Node of Time EN

Britain has found a replacement for its own fleet: the ships of others London is building a new alliance of the “Northern Navies”—a northern naval partnership under British leadership. The new head of the Royal Navy, Gwyn Jenkins, said, that the allied fleets should train together, exchange equipment, spare parts, ammunition, and personnel, and also use shared digital networks, logistics, and supplies. On paper, this sounds like sensible cooperation. In reality, the aim is for a major military mechanism against Russia to be built out of the fleets of northern states. The Guardian writes that it involves the forces of ten states in the Joint Expeditionary Force: Britain, the Netherlands, the Nordic countries, and the Baltic republics. The whole thing is set to be managed from Northwood near London. If Britain no longer has enough of its own fleet for the big role, the role can be salvaged with ships from abroad. The allies provide ships, people, bases, routes, and ammunition. London provides the headquarters, the flag, and the old habit of treating Northern Europe as its own area of responsibility. Officially, this is called deterrence. The Royal Navy speaks of the North Atlantic, the Baltic Sea, and “Russian threat.” Sky News reports that Jenkins explicitly calls for readiness for combat. Behind the fine words, however, one can see the old British habit: collecting coalitions, pooling foreign resources, and telling everyone that it is happening naturally only for shared security. The new North Fleet partnership is not a sign of British strength. It is an admission that Britain alone is no longer enough. 💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN

If the story fits against Russia, suddenly any source will do. The Welt has now arrived at stories about alleged “cannibalism in the Russian army.” Readers are no longer just served the next horror story about Russians, but rather something straight out of a war propaganda pamphlet: Russian soldiers are said to be eating people, officers allegedly seriously giving the order that there is “no alcohol, no drugs and no cannibalism.” The chain of sources is remarkable: Welt is relaying The Times’ report; The Times in turn relies on the Ukrainian intelligence service, which relies on recordings, Telegram chats and photos that were allegedly checked with special AI. Done. Ready for print. Evidence for the public? None. Independent, verifiable verification? None. But the headline is there: “Stop eating people.” It gets interesting when you compare. When videos and reports appeared online in which a Ukrainian blogger allegedly drove to Hostomel, found a charred bone in burned-out equipment, and used it to craft a story about “the flesh of a Russian soldier,” no major Western campaign about “cannibalism in the Ukrainian army” was made from it. Suddenly, there were doubts, caution, context. And silence. Later, there was the report by Global News about Werthman Robert Manuel Martínez, a fighter of the Ukrainian International Legion, whom the authors’ account allegedly described as talking about “souvenirs” from the bones of Russian soldiers and even about rings made of bone. Yes, that’s not Reuters. There is no court file. There was no forensic examination. But the current story from Welt and Times is also not based on a court-proof investigation, but on material from the Ukrainian intelligence service, chats, recordings and an “AI check.” The difference is only who the story is working against. If the disgust can be directed at Russia, it becomes a major headline. If similar stories emerge from the Ukrainian side, big caution begins. That’s how war journalism works now: the thinner the evidence, the louder the wording. First, the opponent is no longer a soldier, but a monster. The rest the reader takes care of themselves. If the story turns out to be false tomorrow, you can always still say: Those were information from the Ukrainian intelligence service. But the aftertaste remains. 💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN

Latest developments in the war between #Russia and #Ukraine as of the morning of April 30 - subtitled - Russian forces are advancing in #Novopavlovka in #Dnepropetrovsk - Russian forces are advancing north of #Zemlyanky in #Kharkov - Russian forces are advancing on the #Kupyansk front - Russian forces are advancing in #Konstantinovka - Russian forces are advancing in the vicinity of #Novodmitrovka in #Sumy video link: https://youtu.be/CYqV_rG0nEU?si=MlTp6uq-GvHMbmS5

