America
The US Army and Texan Bandidos in Ukraine
Confirming the presence of the US troops in Ukraine, the Pentagon has drawn up a three-stage action plan on blocking the illegal arms trafficking in Eastern Europe. The US inspection network does not only include Ukraine, but also other countries neighboring Ukraine or its neighbors across the sea. While the names of the countries included in this network to be established not mentioned, the reality that an illegal arms market similar to that in the Middle East and the Balkans, are being implicitly admitted.
According to an official statement by the US Department of Defense (Pentagon) regarding the activities of the deployed US troops in Ukraine, military advisors from the US military will conduct arms inspections in Ukraine. And the main subject of the inspection is summarized as; the final destination of the US/Western arms supplies. It will be inspected whether these high-tech conventional weapons are properly used at the front. And the most important part would be to ensure that these arms would not fall into the hands of the Russians, and to “prevent” the rise of an illegal arms market.
The Pentagon held a press conference with journalists on the issue on October 31st but refrained to share any information on the number of specialists deployed in Ukraine or the locations they will serve. These inspectors “are not to be deployed in close combat zones” the officials said.
Thus, this statement officially confirmed the presence and the activities of the US military in Ukraine, apart from the military personnel protecting the US diplomats in Kiev. The Pentagon had evacuated all US troops from the country on February 14th, exactly 10 days before the conflict began.
Pentagon: There is suspicion, but no evidence
The Pentagon officials also said they did not see “any solid evidence” of illicit diversion of the US arms supplies sent to Ukraine, while adding, “Nevertheless, we are aware of the possibility of an illicit arms diversion. We are actively taking all available actions to prevent such a thing from happening.”
And the Republican criticisms on the destination of arms sent to Ukraine, also had a major impact, while the case was upon an investigation process. The Minority (Republican) leader in the House of Representatives Kevin McCarty, said in a speech he made in October that Republicans would not hand a “blank check” to Ukraine.
The Tweet McCarty has pinned on his Twitter account on October 8th, is about the Biden family’s relationship with the Ukrainian government:
“Fact: Joe Biden’s family members profited in foreign regions where he had influence as vice president. Hunter Biden sat on the board of a Ukrainian company in an industry in which he had no experience. His only qualification was that his father ran point on US-Ukraine policy.”
Admitting the existence of an arms black market
It is very possible to say that the arms sent to Ukraine could be sold on the black market, and that more “black markets” could emerge where terror groups can acquire advanced weapons, based on some similar experiences in the Middle East. Some of these risks are clearly explained in the “US Plan to Counter Illicit Diversion of Certain Advanced Conventional Weapons in Eastern Europe” issued by the US Department of Defense on October 27th:
“Wars can provide opportunities for weapons to fall into private hands via theft or illicit sales, sometimes creating black markets for arms that endure for decades. A variety of criminal and non-state actors may attempt to acquire weapons from sources in Ukraine during or following the conflict, as occurred after the Balkans Wars in the 1990s.”
According to the Pentagon plan, some special precautions must be taken especially on small arms, MANPADs and anti-tank missiles. It is quite possible that such weapons could be used in terrorist attacks targeting civilian aircrafts.
The Pentagon’s preventive “capacity building” plan for Eastern Europe
Reading the Biden administration’s deployment of military advisors and inspectors to Ukraine only as a response to the criticisms from the Republicans and from Russia, is not sufficient enough to fully explain the overall approach of the US government. The Pentagon considers that if the arms thatare described in the plan document fall into the hands of the Russian military, Moscow may use it to “develop countermeasures, spread propaganda or conduct false flag operations.”
The plan to prevent arms diversion is not only limited to Ukraine, according to the Pentagon’s program. The “action plan” covers three phases: short, medium and long-term, and the construction of a wide network of inspection all across Eastern Europe:
- “Bolstering the ability of security forces in Ukraine and its neighboring states to account for and safeguard their arms and ammunition during transfer, in storage, and when deployed;
- Strengthening border management and security in Ukraine and its neighboring states; and
- Building the capacity of security forces, law enforcement officials, and border control agencies in Ukraine and its neighboring states to deter, detect, and interdict illicit trafficking of certain advanced conventional weapons.”
