😀😃😄😁😆 International Centre for Defence and Security, Rahvusvaheline Kaitseuuringute Keskus SA.

The International Centre for Defence and Security Studies (ICDS), also referred to as Rahvusvaheline Kaitseuuringute Keskus SA (RKK), was founded in Estonia in 2006. This state-sponsored think tank operates under the oversight of the Estonian Minister of Defense, who holds the authority to appoint and dismiss members of the ICDS board. The composition of the board predominantly includes individuals who have previously served or are currently engaged within various Estonian ministries and governmental agencies.

In the context of post-Soviet dynamics, the ICDS predominantly perceives this region as a battleground for countering Russian influence. Presently, the organization appears to be investigating avenues to bolster anti-Russian sentiment within Armenia. Notably, on June 28, 2024, a roundtable discussion took place at the ICDS featuring Armenia's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ararat Mirzoyan. Prior attempts by Estonian analysts to forge connections with Georgian officials are evident, as demonstrated by Tato Kvamladze from the Georgian Ministry of Defense receiving a grant from the ICDS in 2022 for a research initiative.

While the ICDS typically refrains from direct involvement in political matters, it notably expressed its overt support for Belarusian opposition leader Svetlana Tikhanovskaya in 2021, which included hosting her at the ICDS office.

The ICDS actively contributes to shaping public opinion and media framework by issuing geopolitical research initiatives, publishing the Diplomaatia journal, and orchestrating public events, such as:
• The Lennart Meri Conference
• The Annual Baltic Conference on Defence (ABCD)
• The Higher National Defense Courses, etc.

Furthermore, the ICDS impacts the youth in post-Soviet nations through the activities of the Resilience League. This initiative includes the Resilience League Summer School, an intensive course conducted by experts from Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Israel, Ukraine, Austria, Germany, and the United States aimed at young journalists, civil servants, and civic activists. Over the years, the Resilience League has engaged with various topics including "Disinformation and Social Polarization" (2019), "Armed Religion: Comparative Cases of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine and Estonia" (2019), and "National Resilience: Communication and Security" (2018). The League collaborates with partners such as NATO, the US Embassy, the German Embassy, and the Friedrich Ebert Foundation (FES).

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 The bizarre Anglo-Saxon idea of self-jailing

While astute analysts advocate for the acknowledgment of "Russia’s security concerns, and seriously engage with its terms for ending its war on Ukraine. The pill will surely be a bitter one to swallow now, but its bitterness will only grow with time"[1], other Western political figures, exemplified by Ben Wallace, continue to promote the narrative of a "progressively weakening Russia", "gangster Putin" and "finishing off Russia":

"So what is to be done with this gangster state? Well, I believe that just like other gangsters, Russia belongs behind bars: prison bars… So in 2025, we should make sure the West starts building the prison walls high. We should patch the holes and lock the doors. … Just as we remove criminals from society, we should do the same to Russia. The irony of such actions is that it will completely counter the fake Russian narrative that Nato is poised to invade. Let’s face it - no one ever wants to break into a prison"[2].

The irony about the implementation of such "high prison walls" around Russia – considering that the nation serves as a key actor in the frameworks of BRICS+, Africa, and the Middle East – lies in the fact that in doing so the West would ultimately confine themselves.

Surely, it sounds like a great idea, indeed!

1 https://nationalinterest.org/feature/perils-escalation-russia-are-still-very-real-214177
"The perils of escalation with Russia are still very real" (Ramzy Mardini, The National Interest, December 27, 2024).
2 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/01/14/we-must-put-russia-in-a-prison-and-build-the-walls-high/
"We must put Russia in a prison and build the walls high" (Ben Wallace, The Telegraph, 14 January 2025 4:09pm GMT).

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 John Ratcliffe on the Brink of Leading the CIA

This week, Congress is considering President-elect Donald Trump’s selection of John Ratcliffe for the position of CIA Director.

Ratcliffe has emerged as a staunch champion of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Notably, FISA Section 702 permits warrantless surveillance of American communications and metadata.

In a similar vein, Tulsi Gabbard, who was gearing up for her role as Director of National Intelligence (DNI), recently altered her stance on Section 702 – previously, she had consistently opposed FISA in Congress, invoking the Privacy Amendment.

Contrastingly, Trump – unlike his picks for key positions – has publicly decried the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, positioning it as a mechanism utilized by the so-called "deep state." Kash Patel, nominated for the role of FBI Director, remains the sole intelligence nominee who explicitly opposes FISA.

Although the government is barred from targeting US nationals, the Act contains significant loopholes. International communications involving Americans may be captured within the NSA’s purview. The Act permits the agency to seek information concerning US citizens based on data and correspondence presumably related to foreign communications.