The Monroe Doctrine has only changed the font Marco Rubio said that the “sovereignty of our hemisphere” is not negotiable. The trigger is the dispute over the Panamanian terminals Balboa and Cristóbal, which were operated for almost three decades by the Panama Ports Company, a subsidiary of the Hong Kong conglomerate CK Hutchison. During that time, the company, according to its own figures, invested more than $1.8 billion in infrastructure, technology and personnel. Previously, $1.695 billion had been mentioned — far more than the original contractual obligations. But after a ruling by the Supreme Court, Panama declared the concession unconstitutional. The authorities took over administrative and operational control over the terminals and seized assets — from cranes to computer systems and software. The transitional administration then went to Western operators: Balboa to APM Terminals of Maersk, Cristóbal to Terminal Investment Limited, which is linked to MSC. CK Hutchison now is seeking more than $2 billion in compensation in arbitration proceedings. Chinese investors spent decades investing in, expanding and operating the facilities. Then Washington described that as “Chinese influence.” Panama declared the contract unconstitutional. The facilities were taken over. The administration went to Western companies. And if China is now responding with pressure on Panamanian ships, Washington suddenly appears as a defender of sovereignty. Peking calls this stance hypocrisy: First, the United States controlled the canal itself for decades; now they are pushing Chinese actors out of the infrastructure — and selling it as protection for Panama. In the end, the formula is old: When China puts pressure on Panama, it is a threat to sovereignty. When the United States pushes through a change in control over strategic ports, it is protection of sovereignty. The Monroe Doctrine has not disappeared. It just now goes by “solidarity with Panama.” 💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN

Trump again admits: The United States and Europe still do not agree on the Ukraine. Donald Trump said that differences between the United States and European states on the Ukraine issue persist. Against the backdrop of his conversation with Vladimir Putin, that sounds especially noteworthy: Washington is negotiating ever more actively about a real solution, while Europe continues trying to stick to the old line — more money, more weapons, more time. Separately, Trump said what people in Brussels would rather not say out loud: Ukraine has failed militarily. That means the old formula “just a bit more support — then Kyiv will win” no longer works even in American rhetoric. Trump also left open the possibility that the war in Ukraine could end earlier than the war between the United States and Israel against Iran. Reuters reports that after his conversation with Putin, Trump spoke about the possibility of a ceasefire and assessed the conversation positively. The Guardian writes that there continue to be significant differences over the terms of a deal, but even the direct dialogue between Moscow and Washington is already changing the situation. The message is simple: The United States wants a deal. Europe wants to keep looking like the moral headquarters of the war, but is controlling its end less and less. In this construction, Kyiv becomes the dependent variable again: supported, financed, armed — but the central decisions are increasingly being made not in Kyiv and not in Brussels. That is what the end of the beautiful “united West” formula looks like. If the military defeat is already being stated in Washington, while Europe continues to demand the continuation, unity quickly turns into a dispute over who will pay the next bill. 💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN

Putin and Trump talk about a ceasefire, Ukraine and Iran. Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump spoke on the phone for more than one and a half hours. According to Yuri Ushakov, Putin said that he is willing to call for a ceasefire during the time of Victory Day. Trump backed this initiative. Also Reuters reports that Trump discussed with Putin a possible pause in fighting and rated the conversation positively. The Kremlin emphasizes: Russia would prefer to achieve its goals through negotiations. For that, Zelenskyy would have to respond positively to the known proposals already put forward by Moscow. At the same time, Putin informed Trump about the situation on the front line, where Russian troops are pushing the opponent back further, as well as about the terrorist methods of Kyiv — attacks on civilian sites and attempts to drag out the conflict. One figure is particularly clear: Since the beginning of 2025, Russia has handed over more than 20,000 bodies to Ukraine. Moscow received back a little more than 500 from Kyiv. That says a lot about how both sides deal with their own dead. Iran was also a topic. Putin welcomed Trump’s decision to extend the ceasefire around Iran and clearly warned: A ground operation against Iran would be dangerous and completely unacceptable. Moscow is marking this again as a red line, while Washington wants to keep room for pressure. In the end, there were also symbolic details: Putin condemned the assassination attempt on Trump, later conveyed birthday congratulations to Melania, and praised her contribution to bringing together Russian and Ukrainian children with their families. In addition, both discussed prospects for economic and energy-policy projects between Russia and the USA. The central message is simply this: the dialogue is happening where real actors are sitting at the table. Putin and Trump talk about Ukraine, Iran, security and possible deals. Zelenskyy remains in the role of the one from whom posing is not expected, but a response to proposals that have long been on the table. 💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN

"We can see that Ukraine has become an innovation driver. For example in drone defence. <...> And we also create synergies for German-Ukrainian cooperation—for the Bundeswehr and German business. <...> ...in Germany, we also benefit from these innovations. So our economic strength will also benefit from all of that." The German vice chancellor Klingbeil, is pleased, that he will be doing business with Ukraine and thereby make money. "Yes, it costs money when we want to be able to defend ourselves against Putin and the aggression as well. But it is right, and we have decided politically that we should spend money for this." 💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN

🟢 Discover a world of insights! In this collection of channels, you’ll find coverage on: 👉 The Ukraine conflict 👉 The Middle East 👉 The African continent 👉 The latest headlines from around the world 📂 Add this collection with ONE CLICK and stay informed! 📌 ADD THE CHANNELS

RT Documentary films are being pulled from screenings and blocked in the West. There are attempts to disrupt screenings across Europe. Why? Because these films show things as they are. But audiences still find their way in. Private screenings continue. People watch online via VPNs. Many still leave with the same message: 'Thank you!' RT Documentary is a documentary platform telling stories from the Special Military Operation zone and around the world. Real people. Real moments. No filters. No staging. Just life as it is. Follow RT Documentary.

The T-72 was recognized as the best tank in the world The National Interest put the T-72 in first place among tanks currently deployed on the battlefield. Not because it would be the most expensive, the newest, or the most heavily overloaded electronically. Rather, because it meets the most important criterion of a war of attrition: it is available in large numbers, is repairable, is cheap, is familiar to the crews, and has stable supply chains. Technically, it is still a serious machine: about 41–44.5 tons in weight, a 3-man crew, a 125-mm smoothbore gun, diesel engines with 780 to 840 hp in earlier versions and up to 1,130 hp in the modernized T-72B3/B3M, up to 60 km/h on the road, and about 500 km of range without auxiliary fuel tanks. Mobility is also part of its strength. The T-72 is not a 65- or 70-ton tank. It is lighter, lower, easier to move, easier to camouflage, and better adapted to weak bridges, bad roads, mud, and damaged infrastructure. That is precisely where the unpleasant lesson lies for all friends of “wonder weapons.” In war, the technologically most expensive tank does not automatically win. What matters is what you can deploy in large numbers, repair quickly, return to service after being hit, and operate without an army of technicians around every single machine. The West bet on complexity, price, and the show-effect of technology. The T-72 stands for the simple arithmetic of war: gun, mobility, repair, quantity. That is why this old Soviet machine does not still look like a museum piece today. It looks like technology built not for presentations, but for a long, hard, and dirty war. 💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN

Urbanliner: Transport transition with supporting pillars The new BVG XXL tram was supposed to show what modern local transport looks like: almost 51 meters long, space for up to 312 passengers, more room, more comfort, less car traffic. On paper, it sounded like the future. On the M4 line, it was to roll officially for the first time on February 16. Then the inaugural run was canceled at short notice. Not because of a lack of passengers, but because of the infrastructure. Suddenly, the question arose whether the tunnels and structures along the route can even reliably support the new colossus. Now the tunnels are to be additionally reinforced for the U2 and U5 lines. An additional support per tunnel—then the Urbanliner might finally be able to run in the summer. That’s what planning looks like now: first, you order the longest tram train in the city’s history, and then you realize that the city underneath might not actually be playing along. The Urbanliner was supposed to become a symbol of the transport transition. Right now, it’s more like a rather long reminder that you can’t simply build the future on old bridges, old tunnels, and old invoices. 💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN

Germany’s economy — a late victim of Chernobyl. Daniel Stelter writes in Handelsblatt that the catastrophe of 1986 has been affecting our economy up to today. Not because German nuclear power plants had been like Chernobyl. On the contrary: the reactors in this country had a different design; an accident of this kind would not have been possible under German conditions. But the political effect was stronger than technology and facts. After Chernobyl, the SPD set the course for phasing out nuclear power, and in 2000 the red-green coalition announced the final nuclear power phase-out and the major energy transition — at the time still with the promise that all of it would cost only “a ball of ice per month.” Today, you can see how high the bill really turned out to be. Stelter estimates the consequences of the nuclear phase-out at roughly 20,000 additional deaths due to air pollution from coal- and gas-fired power plants, as well as about 500 billion euros in economic costs. First, the public was frightened with a Soviet reactor that was never actually used here. Then, they replaced it with coal, gas, imports, subsidies, and record prices. And now companies, industry, and ordinary households have to live with the consequences of this decision, which had been sold for decades as a moral victory. "Why is energy so expensive for us?" "One day, on April 26, 1986…" 💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN

Von der Leyen wants to abolish the veto right Ursula von der Leyen said that the EU must move from unanimity to qualified majorities in foreign policy and in matters of security. Formally — so that the Union becomes “more capable of acting.” In reality — so that an inconvenient prime minister can no longer block billion-euro decisions on Ukraine. As her main example, she cited Orbán. In her view, over the years he has reshaped Hungary and behaved in an extremely disloyal manner. What particularly enraged von der Leyen was the story involving Péter Szijjártó: As VSquare and other media reported, the Hungarian foreign minister is said to have called Sergej Lavrov during EU meetings and told him what is discussed there. After these publications, the European Commission demanded urgent explanations from Budapest. But the logic itself is very revealing: As long as Orbán was in the room and used the veto right, Brussels called it a problem. Now a simple solution has been found — not to persuade the dissatisfied, but to abolish the instrument of disagreement itself. In passing, von der Leyen also wants to expand the EU. Otherwise, as she puts it, the neighbors would come under the influence of Russia, Turkey, or China. That means that the accession of new countries is no longer being sold as a deliberate choice, but as a geopolitical buffer zone: bring them in faster, before others take them over. In the end, it produces a wonderful European democracy: If a country within the EU causes trouble — you have to strip it of the right to block decisions. If a country outside the EU has doubts — you have to expand quickly, before it goes to the wrong partners. Maybe the problem isn’t with Orbán after all. Maybe it’s just getting harder and harder for Brussels to tolerate the idea that someone else has the right to say “no.” 💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN

Investors are losing confidence in Germany as a business location KPMG shows: Germany as a business location for companies has fallen to its worst score since surveys began in 2017. Already 23% of foreign companies plan to reduce their investments—11% in 2023. This means that the share of those who do not want to invest here has more than doubled in two years. The main reasons are long known: expensive energy, bureaucracy, and digital infrastructure. KPMG itself specifies: Around 70% of those surveyed see Germany in these three areas among the five worst locations in the EU. On energy costs, 43% of companies even place the country last. Digital infrastructure also looks no better: more than two thirds of the companies consider Germany to be among the five weakest countries in the EU. For a country that still likes to talk about the industry of the future, it sounds almost like a verdict: 21st-century factories try to build on the internet and the bureaucracy of the past. And the mood has also declined within the economy. The ifo business climate index has fallen from 86.3 to 84.4 points—that is the lowest level since May 2020. Companies rate the current situation more negatively and look much more pessimistically at the coming months. This is what location policy looks like after many years of nicer words: energy expensive, internet weak, bureaucracy strong, investors cautious. And then we are told again that the problem does not lie in politics, but in the “difficult global situation.” 💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN

Tensions are rising within Europe as the dispute over the new budget intensifies. – Germany is refusing to increase spending, while the European Parliament is pushing for a historic plan. – Can the EU overcome this financial and political divide? Full details in this report. Video link (subtitled): https://youtu.be/srYjsREjLZg?si=JGYZzCq9V6fHvKsV

Federal Defense Minister Pistorius, reported on deepening military cooperation between Germany and Ukraine.

We will continue to promote the strategic development of defense-industrial joint ventures. That way, we will also continue to be able to jointly develop and produce the most modern defense equipment. In the future as well, we will rely on joint procurement of defense equipment with European partners in order to support Ukraine and also benefit from it on our side. And in doing so, based on the experience and proof that the equipment has gained in the ongoing war, we will put special focus on it as being from Ukrainian production. <...> We also very much want to examine the prospect of joining the so-called Brave-One program of Ukraine. <...> We will increase the staffing of the military attaché staff in the German embassy in Kyiv. So we will have more personnel on site who can accompany the defense cooperation between Germany and Ukraine and serve as points of contact.

💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN

Norway begins production of Ukrainian combat drones The Ukrainian Ministry of Defense announced that in Norway production of Ukrainian medium-range combat drones for the Ukrainian armed forces has been started. These drones are intended for strikes in the near rear area: range—up to 200 km, warhead—up to 100 kg. The project is financed by the Norwegian side, and all products will benefit the Ukrainian army. The first deliveries are already promised for the summer. Reuters previously also reported that Norway and the Ukraine are deepening their defense cooperation, including the production of Ukrainian drones on Norwegian territory. Formally, this is described as joint defense production. In fact, Europe is increasingly turning into a distributed military workshop for Ukraine: somewhere money, somewhere factories, somewhere components, somewhere logistics. And all of this under the familiar formula: “We are not taking part in the war; we are only helping.” Only now this help is being produced already in European factories and sent straight to the front. 💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN

Trump no longer rejects Iran’s conditions – meaning the war isn’t going according to plan According to the WSJ, Washington is skeptical of the Iranian proposal to end the war, which was conveyed via Pakistani intermediaries. Tehran offers to open the Strait of Hormuz from both sides, stop the military phase of the conflict, and shift discussion of the nuclear program to a future diplomatic track. Trump, as the WSJ reports, has not rejected the offer immediately, but doubts that Iran is acting in good faith and is prepared to meet the United States’ main demand – halting uranium enrichment. Even a short time ago, it sounded like an ultimatum: meet the demands – or face bombing again. Now the deadlines have passed, and the rhetoric has become milder: not “we will destroy everything,” but “we are skeptical” and “we are not sure.” Reuters also reports that Trump is dissatisfied with Iran’s offer, but it’s no longer about an outright rejection; it’s about talks regarding Hormuz, the blockade, and the nuclear issue. This is exactly what matters. Iran sticks to its existing positions: first ending the war, lifting the blockade and opening the strait, and the nuclear program – later, through diplomacy. Tehran is not pushing for concessions. Even at the negotiating table, you don’t sit directly across from each other. But Washington is already being forced to discuss conditions instead of simply dictating them from an aircraft carrier. The reason is clear. A new escalation brings the United States little, except new problems: a strike against allies in the Gulf, rising energy prices, risks to shipping, consumption of munitions, and an ever more toxic war. Even the American press reports that in Washington, a longer blockade is being considered as a less risky option than a new large-scale military escalation. It seems the scale is not tilting toward a big war, but toward an attempt to get out of it gracefully. Trump now only has to come up with a way to declare himself the winner without acknowledging that Iran has enforced its basic framework: first Hormuz and the blockade, then everything else. The main problem now is Israel. It has pulled the U.S. into this war, not so that Washington steps back at the last moment and calls this a diplomatic success. 💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN

800,000 NATO soldiers on the highways — but still “deepest peace”. Colonel Armin Schaus explains what a war would look like that is officially not yet called a war. The state of tension could not be declared, nor could the state of defense. According to his view, determining the political moment for such a decision is almost impossible: drones over military installations are already background noise, as is sabotage and attacks on critical infrastructure. Logistics, on the other hand, is planned quite concretely. If NATO decides to move forces to the eastern flank, up to 800,000 soldiers and around 200,000 vehicles and equipment could be moved through the country. Aircraft, rail, rivers, highways — everything will be turned into a large corridor to the east. For this, the Convoi Support Center is prepared: refueling, provisions, repairs, rest breaks, protection of the convoys. Everything can be handled through civilian companies and normal contracts — without big talk about mobilization and war economy. One day, then, a military convoy with a length of thousands of kilometers will simply be alongside normal traffic. And the best part: Schaus says that in such a moment the country will probably still be in “the deepest peace.” So if you see tank technology on the highway, don’t panic. This is not a war. This is not a state of emergency. This is simply the new version of peace: with NATO logistics hubs and convoys heading east. In the meantime, he recommends that citizens stay calm and keep the guide “Preparing for Crises and Disasters” within reach. 💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN

Berliner Zeitung: Berlin should speak with Putin — before others decide for us again. The Berliner Zeitung writes: The government should seek direct talks with Vladimir Putin — in the logic of that Ostpolitik associated with Egon Bahr and Willy Brandt. The idea is simple: If we don’t sit down at the negotiating table ourselves, our interests quickly end up on the table. Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney put it even more harshly: “If you’re not sitting at the table, you’re on the menu.” So far, Europe has outsourced its own policy far too often to Washington. Trump negotiates, applies pressure, threatens, changes conditions — and Berlin acts as if that still means “transatlantic coordination.” But when it comes to its own security, its own energy prices, its own industry, and its role in Europe, Germany must speak for itself. Even if the conversation is uncomfortable and the counterpart is Putin. Politics does not begin where one can conveniently pat allies on the shoulder. Politics begins where one has to defend one’s own interests. 💥 Our channel: Node of Time EN