The post PMQs Badenoch brands Labour government as ‘like the Soviets won’ appeared first on Conservative Home.

Source link

Social and environmental causes are being positioned as close to the hearts of modern-day Royals. But given their enormous wealth and persistently high environmental footprint – amidst ongoing revelations about how much they extract from the public purse – how does this claim stack up?

The Royal assets

Prince William is set to sell off a fifth of the Duchy of Cornwall, raising money “to build homes and help nature”. Announcing this ten-year ambition in the Times earlier this week, its Chief Executive claimed that the Duchy:

should first and foremost exist to have a positive impact on the world.

Not many would disagree that Royal assets could – or should – be directed towards making the world a better place. But how much do the Royals currently benefit from all the resources afforded to them, and how does that compare to the good this does for people and the planet?

The Duchy of Cornwall, created as a source of income for the male heir to the throne, is an enormous portfolio of land worth over £1 billion. It’s estimated to earn Prince William over £20 million each year. Similarly, the Duchy of Lancaster provides an annual sum now approaching £30 million that flows directly to the King. This is on top of the Sovereign grant that the monarchy receives from the government, which has risen sharply in recent years, approaching £140 million in 2026/7.

Beyond these reported sources of income, the Royal Family do not share details of their inherited or privately earned wealth, but this is evidently immense: they own three private estates, which between them occupy more land than Birmingham, as well as extensive collections of jewels, art and more. Their postage stamp collection alone is valued at over £100 million, about 200 times what the average person in the UK earns in a lifetime.

Talking the talk…

So what do the Royals do with the astonishing amount of wealth and land under their control?

Whilst some of their money appears to be channelled towards well-meaning causes, how much remains unclear. The foundations fronted by the Royals, such as the King’s Trust and the Earthshot Prize, are well-publicised for their charitable work, but aren’t solely financed by the Royals themselves – they’re vehicles that redistribute donations and grants from a range of sources.

As large private landlords, both Duchies emphasise their:

commitment to local communities, economies and the natural environment.

But this is hard to reconcile with the profits made from tenants that have included state schools, the NHS and charities, nor the £1.5 million a year they receive renting out an empty prison to the government.

Whilst they act as patrons for nature charities and support several ecosystem restoration projects, the Royals are regularly criticised for the harm they cause to the UK’s nature. This includes presiding over the destruction of our seabed and their penchant for killing wild animals.

The sustainability data reported for activities funded by the Sovereign Grant alone shows the Royals shifting to buying renewable electricity, but does not provide any evidence of significant changes in their consumption, waste or carbon emissions. State-funded “business travel” by the Royals has risen each year since Charles became King, and resulted in the equivalent of 1,900 tonnes of CO₂ emissions last year. That’s like taking five economy-class flights between London and New York every single day.

…but the action does not match

There’s perhaps no starker symbol of UK inequality than the Royal Family living lives of such obvious excess, while an estimated 30% of children live in poverty. And for an institution that benefits so significantly from a legacy of colonialism and slavery, the idea that the Royals are doing anywhere near enough to address systemic injustice is hard to swallow.

And to show the kind of environmental leadership often ascribed to them, they would need to go far, far beyond buying solar panels, planting hedgerows, and adjusting the fuel guzzled by Royal helicopters.

Ecologist Prof James Bullock, who has previously campaigned for the Royals to rewild their land, said:

The UK is one of the most biodiversity depleted countries in the world. To start reversing that and to help adapt to climate change we need to give large areas of land and sea back to nature, as well as use farmland and other productive land more sustainably. The Royals, with their huge landholdings and wealth should be taking a lead on this necessary transition rather than tinkering around the edges.

Commenting on William’s recent announcement in the context of the Royal’s historical land-grabbing, Bullock also said:

The Prince is selling land appropriated from the nation. It would be more appropriate if he gave it back.

Featured image via Aaron Chown – WPA Pool / Getty Images

By Abi Perrin

Source link

If I ever had doubts about how protestors at Saturday’s Unite the Kingdom rally feel about Muslims (which I don’t), they were quickly laid to rest as my Instagram timeline flooded with photographs and videos of incendiary – and sometimes bizarre – anti-Muslim displays of behaviour, which included a Korean musician playing the cello while wearing strips of bacon on his shoulders, before shaking hands with Tommy Robinson on stage and announcing:

I may be hung like a chipmunk, but I’ve got enough balls to fight Islam.

