Authored by Nick Giambruno via InternationalMan.com,

There’s a ridiculous and pervasive notion in finance that US Treasuries are “risk free.”

People repeat it without thinking. Financial institutions build portfolios around it. And for decades, the world has blindly accepted this trope as gospel.

As a result, bonds—especially US Treasuries—became the de facto savings account for many in the post-1971 fiat currency era. Widely regarded as a safe, conservative place to park capital, US Treasuries are the foundation of the massive global bond market.

The global bond market is now estimated to be worth more than $300 trillion. Why? Because the masses were told this was the smart, safe thing to do.

Compare that to all the gold ever mined in the world: worth about $22 trillion. That’s a mere 7% of the global bond market.

But here’s the problem: bonds are on track to become a graveyard for capital.

They will no longer serve as a reliable store of value in the face of relentless currency debasement. I believe the opposite will happen—they’ll become a guaranteed way to lose value.

And when that reality hits, investors will flee in droves.

The Implications Are Massive

If bonds are no longer viable, where do people, companies, and nations park their savings?

Much of the $300 trillion parked in the global bond market will eventually move—either voluntarily into superior store-of-value assets, or involuntarily into the hands of bankrupt governments and their cronies as they accelerate the largest wealth transfer in history.

This is the Big Picture that most still don’t see… yet.

Until recently, bonds had been in a bull market that lasted more than 40 years. Therefore, it’s not surprising that complacency is ingrained and widespread.

It’s important to remember that bonds are simply contracts denominated in fiat currency. They’re like long-dated currency.

The issuer promises to repay the bondholder the principal amount at the bond’s maturity date, often with periodic interest payments.

The fatal problem with bonds is that they are denominated in fiat currency, which I think will be debased to a staggering degree as it’s the only way the US government can deal with its impossible debt situation.

Consider this.

The long-term average growth of the US money supply (M2) is around 7% annually—and I expect that rate to increase. You can think of this 7% as a baseline “debasement hurdle.” If your after-tax returns don’t exceed that rate, you’re losing purchasing power.

I expect this rate of debasement will far exceed the measly after-tax yield that Treasuries will offer.

That makes Treasuries a worthless promise.

Many Treasury holders are now practically assured of a negative real rate of return over the long term—and some may be completely wiped out.

The investment implications are profound.

So let’s stop pretending Treasuries are “risk free.” They’re not. They’re the opposite.

Notwithstanding any short-term bounces, the long-term trend is clear.

Given that outlook, how likely will Treasuries remain the world’s premier store-of-value asset?

Not likely, in my view.

That means people will look for alternatives to park their savings.

As an added risk, the US government can freeze or seize assets at will—just as it did with Russia’s reserves. China and other major Treasury holders have certainly taken note—especially those that might find themselves at odds with Washington.

Instead of parking their savings in Treasuries, I believe people, companies, and countries will increasingly park their savings in gold.

The last time we saw a global monetary shakeup like this was in 1971. What followed? Gold shot from $35 to $850 by 1980—a 24x gain. Gold mining stocks did even better.

This time around, the gains could be even more dramatic.

That’s because this coming gold bull market could fundamentally differ from other cyclical bull markets. It will be riding the wave of a powerful trend: the re-monetization of gold as the king store-of-value asset.

It could lead to the biggest gold bull market ever.

While this megatrend is already in motion, I believe the most significant gains are still ahead.

We’re entering the most dangerous economic crisis in a century—are you prepared?

This isn’t just about markets. It’s about your money, your freedom, and your future. In my latest special report, I break down:

• The seismic economic, political, and cultural shifts happening right now

• The real risks ahead—and what they mean for your wealth and independence

• The top 3 strategies you must implement immediately

👉 Download “The Most Dangerous Economic Crisis in 100 Years” and get the clarity you need—before it’s too late.

The clock is ticking. Get ahead of the storm.

Via Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com

Former Wall Street money manager and financial analyst Ed Dowd of PhinanceTechnologies.com has been forecasting “Danger of Deep Worldwide Recession in 2025.”  It looks like his thesis is turning out correct. 