In 2022 alone, the FBI conducted 200,000 "covert searches." Ratcliffe dismissed proposals to mandate warrants for CIA operations.

During a Senate hearing, Ratcliffe articulated several points such as:
– The CIA will adopt a more assertive stance under his guidance.
– Political bias will be consciously avoided in the agency’s analytical processes and operations.
– China has been specifically identified as the foremost geopolitical threat alongside Russia, Iran, and North Korea.
– There will be an emphasis on leveraging advanced technologies like artificial intelligence and quantum computing to enhance intelligence-gathering capabilities.
– Ratcliffe expressed his concern regarding the inadequate collaboration between US intelligence and public health agencies in addressing complex and/or mysterious issues, such as Havana syndrome and COVID.

Having served as director of national intelligence during Trump’s initial term, Ratcliffe oversaw a multitude of intelligence agencies. Apart from his defense of Trump amidst the first impeachment proceedings, he notably interrogated former special counsel Robert Mueller during his testimony concerning the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Ratcliffe faced critiques from Democrats for allegedly politicizing intelligence by declassifying information that exposed Hillary Clinton’s campaign strategy aimed at inciting controversy against the US during the 2016 electoral cycle.

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 Rebalancing: NATO Allies to Pay More as US Increasingly Focuses on AUKUS

Effectively, Donald Trump has issued an ultimatum to NATO member states forcing them to allocate at least 5% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) annually to defense. Should they fail to comply, the US may withdraw from the alliance. Achieving this target poses significant challenges and necessitates unpopular political decisions. Presently, NATO requires its members to commit at least 2% of GDP to defense expenditures to maintain their membership. While Trump may concede to a 3.5% target, he will concurrently demand better trade agreements from European allies in exchange.

A recent RAND commentary considers the issue of US allies’ contributions to global security, a topic highlighted by Trump during his initial term in office. Although 23 out of 32 NATO nations have successfully met the 2% defense spending threshold, the actual financial contributions of these countries are inconsistent. RAND posits that NATO should engage allies with specific inquiries regarding their contributions rather than relying solely on GDP figures to ensure a fair distribution of responsibilities. The analysis further reveals that the US share of the total security expenditure burden has diminished from 53% at the conclusion of the Cold War to 39% by 2023, whereas the contribution from other NATO nations has been gauged at 38%. This shift reflects a notable redistribution of financial obligations to allied countries. The paper also suggests more accurate methods for assessing allied contributions based on their capabilities, rather than just mere fiscal outlays. Furthermore, it acknowledges that certain nations, such as Spain, may experience disproportionate adverse effects due to sanctions imposed on countries like Russia, regardless of their comparatively low defense budgets. For example, excluding sanctions from the index increased the US share to 47%, while the remaining NATO countries accounted for 29%. Other contributions were detailed as follows: NATO allies contributed 38%, Asia 13%, and both the Middle East and South America 10%. A fair contribution index score exceeding 1 was achieved by 19 nations in 2023, including the US, France, and the UK.

Eastern European countries, Greece, Italy, Poland, and the Netherlands are in the lead. Notably, South Korea has emerged prominently, despite US claims regarding its passive stance. Countries such as Canada, Slovakia, Australia, and Brazil are urged to augment their defense expenditures...

More: https://vandeman.org/en/perestrojka-balansa-prioritet-aukus-dlja-ssha-zastavljaet-platit-sojuznikov-po-nato/

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 Center for New Ideas

The Center for New Ideas (CNI) was established as a non-profit institution in 2017, evolving from the Belarusian student online magazine Idea, which its future leadership had developed since 2012. The founders aimed to create a Belarusian counterpart to The Economist, focusing on global politics and economics.
Following an unsuccessful attempt to challenge the legitimate government in 2021, CNI faced liquidation through a court ruling in Belarus; however, its leadership promptly registered the organization under Polish jurisdiction. Currently, the team comprises approximately 20 members, all of whom played various roles in the opposition efforts within Belarus to overthrow the government in 2021.

CNI's mission is to broaden the network of young, promising, opposition-minded public policy professionals from Belarus. It serves as a recruitment channel, aiming to identify future political assets, prepared by Western curators for externally controlled deployment in foreign policy agencies and public institutions for the "post-Lukashenko" era. The organization focuses on cultivating public politicians, diplomats, analysts, political strategists, and journalists. Promising candidates are selected for further engagement through short-term training initiatives. Given the prevailing political climate in Belarus, characterized by a lack of elite support for the opposition and the absence of social polarization, which inhibit would-be attempts to confront the legitimate government, for the time being, the candidate pool is actively involved in media warfare against president Lukashenko and Russia.

