These two days of inaction are perhaps the most difficult.

As is known, warfare is not merely a clash of arms. Nor is it merely a contest of strategical thinking. Warfare involves also subterfuge. The most famous is represented by the iconic Trojan Horse. The Achaeans did not conquer the city of Troy by arms, by the ten-year siege, betrayal of some of the Trojans. The Achaeans won the war by means of an ingenious stratagem, by means of cunning and deception, by means of surprise. Similar feats would be employed in the centuries to come by various contesting parties. Such military feats are also pulled off today.

It was in August 2024 that the Ukrainian military forces decided to break through the front line in the direction of Kursk. As the Russians were taken by surprise, Ukrainians managed to conquer over 400 square kilometers and pursued their goal of capturing the nuclear power station in Kurchatov. What was the intention of the Ukrainian general staff and the Ukrainian civilian leaders?

First, the Ukrainian authorities wanted to raise the morale of the society. Months of retreat, months of Russian advance had played havoc with the will to fight or to resist the enemy.

Second, the Ukrainians had hoped to distract the Russian forces from the other segments of the front line and thus make it easier for Ukrainian soldiers to withstand Russian assaults there.

Third, the Kursk region, if captured and permanently held by Ukrainians, might become a bargaining chip in future negotiations between Kiev and Moscow. Kursk could be exchanged for one or a few or all the provinces claimed by Russia.

So far, so good. It was to the Ukrainians’ disadvantage that Russians had numerical superiority in manpower and equipment, so they could quickly mobilize troops that had been held in reserve and launch a counteroffensive. Strictly speaking it was not a counteroffensive in the true meaning of the word. Rather, Kutuzov-like harrowing. The Russian troops limited themselves to pounding the enemy by means of their artillery and drones, and severing the enemy’s supply lines. It took a lot of time but it proved to be successful. That’s what General Kutuzov opted for when Napoleon invaded Russia. Rather than fighting a series of spectacular battles, he enticed the enemy deep inside the country and let the European troops overreach themselves, to exhaust themselves. Didn’t Ukrainians know about it?

One of the focal points during the fight over the Kursk region was the town of Sudzha. It is here where the Trojan Horse comes into play. It happens so that a disused gas pipeline runs by Sudzha and this pipeline was to be employed by some five hundred selected Russian soldiers. At first the engineers presented the blueprints of the pipeline. They were available because the pipeline was constructed during the times of the Soviet Union. Then some of the remnants of the gas was pumped out as much as it was feasible. Despite these efforts, a lot remained inside. Next, the selected fighters entered the dark chasm. It took four days for the 500 soldiers to move almost 16 kilometers along the pipeline whose diameter is 1.7 meter. They had difficulties breathing and they were running low on their food and water supplies. When they reached the outlet of the pipe, they they stayed put two more days, waiting for the opportune moment to emerge and attack the enemy. When they eventually carried out an assault, the Ukrainian troops were taken by surprise and went into panic. You can only imagine the feeling of suddenly discovering that the enemy is shooting not only from the front but also from the rear.

Though the place from which the Russian troops were emerging was soon localized by Ukrainian drones and consequently shelled by the artillery, the overwhelming majority of the Russian fighters (if not all of them) had already left the belly of the Trojan Horse – the chasm of the pipeline – and were engaging the enemy. The days or rather hours of the Kursk salient were counted. Before the month of March expired, Ukrainians lost the Kursk salient to Russians.

The Kursk salient! It resonates with Russian historical memory! It was in this Kursk region that the greatest battle of tanks was fought during World War Two between the Wehrmacht and the Red Army. It was fought in 1943. Who would have thought that eighty-three years later Russians would fight in the same place… this time against Ukrainians? Who would have thought back then that those Russians and Ukrainians who were united within the ranks of the Red Army would in eighty-three years’ time be at each other’s throats? Who would have thought back then that in eighty-three years one Slavic tribe going by the name of Ukrainians would be equipped with German – German! – tanks and combat the other Slavic tribe known as Russians? The Führer must have made a terrible blunder back then. He sacrificed precious German blood in a war against Russians and Ukrainians making up the Red Army rather than pitting the latter against the former, rather than providing the latter with his Tiger and Panther tanks and idly watching the two ethnicities bleeding themselves dry! Who knows, maybe at present this blunder is being put right…?

Russian soldier mopping up conquered terrain in and around Sudzha. Notice the religious emblems on his outfit.