He predicted interest rates would be declining.  They did.  And inflation has been going down right along with the economy as illegal immigration was being stopped and deportations ramped up.  Dowd says:

“Our friend Joe Biden spent anywhere between $500 billion to $2 trillion to bring these people in and set them up.  Now, that’s all going the wrong way.  Trump has shut down the border crossings, and as deportations heat up, that will only add to the problem.  There will be a lot of supply, and prices have already started coming down in certain regions, and that is going to accelerate. 

Inflation is going to be coming down.  Chairman Powell is dead-ass wrong.  Tariffs are actually deflationary, and he’s holding rates higher for longer. 

That is going to end up being a big policy error.  We think interest rates have peaked for the year...

We think the Fed will be forced to cut rates when the hard data comes in the wrong way.”

What is Dowd looking at most?  Dowd says:

“If we did have an oil shock, our thesis of a deep world-wide recession would trigger even faster.  During the last twelve days of this Iran/Israel war, I said to my followers, I am watching one thing and one thing only, and that is the price of oil.  The price of oil did go up . . . I said if oil breaks out above $80 per barrel, then we’ve got problems. 

Oil has collapsed, and the oil markets are telling you the Iranians are not going to close the Strait of Hormuz.  So, for now, the economies of the world are not going to be experiencing an oil price shock.”

That does not mean we are set for clear sailing throughout 2025. 

Dowd is forecasting that commercial and residential real estate will be a huge drag on the economy as prices fall and fall hard.  Dowd says,

“We think shelter is going to trend lower, and there is going to be a deflationary scare coming.”

Dowd thinks the Fed will panic and have emergency rate cuts this fall.  The stock market will take some big hits.  Dowd says, “I think they freak out in the fall in October or November...”

“I will point out airlines have taken out previous lows, homebuilders are weak, the DOW Jones transports are not close to all-time highs. 

The real economy is rolling over.  Typically, when bubbles like this end, everyone is on the wrong side of the trade, and it’s going to happen quick. . .. Warren Buffett is telling you everything you need to know about this market.” 

Buffett has reportedly $350 billion in cash on the sidelines.

Dowd favors gold because the big banks like gold.  Dowd says,

“Gold counts as a quasi-asset because it is a Tier 1 asset.  That means they can create loans against that as an asset whereas before you couldn’t.  It was not Tier 1.  This is going to be misunderstood by a lot of people, and gold is now a big deal again…

If I am a long-term investor, I am going to do what the banks are doing.  They have made gold money again.  So, gold is money good…

I am going to go with what the banks are buying.”

Dowd wrote a popular book called “Cause Unknown,” which tracked the deaths and injuries that started after the CV19 vax rollout in 2021.  He’s still tracking the injuries that just added another 700,000 disabled people.  Since the CV19 injections started, that’s a hit a new high of 5.5 million permanently disabled Americans.  Dowd says,

“This looks like a bullish trend that isn’t stopping anytime soon.  It goes up to a new high, consolidates and breaks out again.  If this was a growth stock, I’d be all over it, and I’d be long disability… the meta data, the big data, says something drastically changed in 2021.  It’s a disaster. 

I think it’s the CV19 vaccine. 

I find it interesting there is no curiosity about this even with the new administration.  It’s an elephant in the room, and they don’t want to talk about it.”

There is much more in the 46-minute interview.

Join Greg Hunter of USAWatchdog.com as he goes One-on-One with money manager and investment expert Ed Dowd, as he talks about gold, the US dollar and the report called “Danger of Deep Worldwide Recession in 2025.”  Dowd has new reports and analysis on the big problems coming for real estate for 6.24.25.

* * *

To Donate to USAWatchdog.com Click here

If you want a copy of Dowd’s report called “Danger of Deep Worldwide Recession in 2025,” click here.  There are other new real estate reports there too.

As NATO leaders met in The Hague for their major annual summit – where the focus was collective increased defense spending, Trump’s proclamation of Iran’s nuclear program having been ‘obliterated’, and more support for Ukraine – Russian forces gained another town in Eastern Ukraine.