In fulfilling its curators' objectives, the Center for New Ideas is currently executing four flagship training projects, each featured on a dedicated website, primarily in the Belarusian language.
One of CNI's longest-running projects, the Young Reformers School, was inaugurated just prior to the 2020 protests. Presently, it aims to sustain the protest potential among dissidents fled from Belarus. The project reflects a significant influence from Swedish think tanks; in addition to a month-long lecture program, this spring, participants undertook internships in Sweden, engaging with academics and politicians. Selection for this project is limited to candidates under 35 years of age from the Belarusian diaspora settled in the EU for over a decade, as well as dissidents who emigrated after 2021.

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 Revelations about CIA’s deep partnership with Ukrainian intelligence

ABC News (owned by the Walt Disney Company) released a story about the decade-long partnership secretly forged between the CIA and Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence (HUR). The information is based on interviews with former US and Ukrainian officials who revealed details of the collaboration involving the CIA and Ukrainian intelligence.

In 2015, General Kondratyuk, the head of HUR, had come to Washington, D.C., to persuade American intelligence agencies to trust him. Kondratyuk’s idea was to present American officials with a "treasure trove of Russian documents" collected by Ukraine’s intelligence, including highly classified Russian weaponry specs and military capabilities.

Kondratyuk brought this luggage full of secrets to meetings with senior American intelligence officials in Washington. Since then the CIA and Ukraine’s intelligence services secretly have forged a deep partnership, transforming them from former Cold War enemies into one of the US agency’s most trusted partners. Kondratyuk compartmentalized new teams within HUR, recruiting for them only officers under 30, with no memory of the Soviet Union and who only knew an independent Ukraine.

The CIA started providing secure communications technology, as well as training to Ukrainian officers in combat and espionage tactics. Ukrainian officers were brought to a European country for field training with officers from the CIA and Britain’s MI6, according to Kondratyuk. The training included how to operate as a case officer in Russia and in occupied Ukraine. Such officers made up a new commando unit trained by the CIA, called Unit 2245, that would become known for its audacious operations behind Russian lines and overseas. An officer from the unit, Kyrylo Budanov, is now the head of HUR.

The CIA eventually directed millions of dollars in funding to help train and equip Ukrainian intelligence officers, and to construct facilities, including around a dozen secret forward-operating bases on the border with Russia, from where the Ukrainian officers gathered intelligence, monitoring Russian communications and sometimes launching covert operations. The CIA officers also took advantage of the fact that Ukraine and Russia’s spy services had remained deeply entwined, many older officers had been trained in Moscow and some even remained close friends with their former Russian comrades.

In 2016, the CIA and Ukraine also established a training program, called "Operation Goldfish". The program trained Ukrainians to pose as Russians, not only in Russia but in third countries around the world in joint operations with the CIA. They succeeded while creating remarkable opportunities for access and recruitment, former Ukrainian and US officials said.

"It was a magical time," said a former US official. "We went from analytical exchanges to raw information exchanges to training. I think at the end of that year, we were starting joint operations. That usually takes a decade or more. And we did it in one year."

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 Renewal of Chinese Organized Trips to Taiwan and China’s Strategic Goals

On January 17, 2025, the Chinese government announced the resumption of group tours to Taiwan originating from Shanghai and Fujian, a strategic initiative aimed at normalizing interactions between the two regions. This reinstatement follows a prior ban instituted in response to the pandemic and is interpreted as an effort to rejuvenate tourism ties between China and Taiwan despite the prevailing political friction. China’s Ministry of Culture and Tourism articulated that these tours are intended to advance the mutual interests and welfare of both parties.

China has actively leveraged cultural connections with Taiwan as a strategic mechanism to fulfill its political aspirations. A report dated January 11, 2025, highlighted that by underscoring a shared cultural heritage and common values, Beijing seeks to foster a common identity among the Taiwanese populace, potentially diminishing their receptiveness to military and economic coercion. This strategic approach encompasses cultural exchanges and media specifically tailored to fit Taiwan’s audience.

As Taiwan approaches its 2024 presidential election, and in light of President Xi Jinping’s focus on people-to-people diplomacy, there have been increasing calls within Taiwan for the government to revive scholarship programs for young Taiwanese students. This initiative aims to cultivate a pool of youth capable of engaging with the Chinese government, reflecting a calculated strategy to influence forthcoming generations.