Gefira 92: Tectonic plates disrupt the lithosphere

When tectonic plates move, they press against each other, they produce tension and eventually bring about either earthquakes or eruptions of volcanoes. Figuratively, in international relations, national interests are such tectonic plates. Such tectonic plates are also the interests of supra- or international entities. They naturally have different interests, these interests conflict and produce tensions, and in due time tensions erupt in social turmoil or military conflicts: nations against nations, organizations against organizations, organizations against nations. We have been recently seeing a series of such eruptions. The pressure that the collective West brought to bear against Russia erupted in the Russo-Ukrainian war, in point of fact a proxy war between the West and the Russian Federation. The pressure that globalists exerted on Western societies in that they sought to deconstruct and reconstruct social conduct, tradition and custom, resulted in the political earthquake in the United States, where Donald Trump, a representative of anti-globalists, has been elected president and has put an end to the madness that has enveloped American society.

Contemporary tectonic changes are only comparable to those at the end of the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s, when the Soviet Union collapsed, the eastern political bloc of the so-called socialist countries shook off its Soviet harness, when the Warsaw Pact dissolved and NATO began to expand eastwards. Still earlier, the Second World War was such an epic change, preceded by World War One, preceded by the Napoleonic Wars and the French Revolution, preceded by the Thirty Years’ War… Each of those planetary events would cancel the ruling international order and introduce new order that would last a few decades to be inevitably replaced by yet another change, yet another set of rules by which international players attempted to play the game of politics.

What are the changes that we are witnessing nowadays? First, globalists seem to have been defeated. Whether temporarily or for good remains to be seen. As for now, they have been defeated in China when the Shanghai-based communist pro-American (i.e. pro-globalist) faction was foiled in its plans; they have been defeated in Russia, where President Vladimir Putin has been keeping a firm grip on the Russian state, and hindered the process of subjugation of the country to the Western oligarchs; lastly, they have been defeated in the United States, where Donald Trump rallied anti-globalist forces among the powerful and among much of the American citizenry.

Second, the world dominated by the United States and the countries gathered under G7 – the so-called unipolar world – is disintegrating. There emerge two other powerful players: Russia and China, with the so-called global south – India, Brazil, Indonesia – being on the rise. Some of the countries of the Third World – also politely referred to as emerging economies – are about to economically threaten and surpass the old colonial powers because…

…third, the former colonial powers acting under the umbrella of the European Union have become irrelevant within the last two-three years. Due to the de-industrialization of Germany, due to the devastating woke ideology, due to the policy of ethnic replacement, and, lastly, due to the harebrained crusade against Russia, the Old Continent has put itself out of the equation of international policy making. Talks that are held between Americans and Russians are no longer taking place in Vienna or Paris, in Helsinki or Geneva, that is in places where the talks between the United States and the Soviet Union used to be held: they are taking place in Saudi Arabia. To make things worse for the pretentious European Union, European top leaders like France’s President Macron, Germany’s Chancellor März, United Kingdom’s Prime Minister Starmer or EU’s leader von der Leyen have not even been invited nor are they consulted on anything of importance. Merely three years earlier Europeans dreamed – nay – were sure that they would bring Russia to its knees and put Vladimir Putin on trial like they put on trial Slobodan Milošević. For three years Ukraine’s President Zelensky was showered with praises and honours while the red carpet was rolled out before him wherever he set his foot in Europe or the United States. Today? Today for Washington he is a persona non grata. European leaders, while making believe that they want to continue the war effort and support Zelensky, in their heart of hearts, left by Washington to their own devices, are helpless and powerless. They are putting a brave face on a lost game. These are, tectonic changes, indeed.

Gefira Financial Bulletin #92 is available now

A Point of Bifurcation
America for peace, Europe for war
Calvin Klein – attack on the traditional family model
Retreat from the sinking ship of the DEI

Trump wants to cause a recession

The American president changed his approach to the stock market in his second term. To the extent that he paid homage to Wall Street during his first term, he recently said in an interview for Fox News that he needs to build a strong country without looking at the stock market. The average American cares because retirement funds are operating on risky assets and many small investors are putting their savings into the stock market instead of keeping their money in low-interest accounts like Germans or most Europeans.

Trump believes that we are now facing a transition that will eventually lead to the return of wealth to America. Incoming Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent later added fuel to the fire when he said during his interview that if anyone thinks Trump will change his policies to stop the stock market decline, they will be disappointed. Bessent is of the opinion that we are currently in a “detox period” – a transition from reliance on public spending to private spending – and any negative market behavior is the legacy of Joe Biden and his policies to stimulate the economy with debt and deficits.