According to the plan put up in the document, the coordination mechanisms are defined as “Building the capacity of law enforcement officials and analysts in Ukraine and neighboring states to process and share information regarding interdicted or captured weapons”.
“Azov battalions could get out of control”
The Europol agency also warned last summer about the illegal diversion of arms in Ukraine across Europe. On October 27th the EU Commission tasked on the issue, also drafted a new law on the increasing allegations of arms trafficking over the Ukrainian war. The commission noted that the Ukrainian war constitutes a new source for illicit arms trafficking in Europe.
The figures also show the extent of this threat. Since last February, the Pentagon has sent around 10 thousand weapons including missile launchers, and around 64 million ammunitions for small arms to Ukraine.
According to a 2020 Pentagon report, the US has increased its military aid to Kiev to 400 million USD in 2019, from 30 million USD back in 2013. And the total amount of the military supply the Pentagon has sent to Kiev in the last eight months alone has reached 18 billion USD.
Experts consider a military aid of this magnitude to fall into the black market and into the hands of dangerous organizations, as within possibilities.
The US think-tank Responsible Statcraft, points out to the possibility of the course of the war in Ukraine to turn towards strengthening the radical groups, which can form independent paramilitaries with the help of these weapons. According to Jordan Cohen from the Cato Institute, it may get much more difficult for Volodymyr Zelensky to control organizations such as the Azov battalions in the future. Cohen describes the danger by saying, “If he loses control of those groups, then I think you are going to start seeing those groups kind of creating their own military units, and that is dangerous”.
The arms market of Bandidos in Ukraine
Founded in 1966 in Saint Leon TX, the Bandidos Motorcycle Club has a wide network of organizations around the world. This criminal organization is among the leading actors in the transportation of commodities of the arms black market into European heartland. At the end of October, Finnish National Bureau of Investigation announced that weapons of Western origin sent to Ukraine, may have reached the black markets in Finland, through criminal organizations such as the Bandidos. Speaking to Finnish publication Yle, Chief Inspector Christer Ahlgren stated: “Weapons delivered to Ukraine from various countries have also been found in Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands”. According to Inspector Ahlgren, there are strong indications that these weapons are on their way to Finland.
Inspector Ahlgren says this black market is run by bike gangs:
“The three largest bike gangs in the world, which are all part of a wider international network, are all active in Finland. One of them is the Bandidos Motorcycle Club, which has cells in all major cities of Ukraine”.
Here, a huge gap is opening between Russia and the European Union, as Texan Bandidos and similar criminal organizations and US military inspectors play cat and mouse over Ukrainian soil.
America
How will Brazil’s presidential runoff work?
The second round will determine which candidate secures a majority of the valid votes.
By Micaela Ovelar, São Paulo
Brazil’s presidential election will be decided in a runoff between Senator Flávio Bolsonaro, of the Liberal Party (PL), and President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, of the Workers’ Party (PT). With all voting machines counted, Bolsonaro finished the October 4 first round with 47.03% of valid votes, ahead of Lula’s 45.16%. Neither secured the majority required for an outright victory, sending the two candidates to a second round on October 25.
Bolsonaro received 56,104,503 votes, while Lula obtained 53,879,538—a difference of 2,224,965 votes, or approximately 1.87 percentage points. Bolsonaro therefore enters the runoff as the first-round leader.
The election also settled legislative contests and most gubernatorial races. In São Paulo, Brazil’s largest electoral state, Governor Tarcísio de Freitas (Republicanos) secured reelection in the first round. Nationwide, 20 gubernatorial contests were decided without a runoff.
The presidential count
The two leading candidates together accounted for 92.19% of valid presidential votes. The remaining candidates shared 7.81%
|
Candidate |
Party |
Votes |
Share of valid votes |
Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Flávio Bolsonaro |
Liberal Party (PL) |
56,104,503 |
47.03% |
2,224,965 |
|
Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva |
Workers’ Party (PT) |
53,879,538 |
45.16% |
1.87 % |
Source: Brazilian Superior Electoral Court (SEC).