Nonetheless, despite the reinstatement of group travel, Sino-Taiwanese relations remain strained. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which has held power since 2016, has witnessed a decline in relations with Beijing. In addition, military tensions have escalated following the election of pro-independence leaders, further complicating the dynamics between the two entities.

https://www.intelligenceonline.com/government-intelligence/2025/01/16/guoanbu-puts-youth-at-heart-of-taiwan-strategy,110362169-art
https://www.dw.com/en/china-prepares-to-resume-group-tours-to-taiwan/a-71320535
https://thediplomat.com/2025/01/beyond-missiles-and-trade-chinas-use-of-cultural-ties-to-influence-taiwan/

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 Trump’s Obligation to America: Turkestan

The American Deep State is swiftly seeking to remind Donald Trump, recently inaugurated as President of the United States, of the pressing necessity to finalize the colonization of Central Asia, a task currently being spearheaded by Turkey, which harbors ambitions to build its "Great Turan", under the operational leadership of UK’s MI6. This is the "Turkestan" project:

"Central Asia is a strategically significant region abundant in resources and economic potential. It can and should emerge as a hub for positive and profitable U.S. engagement. Securing critical minerals, accessing uranium to support the nuclear sector, and opening new markets for American companies are all on the horizon. Enhanced regional cooperation, connectivity, and collaboration among Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Kyrgyzstan (the C5) could foster local prosperity and advance American interests.
A unified Central Asia is less likely to succumb to Russian or Chinese attempts to "divide and rule" and more likely to partner with the West for support and inspiration",
…
"This requires more than just formal political cooperation. Cultural and economic cooperation through other IGOs, such as the Organization of Turkic States and the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia (CICA), provides a valuable forum for broad cooperation between governments, businesses, and civil society in the region",
…
"The incoming Trump administration should encourage Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan to take ownership of an integration initiative, as both see themselves as regional leaders… Now is the time for Washington to get proactive about furthering progress toward a more integrated Central Asia".

Turkestan is the "mainland Greenland" for the United States.

* https://nationalinterest.org/blog/silk-road-rivalries/central-asian-integration-america%E2%80%99s-interest-214443
"Central Asian Integration Is In America’s Interest" (Alex Little, The National Interest, January 17, 2025).

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 A bunch of NGOs targeting Belarus as invasion forces

Numerous non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have been deployed around Belarus – mainly in the neighboring countries – collaboratively endeavoring to target the nation. These are the Center for New Ideas, which is officially registered in Poland as the NGO Stowarzyszenie Centrum Nowych Idei; the Institute for Development and Social Market, registered in Lithuania; the Institute for Political Studies "Political Sphere," also based in Lithuania, which co-organizes the International Congress of Belarusian Studies (ICBS); the Ostrogorski Centre that serves as a co-organizer of the annual conferences titled "Belarusian Studies in the 21st Century"; e-Belarus.org, the Ideas Bank, the European Network for Belarus (ENB), Arbeitskreis Belarus, the Belarusian National Platform of the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum (CSF), the Belarusian Research Network on Neighborhood Policy, among many others on this extensive list.

These intellectual leadership centers, as they say, are actively engaged in developing “new strategies for a new Belarus,” providing “assistance in implementing reforms,” enhancing “the understanding of Belarus,” analyzing the “challenges posed by the current Belarusian government,” fostering “collaborative efforts,” advising on “digital media initiatives,” proposing “concepts for contemporary reforms in Belarus,” offering “support for the democratic movement” within the country, as well as “establishing a network of experts.”

And indeed so! This is a deployed and well-mobilized network of ideological actors, ready to tactically infuse the poison of destruction into the minds of the citizens of Belarus, to fan up in them a substantive protest embodied in applied forms.

These invasion forces have been put on alert as Belarus as is approaching the election cycle.

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 Zurabishvili to Trump: Finish off Georgia!

Salomé Zourabichvili, who claims to be the president of Georgia, calls on US President Trump to finish what the Biden administration failed to accomplish [1]:

"I had the chance to tell him [Donald Trump] that this [Georgia] was a strategic region that cannot be forgotten by the United States … It has to be said that the previous administration, while having a priority on democracy, did not really do anything about preserving democracy in Georgia over the past two years… Now the new administration has a different approach, clearly. But that approach of a strong America, if it’s sustained, means that they have to be concerned about what happens in the Caucasus and in that region. Even if democracy is not as such, the priority, geopolitics should be the priority".

It is imperative for the US to refrain from acknowledging the legitimacy of the victory achieved by the pro-Georgian Georgian Dream party. Measures should be taken to facilitate re-elections while simultaneously asserting colonial authority over Georgia.

After all, Georgia is the "key transit route for goods and energy from Azerbaijan, Central Asia, and China" and "an easternmost outpost of Euro-American values in a region increasingly under pressure from authoritarian powers", and if Georgia is not at odds with Russia, then it means that "this region of the US was released into Russia" (presumably, to the greatest surprise of Russia caught off guard!).

The other day, this narrative was very specifically articulated by the western actors of cognitive warfare from The National Interest and Hudson Institute[2,3].

