Saturday, October 18, 2025

Polaris of Enlightenment

“After DCA: Open letter to Sweden Democrat grassroots”

The new cold war

The DCA agreement is the biggest political scandal since the Second World War, which means that foreign powers can now have military bases on Swedish soil. The Sweden Democrats has contributed to this, writes Björn Backengård.

Published 19 October 2024
Sweden Democrat leader Jimmie Åkesson.
5 minute read
This is an opinion piece. The author is responsible for the views expressed in the article.

If the Sweden Democrats had voted no to DCA, the issue would have been tabled, and the Swedish people would have had time to familiarize themselves with the issue. Members of the Swedish Parliament (Riksdag) were informed. On June 7, Svenska Dagbladet published the article Wait with decisions on American bases, and they received emails with tips about the article.

Here you can see how the Riksdag voted. Scroll down a bit and you will see a list of how each person voted.

What does DCA mean?

The DCA has nothing to do with NATO membership but is only a military agreement between the US and Sweden. The agreement is for ten years, which means that the US is allowed to have seventeen military bases in Sweden where they can also store military equipment. Their aircraft, ships and vehicles may move freely in the country. There are no guarantees that nuclear weapons will not be placed in Sweden.

The work on the agreement was started by the former Minister of Defense, Peter Hultqvist, and completed by the current Minister, Pål Jonson. The idea behind the DCA is that the US is planning war against Russia, and they want to be able to attack Russia from Sweden. The US can attack with aircraft or missiles. They avoid attacking from their own country, while any response from Russia impacts Sweden. This would drag Sweden into the USA’s war against Russia. This plan from the USA is diabolical, and unfortunately, there are people here in Sweden who have helped facilitate it.

Read the agreement here with some comments.

Response to an opinion poll

The Swedish Peace Council commissioned an opinion poll. The question was: Do you think that foreign powers should be allowed to place military and war material on Swedish military bases without Swedish supervision? 84% answered “No”.

The Sweden Democrats’ central office was informed of the opinion poll, and the following response was given:

Hello

… the starting point is that all activities are conducted with respect for Swedish sovereignty… [Regarding selected parts of the agreement: Economy, law, bases, nuclear weapons.]… the significantly deteriorating security situation in our region has necessitated a reevaluation of our foreign and defense policy.

Kind regards,

[First name]
Information assistant”

On Swedish sovereignty. It is abolished in point 7.3 of the agreement. Also paragraph 11.1 abolishes Swedish sovereignty: “[U.S.] aircraft, vessels, and vehicles may not be boarded or controlled without the consent of the United States.”

On deteriorating security policy developments. There is nothing in the agreement about US assistance. Instead, with American attacks from here, the security policy development will be much worse for us.

The full response from the Sweden Democrats can be read here. It was probably written by influential people at the top of the party, and it is cowardly that they do not sign their names.

On crimes against Sweden’s security

The human rights organization Accoun filed police reports on 13 December 2023 and 9 June 2024 about how DCA had come about. The reports have so far led nowhere, but they contain valuable material for further work against DCA. In the report, they drew our attention to the Criminal Code’s provisions on crimes against Sweden’s security.

DCA supporters try to bluff

The DCA supporters claim that Russia is threatening its surroundings. They mention Ukraine, Crimea and Georgia and then claim that US military bases are therefore needed in Sweden.

The war in Ukraine began in 2014 with the coup d’état in Kiev. The new regime then rearmed, and for several years bombed its own population in eastern Ukraine. In December 2021, Russia submitted proposals to the United States and NATO for agreements on security issues, but was rejected. On February 24, 2022, Russia entered Ukraine and in March there was a peace agreement that NATO blocked.

Crimea was annexed to Ukraine in 1954. In 2014, following a referendum, it applied to become part of Russia. Russia approved the application, protecting the Russian population and preventing its naval base on the Black Sea from becoming part of NATO.

