CMR is the leading provider of funding and management support for small to medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs 

Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,

With the War in Ukraine now approaching its fifth year and possibly reaching a climatic stage, it’s timely to offer an overview of the situation.

This overview has three vectors – the situation on the battlefield, the corruption scandal rocking Kyiv, and the prospects for the success of the Trump peace plan.

The thread that connects these three vectors is the role of the Russian Federation and specter of Vladimir Putin.

Let’s look at these vectors separately and then unify them in the end.

On The Ground

The situation on the battlefield is straightforward. Russia is winning the war decisively and is now poised to take all Ukrainian territory east of the Dnipro River, the main waterway that divides east and west Ukraine.

The Donbas consists of two Russian-speaking provinces in eastern Ukraine called Donetsk and Luhansk. Russia has formally annexed the Donbas into the Russian Federation, although the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) continue to fight to retain them. Russia has scored a series of key victories in Mariupol (2022), Bakhmut (2023) and Avdiivka (2024). A major AFU counteroffensive in 2024 failed totally.

U.S. and NATO weapons have been of no benefit to Ukraine. Armored vehicles including Abrams, Challenger and Leopard tanks and Bradley Fighting Vehicles have been left burning on the battlefield. Precision artillery has been made useless by the Russian ability to jam the GPS guidance systems. Ukraine’s initial advantage in drones has been crushed by Russia’s war mobilization and ability to produce thousands of drones per month.

F-16 fighter jets are shot down with ease by advanced Russian anti-aircraft systems. Patriot anti-missile systems are being blown-up by Russian hypersonic missiles that the west does not even possess. Ukraine has managed some attacks on Russian energy infrastructure inside Russia, but these have been no more than pinpricks and have been easily repaired. Meanwhile, the entire Ukrainian power grid has been severely degraded by Russian drones and missiles as bitter cold winter weather approaches.

Now, Russia has taken Pokrovsk, a medium-sized city in the Eastern Donbas closer to the Dnipro River. The significance of Pokrovsk is not its size, but its role as a major logistics hub for rail and road transportation. Pokrovsk is the distribution center for almost all AFU military operations in the Donbas region. Now, pockets of Ukrainian resistance in other cities such as Kramatorsk, Slovyansk and Lyman are without supplies of food and ammunition and are gradually being surrounded.

A Prelude to Victory. Pokrovsk is considered the gateway to Donbas and the key to allowing Russia to capture the rest of the region. When it was taken, it now gives Russia a new “jumping off” point into other major cities in the Donbas.

At the same time, the Russians have surrounded another major city in the north called Kup’yansk at the head of the Oskil River, not far from the provincial capital city of Kharkiv. Once Kup’yansk falls, the way will be open to surround Kharkiv. The Ukrainians have already stated to evacuate civilians from that city. These encirclement maneuvers are in addition to a major pincer movement in central Donbas focused on Kostyantynivka, Yablunivka and Toretsk.

The result is that the Russians are making major offensive moves in the north, central and southern areas of the Donbas and AFU positions are crumbling due to lack of food, ammunition and manpower. By this winter, there will be little standing in the way of a full-on Russian race to the Dnipro.

Beyond that, the Russians would look to the eventual taking of Kharkiv, Odessa and the portion of Kherson on the western bank of the Dnipro. Russian control of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson and the entire Black Sea coast of Ukraine would be complete. There would be nothing left of Ukraine except a landlocked rump state and the cities of Kyiv and Lviv.

Russian never wanted to conquer all of Ukraine. It wanted to secure the Russian-speaking areas and strategic points along the Dnipro River and the Black Sea Coast. With a much larger population, larger economy, better technology, full war mobilization, gold reserves, and the complete failure of Western economic sanctions, it is close to achieving those goals.

A Corrupt Kyiv

While Russia advances, Kyiv collapses politically. A major corruption scandal has emerged, implicating many of the top political leaders around the Ukrainian military dictator Zelensky. The accusations involve kickbacks and bribes from major Ukrainian energy companies.