I’m sorry, Mr. Cellist, but crispy cured pork will not result in me fainting or repel me back into the shadows like a vampire exposed to garlic. I also found his self-denegrating joke about the size of his package to be, in all honesty, quite sad. It plays into racist Western stereotypes about Asian men that have sought to emasculate them. It was an example of the ways in which people of colour belittle themselves to fit into white-dominated spaces. But I digress.

Saturday’s march was less ‘Unite the Kingdom’ and more ‘Unite the fight against Islam’ – the crusader references at the march were too many count. Far-right racists often accuse British Muslims like me of playing the victim card, but never has there been more blatant hatred for Islam on display than there was at Saturday’s march, which one attendee called ‘an incredible family day out in London‘ in a post on Facebook group Britain’s Voice, showing just how polarised British society has become. I am not sure you can call a rally where a 15-year-old girl was sexually harassed on camera ‘family friendly.’

However, the cherry on the top was Collectif Némésis’ niqab stunt.

Unite the Kingdom: an anti-Islam trope as old as time

Three members of the French right-wing ‘feminist’ group – I am intentionally putting the word feminist in quotation marks – took to the stage during last Saturday’s rally clad in black niqabs (the Islamic face veil) and abayas (an over garment worn by some Muslim women) before whipping them off in unison to a crowd of jeering men yelling “take it off.” How very feminist of them.

Not only was Collectif Némésis’s stunt reductive, resorting to the use of Muslim women’s clothing yet again as a symbol of what they perceive to be oppression, which is an anti-Islam trope as old as time, but by politicising our clothing and placing us on the frontline of their racist, bigoted political agenda, they are endangering us. And endangering fellow women isn’t very feminist, is it?

Muslim women bear the brunt of anti-Muslim hatred

The intent is clear: to stoke racist tensions by reinforcing the pernicious view of Islam as an oppressive force against women. And it is Muslim women who bear the brunt of these tensions.

It is well-documented that anti-Muslim hatred is gendered, with more Muslim women in Britain experiencing anti-Muslim harassment and hate crimes than Muslim men. Arguably, that’s because the hijab makes us more visibly Muslim. According to Tell MAMA, a non-governmental organisation monitoring anti-Muslim hatred in the UK, 65% of Islamophobic incidents in cities happen to girls and women, and stunts like the one Collectif Némésis pulled off last Saturday just embolden those who seek to harm Muslim women.

The consequences are serious; last month John Ashby was given a life sentence for raping and strangling a Sikh Woman last October in Walsall who he thought was a Muslim woman.

Mainstream British media outlets also bear some responsibility for the entitlement and impunity the far right feel when it comes to expressing their hatred towards Muslim women. When it comes to media coverage of the hatred that was openly expressed towards Muslims and Islam last Saturday, all you can hear are crickets.

Collectif Némésis’s actions contradict feminism

Then, there is the anti-feminist aspect of Collectif Némésis’s pathetic burlesque. The three French activists can be seen in the video encouraging the men in the audience to shout, ‘Take it off.’ The sexual objectification of women via the removal of clothing is misogyny at its finest. It also plays into the Orientalist and colonialist-era obsession that some white men in the West have with unveiling Muslim women. As a visibly Muslim woman, I feel equally hated and fetishised by far-right white men.

Collectif Némésis claims to be a feminist group, but really what they exhibited at the Unite the Kingdom rally was their blatant support for Britain’s misogynistic, patriarchal far-right movement whom, if they were to gain power, would rescind women’s rights. According to Politico, one in three Reform supporters are fans of Tommy Robinson, a party that has spoken about repealing the Equality Act 2010, imposing a tax on childless women, and lowering the legal abortion limit, among calls for a return to traditional family values reminiscent of The Handmaid’s Tale. Women who degrade, ridicule, and harm other women to win the approval of the same men who would hurt them, are, what queer feminist activist and writer Mona Eltahawy calls: foot soldiers of the patriarchy.

Right-wing women like those who are members of Collectif Némésis hide behind the guise of feminism and ‘liberating’ Muslim women. They have absolutely no interest in making life better for Muslim women; their hatred is one and the same.