The war in Georgia in August 2008 was not Russian aggression. See Swedish Wikipedia.

It is NATO that has been pushing against Russia and preparing for war in Ukraine for many years, as part of NATO’s plans to attack Russia. That’s the big picture in a nutshell.

The Sweden Democrats bylaws

We read in the Sweden Democrats bylaws, Chapter 1, General Statutes, § 1 Purpose and goals:

The Sweden Democrats are a social conservative party with a nationalist outlook … The party was formed in 1988 with the overall goal of forming a democratic, political movement that would safeguard the common national

identity … We affirm … proven well-functioning natural communities in the form of the family and the nation.”

Can a nationalist party really allow foreign powers to acquire military bases on Swedish soil?

Members’ power in the party

The Sweden Democrats grassroots can arrange for an extraordinary National Congress to be convened in order to replace the top members responsible for the party voting in favor of the DCA agreement.

Furthermore. Elections to the Riksdag will be held in the fall of 2026. The party candidates, and thus the ballots, will probably be decided in 2025 or early 2026. Then make sure that those who voted for the DCA agreement end up so far down the ballot that they do not enter the Riksdag again.

Collaboration is important

The purpose of the DCA is that the US wants to be able to attack Russia from Swedish soil, and thus the agreement is extremely dangerous for us. Therefore, we must seek cooperation in every possible way to terminate the agreement, preferably before the ten-year deadline. NATO supporters and opponents must work together. Most NATO supporters are peaceful, but unfortunately, they have not fully understood NATO’s militaristic nature. They can help against the DCA.

A renewed Sweden Democrats party should seek cooperation with the Left Party (V) and the Greens (MP) on the issue of DCA and apply something called a united front. This means that even if you are far apart politically, a particular issue may be so important that you work together on that particular issue to achieve results.

All avenues must be explored. It is possible to propose in the Riksdag that the Chancellor of Justice and the Constitutional Committee examine how the agreement was established, doing so in light of Chapter 19 of the Penal Code, and that as long as the review is ongoing, the agreement should not be valid.

Chapter 19:3 of the Penal Code states:

If a person assigned to negotiate on behalf of the realm with a foreign power, or otherwise to safeguard the interests of the realm with someone representing the interests of a foreign power, abuses their authority to represent the realm or otherwise misuses their position of trust, thereby causing significant harm to the realm, they shall be sentenced for disloyalty in negotiations with a foreign power to a fixed term of imprisonment, not less than two years and not more than eighteen years, or for life.

This is serious stuff.

Our times are dramatic, and a revitalized Sweden Democrats party can make a significant impact on Sweden.

 

Björn Backengård,
Hisings Backa, Gothenburg, Sweden

 

Translation by TNT editorial team.

The Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA) is a bilateral defense cooperation agreement between Sweden and the United States. It was approved by the Swedish Parliament on 18 June 2024.

The Sweden Democrats is the second largest party in the Swedish Riksdag. They are not part of the current "Tidö" government, but work closely with it.

TNT is truly independent!

We don’t have a billionaire owner, and our unique reader-funded model keeps us free from political or corporate influence. This means we can fearlessly report the facts and shine a light on the misdeeds of those in power.

Consider a donation to keep our independent journalism running…

Slovakia: EU must prioritize economy over Ukraine

The new cold war

Published yesterday 12:27
– By Editorial Staff
Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico's Slovakia is one of the few EU countries that has refused to deliver weapons to Ukraine and opposed Ukrainian NATO membership.
2 minute read

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico accuses the EU of concealing its own fundamental problems by constantly focusing on Ukraine – and refuses to discuss new Russia sanctions until the union’s economic crisis is taken seriously.

Ahead of next week’s European Council summit, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico is launching a frontal attack on the EU’s priorities. In a post on X, he states that the union’s constant focus on Ukraine masks its inability to handle the bloc’s own serious challenges.

