Image is sourced from this article.

Those who were around in the early days of the news megathread may remember Pedro Castillo, the left-leaning leader of Peru who was deposed in December 2022. He was replaced by Dina Boluarte, the first woman to be President of Peru, who described herself as a progressive but afterwards routinely sided with Peruvian conservatives and American interests. To say she was unpopular is an understatement of titanic proportions - she descended to such lows that she was, at one point, the single most unpopular leader on the planet. As with most deeply unpopular leaders that side with the West, she kept power for a bafflingly long time.

However, on October 10th, after a period of protests against the government, she was impeached and removed by Peru’s Congress in a unanimous vote. José Jerí was sworn in as the new President, who was previously the President of the Congress and is a member of a centrist Peruvian party. The government is trying the classic strategy: keep doing the same thing as before, and sacrifice an unpopular figure - here, Boluarte - in the hopes that this appeases the crowd.

Is this strategy working? It doesn’t really seem to be - protests are not only continuing, but strengthening, as it is clear that neoliberalism will not reformed and the brutality by police will not stop (there was very recently a high-profile case in which a musician, Mauricio Ruiz, was murdered). Controversies surrounding Jerí, including allegations of SA, are already being reported. If Jerí is deposed, the next person in line to try their hand at ruling will be the former army general Roberto Chiabra, who would be the ninth President in less than a decade.

Last week’s thread is here.
The Imperialism Reading Group is here.

Please check out the RedAtlas!

The bulletins site is here. Currently not used.
The RSS feed is here. Also currently not used.

The Zionist Entity's Genocide of Palestine

If you have evidence of Zionist crimes and atrocities that you wish to preserve, there is a thread here in which to do so.

Sources on the fighting in Palestine against the temporary Zionist entity. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:

UNRWA reports on Israel’s destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.

English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news.
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.

English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.

Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict

Sources:

Defense Politics Asia’s youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don’t want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it’s just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists’ side.

Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.

Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:

Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.

https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR’s former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR’s forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster’s telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a ‘propaganda tax’, if you don’t believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.

Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:

Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.

  • Redcuban1959 [any]@hexbear.netEnglish
    46·
    14 hours ago

    EU Fails to Agree on Using Frozen Russian Assets to Fund Ukraine Aid - Telesur English

    Article

    Von der Leyen seeks to create a ‘reparation loan’ of around 140 billion euros. On Thursday, EU leaders failed to agree on a plan to use frozen Russian assets to finance new loans for Ukraine, after divisions resurfaced at a European Council summit.

    The summit’s conclusions contained significantly softer wording than earlier drafts, reflecting Belgium’s objections and legal concerns raised by the European Central Bank (ECB).

    EU leaders reaffirmed their political, economic and military support for Ukraine but stopped short of backing any specific funding mechanism. The conclusions merely invited the Commission to present, “as soon as possible, options for financial support based on an assessment of Ukraine’s financing needs,” saying that the issue would be revisited at the next EU summit in December.

    The document also reiterated that Russia’s assets should remain immobilized until “Russia ceases its war of aggression against Ukraine and compensates it for the damage caused.”

    The dispute centers on a proposal outlined by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in her September State of the Union address to create a “reparation loan” of around 140 billion euros (about US$163 billion), backed by frozen Russian sovereign assets.

    The plan is supported by Germany, France and the Baltic States, but opposed by Belgium and the ECB, which warn that it could breach international law and threaten eurozone financial stability.

    Belgium holds most of the Russian central bank assets immobilized by the EU shortly after the conflict began. Speaking ahead of the summit, Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever said he would block the plan unless other EU members agreed to share the financial risks equally, provide guarantees in case frozen assets must later be returned to Moscow, and ensure all countries holding Russian funds act together.

    “If we move, we must move all together, that’s European solidarity,” he said, warning he would use all political and legal means to stop the decision if these conditions were not met.

      • EnsignRedshirt [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
        18·
        10 hours ago

        What they’re trying to do is use the frozen assets as collateral against a loan, rather than seizing them outright. The argument they’re making to themselves is basically that Russia is going to have to pay reparations after the war, and they can theoretically freeze the assets until the war is over, so the assets can be used to secure a loan in the meantime, because they wouldn’t be released unless they got a satisfactory agreement to end the war. The loan could be repaid with reparations, and the assets could be released back to Russia, technically not violating all of the most fundamental principles upon which the international financial system is based.

        This argument has many problems, but the core issue is that the EU appears to want to have its cake and eat it. They want to finance aid to Ukraine in the near term, maintain credibility in their financial system, and not be on the hook for the money going to Ukraine. Practically speaking, they can really only have two out of three, and that’s what they’re arguing about right now.

        I’m not sure if this is a charitable or cynical interpretation, but it feels like this conversation is more about optics than law or finance. European leadership wants to support Ukraine, but their citizenry is getting tired of unlimited blank checks for war while their quality of life is stagnant or declining. Simply printing €140B and sending it to Ukraine, even as a loan, might be unpopular. What they may be doing is trying to use the frozen Russian assets as a fig leaf to cover the fact that Europeans are the de facto guarantors of this funding. If there’s ever a situation where Russia gets to claim their assets without paying reparations, or before reparations are agreed upon, then the EU is holding the bag. That’s what the Belgian PM is getting at.

        My assumption is that they’re not discussing blowing up their entire financial system just to help Ukraine, and that this is more about appearing to take a strong position against Russia while doing what they were going to do anyway.