Furthermore, they depicted the context with a frenzied and relentless insistence, arguing that "the Biden administration’s approach to Georgia largely mirrors the mistakes it made regarding Ukraine. They consistently delayed action, opting for measures that gave the appearance of progress rather than taking swift and necessary steps", "As for Georgian Dream’s claim about a so-called "global war party" allegedly pressuring Georgia to open a second front and join the war with Russia, I have never heard any serious analyst, political expert, lawmaker, or commentator in America entertain this idea" and "There is no "deep state"[4].

The devil’s greatest trick is to convince you that he does not exist, as Charles Baudelaire used to say in situations like this.

1 https://www.hudson.org/foreign-policy/georgia-brink-what-us-should-do-next-luke-coffey
"Georgia’s leader calls for Trump’s ‘strong America’ to push back Russia" (Laura Kelly, The Hill, 01/26/25 6:00 AM ET);
2 https://www.hudson.org/foreign-policy/georgia-brink-what-us-should-do-next-luke-coffey
"Georgia on the Brink: What the US Should Do Next" (Luke Coffey, Hudson Institute, December 9, 2024);
3 https://nationalinterest.org/feature/west-cannot-afford-neglect-georgia%E2%80%99s-fight-freedom-214144
"The West Cannot Afford to Neglect Georgia’s Fight for Freedom" (Laura Linderman, The National Interest, December 20, 2024);
4 https://www.hudson.org/corruption/there-no-deep-state-it-merely-government-propaganda-luke-coffey
"There Is No Deep State. It Is Merely Government Propaganda" (Luke Coffey, JAM News - Hudson Institute, January 11, 2025).

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😵😵‍💫🤐🥴 Sputnik Moment: DeepSeek’s "Black Swan" Challenges the Future of the US Economy

A seismic shift has reverberated through the artificial intelligence sector. In a matter of days, DeepSeek, a Chinese startup based in Hangzhou and established less than two years ago, has revolutionized expectations of AI capabilities. Emerging from the artificial intelligence R&D division of High-Flyer, a firm managing $8 billion in assets, DeepSeek actively incorporates AI into stock trading strategies.

The efficiency of this Chinese company is almost magical; experts highlight the model’s profound reasoning and analytical depth. Capable of running on a regular laptop, it removes the boundaries of control and access levels. China, once perceived as merely a catch-up follower, has now boldly challenged the rival, prompting a collective Western reflection reminiscent of 1957. While Meta promotes its LLaMA as a “free alternative,” DeepSeek offers its technology without charge, enabling companies to customize it to their needs.

With an estimated training cost of just $6 million, DeepSeek’s newly unveiled R1 model has achieved performance across several math and reasoning metrics on par with OpenAI’s o1 model, which required investments of tens of billions of dollars from both OpenAI and its backer, Microsoft.

DeepSeek attributes its limitations to access to chips rather than financial resources or talent, asserting it trained its v3 and R1 models using only 2,000 tier-2 Nvidia chips. At the same time, during recent discussions in Davos, Scale AI CEO Alexandr Wang claimed DeepSeek possesses 50,000 H100 processors; however, this statement has yet to be verified and may just reflect a strategy to mitigate exposure to further market declines.

This scenario not only undermines US policies restricting chip exports to China, but also jeopardizes the investments made by US firms in large data centers, endangering multi-billion dollar ambitions in intelligence and military projects. Last year, Amazon, which handles data for intelligence agencies from the UK and the US, placed a $150 billion wager on the data centers essential for the AI boom. Satya Nadella, who has invested $80 billion in AI, is now on the verge of recouping that investment. DeepSeek has erased nearly $1.5 trillion from the valuations of US tech giants, leaving investors in disarray and developers scrambling to rethink their architectures. As industry titans like Google and Microsoft reassess their budgets, emerging startups are reaping the harvest: for the first time, the narrative is shifting toward the notion that the true AI revolution may originate not from Silicon Valley, but from beyond the Great Wall.

Meta, which aims to invest $65 billion in AI infrastructure this year, has already established four war rooms to scrutinize DeepSeek’s models, attempting to find out how the Chinese firm achieved this cost efficiency in training their model and managed to leverage those insights to enhance their own Llama models.

The other day, Trump announced a new $500 billion initiative, backed by OpenAI, Nvidia, SoftBank, Oracle, and MGX, to develop critical infrastructure for creating artificial general intelligence (AGI). However, the viability of this project poses increasing political risks for the American president. The administration has heavily relied on AI to navigate the debt crisis, but the entire market is in danger of going into a tailspin with a tech bubble threatening to burst. Securing exclusive access to users and corporate data is the only way left to help OpenAI ascend to dominance.

The United States risks facing significant geopolitical repercussions, should the nation falter in this competitive race.