This is the same racket that Hunter Biden and the Biden Crime Family conducted from 2014 to 2022, but on a larger scale. One key figure close to Zelensky has already fled to Israel (which has no extradition treaties). Zelensky’s top aide Andrii Yermak has recently resigned. All signs point to Zelensky himself being implicated in this scandal.

The only real scandal is why this current scandal wasn’t revealed earlier. This corruption has been going on in Ukraine for over thirty years. A lot of the corrupt money was being funneled back to the Democratic Party, which is why the U.S. never pursued the matter under Obama or Biden. When Trump tried raising the issue in 2019, he was impeached for just discussing it on the phone.

The implication is that the U.S. is now allowing the investigation to move forward because it’s time for Zelensky to move to one of his mansions in Miami, Dubai or Spain. The anti-corruption commission in Ukraine is controlled by U.S. appointees and funded with U.S. money. The message to Zelensky is to sign the Trump peace treaty or run for your life – perhaps both.

Three Choices for Trump

This brings us to the peace process currently underway. Top White House negotiator Steve Witkoff, aided by Jared Kushner and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, have just met with Putin in Moscow after discussions with Zelensky and NATO allies including the UK, France and Germany.

The Trump peace plan began a few weeks ago with 28-points. These points were narrowed down to 19-points after discussions with Zelensky. The exact text of this plan has never been revealed to the public and it is a work in progress.

In the main, we know it would cede the Donbas, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson to Russia up to the Dnipro River. Russia would give up a small patch of Ukrainian territory in the Sumy region, which was never on Russia’s list of goals. Russia would also give up its designs on Odessa. Ukraine would agree never to join NATO and maintain a kind of neutrality between east and west.

Russia’s list of demands to end the war has scarcely changed since before the war. It includes demilitarization, de-Nazification, neutrality, no NATO membership and protections for the Russian-speaking population. As Zelensky attacked the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine, Russia’s list expanded to include protections for the Church.

The biggest change in the Russian position has involved the annexation of Ukraine territory into the Russian Federation. Russia began the war with Crimea and quickly expanded its territory to include the Donbass. The longer the war lasts, the more territory Russia gains. There should be no expectation that Russia will return any of this land except Sumy. Today, Russia claims Ukrainian territory up to the Dnipro River that is has not yet occupied but expects to in the ongoing offensive.

The Russian position is very close to the original Trump 28-point plan – close enough to get a deal done. The problem is that NATO and Zelensky have changed the Trump deal in the last two weeks of negotiations. These changes include “boots on the ground” in the form of a peacekeeping force comprised of NATO troops and security guarantees that would oblige NATO members to come to the aid of Ukraine in the event the Russians engaged in future military action. Of course, Russian military action could easily be provoked by Ukrainian covert operations or drone attacks.

In short, the Ukrainian additions to the original peace plan amount to NATO status without formal NATO membership and lay the foundation for a new war. It would be the same package of lies the west has served up to Moscow in the Minsk I and Minsk II agreements, not to mention the Maidan “color revolution” in 2014 orchestrated by CIA, MI6 and Ukrainian Nazis.

Trump’s Choices. While the outcome is uncertain in the war, the timing is not. We’ll know within a week or two which way this is going. Russia wins in every scenario.

The Trump team is between a rock and a hard place. If they push the modified peace plan with the Ukrainian changes, Russia will say no. If they agree to the Russian position with slight concessions by Moscow, then Ukraine, France, Germany and the UK will say no.

Trump has three choices:

• The first is to stick with the modified plan, in which the case the war will drag on.

• The second is to agree to the Russian position and force Zelensky out of office in favor of a new leader who will agree. In that event, the war will end quickly. Western Europe doesn’t really matter in this scenario – they’re vassal states.

• The third is just to walk away; something Trump should have done last February when it was still Biden’s war. It’s not too late to do that, although Trump will be branded as a Putin Puppet by the DC warmongers.

My estimate is that the first scenario will play out.