Featured image via Instagram/CNN News 18

By Yousra Samir Imran

Source link

Yves Sakila, a 35-year-old Black Congolese man who has lived in Ireland for more than 20 years, has been killed in a horrific encounter with a team of brutish security guards in Dublin.

Video footage from 15 May shows a group of five men holding Sakila down with what is clearly excessive force. All five men are placing their weight on the grounded man, who is not providing any meaningful resistance. At one point, one of those on top places his knee forcefully into the back of Sakila’s neck.

The footage closely resembles the appalling racist murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis, US, in 2020.

In media reporting of the Dublin incident, the phrase “became unresponsive” is applied to Sakila. It is the same passive voice framing so often used for police killings as if victims’ sudden loss of life was a spontaneous incident unrelated to the actions of anyone else. The evidence strongly indicates the men restraining Sakila caused his death.

Sakila mourners: ‘Don’t whitewash this crime’

People mourning his death held a vigil at the scene of the crime on Henry Street on Tuesday. There, a woman can be heard demanding:

We want the media to say that a man was killed. We want the media to cover what happened…we want justice.

Another man berates the media present and insists they cover the incident properly, and be on the side of justice. The likes of RTÉ and the Irish Times have referenced the claim that the five-man assault of Sakila occurred in the context of an alleged shoplifting incident. They have not emphasised that even if Sakila had been accused of murdering someone, the nature of restraint the men used had no justification.

The Irish Times at least made some limited attempt to humanise Sakila, who was homeless. Quoting staff at the Salvation Army shelter where he lived, the Irish Times wrote:

Staff described him as a “pleasant and quiet” resident who had a “deep interest in technology and sometimes attended prayer services”.

They also quote a mourner at the vigil, Boma Biansolo, who said:

I came here because…my brother [died] here on Friday and no one tried to help him or save him…Of course I am scared for my son because that happened.

This is another disturbing aspect of Sakila’s killing — the fact he was assaulted while a large crowd of people looked on and did nothing to assist him as he clearly cried out in distress. It poses disturbing questions for Irish society, especially in the context of Bertie Ahern’s recent disgusting racist remarks.

Speaking on the doorstep of a potential voter who was vomiting out a torrent of xenophobic bile, Ahern said:

The ones I worry about are the Africans. I agree with you on the Africans. We can’t be taking in people from the Congo and all these places. I think there’s too many from those places.

Killing follows racist remarks from Bertie Ahern

It would be excessive to directly blame Ahern for Yves Sakila’s death. However, such remarks, made often enough by influential people, create a racist culture in which violence against people of colour becomes more frequent.

Eoghan Ó Ceannabháin, of People Before Profit, emphasised this.

He said:

Immigrants are facing increasing hostility and fear of attack created by far-right groups, but also by anti-immigrant government policies and rhetoric. Bertie Ahern’s recent comments were a shameful example of how government parties are fanning the flames of anti-immigrant hatred to divert from their own disastrous policies. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael bear heavy responsibility for the fear immigrant communities have to live with today.

In a statement, Shane O’Curry, of Irish Network Against Racism (INAR), said:

The death of a black man in such circumstances is extremely worrying, and we urge the authorities to thoroughly investigate all of the circumstances leading to this man’s death, in order to ensure minority ethnic community confidence in the criminal justice system.

The group is calling on supporters to attend a protest organised by the Congolese community in Ireland. It will take place at the Dáil at 1pm on Thursday 21 May.

Featured image via the Canary

By Robert Freeman

Source link

AI has outpaced us, thinks faster, scales wider, comprehends more. To cede cultural, emotional, and imaginative labor to algorithms is not progress; it is capitulation. Automated search engines or text-to-image prompt-to-creation systems are not just about machines; they now involve the executives, institutions, and stakeholders who determine how, where, and why these technologies are deployed.

When state companies and nation-state enterprises opt for the shortcut of AI-generated content in public communication and cultural production, the consequences go beyond the aesthetic and strike deeply at the level of meaning. It broadcasts a message louder than any campaign: that authentic creative labor is dispensable. Meanwhile, advocates argue that AI literacy should be treated as a public infrastructure issue, on par with education or access to information, to make society more resilient to systems capable of influencing our decisions and emotions. 