Augusto Cury, of Avante, placed third with approximately 2.89% of valid votes (3,448,569), followed by Renan Santos, of Missão, with 2.24% (2,675,887), and Ronaldo Caiado, of the Social Democratic Party (PSD), with 2.18% (2,605,148). Romeu Zema, of Novo, received 0.27% (326,488). None advanced to the runoff.
Cury and Santos subsequently said they would not endorse either finalist. Their announcements do not determine how their supporters will vote on October 25: ballots cast for eliminated candidates cannot be automatically assigned to Bolsonaro or Lula.
The completed count also differed from the final polls, which had placed Lula ahead with 45%, against Bolsonaro’s 42%. The election result instead gave Bolsonaro a narrow lead.
The territorial distribution showed Lula ahead in the Northeast, while Bolsonaro prevailed in the three southern states: Paraná, Santa Catarina and Rio Grande do Sul. Across the country, Bolsonaro led in 14 states and the Federal District, while Lula finished ahead in 12 states. These results contribute to a single nationwide presidential count rather than awarding separate electoral mandates for individual state victories.
How the election works
Brazil elects its president and vice president on a joint ticket through a two-round system. A ticket wins in the first round only by obtaining more than half of valid votes. Blank and invalid ballots are excluded from that calculation. If no ticket crosses the threshold, the two highest-placed candidates advance to a runoff.
The October 4 election combined presidential voting with contests for governors, the Chamber of Deputies, the Senate and state or Federal District legislatures. All 513 Chamber seats and 54 of the Senate’s 81 seats were contested. The Senate election renewed two-thirds of the chamber, with voters choosing two different senatorial candidates in each state and the Federal District.
Voting in Brazilian territory ended at 5 p.m., Brasília time, after which electoral authorities published the count. The Superior Electoral Court (TSE in Portuguese) provides results through its official results website and mobile application.
The October 25 runoff will decide the presidency and gubernatorial contests requiring a second round. Legislative elections are determined through the first-round vote and do not proceed to a runoff.
Participation and abstention
Approximately 125.3 million people voted in the presidential election, representing a turnout of 78.92%. Around 33.5 million registered voters did not participate, producing an abstention rate of 21.08%.
The count also recorded approximately 2.3 million blank ballots and 3.67 million invalid ballots. Together, these represented roughly 4.77% of ballots cast, leaving approximately 119.3 million valid presidential votes. Bolsonaro’s 47.03% and Lula’s 45.16% refer to that valid-vote total, not to all ballots cast or the entire registered electorate.
Abstention is distinct from blank or invalid voting. An abstaining voter did not cast a ballot; someone who submitted a blank or invalid ballot participated without recording a valid candidate choice. Neither group should automatically be described as undecided voters.
Those who did not participate on October 4 will have another opportunity to vote in the second round. Of course, the first-round figures do not establish how many will return to the polls or which finalist they will choose.
São Paulo and state results
São Paulo entered the election with approximately 34.1 million registered voters, around 21.5% of Brazil’s electorate. It is the country’s largest electoral state and forms part of the Southeast alongside Rio de Janeiro, Minas Gerais and Espírito Santo. Its weight in the national electorate makes it particularly important when examining presidential results.
The state’s gubernatorial contest ended in the first round. Tarcísio de Freitas, of Republicanos, won reelection with almost 63% of valid votes (14,491,874), defeating PT candidate Fernando Haddad (8,423,656). This is a gap of approximately 26 percentage points between them.
Across Brazil, 20 gubernatorial races were settled on October 4, the highest first-round total of elections since 1994. That exceeded the 15 contests decided in the first round in 2022 and the previous high of 18 in 2010.
Other first-round winners included Cleitinho Azevedo in Minas Gerais, Sérgio Moro in Paraná and Luciano Zucco in Rio Grande do Sul. PT incumbents Jerônimo Rodrigues, Elmano de Freitas and Rafael Fonteles won reelection in Bahia, Ceará and Piauí, respectively. Six gubernatorial runoffs have been confirmed: Acre, Amazonas, Espírito Santo, Rio Grande do Norte, Tocantins, and the Federal District.