But Trump has enormous capacity to surprise the world, so one cannot discard the second scenario. The third scenario seems unlikely because it’s a no-win for Trump politically, even though it would be the cleanest course militarily.

While the outcome is uncertain, the timing is not. We’ll know within a week or two which way this is going. Russia wins in every scenario. The only variables are the size and speed of the victory.

Iranian authorities have executed over 1,000 people between January and September 2025, the highest number of yearly death penalties conducted in Iran that Amnesty International has recorded in at least 15 years.

As Statista's Tristan Gaudiat shows in the chart below, within less than nine months, the number of people executed by the regime has already surpassed last year’s grim total of 972 executions.

You will find more infographics at Statista

These figures are likely low estimates due to the Iranian authorities not publishing such data publicly.

According to Amnesty, the Iranian regime has increased its use of the death penalty since the 2022 "Woman, Life, Freedom" movement uprising, as a tool of state repression and to crush dissent.

In 2025, the authorities have further intensified executions in the aftermath of the escalating hostilities between Israel and Iran, under the guise of national security.

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

Trump 2.0 just released its National Security Strategy (NSS).

It can be read in full here, but for those with limited time, the present piece will summarize its contents. The new NSS reconceptualizes, narrows, and reprioritizes US interests. Focus is placed on the primacy of nations over transnational organizations, preserving the balance of power through optimized burden-sharing, and the US’ reindustrialization that’ll be facilitated by securing critical supply chains. The Western Hemisphere is the top priority.

The “Trump Corrolary” to the Monroe Doctrine is the centerpiece and will seek to deny non-hemispheric competitors ownership or control of strategically vital assets in an allusion to China’s influence over the Panama Canal.

The NSS envisages enlisting regional champions and friendly forces to help ensure regional stability for preventing migrant crises, fight the cartels, and erode the aforesaid competitors’ influence. This aligns with the “Fortress America” strategy of restoring US hegemony in the hemisphere.

Asia is next on the NSS’ hierarchy of priorities. Together with its incentivized partners, the US will rebalance trade ties with China, compete more vigorously with it in the Global South in an allusion to challenging BRI, and deter China over Taiwan and the South China Sea.

Trade loopholes through third countries like Mexico will be closed, the Global South will tie its currencies more closely to the dollar, and Asian allies will grant the US greater access to their ports, etc., while ramping up defense spending.

As for Europe, the US wants it “to remain European, to regain its civilizational self-confidence, and to abandon its failed focus on regulatory suffocation” in order to avoid “civilizational erasure”.

The US will “manage European relations with Russia”, “build up the healthy nations of Central, Eastern, and Southern Europe” in an allusion to the Polish-led “Three Seas Initiative”, and ultimately “help Europe correct its current trajectory.”

A hybrid set of economic and political tools will be employed to this end.

West Asia and Africa are at the bottom of the NSS’ priorities. The US foresees the first becoming a greater source of investment and destination of such while the second’s ties with the US will transition from a foreign aid paradigm to an investment and growth one centered on select partners. Like with the rest of the world, the US wants to keep the peace through optimized burden-sharing and without overextending itself, but it’ll also still keep an eye on Islamist terrorist activity in both regions too.

The following passage sums up the NSS’ new approach:

“As the United States rejects the ill-fated concept of global domination for itself, we must prevent the global, and in some cases even regional, domination of others.”

To that end, the balance of power must be maintained through pragmatic carrot-and-stick policies in conjunction with close partners, which includes securing critical supply chains (especially those in the Western Hemisphere). This is essentially how Trump 2.0 plans to respond to multipolarity.

The grand strategic goal is to restore the US’ central role in the global system, but if that’s not possible and it loses control of the Eastern Hemisphere to China, then Plan B is to retreat to the Western Hemisphere, which will be autarkic under the US’ hegemony if it succeeds in building “Fortress America”.

Trump 2.0’s NSS is very ambitious and will be more difficult to implement than it was to promulgate, but even partial success could radically reshape the global systemic transition in the US’ favor.