Yet removing human accountability breeds monsters: it undermines professional environments, disrupts competitive fields, and gradually erodes the human sense of initiative and creativity day by day. What was once a subculture, a shared resource, one requiring careful stewardship and limited use, is being transformed into an infrastructure of extraction and efficiency. 

Its social, cultural, and environmental costs are increasingly displaced outward, absorbed quietly by those who neither built it nor were consulted in its redesign. This shift, however, is not simply the result of technological inevitability or bad intentions. Rather, it extends to the gradual marginalisation of professional and creative roles in favour of optimised, automated services that quietly reconfigure the fabric of human work, expertise, and value.

Education integrated with AI

In China, university students now face educational landscapes stripped of artistic practice. Local universities that are less hesitant shutter arts degrees in the name of AI’s march. 

As reported by Al Jazeera’s Katrina Yu, such decisions render humans into passive bystanders. Moreover, the kinds of careers these students will pursue are increasingly shaped – or deformed – by this shift, ultimately orienting them away from traditional approaches to creative and performative work.

An open letter signed by some students of the university began circulating on social media. As a reaction to this outspoken strategy by the Chinese academic system, students reacted: 

When we saw the news, we were completely stunned. We applied to the Communication University because of these programmes. Now they’re being cut just like that. Will our diplomas still be recognised? What will happen to our remaining classes? And when we apply for jobs after graduation, will potential employers think we have also been eliminated in this game since our majors have been scrapped?

Once that path is normalized, it is unclear whether we, or our children, will recognize the contours of human creativity at all in the same way as we once did.

AI and the Performing Arts

AI is now also capable of generating avatars, songs, scripts, and even entire stage narratives. 

Fabrice Laffon is living proof of a professional exploring this new frontier of art and digital automation. He is the director of the legendary Madame Arthur, Pigalle’s historic drag cabaret. The troupe’s communications team unveiled Data von Tana, an AI-generated entity, at the beginning of April, signaling a subtle but profound shift in the cabaret’s artistic tone. 

Arkadi Zaides’ theatrical performance The Cloud is unique: much of the creative work – editing, staging, even the act of performance – is executed by artificial intelligence itself, rather than by the performer or the artist. If even learning to act can be algorithmically optimized and distributed at scale, the very foundation upon which theatre and performative arts stand begins to wobble.

Only by keeping firmly in mind that human creativity and AI literacy can and must coexist without machines “tricking” people will it be possible to manage the automation processes of contemporary society. Difficult? Yes, but our survival as human beings depends on our ability to assist human decision-making, never to replace it. 

The real question is not whether AI can replace performance, but whether enough people will stop caring about the difference to make replacement economically sufficient. That is a cultural question, not a technological one, and it is considerably more disturbing.

Featured image via Hollie Adams / Getty Images

By Tommaso Zerbi

Source link

Arsenal have ended a 22‑year wait for the top-flight title, finally turning near-misses into silverware under Mikel Arteta. The Gunners sealed the 2025/26 Premier League crown after Manchester City drew 1-1 at Bournemouth, a result that handed Arsenal the trophy with one game to spare.

How it happened

Arsenal led the table for much of the season, then weathered a tense April that threatened to derail their bid.

A 2-1 defeat at Manchester City looked like a momentum shift, but Arteta’s side steadied, kept their nerve and capitalised when City failed to win at Everton and Bournemouth. The draws mathematically ended Arsenal’s long wait for a league title.

What it means for the club

This is Arsenal’s first league title since the Invincibles season of 2003/04.

Beyond the nostalgia, the victory marks the end of a run of three consecutive second-place finishes and a six-year trophy drought.

For Arteta, it’s his second major honour as manager at the Emirates and a vindication of a project built on structure, discipline and a clear identity.

The squad and style

Arsenal’s season was defined by a compact, resilient unit rather than a single superstar explosion.

The defence proved the backbone of the campaign, while key midfield signings and tactical tweaks allowed the team to grind out results when flair alone wasn’t enough.

The balance between organisation and attacking intent gave them the consistency required over 38 games.

The moment and the reaction

Players and staff celebrated at London Colney as the final whistle blew at Bournemouth. Social media and former figures associated with the club joined the chorus of congratulations.

The club will lift the trophy after their final game of the season at Crystal Palace, a formal coronation to match the long, patient build-up.