Rio de Janeiro Case
In Rio de Janeiro, Douglas Ruas had 49.27% and Eduardo Paes 42.76%. Anthony Garotinho’s withdrawal of an appeal concerning his rejected candidacy could change which votes enter the calculation, potentially lifting Ruas above the first-round threshold. Rio de Janeiro remains an unresolved case because a pending electoral decision could affect the total number of valid votes. Formal action by electoral authorities was still required, so the contest could not yet be presented as a settled first-round victory. However, the electoral justice system is highly likely to announce a first-round victory for Douglas Ruas, who is also a candidate from Bolsonaro’s political party, the PL.
Brazilian voters abroad
Brazilians registered abroad participated in the presidential contest, with approximately 341,800 casting ballots in 186 cities, according to TSE data. Around 916,500 voters were eligible to vote overseas. Unlike the nationwide result, the overseas count placed Lula ahead. He received 157,387 votes, or 47.57% of valid ballots cast abroad, against approximately 143,900 votes, or 43.49%, for Bolsonaro. Lula led in 64 countries and Bolsonaro in 37.
The distribution varied sharply by country. Bolsonaro obtained 61.10% in the United States and 71.76% in Japan. Lula led in Portugal with 52.45%, Argentina with 64.44%, Canada with 57.75% and Germany with 71.93%. Overseas ballots form part of the national presidential total rather than a separate electoral contest.
Brazil now heads to the October 25 runoff with Bolsonaro ahead in the first-round count, but the presidency is still undecided. The second round will determine which ticket secures a majority of valid votes.
America
US AI spending needs 9% of GDP by 2032 to justify capital boom
For the ongoing wave of artificial intelligence investment in the US to yield a financial return, businesses and consumers would need to spend approximately 9% of national income on the technology, according to calculations.
This proportion is equivalent to the entire budget the American public allocates to food, double all energy expenditures, or roughly seven times the total amount paid for telephone, internet, and digital streaming services.
A study prepared by Columbia University finance professor Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh and presented at the Brookings Institution, reported by The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), revealed that artificial intelligence infrastructure construction has become the largest investment drive in US history.
Based on current data centre construction plans, average costs, potential project cancellations, and an expected 10% unleveraged return on capital, calculations show that the sector must generate $3.5 trillion in revenue by 2032.
Under the assumption of 4% annual nominal growth, this figure corresponds to 8.8% of US gross domestic product (GDP).
Capacity expansion may lower prices
The foundation of current revenue projections rests on the assumption that artificial intelligence companies such as OpenAI and Anthropic will be able to sustain existing processing power prices into the future.
Stating that the current deficit in processing capacity is keeping profit margins high, Van Nieuwerburgh noted that companies will not be able to sustain today’s scarcity pricing in an intense competitive environment by 2032, when capacity is projected to quadruple.
Sharp price declines seen in past technology investments show that comparable crises have occurred before.
As a result of laying new lines and expanding capacity, bandwidth prices on transatlantic fibre-optic links between London and New York plunged by 96% between 1997 and 2001, a process that triggered the bankruptcy of numerous telecommunications companies.
Could falling prices boost demand?
While the processing capabilities of artificial intelligence models double every four to five months, data from Epoch AI show that the cost for a given capability level has been falling by 47% per quarter since 2023.
Optimists, drawing on the concept known in economic literature as Jevons’ Paradox, argue that expanding capacity and lower costs will multiply demand, thereby driving corporate revenues higher.
The $300 billion combined annual revenue estimate set for 2030 for OpenAI and Anthropic by an expert panel led by Ezra Karger of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago has already been surpassed.
The annualised combined revenue run rate of the two companies has reached approximately $180 billion and continues to post double-digit growth each quarter.
Against advocates who view the technology as a third factor of production alongside capital and labour, forecasts indicate that the growth rate will decelerate and the law of diminishing returns will take effect as the system becomes widespread.