The new managers on the Potomac point out that the indicators are falling and Wall Street appears to be heading for a deeper correction.

What is also falling are the indicators of economic activity: the ISM Manufacturing (PMI) (activity in the US manufacturing sector), while ISM Manufacturing Price (change in the prices manufacturers pay for raw materials and other materials for production) is rising significantly. In the case of the former, it was above 50 points, i.e. above the threshold above which the economy is assumed to be developing, but well below the previous value and also below forecasts. In the case of the latter, it may be a return of higher inflation. In addition, orders in the US manufacturing sector are falling. Unemployment is also rising – Trump’s (or Musk’s) redundancies in the public sector are important here.

As a result, Americans are less willing to spend their money, which means that domestic demand, one of the main drivers of the US economy, is falling. After all, consumer spending accounts for 68% of US GDP!

Can such a situation suit the Trump administration? Paradoxically: Yes!

It is well known that the Fed is maintaining high interest rates (4.5%) in response to persistent inflation of around 3% (target is 2%). High interest rates lead to higher bond yields. Considering that the US needs to refinance a large portion of its debt this year (a good 25% of the total), it would be best for it to do so at the lowest price – i.e. the lowest interest rate on bonds. It is well known that it will not be easy to get the Fed to lower interest rates in the face of increased inflation, so a recession is the best solution. With limited economic growth and demand (see above), inflation may ease considerably and the associated layoffs could prompt the Fed to cut rates to stimulate economic growth.

Hence the tariffs, hence the trade wars – the aim is to bring production back to America, to increase the attractiveness of US products for domestic consumers and… to initiate a new, better period for the American economy after the recession.

The EU under “Führer Ursula” is not a peaceful project, says Lavrov

A few days ago, this week, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov gave an interview to three Americans: Judge Napolitano, Larry Johnson, and Mario Nawfal. Judge Napolitano runs a popular YouTube channel Judging Freedom, Larry Johnson is a former CIA operative, while Mario Nawfal runs his own channel on YouTube. A few days prior to the Lavrov interview, the last of the three mentioned interviewed Belarus’ President Alexandr Lukashenko. The interview with Minister Lavrov lasted an hour and a half and was conducted in English without an interpreter.

Go and have a listen before it is not taken down by YouTube. If you think you can form your own judgement, you need to know what the other side to the conflict has to say. Especially from the horse’s mouth, so much so that Minister Lavrov did 95% of the talking. Below a few take-aways from the interview.

① Russia is a Christian country, a Christian nation with Christian values. The United States and Western Europe have departed from Christianity and have been pursuing deviant ideas of the alphabet sexuality, unisex toilets and the like.

② The West promised Mikhail Gorbachev not to expand NATO eastwards by an inch and broke its promise. Even if it were not formulated in written form (it was), a man of honour keeps his word.

③ Security cannot be divisible, i.e. one country cannot provide for its security at the expense of another country. Expanding NATO may increase the West’s security, but it certainly decreases the security of the Russian Federation.

④ Ukraine itself is to blame for the losses that it has sustained. Had there be no coup d’etat as a result of which legitimate President Viktor Yanukovych was made to flee the country, Ukraine would not have lost Crimea; had Kiev abided by the Minsk I and Minsk II Accords, Ukraine would not have lost the four eastern provinces.

⑤ Viktor Yanukovych, Ukraine’s president who was toppled by the coup in 2014, had every right to reconsider Ukraine’s association with the European Union. There was no malice on his part, nor was he a Russophile. The decision of associating Ukraine with the European Union had very serious economic consequences. At that time there were no tariffs between Ukraine and Russia, but there were tariffs between Ukraine and the European Union. An association with the European Union meant lifting the tariffs between the EU and Ukraine, which would have meant the necessity of imposing such tariffs between Ukraine and the Russian Federation as the Russian Federation needed to protect its market against European products. Since Ukraine’s trade with Russia was way larger than that with the EU, an association with the EU would have meant huge economic losses for the country.

⑥ The European Union is not a peaceful project. Minister Lavrov quoted Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen who said that “peace in Ukraine could actually be more dangerous than the war that is currently taking place,” and quoted Jens Stoltenberg, NATO’s secretary general, who floated an idea of expanding the alliance or the alliance’s tentacles as far east as China, Korea and the Pacific Ocean. One of the most bellicose politicians of the European Union is its leader Führer Ursula, as Lavrov put it, and mentioned the 800 billion earmarked by her for the re-militarization of the continent.