What’s next

Arsenal now head into the Champions League final against PSG in Budapest with momentum and belief.

The European final represents a chance to add a historic first Champions League trophy to the season’s haul and to cement this campaign as a genuine turning point for the club.

Quick takeaways

• End of an era: First league title since 2004; the Invincibles’ shadow finally lifted.
• Managerial milestone: Arteta’s project reaches a major peak; continuity rewarded.
• Team effort: Defence and midfield balance carried the campaign; collective over individual.
• Still to play for: Champions League final against PSG offers a chance for a double.

Arsenal’s title feels like the payoff for a long, methodical rebuild: smart recruitment, a clear tactical identity and a manager who learned from setbacks. The celebrations will be loud, but the real test is whether this becomes a launchpad for sustained dominance or a glorious peak.

Either way, north London has its crown back and the club’s next chapter starts with a trophy in hand and a European final on the horizon.

Featured image via Julian Finney / Getty Images

By Faz Ali

Source link

President Donald Trump has finally delivered on his promise a decade ago: He has made Republicans “so sick and tired of winning.”

The winning — a series of retributive primary challenges this month that settled scores up to five years old — has led to a fresh round of chest-thumping from MAGA allies boasting about their victories in Indiana, Louisiana and Kentucky.

Trump ended his vendetta spring Tuesday by dropping a two-stage MAGA bomb, backing Attorney General Ken Paxton for Senate in Texas on the same day he ushered Rep. Thomas Massie to the exits in Kentucky.

But the revenge tour is increasingly imperiling Trump’s midterm agenda on the Hill.

That’s because for every apostate ousted by Trump this month, there’s a sign of not only his waning political capital on the Hill, but that his backward-focused endeavors have damaged his own legislative ambitions, leaving him a victim of his own primary success.

“Those so-called victories over the last couple weeks are just a mirage. They are self-owns,” said one senior Senate Republican operative, granted anonymity to speak candidly about frustration with the White House. “We’re not actually beating Democrats, and we’re not actually advancing legislation. Instead, gas is up 45% due to our actions and the President’s decision to go to war with Iran. He’s focused on the ballroom. He’s announced a $1.8 billion restitution fund with zero details or congressional authority to do so. It just is crazy.”

In just one day, a conquered — and, consequently, unbridled — Sen. Bill Cassidy joined Democrats to become the 50th yes vote on a war powers resolution, opposed Trump’s ballroom funding in reconciliation and called Trump’s freshly picked Paxton a “felon.” And that was just day three of Cassidy unchained.

Cassidy is not alone. Trump’s ballroom funding is stalled, the SAVE America Act is mired in the Senate and Majority Leader John Thune is pushing back on his desire to fire the parliamentarian. That’s not to mention the pushback even from the likes of the friendlier senator from Louisiana, John Kennedy, who expressed doubt about the Justice Department’s $1.8 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund.

“There are still many, many months to go before the election, and this president is going to have to continue to deal and work with, and partner with, or battle with this group of lawmakers,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska told reporters Tuesday. “Even though Bill Cassidy lost his primary, he is still a voting member of the Senate until January. … So the president may have just opened some opportunities for people.”

Now Cornyn could join their ranks. After Trump endorsed Paxton, the senior Texas senator faces increasingly slim chances of surviving next week’s runoff election. Should he lose, Cornyn will be liberated to vote his conscience — unmoved by threats of further political vengeance from Trump — for the final months of his term.

“What is the return on investment for Trump?” said Greg Lamantia, a Texas businessman who supports Cornyn, about Trump’s Paxton endorsement. “I don’t understand why you take this risk, versus sitting back and doing nothing. Now you’ve created an enemy for six months, when you have a razor-thin majority.”

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

Come November, if Paxton loses to state Rep. James Talarico, this week and Trump feeling himself after victories in Indiana and Louisiana could be remembered as the week where he overreached.

“Some of the issues I hear about when I’m at home in the grocery store, in the hardware store, are not the same issues we’re talking about in Washington, so I think it’s really important that we prioritize what people are talking about,” said Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo).

That daylight between Trump’s priorities and the top issues for voters is widening. The economy and cost of living remain voters’ top priorities, even as patience for the Iran war wavers. And though Trump has flexed his electoral muscle in primary after primary, his endorsement may hurt more than it helps in battleground races this November, according to a recent analysis from The POLITICO Poll.