Productivity gains do not translate directly into revenue
Following the price drops and productivity surge seen from 1966 onwards during the personal computer revolution, corporate computer expenditures flattened out at around 0.8% of GDP by approximately 1984.
A recent study conducted by Harvard University doctoral students Fiona Chen and James Stratton, examining software projects on the Jellyfish platform, pointed to a similar structural ceiling.
The researchers determined that artificial intelligence assistants increased the number of lines of code written by 12%, while autonomous software agents increased it by 30%.
Conversely, because users spent more time reviewing, interpreting, and modifying code, the ultimate contribution to completed projects remained low and was found to be “statistically insignificant”.
Experts emphasise that even if artificial intelligence boosts productivity, this outcome may not translate directly into the massive profit and revenue figures anticipated by investors.
America
Flavio Bolsonaro leads Lula as Brazil election heads to run-off
Brazil’s presidential contest between Lula and Flavio Bolsonaro is heading to a second round, as the Bolsonaro family secured a full contingent in the Senate.
Right-wing candidate Flavio Bolsonaro won the first round of the election, edging out incumbent Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. However, he failed to secure the more than 50% of the vote required to win outright in a single round.
A run-off vote between the two candidates will take place on 25 October.
Flavio Bolsonaro is the son of former president Jair Bolsonaro, who was sentenced to 27 years in prison for plotting a failed coup attempt after losing the last election.
The race was neck and neck; during the campaign, President Lula had maintained a slight lead in the polls. With 99% of the votes counted, Bolsonaro took 47.03%, while Lula garnered 45.16%.
Bolsonaro’s result exceeded expectations, suggesting that the run-off is now within his grasp given that several other presidential candidates eliminated in the first round were right-wing alternatives.
Bolsonaro’s Liberal Party (PL) also emerged as the party securing the largest number of governors, senators, and federal deputies, according to results announced so far.
This means the party is expected to wield the greatest influence in Congress.
After casting his ballot, the 80-year-old Lula warned that the election was a choice between democracy and “barbarism”.
The 45-year-old Bolsonaro said he wanted to “liberate the Brazilian people”.
After winning election in 2002 and 2006, Lula defeated Jair Bolsonaro in 2022 by a margin of less than 2%, in what was the most closely fought presidential contest in Brazil’s history.
Following that election, on 8 January 2023, supporters of Bolsonaro ransacked government buildings.
Jair Bolsonaro was barred from running for office again even before he began serving his prison sentence; he endorsed the candidacy of his eldest son, Flavio, in his place.
Jair Bolsonaro’s wife, Michelle, was also elected to the Senate on Sunday.
Flavio Bolsonaro has pledged that, if elected, he will pardon his father and the supporters responsible for the 8 January riots.
Bolsonaro is more popular in the southern regions, among wealthier voters, and among evangelical Christians.
In a statement on Sunday, Bolsonaro said he was “very happy” to have finished ahead of Lula in the first round and expressed confidence that he would secure victory in the run-off in three weeks.
“I am very happy about the real possibility that in three weeks Brazil will give a definitive answer by electing a modern government,” the right-wing politician said.
Lula acknowledged that the election result was “unexpected” but stressed that the race was not over.
Speaking on Sunday, Lula said: “I admit I was convinced I would win in the first round. The match is about to begin. We are in extra time. In extra time, we will win the hearts of the Brazilian people.”
During the campaign, President Lula made the issue of “sovereignty” a cornerstone of his platform, periodically accusing the US of attempting to interfere in and influence Brazil’s elections.
Lula pledged to increase defence spending.
Earlier this year, Flavio Bolsonaro persuaded the US to designate Brazil’s two largest gangs as “terrorist organisations”.
In July, Brazil refused to grant visas to two US State Department officials. Brazil alleged that these officials had sought to cast doubt on the country’s voting system, a claim the US termed “unfounded”.
This development followed claims that Flavio Bolsonaro told a group of foreign diplomats that Brazil’s voting machines shared the same origin as those in Venezuela.