According to Reuters on Wednesday, “Russian forces have taken control of the settlement of Yalta in Ukraine’s eastern Donetsk region, the state-run RIA news agency reported on Wednesday citing the Russian Defense Ministry.”

“Battlegroup East units liberated the settlement of Yalta in the Donetsk People’s Republic through active and decisive actions,” the defense ministry said in the statement.

While Reuters and others are not able to independently verify the battlefield report, this is part of Russian forces’ slow but steady momentum in the east, and even lately expanding west of Donetsk as part of establishing Putin’s big security ‘buffer zone’. 

At this point it’s clear that Kiev’s backers in NATO can do nothing about this, except throw more money and weapons at the conflict, and President Trump met with Zelensky on Wednesday on the sidelines of the NATO meeting.

The two reportedly discussed Ukraine procuring more US anti-air defense systems, which ironically enough will likely be purchased with US taxpayer funds already poured into Kiev’s coffers.

As for Ukraine’s push for more US sanctions on Moscow, the response from The Hague was as follows:

“If we did what everybody here wants us to do, and that is come in and crush them [Russia] with more sanctions, we probably lose our ability to talk to them about the ceasefire – and then who’s talking to them?” Rubio said at the NATO summit.

Trump will “know the right time and place” for fresh punitive measures, he added. “If there’s an opportunity for us to make a difference and get them [Russia] to the table, we’re going to take it,” the state secretary emphasized.

But meanwhile, Russia will be busy gaining more territory, and future leverage at the negotiating table, as war fatigue has continued to set in among Ukraine’s Western backers.

#NewsMap
The Ukrainian frontline continues to crumble in southern Donetsk oblast.#Zaporizhzhia and #Yalta were captured by Russian invasion forces.
Only 14 villages remain under Ukrainian control in that area. pic.twitter.com/CB2MgX5BPj

— Julian Röpcke🇺🇦 (@JulianRoepcke) June 25, 2025

There’s been talk over the last months of Europe taking the lead, and the US stepping back, but it will be a long haul before European countries can take the lead on anything in terms of the outsized role America plays in NATO.

The Trump administration is reportedly preparing an executive order to block banks from denying services to politically disfavored industries—particularly crypto firms and gun manufacturers, according to CoinTelegraph and the WSJ. 

The move comes as part of a broader backlash against what critics are calling “Operation Chokepoint 2.0,” a term that refers to the alleged, informal coordination between financial regulators and banks to “debank” certain legal but politically controversial sectors.

This follows a surge of complaints from crypto entrepreneurs and tech founders, over 30 of whom were reportedly denied banking services during the Biden administration.

The issue gained national attention after the sudden collapse of three major crypto-friendly banks—Silicon Valley Bank, Silvergate, and Signature—in early 2023. Their rapid downfall fueled speculation that government pressure had played a role, with crypto investor Nic Carter calling it a “coordinated effort” to dismantle the digital asset ecosystem through financial exclusion.

In response, President Trump declared at the March 2024 White House Crypto Summit that he would “end Operation Chokepoint 2.0,” vowing to restore neutral banking access regardless of politics. If enacted, the executive order would mark a major escalation in the GOP’s effort to curb what it sees as partisan interference by banks and federal regulators.

The issue has also drawn unusual bipartisan concern. Senator Elizabeth Warren, a frequent critic of Wall Street, stated in a February Senate hearing that “no one should be locked out of the financial system based on who they voted for or what they believe,” adding fuel to a rare moment of agreement across party lines.

Meanwhile, major banks including JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, and Wells Fargo have met with officials in Texas and Oklahoma to deny allegations that they’ve selectively restricted services to industries like crypto, firearms, and fossil fuels—industries increasingly caught in the political crossfire.

The report says that despite Trump’s pledge, crypto advocates warn the battle is far from over. Caitlin Long, CEO of Custodia Bank, whose firm has faced repeated debanking challenges, said in March that the industry likely won’t see meaningful relief until at least 2026.

With the Federal Reserve maintaining its current stance—and new leadership appointments not possible until early 2025—regulatory hostility could continue, even if other agencies like the OCC and FDIC shift course.