At the summit, EU leaders are expected to discuss increased defense spending, military cooperation and continued support for Kyiv. But Fico argues this is happening at the expense of more urgent problems within the union.

“Not interested”

On Wednesday, the Slovak leader stated that he is “more and more convinced” that the EU, by “”constantly discussing Ukraine, we in the EU are covering up our inability to deal with our most fundamental challenges and problems”. He says he has raised the issue with European Council President António Costa.

Fico then issues an ultimatum:

— I am not interested in dealing with new sanctions packages against Russia until I see, in the conclusions of the EC summit, political instructions for the European Commission on how to address the crisis in the automotive industry and the high energy prices that are making the European economy completely uncompetitive.

Automotive industry and energy prices in focus

The criticism doesn’t come from nowhere when it comes to Slovakia. The country’s economy is heavily dependent on automobile manufacturing, a sector under severe pressure from EU green policies and global competition. At the same time, Slovakia remains heavily dependent on Russian gas and crude oil under long-term contracts, despite Brussels demanding a complete phase-out of Russian energy imports by 2027.

Bratislava plans to present more concrete proposals on the automotive sector and energy prices at the summit than what is currently in the draft conclusions.

Fico continued:

— I refuse to let such serious issues be handled in the EC conclusions with general phrases, while detailed decisions and positions are devoted to aid for Ukraine and support for the war.

Divergent line

Slovakia stands out among EU countries in its stance on the war in Ukraine. Unlike most member states, the country has refused to deliver weapons to Ukraine, opposed Ukrainian NATO membership and repeatedly turned against EU sanctions on Russia.

The majority of EU countries maintain that Western support for Ukraine must continue and support rapid military rearmament, citing the alleged threat from Russia. The Kremlin has dismissed these claims as “nonsense” and accuses Western governments of using them as a pretext for increased military spending.

Hegseth to Europe: Buy more American weapons for Ukraine

The war in Ukraine

Published 15 October 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Pete Hegseth together with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte.
2 minute read

Western military support to Ukraine has nearly halved over the summer. Now the US Secretary of Defense is demanding that NATO countries once again open their wallets for more American weapons deliveries – but several major European nations are hesitating.

Pete Hegseth had a clear message when he met with his NATO counterparts in Brussels on Wednesday: Europe must invest even more money in American weapons for Ukraine.

The US Secretary of Defense pointed to a report from the Kiel Institute for the World Economy showing that military support to Kiev fell dramatically during the summer months – a 43 percent decrease compared to the first half of the year.

Hegseth was explicit about his view on how peace is achieved.

— You get peace when you are strong. Not when you use strong words or wag your fingers, you get it when you have strong and real capabilities that adversaries respect, he declared to assembled journalists.

Zelensky wants more

At the center of discussions is the PURL program – Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List – which has fundamentally changed how the U.S. supports Ukraine militarily. Previously, Washington donated weapons directly, but now NATO countries must pay for the deliveries themselves.

According to Hegseth, the logic is simple: The more Europe buys, the faster the war can be concluded.

— Our expectation today is that more countries donate even more, that they purchase even more to provide for Ukraine, to bring that conflict to a peaceful conclusion, he said.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte announced that $2 billion has been pledged so far through the PURL system, and that he expects additional contributions. But the figure falls far short of the $3.5 billion that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky had hoped to secure by October.

Three countries made new pledges on Wednesday: Sweden, Estonia, and Finland. Corresponding commitments from European heavyweights such as Spain, Italy, France, and the United Kingdom are still lacking.

USA – the big winner?

The Russian government has accused Kiev’s European financiers of prolonging the conflict at the expense of Ukrainian lives, and Moscow claims that European countries are unwilling to acknowledge the failure of their strategy.

Meanwhile, European NATO members continue to bear the economic consequences of their sanctions policy against Russia. After rejecting Russian energy, many EU economies have been hit by rising production costs and widespread bankruptcies in industry.

The United States, however, has benefited from developments through increased investment flows and higher sales of liquefied natural gas to Europe.