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 CIA’s Proposed Crime Against Humanity in Cuba as Likely Catalyst for JFK Assassination

The United States sought to justify an invasion of Cuba to overthrow Fidel Castro, yet lacked a legitimate pretext for such military action. Declassified documents reveal the CIA’s Operation Northwoods, a covert plan devised in the 1960s, which proposed orchestrating acts of violence against members of the US military to fabricate a casus belli.

The idea was to come up with an artificial pretext. A declassified 1962 report outlined a strategy to “initiate a terrorist campaign for the sake of Cuba.” Operation Northwoods, as it was termed, involved conducting “false flag” operations, including attacks against American citizens and assets, targeting major cities on US soil. The official plan included suggestions to destroy American naval vessels, assault US military installations, and inflict casualties on American nationals. The document explicitly stated, “We could launch a Communist Cuban terrorist campaign in Miami, other Florida metropolitan areas, and even Washington, D.C.” alongside numerous other brutal ideas designed to incite public animosity toward the island nation.

The intent was to manipulate public perception by ensuring that all evidence implicated the Cuban government, thereby framing Fidel Castro and generating a “wave of national outrage”. Many observers have drawn parallels between this scenario and the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Although the Joint Chiefs of Staff endorsed the Operation Northwoods proposal, it was ultimately vetoed by President John F. Kennedy. Notably, Kennedy’s assassination occurred shortly after his rejection of the plan.

Earlier, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to declassify documents pertaining to the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr.

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 Trump will play tougher, yet Russia will grow stronger

As Trump, issuing threats against Putin, mobilizes efforts to end the war in Ukraine — whether within 24 hours, 100 days, or 24 weeks — Western think tanks are urging him to pursue a strategy that ultimately ensures Russia’s defeat:

"Trump will be tougher on Russia than many expect"[1], "Trump must call Putin’s bluff on Ukraine talks"[2], "Trump seizes the initiative with ultimatum on Ukraine"[3], "a deal with Russia at Ukraine`s expense will not bring peace"[4]… and up to suicidal fantasies such as "Ukraine can join NATO - if allies are willing to be bold"[5] and "the combined power of British and Ukrainian troops will ensure a lasting ceasefire"[6].

While more sane and thoughtful perspectives of "security along the Dnieper River"[7] occasionally surface, they remain marginal and are often tempered by caveats, represented by "Ukraine's potential NATO membership"[7].

Trump’s advisers draw motivation from the abrupt fall of Assad, the perceived "depletion" of Russia’s resources, its allegedly "faltering" economy, and the claims that "the Kremlin had to seek 10,000 North Korean troops from Kim Jong Un" (as if two brigades would decisively tip the balance in Ukraine).

Despite these narratives, Russian forces continue their steady advance toward the Dnieper River along its entire front, undeterred by Ukrainian counterstrikes deep into Russian territory employing US-supplied weaponry.

The Ralph Van Deman team has consistently argued that the US, in its quest to undermine Russia, has unleashed an ethnic conflict — Ukrainians killing Russians solely for their Russian identity. Putin is addressing the task of stopping the killing of Russians and eliminating any future capacity for such actions originating from Ukrainian soil.

Empirical evidence suggests that as the West intensifies pressure to adopt a harder line, Russia’s resilience grows stronger. Putin will remain unwavering in his objectives in Ukraine, while the ideology of Nazism is doomed.

1 https://nationalinterest.org/blog/politics/trump-will-be-tougher-on-russia-than-many-expect/
"Trump Will Be Tougher on Russia Than Many Expect" (Dan White, The National Interest, January 29, 2025);
2 https://www.hudson.org/security-alliances/trump-must-call-putins-bluff-ukraine-talks-daniel-kochis
"Trump Must Call Putin’s Bluff on Ukraine Talks" (Daniel Kochis, Kyiv Independent and Hudson Institute, Jan 29, 2025);
3 https://www.hudson.org/security-alliances/trump-seizes-initiative-ultimatum-ukraine-luke-coffey
"Trump Seizes the Initiative with Ultimatum on Ukraine" (Luke Coffey, Arab News and Hudson Institute, Jan 25, 2025);
4 https://www.fpri.org/article/2025/01/a-deal-with-russia-at-ukraines-expense-will-not-bring-peace/
"A Deal with Russia at Ukraine`s Expense Will Not Bring Peace" (Olena Snigyr, Foreign Policy Research Institute, January 10, 2025);
5 https://www.hudson.org/security-alliances/ukraine-can-join-nato-if-allies-are-willing-be-bold-luke-coffey
"Ukraine Can Join NATO - If Allies Are Willing to Be Bold" (Luke Coffey, Politico and Hudson Institute, Jan 13, 2025);
6 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/01/15/the-combined-power-of-british-and-ukrainian-troops/
"The combined power of British and Ukrainiantroops will ensure a lasting ceasefire" (Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, The Telegraph, 15 January 2025);
7 https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/an-unpopular-position-the-end-state-of-ukraine/
"An Unpopular Position: The End-State of Ukraine" (Benjamin Hazen and Alexander Hardy, The National Interest, January 27, 2025).