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

Nobody saw it coming…

Iran and Israel surprised the world by agreeing to a ceasefire precisely at the point when most observers expected their war to spiral out of control.

Trump’s decision to bomb several nuclear sites in Iran and his subsequent flirtation with regime change there convinced them that he was about to escalate American involvement in the conflict regardless of whether Iran retaliated against regional US bases or Israel carried out a false flag provocation to justify this.

Here’s why they all agreed to a ceasefire instead:

1. Iran & Israel Inflicted Unacceptable Damage To One Another

The Mainstream Media hitherto claimed that Israel inflicted tremendous damage to Iran while the Alt-Media Community hitherto claimed that Iran inflicted tremendous damage to Israel, and for once, both of them were right even though they dishonestly denied each other’s claims. The reality is that Iran and Israel inflicted unacceptable damage to one another after less than two weeks of strikes. Neither was therefore able to last much longer, thus inevitably leading either to a serious escalation or a ceasefire.

2. The Trump Administration Didn’t Want Another Major Regional War

The escalation scenario was averted solely because the Trump Administration didn’t want another major regional war in West Asia, which could have accelerated the US’ hegemonic decline as well as prevented it from “Pivoting (back) to (East) Asia” for more muscularly containing China. It therefore likely told Israel that it wouldn’t have its back in that event while threatening Iran with outsized (nuclear?) retaliation if its nearby bases were attacked, thus deterring escalation from both and making a ceasefire possible.

3. Trump Unexpectedly Defied The Israel Lobby & Neoconservatives

Many observers concluded that Trump’s decision to bomb Iran signaled his complete capitulation to the Israel lobby and neoconservatives, but they couldn’t have been more wrong. Far from surrendering to their demands for another “shock and awe” regime change war, which could have involved boots on the ground and even nukes, he was somehow able to get Israel to stop bombing Iran, likely by threatening to hang it out to dry if the conflict escalated. Iran then followed suit and the ceasefire entered into effect.

4. The US Spun Its Bombing Of Iran As A Strategic Success

Opinion is mixed about whether the US’ bombing of several nuclear sites achieved its goal of destroying Iran’s nuclear program or at least pushing it back for many years, which could knock Iran out of the geopolitical game, but the US was still able to spin it as a strategic success. This gave Trump a “face-saving” exit ramp for de-escalating the conflict by speculatively pressuring Israel to stop its bombing campaign and then getting Iran to go along with it to avoid the major regional war that he feared.

5. Trump Is Totally Obsessed With Receiving The Nobel Peace Prize

And finally, Trump’s ego probably played a significant role in his decision to coerce Iran and Israel (each in different ways) into agreeing to a ceasefire since he’s totally obsessed with receiving the Nobel Peace Prize, which he hopes that he’ll be awarded as a result. Even though he played a role in sparking the conflict by letting Israel bomb Iran on day 61 of his 60-day deadline for another nuclear deal, all that could be conveniently forgotten by the committee if the ceasefire holds and leads to a lasting peace.

The ceasefire might not hold, however, in which case the US might not fully support Israel’s resumed bombing campaign if West Jerusalem is to blame.

The US might also pursue regime change in Iran via indirect means even if the ceasefire holds.

In the best-case scenario, the ceasefire might lead to a lasting peace through another nuclear deal, which would necessitate Russia’s involvement (such as removing excess nuclear fuel from Iran).

Putin would therefore deserve the Nobel Peace Prize too if that happens.

*  *  *

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

It appears that after we spent years pounding the table on the sector, someone else also figured out that energy stocks are trading at single digit PEs.

The WSJ reports that European energy giant Shell is in early stage talks to acquire the other European energy giant, BP, in what would be the largest oil deal in a generation, and one of the largest merger deals of all time.

The Journal writes that while talks between company reps are active, BP is considering the approach carefully as the resulting company would be one of the biggest energy companies in the world; acquiring BP would put Shell on firmer footing to challenge larger competitors such as ZeroHedge favorite Exxon Mobil and Chevron, and would be a landmark combination of two so-called supermajor oil companies.

A Shell spokesman told the WSJ that “we are sharply focused on capturing the value in Shell through continuing to focus on performance, discipline and simplification.”