“It seems to me his agenda is mostly vengeance,” said former Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), who spent 15 months as a vocal Trump critic after deciding not to run for reelection during Trump’s first term. “It’s not just those that he’s going after he’s gonna have to deal with — Massie and Cornyn and Cassidy — it’s anybody who’s gotten past the filing deadline, or past their primary, and realizing that supporting a lot of what he wants is not good for the general election.”

At the end of a month that put on full display Trump’s dominance over his own party, his season of settling scores may not have advanced the ball toward November.

That dynamic could pose a problem for Republicans, Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley told POLITICO. “Congress doesn’t do much,” he said.

“In November, voters are going to say to Congress, ‘What have you done for me?’ And it’s not going to be enough to say that, ‘Well, you know, we liked some stuff President Trump did, but we didn’t do any of it,’” Hawley said. “I mean, we better do some stuff.”

What does it mean that Trump has vanquished his foes at the expense of his own agenda?

“It means President Trump and his team have completely lost sight of how DC operates and why the American people elected him in the first place,” said the senior Senate Republican operative.

Last year, chief of staff Susie Wiles told Vanity Fair that she had a “loose agreement that the score settling will end before the first 90 days are over.” That was 395 days ago.

Dasha Burns and Ali Bianco contributed to this report.

Source link

Fenerbahçe players celebrated the Turkish Women’s Football League title amid remarkable scenes that included raising the Palestinian flag during the coronation ceremony. The moment received widespread interaction across social media.

Both Zeynep Kerimoglu and Ipek Kaya were seen raising the Palestinian flag inside the stadium during the celebrations.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by @celebrities4palestine

Other clips showed a number of the team’s players celebrating the title with the Palestinian flag after the end of the coronation ceremony. Observers considered this to be a continuation of the frequent presence of Palestinian symbolism inside Turkish stadiums and sports celebrations during recent times.

This comes days after a similar scene during Galatasaray’s celebrations of the Turkish league title, when French player Sacha Boey, 24, stole the show after appearing draped in the Palestinian flag on Friday evening.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by عين على فلسطين | Eye on Palestine (@eye.on.palestine)

Turkish stadiums have witnessed several similar situations in recent months, both from fans and players, in support of Palestine and the Gaza Strip.

Turkish Parliament speaker supports Lamine Yamal

Politician Numan Kurtulmus, who is speaker of the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye, praised Barcelona right winger Lamine Yamal for his anti-genocide stance. Yamal raised the Palestinian flag during his team’s celebrations of the Spanish League title and faced condemnation from Israeli officials for doing so.

Kurtulmus said Yamal had taken a “humanitarian stance” by supporting Gaza despite the pressure, adding that the player had become “the greatest football player humanity has ever known”.

He also attacked Israeli defence minister, Israel Katz, for his criticism of Yamal, while praising the prime minister of Spain, Pedro Sanchez, for backing the 18-year-old footballer.

Featured image via Instagram/ celebrities4palestine

By Alaa Shamali

Source link

Aston Villa head into the Europa League final against Freiburg with a clear sense of purpose and a manager whose record in this competition is unmatched in recent years. The club have already secured Champions League football for next season, and the final in Istanbul represents an opportunity to add a major trophy to a season that has exceeded many expectations.

Experience at the helm

Unai Emery’s presence is the defining factor for Villa in this fixture. He arrives in his sixth Europa League final, having won the competition multiple times with other clubs and lost once in a high-profile defeat.

That history matters less as a tally and more as evidence of his familiarity with the tactical and psychological demands of European finals. Emery himself has downplayed any notion of entitlement, stressing that past success does not guarantee victory with this squad; he has framed the match as a new chapter that must be earned by the current group of players.

Villa players and pundits have been consistent in their praise for Emery’s influence. Striker Ollie Watkins has highlighted the transformation in belief and style since Emery’s arrival, pointing to the team’s cohesion and the work done on the training ground. Former players and commentators have also noted that Emery’s attention to detail and his ability to prepare teams for one-off European nights make him an ideal coach for this occasion.