“A celebration of peace – not a show of force”

The new cold war

Published 14 October 2025
An air echelon attends the victory day parade in Beijing , capital of China, September 3, 2025.
3 minute read
This is an opinion piece. The author is responsible for the views expressed in the article.

China’s Victory Day parade in early September drew wide attention both at home and abroad. While Chinese audiences saw it as a solemn moment of remembrance and confidence, some foreign media outlets rushed to label it a “show of force,” a “signal to the West,” or even evidence of new global division.

These interpretations ignore the deeper significance of the event and the consistent principles guiding China’s approach to global affairs.

At its heart, the parade was an act of remembrance—marking China’s victory in the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the global triumph over fascism. It was a tribute to the sacrifices of millions and a powerful reminder that peace is never easily won.

The presence of numerous foreign leaders in Beijing during the parade was a statement in itself. They were there not to take sides or escalate tensions, but to stand together in honoring the past and fostering a future built on peace. Their participation underscored a shared commitment to dialogue, not division.

Building capabilities to uphold principles

The weapons and equipment displayed at the parade should be understood within the framework of China’s long-standing defense policy, one based on peace and restraint.

Consider China’s nuclear posture: China remains the only nuclear-weapon state to publicly commit to a No-First-Use policy under any circumstances. This reflects a profound belief that nuclear weapons must never be used, and that a nuclear war can have no winners. China’s nuclear arsenal is kept strictly at the minimum level required for national security.

In terms of conventional forces, the unveiling of new-generation tanks, aircraft, and missile systems such as hypersonic weapons does showcase progress in China’s military modernization. Yet this progress is guided by a doctrine of active self-defense. These systems are designed to protect sovereignty and territorial integrity, not to project power globally. They serve as an anchor for national security and a stabilizer for regional security, deterring interference rather than provoking conflict.

The parade also featured unmanned and AI-enabled systems, highlighting China’s progress in technology and innovation. Importantly, this display went hand-in-hand with China’s call for international dialogue on regulating military uses of artificial intelligence. China has consistently advocated for a balanced approach—one that prevents misuse and humanitarian risks without stifling beneficial technological progress.

A message for the future

Yes, the parade was grand in scale. Yes, it displayed advanced weaponry systems. But above all, it conveyed a message of responsibility, transparency, and an enduring commitment to peace.

In times of rising mistrust and uncertainty, that message carries weight. The real choice before the international community is not between holding parades or staying silent, but between pursuing dialogue or confrontation, cooperation or suspicion. By honoring history and demonstrating its defensive posture, China has extended a hand of reassurance, not a fist of provocation.

The lesson of history is clear: peace is built through openness, cooperation, and mutual respect. This parade was, in that spirit, a step forward—a visible pledge of China’s dedication to a peaceful and stable world.

 

Hua Gesheng

About the author

Hua Gesheng is a commentator on international and multilateral affairs, writing regularly for Xinhua News Agency, Global Times, China Daily, CGTN, etc.

From trade war to industrial warfare – the battle for rare earth metals

The new cold war

Published 13 October 2025
– By Editorial Staff
China controls 90% of the world's rare earth metals, minerals found in everything from smartphones to fighter jets.
8 minute read

On October 10, China detonated a bomb – not with missiles, but with minerals. New export controls on rare earth metals now threaten to suffocate the entire global high-tech supply chain.

Two superpowers stand face to face in what has become an industrial war. The Nordic Times summarizes the dramatic escalation that has changed the playing field between the USA and China.

The development has been described by analysts as an “economic Pearl Harbor”. This is no longer just about trade policy countermeasures, but about mutual economic mass destruction where both sides are prepared to take major damage to win.

What began as a trade war about tariffs has transformed into a battle for control over the elements that drive the modern world.

What happened on October 10?

On October 10, 2025, China imposed new tightened export controls on rare earth metals and related technology. The regulations require special licenses for export of products containing more than 0.1% rare earth metals from China – or manufactured with Chinese production technology.