While potential terms of any deal couldn’t be learned and a tie-up is far from certain, BP is currently valued at around $80 billion, and when taking into account the usual acquisition premium, a deal could end up as the largest corporate oil deal since the $83 billion megamerger that created Exxon Mobil at the turn of the century. It would also easily be the biggest M&A deal of the year, and one of the largest deals of the century, in a market that has been rattled by President Trump’s trade war and other geopolitical tensions.

Shell is coming into the acquisition talks from a position of strength, with its stock sharply outperforming BP in recent years. Shell, which like BP is based in the U.K. but has operations around the world, has a market value of more than $200 billion. Meanhwhile, BP has been the laggard among major oil companies and a poster child for getting woke and (almost) going broke, after an ill-fated push away from fossil fuels into renewable energy, to signal just how virtuous the company is sent the stock into a tailspin. It has also suffered years of management upheaval and operational disasters.

Activist investor Elliott Investment Management, which owns more than 5% of BP’s shares, has pushed for changes at the energy company since at least February, underscoring the oil and gas producer’s exposure to a potential takeover bid from a rival. BP has since adopted several measures to try to address investor frustrations. It announced plans earlier this year to boost oil and gas production and sharply cut investments in clean energy. 

While BP has struggled, Shell has focused on its most profitable operations, pledging to pump more oil and gas and rolling back green energy targets.  When asked publicly, Shell CEO Wael Sawan has said recently that the company’s bar for big dealmaking would be high. Shell in May announced a multibillion-dollar share buyback plan, the latest in a long series of big share repurchases. Shell has been working with bankers on a potential sale of its chemicals assets in Europe and the U.S., The Wall Street Journal previously reported.

For Shell, acquiring BP would take years of integration, complicated by culture clashes and possibly the sale of overlapping assets. But a deal could give Shell’s global trading business greater reach and bolster its dominance in areas like liquefied natural gas. Analysts and investors also see a good matchup in the companies’ Gulf of Mexico operations.

Acquiring BP would also offer an opportunity for Shell to spread costs over a larger operating base and would box out rivals. Shell would also be more politically palatable to U.K. regulators who may oppose a foreign buyer from acquiring BP, a more than century-old company that traces its roots to oil exploration in Persia during the height of the British Empire.

While huge, a Shell-BP deal would be only the latest in a wave of M&A activity across the energy landscape as the producers look to achieve greater economies of scale. Chevron is still working to close its $53 billion megadeal for Hess, which has been held up due Exxon’s effort to challenge the deal’s legality.

Meanwhile, Exxon is already boosting its operational efficiency after closing a $60 billion deal to buy US shale giant Pioneer Natural Resources. Diamondback Energy sealed a $26 billion deal for Endeavor Energy Resources to bolster its position in the Permian Basin.

In response to the news, BP stock spiked 10%, erasing all losses since Liberation Day…

… while the rest of the energy sector is also trading higher.

For the third consecutive day, extreme heat across the eastern half of the U.S. has triggered power grid alerts and emergency warnings, highlighting the fragility of current energy infrastructure. Extremely tight power grids reinforce a core part of our energy thesis: the urgent need for clean, reliable baseload power, and there is no better option than nuclear. 

The current environment strengthens our conviction as long-term ‘atomic bulls‘, a stance we’ve maintained since our original call in December 2020 (read here). Nuclear energy remains the only scalable, carbon-free solution capable of delivering 24/7 generation for powering up America in the 2030s (more here).

On Wednesday, a team of UBS analysts, led by Dim Ariyasinghe, upgraded their near-term uranium price forecast by ~10% (to $72/lb for 2025) due to improved policy sentiment, bipartisan support, and tighter supply from global disruptions.

The analysts recently hosted a call with the Atlantic Council, noting that U.S. nuclear capacity could grow from approximately 100 GW to 400 GW by 2050—surpassing the Biden administration’s current targets. News earlier this week of New York’s plan to develop a 1GW plant provided additional tailwinds for the industry.

“We upgrade our near-term U prices ~10% on an improved US policy backdrop, which has buoyed broader market sentiment,” Ariyasinghe penned in a note to clients. 