⑦ All the anti-Russian campaigns like those centered around the downing of the Malaysian airliner, the Skripal and the Navalny cases, the Bucha massacre allegedly perpetrated by Russians were aimed at harming the international image of the Russian Federation. This is easy to prove because in each of the aforementioned cases Russia’s request to have access to the medical, chemical, legal and other documentation was denied.

⑧ Human rights have been weaponized by the West. Human rights only serve as a pretext to meddle with the internal affairs of other nations and as a justification for assaulting them militarily.

That’s Minister Lavrov’s understanding of the ongoing conflict between the West and the Russian Federation, that’s in a nutshell Russia’s view of the current political situation and its causes.

Is presidential candidate Călin Georgescu a political reincarnation of Pastor László Tőkés?

Over 30 years ago protests in Romania made a spectacular mark of the collapse of the communist system in Europe. Are the present protests in Romania going to be a mark of the collapse of the European Union?

Romania is having a fever. Romania is being brought to boiling point. One of these days Romania might explode.

Romanians more or less regularly have been taking to the streets over a couple of the last weeks to protest the decision of the Romanian Constitutional Court – in fact the decisions of the European dictators in Brussels. The decision was to annul the results of the presidential election that took place on 24 November 2024 on the flimsiest of grounds that there were ever of foreign interference in the form of exerting the political influence on the voters via TikTok. This most ridiculous justification underlying the decision to annul the election results has been compounded with others. What do we have, indeed! Yes, yes, the usual string of accusations that Călin Georgescu is far-right (how otherwise!), antisemitic (sure!), a sympathizer of fascism and Russia. One wonders which of these grave sins is the gravest. The list is not complete. Wikipedia has gathered all the remaining “nasty” facts about Călin Georgescu including his belief that humans did not land on the moon. Surely, an “intelligent” Wikipedia’s consumer will immediately classify Călin Georgescu as a nitwit. Some of the indictments, though, reveal why the managers of the European Union fear Călin Georgescu so much: Călin Georgescu thinks that Romania has been and continues to be exploited by Western companies and that the West has stemmed Romanian economic development. Now that’s something serious! Călin Georgescu might spoil the business of the many corporations. He could be far-right and even a fascist if only he did not want to deprive the powers that be of their profit! Fool that he is, he dared to touch the most sacred of the sacred: someone’s money!

The authorities did not stop at simply cancelling the vote. Since the polling data show that Călin Georgescu is now by far the most popular candidate, Bucharest – Romania’s capital – obviously took orders from Brussels, the overlord, to prevent Călin Georgescu from taking part in the repeat of the election that is planned for May this year. Indeed, when Călin Georgescu was filing his candidacy for the 2025 presidential election, he was detained and interrogated for a couple of hours. Two days later his candidacy was rejected. Democracy at work made by the EU.

The commissioners do not have a good memory. It was more than 30 years ago – that is well within living memory – that such protests in Romania brought about the collapse of Nicolae Ceausescu and the communist political system in the country. Similar protests did not erupt at that time in other socialist countries like Poland or Czechoslovakia, Hungary or Bulgaria or for that matter in East Germany: they erupted in Romania of all the places. Why?

Well, the communist authorities in the aforementioned countries were wise enough to feel the anger of their people, which resulted in their decision to cave in. as a result, there were only civilized, so to say, or mild revolutions or protests, round table talks and the like that gave vent to popular dissatisfaction with the political and economic reality. Only in Romania did the communist authorities not deem it clever to handle the rising tension with care: they chose to strengthen the iron grip on society and to suppress all manifestations of discontent by force and violence. So it came to pass that an initially insignificant protest in Timișoara that occurred in December 1989 morphed into a nation-wide revolution that brought about the collapse of Nicolae Ceausescu’s rule and, indeed, his death. Are the European commissioners not afraid of a repeat?

When one watches film footages showing the 1989 protests and compares them with the footages showing the 2025 protests, one thing attracts the viewer’s attention. In 1989, Romanians waved national flags with huge holes in their centre, an empty space left after the national coat of arms symbolizing socialist or communist Romania had been torn away. A clear message that the people were not merely against Romania’s President Ceausescu, but against the whole political system. What attracts attention in today’s protests is the fact that Romanians are waving plenty of Romanian national flags and… no flag of the European Union. Clearly, Romanians are aware of who the ultimate perpetrators of cancelling the election and banning Călin Georgescu

from the round in May are, and clearly Romanians say a big NO to the European Union.