Freiburg: the underdog with clear strengths

Freiburg arrive in Istanbul as a side that has outperformed many expectations. The German club have combined a compact defensive structure with creative attacking outlets, and their route to the final has included results against established Bundesliga opponents.

Key figures for Freiburg include experienced defender Matthias Ginter, creative midfielder Johan Manzambi, and long-serving forward Vincenzo Grifo, whose goals and influence have been central to their run. Observers warn that Freiburg should not be underestimated; their balance and the form of certain individuals make them a genuine threat.

Tactically, Freiburg have tended to use a 4-2-3-1 shape for much of their domestic campaign, which has allowed them to be compact without the ball and fluid in transition. That structure will test Villa’s midfield control and the ability of Emery’s side to create and exploit space in wide and central areas.

What Villa must do to win

Villa’s path to success in the final is straightforward in concept but demanding in execution. They must combine the defensive organisation that has improved under Emery with the attacking fluidity that has produced notable results in the Premier League and Europe. Controlling the midfield, limiting Freiburg’s counter-attacking opportunities, and ensuring clinical finishing from chances created will be decisive.

Set-pieces and transitions are likely to be key moments. Villa’s ability to press and force errors, then convert those moments into goals, will test Freiburg’s discipline. Equally, Villa must guard against individual moments of quality from Grifo and Manzambi, who can change a game with a single action.

Atmosphere, stakes and perspective

For Aston Villa supporters, this is the club’s first major European final since 1982, and the occasion carries emotional weight for the fanbase and the city.

The club’s recent progress and securing Champions League qualification establishes a consistent top-level presence, which means the final is also a logical next step rather than an isolated peak. For Emery, adding silverware would be another milestone in a project that has already shifted Villa’s trajectory.

Emery’s own words ahead of the match were measured and forward-looking; as he put it:

It’s going to be a special day.

That short line captures both the significance of the occasion and the coach’s attempt to keep focus on the task rather than the narrative of his past achievements.

Final thought

The Europa League final between Aston Villa and Freiburg presents a clear contrast: a club on the rise under a manager with a proven European blueprint, versus a disciplined and spirited Bundesliga side that has earned its place through collective effort.

The match will be decided by preparation, composure in key moments, and the ability of both teams to impose their preferred style.

For Villa, the chance to convert a season of progress into tangible silverware is real; for Freiburg, the opportunity to complete a remarkable campaign is equally compelling.

Featured image via Francisco Seco – Pool / Getty Images

By Faz Ali

Source link

At a time when Western media and political discourse insist on marketing the narrative that the Russian-Ukrainian conflict has settled into a permanent stalemate and a mutual swamp of attrition, facts on the ground reveal a completely different trajectory.

This prevailing perception represents a flawed strategic reading: Russia has not merely managed a local war of attrition, but has used it as a historical lever to massively restructure its military and industrial power. Today, the result is manifested in a decisive Russian superiority in the defence.

By manufacturing war, and through intensive preparation for a potential (and more conventional) confrontation with NATO, Russia reveals how the European continent is structurally helpless, militarily depleted, and unqualified to fight a conflict of this scale.

The Russian Military-Industrial Revolution: The Numbers Speak

The first of these leaps was manifested in human mobilisation and structural expansion, as the size of the Russian army jumped from 900,000 soldiers on the eve of the conflict’s outbreak to 1.6 million, with a relentless target of reaching a solid regular force of 2.2 million troops. This increase is supported by a complex logistical infrastructure and deep strategic stockpiles of conventional and advanced ammunition, which are capable of sustaining various large-scale emergencies.

Reflecting plans for a long-term confrontation with NATO, Russia has established the ‘New Leningrad Military District‘ along the Finnish border. This district includes a massive military corps, which some analyses estimate to be between 20,000 and 70,000 soldiers, formed by merging and expanding Soviet-era units, depots, and military enclaves in Karelia and Murmansk. On completion, this would produce an integrated front equipped and ready to fight a wide-ranging conventional war.

On the drone warfare and ‘aerial flooding’ strategy front, Russia has tripled the area of its Shahed-136 manufacturing facilities (known in Russia as ‘Geranium’) outside the city of Kazan. Although official documents and conservative estimates indicate production rates ranging between 100 and 600 drones per day (averaging 4,500 drones per month, with the ability to mobilize 1,000 drones in concentrated attacks), the entry of advanced jet-powered generations into service gives Moscow the future capability to raise the pace of attacks to record levels, aimed at completely paralysing Western air defences.