Started in 2012, Giving Tuesday, which takes place on the Tuesday after Thanksgiving, is a day which aims to encourage people to do good.

Described as "a global generosity movement unleashing the power of radical generosity", the goal of Giving Tuesday is to encourage people to donate time or money or to use their voice for a good cause.

While generosity may seem like a complicated concept to quantify, for over a decade now, the Charities Aid Foundation has been providing an overview of generosity around the world with its World Giving Index.

This international study examines populations in more than 100 countries according to three main aspects of generosity: charitable donations, volunteering and willingness to help strangers.

As in previous years, Statista's Valentine Fourreau notes that the most generous country is not one of the richest in the world.

You will find more infographics at Statista

In 2024 Indonesia again tops the ranking, with a score of 74. The volunteer rate in the country (65 percent) is nearly three times higher than the global average (24 percent), and nine out of ten Indonesians made charitable donations in 2023 (year the data was collected).

In second place among the most generous countries is Kenya, with a score of 63, while Singapore and the Gambia both obtained a score of 61.

This ranking, whose top 20 remains fairly similar from one year to the next, reflects certain religious and cultural characteristics.

Notable examples include the influence of Islamic charity in certain Muslim countries such as Indonesia (with zakât, or ‘legal alms’), and that of Theravada Buddhism in Thailand (ranked 14th) and Myanmar (ranked 19th), an ancient branch of Buddhism that values offerings and charitable donations.

Anglo-Saxon and Protestant countries, with their long tradition of philanthropy, are also well represented.

Via Brian McGlinchey at Stark Realities

Across the American political spectrum, support for the State of Israel is steadily eroding. With the long-running, staggeringly expensive redistribution of American wealth and weapons to one of the world’s most prosperous countries under unprecedented threat, Israel’s advocates inside the United States are growing increasingly desperate to suppress the facts, opinions, questions and imagery that are causing this sea change. 

Pro-Israel forces have long worked to limit and shape US discourse to Israel’s advantage. However, the intensity and novelty of what’s taking place in 2025 — from the government-coerced transfer of a social media platform to pro-Israel billionaires, to the jailing and attempted deportation of a student for writing an opinion piece, and more — deserves the attention of every American who values free expression, an enlightened electorate, and independence from foreign influence.

Many Americans know that Congress and President Biden teamed up in 2024 to force the Chinese company ByteDance to divest its US operation of the popular video-sharing app TikTok, yet few realize this unusual intervention was motivated in large part by a desire to serve the interests of Israel. 

Though politicians pointed to the supposed Chinese menace lurking inside the app — while revealing their lack of sincerity by continuing to use it themselves — the catalyst for the extraordinary TikTok ban's passage was a sea of viral content illuminating Israel’s rampage in Gaza, casting Palestinians in empathetic light, and questioning the legitimacy of the political philosophy that is Zionism. 

The idea that passage of the ban was largely about Israel is no conspiracy theory. American politicians who supported the compelled divestiture of TikTok have candidly said so themselves. Sharing a stage with Biden Secretary of State Antony Blinken in 2024, then-Senator Mitt Romney said: 

“Some wonder why there was such overwhelming support for us to shut down, potentially, TikTok or other entities of that nature. You look at the postings on TikTok and the number of mentions of Palestinians relative to other social media sites — it’s overwhelmingly so among TikTok broadcasts, so I’d note that’s of real interest to the president, who will get the chance to take action in that regard.” 

Similarly, Rep. Mike Lawler of New York told a webinar that pro-Palestinian student protests were “exactly why we included the TikTok bill…because you’re seeing how these kids are being manipulated by certain groups or entities or countries to foment hate on their behalf and really create a hostile environment here in the US.”

Of course, mere divestiture wouldn’t guarantee that TikTok would start suppressing anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian content in the United States. To have the desired effect, the buyer — who required White House approval — would have to be an ardent supporter of Israel. That’s just how things played out. In September, President Trump approved the sale of TikTok’s US operations to a joint venture led by Larry Ellison, the founder of tech-titan Oracle and the fourth-richest man in the world. 