The 1989 protests in Timișoara broke out over the person of Pastor László Tőkés, who was to be evicted by the authorities from his parish. The 2025 protests are over the annulment of the election results and over the banning of Călin Georgescu from presidential elections. Will Călin Georgescu become a symbol of another revolution that will be sparked not only in Romania but in the whole of the EU bloc?

Warmongering and Fear-Mongering

Women empowerment, indeed! Ursula von der Leyen and one Kaja Kallas are in the forefront of rearmament and aggressive policy of the European Union. Prime Minister of the European Union’s government has called on huge almost war-time expenditure – some 800 billion euros – on the military, while Kaja Kallas from teeny-weeny Estonia, vice-prime minister of the same supranational, Paneuropean government, flexes her? European? muscles in an effort not only to overcome Russia but also to take on… China! Wow! Really, women empowerment in action! The two women even look alike. Who said that men are aggressive and women are not? Whoever did, he had better reconsider.

Ursula von der Leyen’s idea goes by the name of Re-Arm Europe Plan. Faced with American disengagement from the war in Ukraine, European demagogues, apparatchiks and chickenhawks are throwing temper tantrums. You may bet that neither Ursula von der Leyen’s family nor the family of Kaja Kallas are or ever will be exposed to danger in case war with Russia breaks out. What they are preparing is for us alone. They and their company will only draw benefits from war mongering or from war.

Their hatred of Russia in general and of Putin in particular is passionate and implacable. Their greed is insatiable. Their drive for dominance is unparalleled just as unparalleled is their insolence and mendacity. Fear of Russia – a new treat for the Europeans after the notorious virus scare. Just as at the time of the so-called pandemic we were supposed to be wiped out from the face of the earth by the chemical compound attacking us surreptitiously, so now we are going to be invaded and enslaved by… Russians! And you know what? Europeans are going to buy into it lock, stock and barrel. They already bought into all this clap-trap about Russian threat many years before. This fire only needs fuelling, from time to time. This fire only needs to be fed on the black-and-white fairy tale according to which we, the Europeans are the good guys, they, the Russians, are the bad guys. It only needs Orwellian two-minutes of hate now and again, with the face of the dictator from the east to be spat on and screamed at. No big deal for European propaganda managers.

Once Ukrainians fell for this trap. They flexed their muscles in the belief that the whole West flexed its muscles with them. As a result, Ukrainians were oh so confident about their prevalence over Russia in everything. Yet, when push came to shove, they saw that they were left to their own devices. That is, yes, the West provided them with arms and intel, the West kept pummelling Russia with “sanctions” (while purchasing Russian gas via go-betweens), and the West saluted to Zelensky and pandered to his whims and wishes, but all proved to be of no avail. Worse, recently the United States – the West’s overlord – rode roughshod over Ukrainian president, over Ukraine as such, over all that heretofore was held oh so dear and sacrosanct.

Implacable hatred towards Putin on the part of Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas can surely be explained in a Freudian manner: the two women with their brains invaded by feminist ideas (think of Annalena Baerbock and her feminist diplomacy!) just cannot come to terms with the fact that a male, a white male, a white representative of patriarchy dares to oppose them and seems to be getting the upper hand! Indeed, it must be a nightmare with which Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas keep waking up in the dead of night, sweat on their bodies. Why, Ursula von der Leyen has become empress of Europe the likes of which history has never seen and – lo and behold – a Russian muzhik has thrown down the gauntlet and has questioned the moral and political preponderance of the progressive ideas made by the EU.

This sweaty nightmare that the two women experience must be compounded by the fact that another white, dominant male across the Atlantic took power and seems to be intent on establishing a friendly relationship with – who could have thought it possible a couple of months earlier! – Moscow. It is not Kamala Harris but Donald Trump on the Hill! How wholeheartedly would Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas embrace Kamala Harris at a meeting in Paris or London, or in Washington! Tough luck, though. Again two dominant males on the political stage, and – to make things even worse – a third one on the horizon: Xi Jinping in China! What the two women must experience would make a very interesting case for Sigismund Freud or for that matter Carl Gustav Jung.