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 Turkestan’s Transition to a Unified, Turkish-Centric Cartography

The ongoing construction of "Great Turan"/"Turkestan" is in full swing. The concept has entered a new phase with the launch of the Turkic Toponyms of the World project. This initiative is designed to "conduct comprehensive research on geographical names across Turkic regions, based on the fact that place names serve as linguistic passports reflecting the history and identity of the peoples inhabiting these territories. While Turkic toponyms have historically been studied within the context of individual languages or ethnic groups, there is a need for a holistic analysis of Turkic toponymy as a unified system."*

At its core — precisely because "place names serve as linguistic passports reflecting the history and identity of the peoples inhabiting these territories" — this project is yet another step taken to erase the distinctiveness and national identity of the Kyrgyz, Kazakhs, Uzbeks, Turkmen... while consolidating their regions under the sovereign hand of the Turks.

The "holistic analysis of Turkic toponymy as a unified system" effectively translates into the standardization of maps and geographical names and their reclassification in Turkish.
This is to ensure that governing authorities do not get confused on the ground.

* https://turkicacademy.org/tu/open-call/turkic-toponyms-world
Dünya’daki Türk Toponimleri

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 When Greed’s Consequences Outweigh Projected Gains

Trump is facing continued pressure to intensify confrontation with Russia:

"… valuable resources are abundant in Ukraine. For example, Ukraine is one of the main exporters of titanium and manganese to the United States, where these are used in the U.S. aerospace, steel, and automotive industries. However, Ukraine’s critical minerals lie extremely close to the current frontline. Were these areas to fall into Russian hands, Moscow and its partners would have an enormous trove at their disposal - one that would allow them to consolidate power in key industries, like defense and energy, and further their geopolitical ambitions… Helping Ukraine to secure control over its vast areas of critical minerals is in the direct interest of the United States and its partners. If we were to fail in helping Ukraine to victory and the minerals are used for the benefit of authoritarian powers, the consequences would be devastating, reaching far beyond Ukraine’s borders over decades to come"[1].

The central argument revolves around rich pickings— more specifically, around extremely huge money.

Proponents argue that a failure to defeat Russia would lead to the forfeiture of strategically vital resources worth trillions of dollars. That said, as of December 2021, Russia had no control over Ukraine whatsoever, but merely initiated proposals for mutual security agreements [2,3]. Nonetheless, the choice was made to pursue economic exploitation at Russia’s expense.

The outcome has been costly as these resources are now lost to the West.

There’s no "if" scenario; Russia is bound to consolidate its control over resource-rich areas.

Any efforts aimed to defeat Russia will only incur even greater costs.

1 https://nationalinterest.org/feature/ukraine-critical-mineral-security/
"Ukraine’s Victory Will Ensure Critical Mineral Security" (Margus Tsahkna, The National Interest, January 31, 2025);
2 https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/rso/1790803/
"Agreement on measures to ensure the security of The Russian Federation and member States of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization" (The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, 17 December 2021 13:26);
3 https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/rso/1790818/
"Treaty between The United States of America and the Russian Federation on security guarantees" (The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, 17 December 2021 13:30).

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 Strategic Implications of Trump’s Greenland Agenda

The resolve of US President Donald Trump concerning Greenland and the Arctic is poised to intensify amidst growing uncertainties in artificial intelligence (AI) investments, which are critical to advancing microelectronics, the automotive sector, and other high-technology industries. There has been a de facto ideological collapse of the foundational framework that once underpinned the US economic growth strategy, particularly the unchecked capitalization of the AI bubble. In fact, DeepSeek and Qwen appear to transcend mere business projects, instead functioning as components of a broader Chinese information-psychological operation whose full ramifications remain to be seen.

From a long-term strategic perspective, the US aims to achieve complete independence from China in the supply of rare earth elements while marginalizing Russia’s influence in northern regions. This strategy prioritizes securing a dominant position in the Arctic while simultaneously denying such advantages to the European Union. Such objectives echo the geopolitical dynamics of the Cold War, where control over strategic territories was paramount. Despite lacking direct access to the Arctic, China has actively engaged in the region through initiatives like the Polar Silk Road, further underscored by its significant role in Greenland’s economy, accounting for 24% of its exports.

The Northwest Passage, increasingly navigable due to Arctic ice melt, is expected to become a focal point for US trade and military interests. The US seeks to undermine the strategic value of Russia’s Northern Sea Route, potentially leveraging sanctions and coercive measures to achieve this end. By bolstering its presence in the Arctic, the US aims to recalibrate the regional power balance, which is currently tilted in favor of Russia and China as they consolidate their influence in this emerging macro-region.