Ellison has expressed his “deep emotional connection to the State of Israel” and has been a major benefactor of the Israeli Defense Forces, via donations to IDF-supporting organizations. He spent at least $3 million on Marco Rubio’s failed 2016 presidential campaign, after being assured by Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations that Rubio would “be a great friend to Israel.” There are other Israel-favoring billionaires in the consortium now controlling TikTok’s American presence, among them NewsCorp head Rupert Murdoch and investment trader Jeff Yass. 

Americans were propagandized into fearing Chinese control of TikTok users’ data. Now that data will be controlled by Oracle, a firm whose founder has described Israel as his own nation, said “there is no greater honor” than supporting the IDF, and invited Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to take a seat on the board. It’s also a firm with strong business ties to the Israel government, and a firm whose Israel-born executive vice chair and former CEO last year declared, “For [Oracle] employees, it’s clear: If you’re not for America or Israel, don’t work here.”

A few months before the TikTok divestiture was finalized, the company installed former IDF soldier and self-described “passionate” Zionist Erica Mindel as TikTok’s hate speech manager in July. Weeks later, and just days before the transfer of TikTok’s US operation was approved, the platform posted new guidelines on Sept 13 about what’s allowed on the platform. 

Soon after the change, users and content creators began sharing examples of content being deleted by TikTok, with the platform exploiting its vague new rules about “conspiracy theories” and “protected groups” to reject negative content about Israel — wielding the threat of demonetization of repeat offenders. In a recent appearance on the Breaking Points podcast, Guy Christensen, who has 3.4 million TikTok followers, shared his experience: 

“What all these videos have in common that have been removed since Sept 13 are that I am talking about Israel, I’m talking about AIPAC’s influence, I’m talking about Larry Ellison and the attempt to put TikTok under Zionist control — I’m criticizing Israel in some way. It’s the same thing I’ve heard from my audience, my friends who are creators. Ever since Sept 13, they’ve had the same exact experience. Videos that are more informational and critical of Israel get removed.” 

In a late-September meeting with pro-Israel social media “influencers,” Netanyahu hailed the transfer of TikTok’s US ownership. “We have to fight with the weapons that apply to the battlefield with which we’re engaged, and the most important ones are in social media. And the most important purchase that is going on right now is TikTok. Number one.” Expressing hope that, by “talking” with Elon Musk, his X platform could be reshaped to be more Israel-protective too, Netanyahu added, “If we can get those two things, we can get a lot.”

NEW - Netanyahu mission-briefed American influencers today, stating TikTok is the "most important" weapon in securing Israel's right-wing support: "Weapons change over time... the most important ones are the social media," he said. "The most important purchase that is going on… pic.twitter.com/EeszHlcZmN

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) September 27, 2025

Ellison’s TikTok takeover is troubling enough, but that wasn’t his only media move this year. He also financed his son David’s takeover of Paramount Skydance, the media company that controls many movie and television properties, including CBS. David Ellison quickly installed as head of CBS News Bari Weiss — a self-described “Zionist fanatic” who took a gap year before college to live on an Israeli kibbutz. 

Weiss’s history of wrangling over the bounds of acceptable speech vis-a-vis Israel goes back to her sophomore year at Columbia University, when she was part of a group of students who claimed they were subjected to intimidation by Middle East Studies professors over the students’ Zionist views. A university panel found only one of the supposed incidents represented unacceptable conduct. 

Both outside observers and network insiders are braced for Weiss to nudge the outlet’s reporting to Israel’s benefit, and there are early indications validating worries about her bias. Citing executive sources inside CBS, the Wall Street Journal reported that foreign correspondent Chris Livesay, who was set to be laid off as part of a downsizing move that preceded Weiss’s arrival, sent Weiss an email expressing his affinity for Israel and claiming he was “bullied” for his beliefs. Weiss intervened and saved Livesay from the layoff. Other correspondents told the Journal that Livesay’s claim about bullying was bogus. 