Last year, Donald Trump used Jair Bolsonaro’s coup trial as a pretext to impose tariffs on Brazil and sanction several senior officials and judges.
Should Flavio Bolsonaro win, Brazil is likely to join the US “Shield of the Americas” coalition against drug trafficking and pursue closer cooperation with the US.
However, Bolsonaro has pledged to maintain an “economically pragmatic” relationship with China, which has overtaken the US as Brazil’s largest trading partner and remains a vital customer for Brazilian soy and beef exports.
Corruption became a central theme of the campaign following a scandal involving Daniel Vorcaro, a now-imprisoned banker who orchestrated one of Brazil’s largest financial frauds, entangling senior figures from across the political spectrum.
Flavio Bolsonaro acknowledged that he had sought financing from Vorcaro for a biographical film about his father.
Lula was indirectly touched by the scandal after police alleged that Vorcaro sought assistance from Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes to evade arrest. Moraes denies any wrongdoing.
Although Moraes was not appointed by Lula, he is viewed as an ally of the president because he presided over Jair Bolsonaro’s coup trial.
Crime and insecurity were also among the electorate’s foremost concerns. While Brazil’s homicide rate has fallen, street offences that are highly visible to voters, such as mobile phone theft, have risen.
Violence and drug trafficking continue to be viewed as major problems.
Flavio Bolsonaro has pledged to designate Brazilian gangs as terrorists and construct maximum-security prisons modelled on those in El Salvador.
His father relaxed gun-ownership restrictions during his presidency.
While Lula criticised the US designation of Brazilian gangs as terrorist organisations, he introduced several reforms aimed at disrupting the financial networks of organised crime syndicates, improving homicide investigations, and investing in prisons.
The economy was likewise at the centre of the campaign, amid high levels of personal debt and slowing growth.
Lula built his legacy through a series of social welfare programmes, most notably the Bolsa Familia initiative, which pays families conditional on keeping children in education and ensuring they receive healthcare such as vaccinations.
He also built more universities. These programmes were credited with lifting millions of Brazilians out of poverty.
He supported increased investment in data centres and rare earth minerals, where Brazil holds rich resources, securing active state participation to ensure Brazil benefits.
He also backed oil exploration near the mouth of the Amazon River, which drew controversy among environmentalists.
However, Lula possesses a track record of tightening environmental protections and reducing the deforestation rate in the Amazon.
Deforestation increased significantly during Jair Bolsonaro’s presidency.
Flavio Bolsonaro has pledged to introduce a cap on public debt, cut government spending, revise welfare programmes, and bolster the critical minerals sector.
Brazil accounts for approximately 31% of the total gross domestic product (GDP) of Latin America and the Caribbean.
Writing on his personal blog, Michael Roberts noted that Lula’s commitment to higher public spending was facing scrutiny.
According to Roberts, Lula’s advisers are secretly weighing cuts to healthcare services as well as benefits for the elderly and disabled.
Bolsonaro, meanwhile, is openly calling for significant cuts to social spending and public investment, accompanied by the privatisation of state assets.
According to Roberts, both candidates are discussing austerity because, despite an improvement in living standards during the first three years of Lula’s mandate, those gains began to erode last year.
Economic growth has fallen below an annual rate of 2%, while the manufacturing and industrial sectors are declining rapidly.
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoEast-West Forum in Istanbul highlights irreversible shift to multipolarity
-
Europe2 weeks agoEuropean unions urge governments to scrap all Palantir deals
-
Europe2 weeks agoEmmanuel Todd says West faces collapse amid Ukraine and Iran crises
-
Europe2 weeks agoRome protests AfD poster depicting South Tyrol as independent state
-
Europe1 week agoGerman interior ministers drop unanimity rule to counter AfD veto
-
Europe2 weeks agoGerman industry stockpiles critical minerals before EU-China talks
-
Europe1 week agoKey European allies excluded from US-led NATO meeting in Poland
-
Europe2 weeks agoHamburg drill tests Baltic deployment prior to formal defense alert