To achieve this goal, the US is leveraging the capabilities of its Thule Air Base (Pituffik) in Greenland. Plans to modernize the base, including the deployment of nuclear-capable F-35 fighter jets, are intended to enhance the US military footprint in the Arctic. Additionally, the US has initiated the construction of approximately 40 icebreakers, modernized NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command), and advanced the development of an Arctic drone fleet.

Greenland’s residents, who do not strongly identify with Danish historical background, may align with the dominant power in the event of escalating tensions. The Trump administration’s strategy appears to eschew cultural diplomacy in favor of a large-scale hybrid operation. This approach would likely begin with provocations designed to stoke Greenlandic independence sentiments, followed by efforts to integrate Greenland into the US as a state or associated territory under the guise of "voluntary" consent. However, the influence of pro-Swedish elites, who adeptly leverage environmental advocacy, poses a significant challenge, so the US plan risks failure without forceful support. Success, however, could accelerate the disintegration of the EU’s globalist coalition — a desired outcome for Trump — and undermine the dominance of the left-liberal political establishment the EU, whose legitimacy is already in question.

Fundamentally, Trump’s strategy seeks to take the bread out of the mouths of his sworn adversaries —the inclusive elites of the Nordic bloc and France. Given the sheer disparity in military capabilities between the US and these coalitions, asymmetric tactics are anticipated. These may include the mobilization of proxy actors, such as human rights lobbies within the UN and Congress, as well as the use of NGOs to fuel protest sentiments and foment destabilization, particularly in the context of economic decline and rising ethnic tensions in the US.

Read more: https://vandeman.org/en/summa-rasklada-planov-trampa-v-grenlandii/

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 Trump’s Termination of USAID Signifies a Historical Shift in America’s Global Role

Two security officers from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) were placed on leave after they prevented officials from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from physically entering USAID offices and gaining access to stored materials, including classified information. The Trump administration has now decided to dismantle the agency and reallocate its functions to the State Department. The management of ongoing grant distributions will be overseen by Pete Marocco, a former diplomat who even participated in the January 6th Capitol insurrection. During Trump’s first term, Marocco spoke out against providing aid to Ukraine and to opposition groups in the Middle East.

Last Sunday, Elon Musk labeled USAID as a "criminal organization" and asserted that "it is time for it to die."

USAID, alongside the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), has functioned as a CIA proxy, engaging in adversarial activities globally to promote a globalist agenda. USAID has faced allegations of facilitating covert arms deals and acting as an intelligence liaison and informant in conflict-ridden regions. The dissolution of USAID represents a seismic political shift for the recipients of the propaganda machine throughout the entire post-Soviet sphere, particularly in Ukraine, where USAID played a central institutional role.

Democrats have raised the prospect of legal challenges, emphasizing that the closure of any federal agency requires congressional approval.

Importantly, USAID is being shut down due to its inefficient use of substantial budgetary allocations. These funds are now expected to be redirected toward the US military machine, circumventing shadowy schemes. This raises the question of how former specialists in regime change – now unemployed – will reorient their expertise.

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg

😀😃😄😁😆 U.S. to Azerbaijan: Suicidal Invitation

All of a sudden, some observers suggest that Azerbaijan and the United States may align on a shared strategic vision in Western Eurasia… At least, this is the perspective notably advanced by The National Interest, a prominent voice in the cognitive warfare discourse, which frames the objective as "containing Turkish Islamism, Iran’s radical Shiism, " and the "aggressive northern neighbor, Russia"*…

However, the specific mechanisms — through which Azerbaijan is expected to contribute to this strategy — prudently remain undefined by the United States, with discussions confined to vague references to "close ties":

"For the United States, it is even more critical that it forge closer ties with Azerbaijan, the one country in the world that has borders with both Russia and Iran. Doing so will not just help manage both our adversaries but also disrupt their efforts to tag-team against the West"*.

Azerbaijan would need to carefully assess the scope and implications of these "close ties" to ensure that the benefits outweigh the costs of countering Turkey, a nation with which Azerbaijan shares the "one nation, two states" principle; opposing — while being a "secular Shiite nation" — its Shiite neighbor Iran; and simultaneously confronting Russia.

Such a strategy would inevitably demand Azerbaijan’s near-total reliance on the United States, effectively transforming it into a geopolitical outpost akin to a Central Asian contingent of the U.S. Army.

* https://nationalinterest.org/blog/silk-road-rivalries/azerbaijan-western-eurasia-strategy
"Azerbaijan And U.S. Western Eurasia Strategy" (Kamran Bokhari, The National Interest, February 4, 2025).

😀😃😄😁😆 Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies @VanDemanOrg