Compounding the expectations that CBS News is about to become a de facto Israel PR outlet, the network’s new ombudsman — the arbiter of editorial concerns — also has strong Zionist credentials. The New York Times describes Kenneth Weinstein as a “firm and vocal champion of Israel.” On X, Grayzone editor-in-chief Max Blumenthal notedthat, “during a 2021…event with Mike Pence, Weinstein touted his Israel lobbyist creds, describing how he’d been groomed by the Tikvah Fund, the Likudnik training network which will award Bari Weiss its Herzl Award this November.” (The Likud Party is the Israeli party led by Netanyahu.)

Here's how Glenn Greenwald summed up the TikTok and CBS moves:

The minute the American public starts turning against Israel and the US financing of that country, the world's richest and most fanatical pro-Israel billionaires start buying up large media outlets and TikTok, then install Bari Weiss and an ex-IDF soldier to control content: https://t.co/wjJbliKRmO

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) November 20, 2025

The transfer of TikTok into Israel-friendly hands isn’t the only example of intensified US government intervention in America’s public square on behalf of the tiny Middle Eastern country. Much of the Trump administration’s war against anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian speech has focused on college campuses. In the most alarming such move in 2025, the Trump administration has arrested, jailed and attempted to deport foreign students for merely voicing their support for Palestinians or opposition to the Israeli government. 

The most atrocious example — which Stark Realities examined in depth earlier this year — centers on a 30-year-old, Turkish Tufts University PhD candidate who was arrested on a Boston street and whisked away to a dismal Louisiana prison, just for co-authoring a calmly-written Tufts Daily op-ed urging the university to formally characterize Israel’s conduct in Gaza as genocide, and to sell the school’s Israel-associated investments. 

This cruelly despotic tactic is the brainchild of the Heritage Foundation. In a policy paper, the think tank urged pro-Israel groups and the US government to characterize pro-Palestinian activists as “effectively members of a terrorist support network,” and then use that characterization to target activists for deportations, expulsions from colleges, lawsuits, terminations by employers, and exclusion from “open society.”

Supporters of Israel have long attempted to stifle critics of the Israeli government by smearing them as antisemites. In 2016, that kind of mislabelling was codified in a definition of antisemitism that’s now being embraced by governments, universities and other institutions in the United States and around the world: the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s “working definition of antisemitism.”

Some elements of the IHRA definition are reasonable, but others irrationally conflate criticism of the State of Israel with hatred of all Jews. For example, the IHRA definition says it’s antisemitic to “claim that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor” or to merely “draw comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.” 

Other, vague elements of the definition are open to creative interpretations, facilitating bogus accusations of bigotry against Israel’s critics. For example, the IHRA says it’s antisemitic to “apply double standards by requiring of [Israel] a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.” The IHRA also says it’s antisemitic to make statements about the “power of Jews as [a] collective,” which can put someone who talks about the enormous influence of the pro-Israel lobby squarely in the crosshairs. 

Similarly, the IHRA says it’s antisemitic to “deny the Jewish people their right to self-determination,” a definition that could ensnare people who — right or wrong — advocate for the State of Israel to be replaced by a new governing arrangement for the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. Indeed, those who want speech to be policed on Israel’s behalf frequently point to the slogan “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” as inherently antisemitic. 

As I wrote in an earlier article (“No Country Has a Right To Exist”): 

Those who support the State of Israel are free to present a case that it’s a just arrangement for the 7.5 million Jews and 7.5 million Palestinians “between the river and the sea.” However, painting those who demand a new arrangement as inherently immoral, genocidal or antisemitic is ignorant at best and maliciously misleading at worst. 

Doing its part to vilify Israel’s critics and mislead the public and policymakers, the Anti-Defamation League has employed expansive definitions in its numerical tracking of antisemitic incidents — statistics that are unquestioningly quoted by journalists and cited by pro-Israel politicians. 