There certainly is more to all this than meets the eye. Threat alleged threat from Russia is the declared problem, but what is the genuine aim? The genuine aim is concealed from us. Do you remember the public outrage when it turned out that Ursula von der Leyen ordered hundreds of millions of vaccines in a company where her husband was employed? Europe loves finger-pointing at Russia when it comes to corruption, when it comes to bribery, yet in this case everything has been swept under the carpet. The pandemic designed or exploited or both by the managers of the world enriched the same managers of the world, the same designers, the same exploiters. Millions for vaccine manufacturers and more power for politicians under the guise of the public good. It was as simple as that. Now what do you think what purpose the Re-Arm Europe Plan is going to serve? Yes, you guessed it right. The managers of Europe will line their pockets. Simultaneously they will be free and justified to blame all failures in economy and social policy on the war expenditure, on Russia, ultimately on Putin! Indeed, if there were no Putin, the European Union would have to invent one. More to it, the apparatchiks and demagogues of the European Union will feel justified in curtailing free speech under the disguise of preventing Russian propaganda! They could cancel election after election (think of Romania) because of Russian interference. What a godsend this Putin is, really!

And you may rest assured that although money will be needed for rearmament, there will be no slowing down of the policy of importing people from outside Europe. Miraculously, there will always be money for accommodating them. It is the indigenous Europeans who will pay the price for the war between Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas on the one hand, and Vladimir Putin on the other.

Coming back to Sigismund Freud and Carl Gustav Jung. The case of Kaja Kallas from Estonia is really fascinating and intgriguing. Her lilliputian home country borders on the gargantuan Russian Federation, and still she indulges herself in war mongering. There must be something the matter with her brain. A list of European cities that number more inhabitants than the whole population of Estonia would be longer than a hundred… or maybe I have exaggerated, but you get the point. Estonia has 1.3 million inhabitants of which Estonian as a mother tongue is spoken by merely 67%. So, a third of the population are not even ethnic Estonians. Guess who they are! Yes, you guessed it right: for the most part they are Russians. Is Estonia going to shell them like Ukrainians did the Russian minority in the Donbass? Is Estonia going to pick up a fight with Russia? Does Estonia count on the effectiveness of sanctions that the European Union will impose on Russia in case of aggression? Does Kaja Kallas really think NATO will go to war over one million Estonians somewhere on the east Baltic coast? If she believes it, then she needs to consult a specialist. If she does not, then why is she pursuing this policy of antagonizing Russia?

Consider also, that Estonia’s population was the largest when the country was occupied and exploited as it is fashionable to say today by the Soviet Union. In 1990, shortly before independence from the Soviet Union, Estonia numbered a bit more than 1.5 million citizens. Since that time the population trend is only downwards. Is it because of the many benefits that the membership in the European Union has blessed Estonia with?

Let us take on Ursula von der Leyen for a change. What she might have at the back of her weird mind is perhaps ultimately a war with Russia. That’s at least the impression that one gets while consuming this war mongering and fear mongering propaganda. Now, I would very much like to ask the European Prime Minister a simple question: does she think all those Third World people who have become Europeans at the stroke of a pen will rally around the star-spangled blue banner of the European Union and fight for it? Does she think the Nigerians and the Afghanis, the Syrians and the Libyans have left their war-torn countries and come to Europe for the purpose of… dying or becoming maimed in a war? Give me a break!

So, it is going to be the white, indigenous Europeans who will be made to fight in the name of Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas, that is, in the name of Europe, in the name of democracy and “values”. Yet, how many Europeans identify with Europe, with the alphabet sexuality, with diversity- equality-inclusion, with women empowerment, with, with, with? Are they going to defend these “values” and lose their limbs? I’m eager to see it happen!

Millions of Ukrainians have fled their country, reluctant to take up arms. Lots of them do not feel Ukrainians in the first place. To defend a nation you need to feel strongly about it. Now Europeans have been taught for decades that patriotism and national sentiment are evil, that masculinity is evil. How then can Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas count on European effeminate males who have unlearned manliness and forgotten patriotism to take up arms? I bet the two women can’t even grasp what fix they are in. They can’t grasp it not only because their mental faculties are not sufficient, but also because they have mingled with the EU apparatchiks and demagogues for so long that they have lost all and any contact with reality. Here think of Annalena Baerbock, Germany’s foreign minister, who boasted about her “feminist diplomacy” and you get the whole picture. These three women – von der Leyen, Kallas, Baerbock (soon to part with her ministerial position, what a loss for Europe!) – might act in the opening scene of Shakespeare’s Macbeth, bent over the cauldron in which they are boiling the hated Putin alive, while muttering war-mongering and fear-mongering curses.