It sounds technical, but the implications are explosive. As journalist Mario Nawfal states: “That’s laptops, batteries, EVs – basically the modern world”.

With a stroke of the pen, Beijing gained veto power over large parts of the world’s high-tech production.

President Donald Trump responded within hours. He threatened an additional 100% tariffs on Chinese goods “on top of all tariffs they are currently paying,” with start on November 1. Trump called China’s move “absolutely unheard of in International Trade, and a moral disgrace”.

The market reaction was brutal – in a single day, $2 trillion in market value disappeared from American stock markets. The Dow Jones fell by 879 points (1.9%), the S&P 500 dropped 2.71%, and the Nasdaq plunged 3.56% – the worst days since April.

Why are rare earth metals so important?

To understand why the world now stands on the brink of an economic crisis, one must understand what rare earth metals are – and why China controls them.

China accounts for 70% of global rare earth metal mining and 90% of the world’s processing and refining. The country produces as much as 95% of the world’s rare earth magnets.

These minerals are used in everything from smartphones and electric vehicles to military equipment and renewable energy technology. Rare earth metals are critical components in advanced military technology – from fighter jets to submarines, these critical minerals power essential systems.

The figures are striking: A single F-35 fighter jet contains over 400 kg of rare earth metals, while a Virginia-class submarine requires a full 4,600 kg. Rare earth metals are also critical for medical technology in laser surgery and MRI scanning.

Already in 1992, the then Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping stated that “the Middle East has oil and China has rare earths”. It wasn’t just an observation – it was a long-term strategy that is now reaching its culmination.

From trade war to industrial war

The trade conflict between the USA and China began in 2018 during Donald Trump’s first presidential term, when the USA imposed tariffs on Chinese goods to limit the growing American trade deficit with China.

During the Joe Biden administration (2021-2025), the tensions continued, with Trump’s tariffs remaining and Biden imposing restrictions on American exports of technological knowledge and advanced chips to China.

When Trump returned to the White House in January 2025, the conflict quickly escalated. On April 2, 2025, during what Trump called “liberation day,” the USA imposed an additional 34 percent tariff, which increased the total tariff against China up to 54 percent.

China responded on April 4 with export restrictions on seven rare earth metals, and tariffs quickly escalated to a minimum of 145 percent during the spring, and stock markets nearly entered a bear market in April.

In May, the parties agreed to a ceasefire to negotiate a new trade agreement, and both China and the USA significantly reduced tariffs. In June, a framework agreement was concluded in which China committed to continue giving the green light for export of rare earth metals to the USA.

But the peace was fragile. In October 2025, China announced the strictest export controls on rare earth metals and permanent magnets to date – and the ongoing trade war transformed into something entirely different.

China’s new weapon

For the first time, China applied the so-called “foreign direct product rule” (FDPR) – a mechanism that the USA has long used to restrict semiconductor exports to China. Now China is turning the tables.

“Under the new regime, any product containing ≥0.1% Chinese rare earths or magnet material now requires a Chinese export license, even if it’s made abroad. In other words: if your phone, drone, or fighter jet includes Chinese-origin materials anywhere in its supply chain, Beijing gets a veto,” comments Mario Nawfal.

“This isn’t about dirt or ore – it’s about control of the midstream, where minerals become tech. The move turns rare earths into a geopolitical weapon”, he continues.

China doesn’t just control the mines, but the entire value chain from raw materials to finished products. And now that power is being used as a weapon.

AI and the defense industry in the crosshairs

The two biggest losers are expected to be the AI industry and the military-industrial complex. China’s new export controls stipulate that materials used for chip production below the 14 nanometer node must seek approval from China.

The nanometer node is a measure of how small the transistors in a chip are – the lower the number, the more advanced and powerful the technology, and modern AI and advanced military technology require chips below 14nm.