UBS maintains a long-term price forecast of $77/lb (real 2025) and $81/lb nominal from 2030.

Uranium spot prices…

Ariyasinghe’s stock views within the industry:

• Paladin Energy (PDN): Maintains a BUY rating with price target lifted 3% to A$9.40/share. Restart at the Langer Heinrich mine is ahead of schedule; FY26 production revised slightly down to 4.5Mlb due to blending lower-grade ore, but this is offset by higher prices and improved costs.

• Boss Energy (BOE): Downgraded to SELL despite production success at Honeymoon mine and a 6% price target increase to A$3.50/share. UBS views the stock as overvalued after an 81% YTD rally and cites risks in long-term growth clarity, wellfield geology, and expansion capex.

Separately, long-time readers will recognize familiar ZeroHedge favorites like Cameco (CCJ) and Oklo, both of which continue to log fresh record highs week after week. We’ve consistently laid out the investment framework over the years—and most recently provided additional, comprehensive guides (read here & here) on how to profit as an ‘atomic bull’ in this unfolding nuclear era. 

Authored by Amin Haqshanas via CoinTelegraph.com,

A new report from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) challenged the notion that stablecoins can serve as money in a modern financial system.

According to the BIS Annual Economic Report 2025, stablecoins fail the fundamental tests of “singleness,” “elasticity” and “integrity,” three critical criteria that define effective monetary instruments.

The BIS described stablecoins as “digital bearer instruments” that resemble financial assets more than actual money. “Stablecoins perform poorly when assessed against the three tests for serving as the mainstay of the monetary system,” the report said.

Unlike central bank-backed money, which is accepted “at par” and requires no background checks, private entities issue stablecoins and often trade at fluctuating rates. This undermines the core principle of monetary singleness, the report claimed.

Stablecoins continue to grow, but volatility remains. Source: BIS

Stablecoins fail elasticity and integrity tests

Elasticity, the second test, is crucial for absorbing shocks and meeting large-value payment demands, BIS said in its report.

It pointed out that “any additional supply of stablecoins thus requires full upfront payment by its holders,” likening it to a “strict cash-in-advance setup” that contrasts with the flexibility of modern banking systems, where central banks provide liquidity as needed.

The third and perhaps most damning failure lies in the area of integrity. The report claimed that stablecoins’ design, especially those transacted via unhosted wallets on public blockchains, makes them prone to financial crime.

“Stablecoins have significant shortcomings when it comes to promoting the integrity of the monetary system,” the BIS noted, emphasizing their vulnerability to money laundering, sanctions evasion and terrorist financing.

Cross-border use of stablecoins has been rising. Source: BIS

Stablecoins should have a limited role

While acknowledging the continued demand for stablecoins due to features like cross-border accessibility and lower transaction costs, the BIS argued that they should only play a limited, well-regulated role.

“Society can re-learn the historical lessons about the limitations of unsound money,” the report cautioned. “Bold action by central banks and other public authorities can push the financial system along the right path, in partnership with the financial sector.”

Circle, the company behind USDC, saw its stock drop more than 15% on Tuesday after the BIS report, hitting $222. CRCL shares had reached an all-time high of $299 on Monday.

Despite its hard take on stablecoins, the BIS report praised tokenization as a “transformative innovation” for the next-generation monetary and financial system. It said tokenization builds on the current financial system rather than replacing it.

Some in the crypto community said it is “no surprise” that the BIS paper was generally negative on stablecoins, given that it is a “regulatory body owned by global central banks.”

“The BIS is hysterical in its opposition to crypto,” Jim Walker, chief economist at Aletheia Capital, wrote. “The first criterion, backed by a central bank, should make it a laughing stock given the historical failures of those institutions around the world.”

As expected, NATO members have agreed to new commitment to significantly boost defense spending, aiming to raise military budgets to 5% of GDP over the next decade—more than double the current 2% benchmark—at the ongoing major annual summit being held in The Hague. NATO’s 32 leaders proclaimed Wednesday: “Allies commit to invest 5% of GDP annually on core defense requirements as well as defense-and security-related spending by 2035 to ensure our individual and collective obligations.”