The Revolution of Commonsense

President Donald Trump’s inaugural speech which he delivered to Congress was as revolutionary as the speech delivered by US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth in Brussels or the one given by JD Vance in Munich. It was revolutionary or – better put – counterrevolutionary. President Donald Trump’s second-term presidency reminds one of the rule by Napoleon Bonaparte or Joseph Stalin, with no malicious hint being meant in either of the two adduced cases. Both Napoleon Bonaparte and Joseph Stalin took power after a period of revolutionary changes – in France and in Russia – changes that had sought to turn everything upside down in terms of morals, in terms of societal norms, changes that had declared war on commonsense. Indeed, both Napoleon and Stalin stopped the pernicious process and reverted it to a greater degree. Prior to the emergence of these two historical figures France commencing from 1789 and Russia starting from 1917 were on a suicidal course. The likes of Maximilien Robespierre in France and Leo Trotsky in Russia were hellbent on reconstructing and de-constructing society and, indeed, the whole world. Nothing was regarded as sacred, as sacrosanct. Everything was subjected to change while opponents were severely punished.

Much the same has been happening in the United States for the last three or so decades and especially during the presidential office of Joe Biden. The only – and indeed significant – difference between the events in France and Russia was that – as yet – the revolutionary changes were not bloody. All the rest is very much alike. What President Donald Trump is attempting to do is best expressed in the term commonsense revolution, a term that he himself employed in his inaugural address. In a nutshell: no more sexes (or genders) than two, no more wokeism, no more diversity-equity-inclusion madness, no more rampant crime, no more impunity on the part of illegal immigrants, no more craze of gender reassignment, and so on, and so forth. Napoleon and Stalin took similar measures in that they reversed lots of pernicious processes and resumed the pre-revolutionary normalcy to a greater extent. Yes, the latter has very bad press in the world, but the alternative to Stalin – the said Trotsky – was much, much worse.

Americans, just as the French and the Russians of the periods mentioned above, are a split nation. One part of them clings to commonsense, to traditional values, while the other despises everything that has created and shaped America and, indeed, the Western civilization. Why do we get such two opposing sectors of society? God only knows. Sociologists, historians, and economists will readily come up with varied explanations of the phenomenon and they all may be partly right. The most probable cause is – as it seems – a psychological i.e. biological phenomenon concerning the human psyche. Man can choose to dress neatly or to defile his skin with tattoos. As it is, social standing, profession, level of education have little or nothing to do with such personal choices. The divide runs across families, runs among siblings, hence it must be something biological, something we might say – genetic. Now, if such an unfavourable phenomenon afflicts and infects a sufficient number of individuals, and consequently if such individuals manage to attain power – it matters little if they attain power by peaceful or by violent means – then a revolution in morals is set in motion. It is as a rule a minority that is capable of violating the morals of the majority of society. Be it the Russian Bolsheviks or French Jacobins, the German National-Socialists or the Chinese followers of Mao Zedong, the numbers of the political seducers and ultimately ruthless tyrants were always relatively very small. It is not the numbers that decide the course of history: it is the decisiveness, determination, fanaticism and ruthlessness on the part of the social annihilators, accompanied by the meekness, submission, self-effacement, and docility on the part of the vast majority of the rest of society.

The revolution of common sense. These are apt words with which one can describe what is happening now in the United States. The Trotskyites of all epochs and latitudes create secular religions out of thin air (though many a time they claim to have science or God on their part) and seek to rebuild reality. Since they usually appeal to moral values of justice, equality, inclusion, aid, charity, and the like, they can always attract relatively many people, especially young, impressionable, especially intellectually weak (though with university degrees) and inexperienced. In the seventies of the previous century, many people who lived in affluent Western nations adored Che Guevara, Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh, Lenin and Castro but – and this is a big but – they never ever thought of relocating and living in a political system created by those heroes of theirs or a country run by them or their followers! More to it, the admirers of Che Guevara, Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh, Lenin and Castro did not even notice that people – common people i.e. workers mean peasants – from the countries under the rule of those Che Guevara, Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh, Lenin and Castro types would regularly leave their social paradise and preferred to be exploited by the system of capitalism, patriarchy, racism and what not which the impressionable Western minds used to criticize so much. So let us say it one more time to bring it home: the idolizers of all those seemingly wonderful social solutions wanted neither to experience them first hand nor did they notice that common people kept fleeing from the likes of Che Guevara, Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh, Lenin and Castro in flocks. Were the adorers and admirers of social experimentation feeble minded en bloc?