Even products with dual-use applications – that is, technology that can be used both civilly and militarily – must be approved. Beijing will decide each case individually.

This creates a potential bottleneck for the entire advanced chip supply chain. TSMC, the world’s largest contract manufacturer of semiconductors, is already prohibited from manufacturing chips below the 14nm node for China at the USA’s request.

Now China is reversing the logic: if we can’t get your most advanced chips anyway, maybe the world doesn’t need them either. China’s own chip manufacturer SMIC can produce equivalent 7nm to 5nm chips.

The stock market reaction showed which sectors are hit hardest. The technology and green energy sectors, both of which are heavily dependent on rare earth metals such as neodymium and dysprosium, bore the heaviest burden.

Nvidia fell by nearly 5 percent, AMD by 7.7 percent, and Tesla dropped over 5 percent. Chinese tech giants were hit even harder – Alibaba fell by 10 percent, Baidu over 8 percent, and JD.com by more than 6 percent.

USA’s desperate countermoves

Trump administration’s top officials have convened executives from technology and rare earth companies in an intensive effort to accelerate the development of the entire supply chain for domestic production.

“The Pentagon launched a $1 billion buying spree to stockpile cobalt, antimony, scandium, and other critical minerals – a modern version of Cold War hoarding”, states Nawfal.

In July 2025, the Department of Defense (recently renamed the Department of War) invested $400 million in equity in MP Materials, making the US government the company’s largest shareholder. The deal also includes a 10-year price floor of $110 per kilogram for the company’s NdPr products.

But reality is brutal: even when these facilities are fully operational, MP Materials will only produce 1,000 tons of neodymium-boron-iron magnets by the end of 2025 – less than 1 percent of the 138,000 tons that China produces.

American officials have acknowledged that the overall effort will still take time and therefore leave the country and its allies vulnerable to Xi’s strategic whims in the short term.

“But time is China’s ally. The U.S. can’t build refining and magnet plants overnight, and global alternatives (Australia, Brazil, India) remain in early stages”, argues Mario Nawfal further.

A new geopolitical reality

A former White House advisor warned that China’s strict controls on rare earth metals represent “the power to forbid any country on Earth from participating in the modern economy”.

The market reaction reveals something fundamentally new: the divergence between the dollar and gold shows that markets are now trading tariffs as if they’re striking back against the USA, not against the rest of the world.

During previous crises, the dollar has strengthened as a safe haven – now it’s falling instead.

The trade wars are an expression of a deeper power struggle between the USA and China that has the potential to shake the world economy and create a new international order.

Mario Nawfal summarizes: “Beijing’s goal isn’t total collapse – it’s pressure through precision. By tightening supply just enough to make the West sweat, China gains leverage”.

What happens now?

Trump threatened to cancel his planned meeting with China’s President Xi Jinping at the APEC summit in South Korea on October 31-November 1, although he later clarified that he had not completely cancelled the meeting but was uncertain whether it would take place.

Both Trump and Xi Jinping under no circumstances want to appear weak, which especially applies to Xi Jinping and the Communist Party, which bases its power position on having made China strong and standing up to Western nations.

China’s Ministry of Commerce said in a statement: “China’s stance is consistent – we do not want a tariff war but we are not afraid of one”.

The 100% tariffs are set to take effect on November 1 – or earlier. The Pentagon is buying critical minerals in panic, allied countries are rushing to build alternative supply chains, and stock markets around the world are holding their breath.

Nawfal concludes his analysis with a grim prognosis: “This isn’t a tariff skirmish anymore – it’s a war over the atoms that make the modern world spin. Forget trade war. This is industrial warfare… and both sides are ready to bleed to win”.

The question is who can endure the pain the longest.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
Consider a donation.

You can donate any amount of your choosing, one-time payment or even monthly.
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Dont miss another article!

Sign up for our newsletter today!

Take part of uncensored news – free from industry interests and political correctness from the Polaris of Enlightenment – every week.