The Trump-backed decision is being finalized in Netherlands this week, with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte having hailed the proposal as a “quantum leap’ during a press briefing. Trump declared Tuesday that we’re with NATO “all the way”. And on Wednesday he’s expected to give a big address, as all eyes are focused on the Iran bombing and what’s next.

Bloomberg notes, also as fully expected and long ago previewed, that the spending target includes 3.5% via core defense and 1.5% in related investment covering infrastructure and cybersecurity.

Rutte and officials gathered in the Netherlands have stressed that all member states must participate, highlighting that Spain’s hesitation over the steep cost—nearly $90 billion annually—will not exempt it from the pledge. “NATO doesn’t allow for opt-outs or side deals,” he has firmly stated.

The increased funding is intended to dramatically scale up NATO’s military production, including building thousands of tanks and multiplying air defense systems by five, at a moment the alliance is staring down Russia amid the Ukraine war, where Moscow forces are establishing a huge buffer zone in the north and east, and actually increasing territory beyond Donetsk’s western border.

WikiLeaks meanwhile says the arms companies will continue to be the only real winners…

Trump posts message from NATO head Mark Rutte about raising military expenditure (much of which goes to arms companies) to 5% of GDP “Europe is going to pay in a BIG way, as they should, and it will be your win.” pic.twitter.com/vJSoeS8ibz

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) June 25, 2025

Rutte has of course identified Russia as NATO’s “most significant and direct threat” and reiterated full support for Ukraine, despite Washington having named China has America’s ‘top pacing threat’ and long-term main miliary and economic rival.

Of course, the alliance has already funneled hundreds of billions of dollars into a conflict with Russia that has resulted in hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides, and all the while Ukraine losing about 20% of its territory.

NATO leaders as of Wednesday have vowed to keep pursuing Ukraine’s path to membership, with Rutte emphasizing that the question of accession was never ruled out, especially not before the war. “There is an irreversible path for Ukraine to join NATO—and that remains true today, and will still be true after this summit,” he has said.

Whether you like it or not: Only one person is in the spotlight at the #NATOsummit: Everyone is focused on Donald #Trump. Secretary General Rutte says: Only thanks to Trump will the European members fulfill their defense commitments to counter the threat posed by Putin. #Nato pic.twitter.com/FlTVPljII6

— Florian Harms (@FAHarms) June 25, 2025

All of these pledges are new commitments were no surprise after Trump long pushed for drastically ramped-up spending, but perhaps the only surprise is that Ukraine’s President Zelensky finally swapped out his green uniform for a black suit (of sorts)…

Dressed to impress? Zelensky must want into NATO very, very badly.

There are two apt sayings for this current situation facing the White House in the wake of the Trump-ordered bombings against Iran’s nuclear facilities. First, what’s worse in war-time decision-making than doing the wrong thing? Doing it incompletely. Second, it is always easy to begin a war, but very difficult to stop one.

And so here President Trump and his top officials find themselves, defending the ‘limited’ strikes and proclaiming the destruction of Iran’s nuclear program and enrichment capability in the face of a skeptical media. The escalation dialectic – which the mainstream media is so good at – begins…

The heat is on an the NATO summit in The Hague, where Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters, “Of course we’re doing a leak investigation with the FBI right now because this information is for internal purposes, battle damage assessments.”

Referencing yesterday’s leaked DIA report which strongly suggests Iran’s nuclear program is “mostly intact” – he continued, “And CNN and others are trying to spin it to make the president look bad when this was an overwhelming success.”

And Trump himself said, “They really don’t know.” And in response to the contrary intelligence, “I think Israel is gonna be telling us very soon because [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu] is going to have people Involved in that whole situation.”

“This was an unbelievable hit by genius pilots and genius people in the military, and they’re not being given credit for it because we have scum that’s in this room. And not all of you are… CNN is scum. MSDNC is scum. The New York Times is scum. They’re bad people. They’re sick,” Trump said. “And what they’ve done is they’re trying to make this unbelievable victory into something less.”