For example, in early 2024, the ADL claimed that, in the first three months after the Oct. 7 Hamas invasion of Israel and the IDF’s brutal assault on Gaza, antisemitic incidents skyrocketed 360%. ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt said Jews faced a threat “unprecedented in modern history.” However, the ADL admitted that it was counting as antisemitic incidents all protests that included “anti-Zionist chants and slogans.” 

Of course, exaggerating the scale of antisemitism does more than facilitate efforts to suppress criticism of Israel: It also helps the ADL justify its existence and boost its fundraising. The ADL’s over-counting is nothing new. In 2017, the ADL claimed antisemitic incidents in the United States had soared by 86% in the first quarter of the year, and major media outlets ran with the story. However, much of the increase springs from the ADL’s decision to include a huge number of bomb threats phoned into US synagogues and schools by a Jew living in Israel.

The IHRA definition is at the forefront of a broad campaign to suppress candid discourse about Israel and Palestine on college campuses, with multiple state governments ordering public schools to use it to determine what can and can’t be said. 

Bard College’s Kenneth Stern, a lead drafter of a 2004 antisemitism definition that was subsequently adopted by the IHRA, has spoken out against the weaponization of the definition to stifle discourse at universities. “The history of the abuse of the IHRA definition demonstrates the desire is largely political—it is not so much a desire to identify antisemitism, but rather to label certain speech about Israel as antisemitic,” Stern wrote at the Knight First Amendment Institute. 

Even at schools that haven’t adopted the IHRA definition, activists and scholars who are critical of Israel and empathetic to the Palestinians are being subjected to countless false accusations of antisemitism, and universities are being sued by pro-Israel students who claim the schools tolerate antisemitism. 

A Stark Realities analysis of an 84-page complaint filed against the University of Pennsylvania found nearly every alleged “antisemitic incident” was merely an instance in which Penn students, professors and guest speakers engaged in political expression that proponents of the State of Israel strongly disagree with. Eighteen months later, a federal judge agreed. “At worst, Plaintiffs accuse Penn of tolerating and permitting the expression of viewpoints which differ from their own,” Judge Mitchell Goldberg wroteas he dismissed the case. 

Courtroom victories, however, can only do so much to counter the chilling effect of campaigns that vilify students, professors and institutions as antisemitic. That’s especially true when university cash flows are threatened. 

Major pro-Israel donors have withdrawn or threatened to suspend donations to various schools, and those threats have been credited with forcing out university presidents like Penn’s Liz Magill. Donor pressure has also led schools to adopt the problematic IHRA antisemitism definition, shut down chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine, and strip Israel-critical professors of chair positions. 

The greatest financial pressure being exerted on universities, however, is coming from the Trump administration, which has not only suspended billions of dollars in funding from various universities that are supposed hives of antisemitism, but has also filed lawsuits and hammered schools with fines. Many of them are surrendering, paying the government large sums and making policy and staffing changes. Last week, Northwestern agreed to pay $75 million to the federal government for its alleged failure to fight “antisemitism.” Earlier, Columbia agreed to a $200 million fine payable over three years, and Brown will surrender $50 million.

There are other avenues by which government force is being tapped to squelch criticism of Israel and advocacy for Palestinians. Dozens of states have passed legislation that bar individuals and businesses from contracting with the state if they boycott or divest from Israel. That led to a bizarre spectacle in which hurricane-battered Texans applying for emergency benefits were asked to verify that they do not and will not boycott Israel. Comparable federal measures have been introduced, but not yet enacted. 

Another proposed federal bill is the Antisemitism Awareness Act, which would require the Department of Education to use the IHRA definition when evaluating accusations that colleges tolerate antisemitism — essentially codifying a Trump executive order. It sailed through the House in 2024 by a 320-91 vote, but stalled in the Senate this year amid bipartisan concerns about the definition. Seven amendments had been attached in committee, including one clarifying that criticism of the Israeli government isn’t antisemitism. 

Tellingly, champions of the bill said amendments like that were poison pills that would render it un-passable.