Much the same is observable nowadays. The activists who want to import people from the Third World hardly ever mingle with the immigrants, hardly ever live among them or close to the neighbourhoods settled by Third World individuals. The activists who try to intimidate the rest of society into accepting gimmegrants and who accuse the societies they live in of racism and capitalist exploitation do not seem to notice that millions of Third World people flock to allegedly racist and exploitative nations of the Western world. The activists who are oh so fond of demolishing traditional morality do not seem to notice that the people from the Third World despise the ideas of having the many sexes or genders and, what follows, of surgical gender reassignment operations, or irreligiousness of the Western world. The activists who act against commonsense and seek to destroy masculinity (necessarily with the adjective toxic) do not seem to notice that the Third World males are very much masculine and hardly likely to be turned into effeminate pseudo-males of the Western type.

The activists who pursue a revolution in morals do not seem to have the powers of observation. They import people from other countries and claim that by doing it they enrich the West (as if the West were not regarded as the richest part of the globe!) and cannot for the lives of them notice that by enriching their societies they necessarily impoverish the societies from which the enrichment is derived! Indeed, commonsense is not what the Che Guevara, Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh, Lenin and Castro types have. They accuse their own nations of being exploitative towards the third world countries and in the same breath they… praise the exploitation of those third world countries by depriving them of the human resources with which those countries or nations could enrich themselves.

In his inaugural speech President Donald Trump enumerated a long (by no means exhaustive) list of the financial expenditures of the previous administration, millions and millions of dollars spent on improving democracy or enabling gender reassignment or similar things in all corners of the world. This procedure shows the craziness of the Trotskyist type that took hold of the Western world. This procedure also enabled a couple of millions of political and social activists to enrich themselves. Political and social activists are as a rule individuals who do not have skills or knowledge that is in demand. These are individuals who have a degree in critical race theory or gender inequality or climate change or, or, or, so participation in government-paid projects such as bringing about or supporting women empowerment somewhere in Africa is the only way for them to assert themselves socially and to have subsistence. Being engaged in such projects one does not need to have any skills or any knowledge: one simply gets money and travels the world with the blessing of a charitable or governmental organization, and can claim to have gained moral high ground.

Because apart from money grants – huge money grants – moral high ground is something that social and political activists of all shades are also very much after. Such is human psyche. A human desperately needs to be regarded as ‘good’. Being ‘good’ is the easiest thing there is in the world. If you cannot master a skill or a branch of knowledge, if you cannot be a good sportsman or artists, you can always gain esteem and achieve a kind of dominance in society by the pretense of being morally good, morally superior. It is especially easy when you do not give away a penny from your own pocket to prove your goodness. The pennies and the pounds come from other sources. It is the others that pay for “women empowerment” somewhere in Africa, and it is the others who pay for your travel there and for your remuneration. It is the tax payers, the people who have skills or that kind of knowledge that is in demand. It is such others who work long hours and pay taxes with which the activity of social do-gooders is paid for, with which the do-gooders can be good.

For we are all driven by the drive of dominance. Dominance is not reducible to material riches or political power. If you cannot assert yourself in either, you can always opt for dominance in the realm of (perceived) morality, you can always strive to become a Gandhi or a Mandela type. This kind of societal dominance can prove better, way better, than material riches or political power. This kind of dominance carries with itself admiration and recognizability, and makes the world adore you. A powerful incentive.

The French revolutionaries and the revolutionaries in Russia, the Chinese Red Guards or the followers of Che Guevara, the followers of John Calvin or Girolamo Savonarola, they all acted for the good of the people. They had no skills nor did they dispose of sound knowledge, but they were spurred on by the dominance drive in that they all wanted to improve society, to improve reality itself, and to present themselves as good men, as good women. What is comforting in all this is the fact that after a period of madness of social engineering there always followed a period of a comeback to commonsense led by the likes of Napoleon in post-Robespierre France, Stalin in post-Trotsky Russia, Deng Xiaoping in post Mao-Zedong China, Konrad Adenauer in post-Hitler Germany, Donald Trump in post-Biden United States, and so on, and so forth. The discomforting element in all this is that periods of societal madness – like this in France or Germany, like those in Russia or China, like those elsewhere in the world throughout history – sadly, keep recurring. Humanity moves along the sinusoidal wave, hitting now troughs, now peaks. Fortunately, we are experiencing a period of relief as the Biden trough is now being counterbalanced by the Trump peak. Sooner or later another trough will come, though. Inevitably.

GEFIRA BULLETIN

GET ACCESS TO CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

€225/250$ FOR 10 ISSUES

GEFIRA provides in-depth and comprehensive analysis of and valuable insight into current events that investors, financial planners and politicians need to know to anticipate the world of tomorrow; it is intended for professional and non-professional readers.