And here’s Secretary of State Marco Rubio, somewhat hedging:

“(Iran’s nuclear) program today has been set behind significantly from where it was a week ago. It is in far worse shape today than it was a week ago because of US actions and because some of the actions Israelis took,” Rubio told Politico.

“So, the bottom line is they are much further away from a nuclear weapon today than they were before the president took this bold action,” he said, adding that “very significant, substantial damage” was done to a “variety of different components.”

Iran has meanwhile admitted that nuclear sites are ‘badly damaged’ – perhaps in hopes of giving Trump what he wants in terms of PR to ensure the bombing will stop and ceasefire will hold; however, the Iranians have also vowed to pursue their nuclear energy program without interruption and that it remains a matter of national sovereignty. 

To review of the leaked DIA assessment, one official had told CNN: “So the (DIA) assessment is that the US set them back maybe a few months, tops.” The White House acknowledged the existence of the report marked top secret but said they disagreed with it.

Trump, Rubio, and Hegseth are in Europe proclaiming the ‘overwhelming success’ of the strikes:

Pete Hegseth: CNN and others are trying to spin this to make the President look bad when this was an overwhelming success.

Trump: This is the New York Times. I call it the failing New York Times. It’s going to hell. And CNN which very few people are watching.
🤔 pic.twitter.com/A6sQCwi0zP

— Ron Smith (@Ronxyz00) June 25, 2025

So this appears yet another case of the White House disagreeing with its own intelligence community (IC) – in an ongoing awkward situation which has Iraq war vibes. However, without doubt the IC is still working on an overall consensus, based likely on several different intel threads, and across agencies.

One obvious danger from the perspective of Western decision-makers (and Israel): if Iran was not intent on getting a bomb before, they likely are now – given their very existence is under threat.

* * * 

More geopolitical developments and headlines via Newsquawk:

• US Secretary of State Rubio says US President Trump will buck Europe’s pleas to ratchet up sanctions on Russia, adding that the US still wants room to negotiate a peace deal, according to Politico.
• US President Trump says NATO will be very strong, when asked about article 5, says “we are with them all of the way”. Thinks the Iran-Israel ceasefire is good. Last thing Iran want to do is enrich (uranium), they want to recover. Thinks US will have a relationship with Iran. Asked if the US would strike Iran again if the nuclear programme is rebuilt, says “sure” Progress is being made on Gaza.
• “Al-Akhbar reported this morning from its sources that Houthi attacks in Yemen against Israel are expected to intensify and escalate in the coming days in response to the Israeli escalation in Gaza”, via Kan’s Kais on X.
• Iranian Parliament approves bill to suspend cooperation with UN nuclear watchdog, according to Nournews
• “There have been no [US] sanctions lifted on Iran,” said Fox Business’ Lawrence, in reference to President Trump’s post suggesting China could continue to buy oil from Iran. A senior White House official added: “The President was simply calling attention to the fact that because of his decisive actions to obliterate Iran’s nuclear facilities and broker a ceasefire between Israel and Iran, the Strait of Hormuz will not be impacted, which would have been devastating for China. The President continues to call on China and all countries to import our state-of-the-art oil rather than import Iranian oil in violation of US sanctions.”
• Iranian Foreign Minister Araqchi said the nuclear programme continues, according to Al Arabiya.
• White House Middle East envoy Witkoff said the US and Israel had achieved their goals in Iran, according to Fox News. He described talks with Iran as encouraging and stated it was time to sit with Iran and make a comprehensive deal.
• Iran’s Revolutionary Guards denied there was any drone attack in the northwestern city of Tabriz following reports air defences were activated in the area, according to Iranian news sites.
• Israel’s representative to the UN Security Council stated that Iran had been involved in producing a nuclear bomb, according to Sky News Arabia.
• Israel’s representative to the United Nations said that diplomatic talks with Iran will take place soon, according to Al Arabiya.
• US is set to open its embassy in Jerusalem on June 25th, following the ceasefire between Israel and Iran and the lifting of all restrictions by Israel’s Home Front Command, according to a statement.
• Iran executed three men for allegedly working for Israel’s spy agency Mossad, according to the Mizan News Agency.