Stark Realities undermines official narratives, demolishes conventional wisdom and exposes fundamental myths across the political spectrum. Join thousands who benefit from ad-free, monthly insights at starkrealities.substack.com

* * *

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge

Concerning nations surveyed in Statista’s Consumer Insights, Americans were among those most worried about food and water security.

Indeed, as Statista's Katharina Buchholz reports, while for most European nations, worry about the topic peaked during the coronavirus pandemic and the beginning of the Russia-Ukraine war, concern has remained elevated in the United States into 2025.

You will find more infographics at Statista

Food and water supplies were not considered a particular issue among developed countries for a long time. But the data illustrates how that is starting to change.

As many as 1 in 5 respondents in France said that food and water security was one of the biggest challenges their country faced in 2025.

The proportion was similarly high in the United Kingdom and Italy (23 percent), while it had fallen a little lower again in Spain (16 percent) and Germany (13 percent).

As wars (trade and kinetic) continue to disrupt international trade and affairs in recent years, the constant chatter about climate change shifting droughts and destructive fires more top of people's minds, and inflation (groceries becoming more expensive), more people are seeing how these and other issues can affect the security of their food and water supply even in richer countries.

In the United States, shifts in government benefit programs by the Trump administration might also add to peoples' feeling around food security.

The fact that Syria's head of state got his start working for ISIS, and was a founding member of Syrian al-Qaeda, continues to produce embarrassing headlines. 

One full year after former president Bashar al-Assad was overthrown and fled to Moscow, Canada has very belatedly removed President Ahmed al-Sharaa's militia group Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham from its list of state sponsors of terrorism, according to a Friday statement from the country’s Foreign Ministry. As part of the new action, Syria has also been removed from its list of state sponsors of terrorism (a list the country had been on over many years of the Assad government).

Sharaa, formerly known as Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, founded and for years headed up the terror group HTS in Idlib province. HTS is the group that took control of Damascus after the collapse of the Syrian army in December 2024.

"Following extensive review, the Government of Canada has removed Syria from Canada's List of Foreign State Supporters of Terrorism under the State Immunity Act, as well as removed Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) from the List of Terrorist Entities under the Canadian Criminal Code," the ministry said.

The US was the first to act, having lifted a $10 million bounty on Sharaa within the months after he seized power, followed by a full US delisting.

The Canadian foreign ministry further said that the decision was "not taken lightly." It stated, "These measures are in line with recent decisions taken by our allies, including the United Kingdom and the United States, and follow the efforts by the Syrian transitional government to advance Syria's stability, build an inclusive and secure future for its citizens, and work alongside global partners to reinforce regional stability and counter terrorism."

So Canada seems to be admitting that HTS is indeed linked to al-Qaeda, and was properly designated in years past as a terror group, but that now it is merely going along with its allies the UK and US which removed the legal designation earlier.

The ministry still sought to stress that Canada "remains committed … to counter global security threats, such as those posed by Al-Qaeda" and ISIS (Daesh).

President Sharaa and his HTS fighters - many which now fill up top government positions - have lately been trying to make a show of 'counter ISIS missions'. However, it is Alawite, Christian, and Druze communities which have suffered repeat attacks by Sharaa's Islamist forces in recent months. 

Western countries have moved to normalize HTS, but nothing fundamentally has changed in their hardline Islamist ideology...

Video footage shows journalist James Longman advising rebels in Damascus, Syria, about the ISIS logo on their uniforms.

One of the rebels attempts to explain that the emblem does not represent ISIS, while the man wearing it is seen quickly removing the symbol. pic.twitter.com/qhZpkJiozJ

— MintPress News (@MintPressNews) December 16, 2024

Various reports have also noted that in some cases HTS members sport ISIS patches, and do little to try and hide it. Still, mainstream outlets like CNN haven't covered this much, and have by and large 'moved on' from coverage of Syria, now with Assad out of the way - as the Western powers had long sought in fueling the proxy war for regime change.