European Fragility: Feeble Armies and Empty Depots

On the flip side, generous and continuous support for Kyiv has emptied the conventional weapons and interceptor missile depots of European nations, exposing sharp structural flaws in the continent’s military readiness.

The United Kingdom, for example, suffers from a severe depletion of resources that prevents it from concluding major new heavy equipment procurement deals until 2030. A striking numerical shrinking has also left the entire British Army small enough to fit inside a modern football stadium, with thousands of empty seats remaining.

As for France, despite the efficiency of its forces, it lacks domestic logistical sustainability and strategic airlift capabilities, leaving it unable to deploy more than 7,000 troops to any external theatre of operations without declaring general mobilisation.

In Germany, despite the allocation of a €111 billion special fund in 2022 to modernise the army, bureaucracy and political divisions have prevented tangible results. Berlin’s plans to deploy a military brigade to Lithuania face logistical obstacles, immense pressure on production lines, and delayed contracts as a result of the war’s repercussions and the tremendous strain the defence industry is undergoing following the war in Ukraine.

The most dangerous vulnerability lies in the fact that Europe today does not possess a real air defence umbrella capable of withstanding a sustained Russian flooding attack of drones and updated cruise missiles, such as the ‘Iskander-K‘ and hypersonic systems. This imbalance has enabled Russia to possess a conventional destructive capability that could level Europe’s strategic infrastructure, with no equivalent conventional deterrence options available to the West.

The Deterrence Dilemma and Breaking Red Lines

For decades, European security doctrine has been built on the sanctity of ‘Article 5‘ of the NATO Treaty and the American nuclear umbrella. However, these calculations face a fatal logical challenge today.

Washington has sent a clear message that any Russian use of tactical nuclear weapons inside Ukraine would be met with a conventional US response using long-range missiles – the very same missiles whose stockpiles the West has critically depleted.

Should Russia launch overwhelming conventional strikes against the European depth, Western leaders will find themselves facing an existential dilemma akin to a political ‘checkmate’. Any French or British nuclear response would automatically mean an immediate Russian counter-retaliation that would annihilate their capitals. With European intelligence networks penetrated and domestic political decision-making fragmented, Moscow moves with the certainty that European leaders will ultimately choose to retreat and swallow a conventional defeat rather than commit collective nuclear suicide.

This understanding coincides with a radical shift in the tone of the Russian leadership. While Russian discourse has historically been characterised by caution and pragmatism, the Western permission for Ukraine to cross red lines and strike deep inside Russian territory has led to a decisive shift in Moscow’s stance. It has transitioned from a posture of managing a local conflict to actual psychological and military readiness for a broader war aimed at punishing European capitals directly.

The Historical Trajectory: How Ukraine Became a Thorn in the Side

The current crisis was not born by chance. It is the culmination of a long-term Western strategy that has used Ukraine as a platform for geopolitical targeting against Russia.

Since 1948, American intelligence circles viewed western Ukraine as an ideal arena for guerrilla warfare against the Soviet Union. This approach deepened through intelligence-driven political interventions in the 2004 Orange Revolution, leading to the 2014 Maidan events that overthrew Kyiv’s neutral government to install hard-line nationalist factions, officially transforming the country into an advanced confrontation front and a ‘thorn in Russia’s side’.

Despite Moscow’s attempts in the spring of 2022 to reach a flexible political settlement via the ‘Istanbul Communiqué‘ – in which Russia expressed a willingness to withdraw from Kherson and Zaporizhzhia in exchange for Kyiv’s neutrality and recognition of the Donbas’s independence – direct NATO intervention, the pumping of billions in aid packages, and intelligence efforts to launch counter-attacks aborted the diplomatic opportunity for peace.

This Western insistence on escalation later forced Moscow to permanently integrate those regions into the Russian Federation through the September 2022 referendums.

Strategic Conclusion: Bitter Choices to Save the Continent

Current data proves that the Ukrainian gamble has reached its end. Russia has already settled the war of attrition in its favour. In order to avoid a catastrophic military clash on European soil, decision-makers on the Old Continent must wake up from the offensive American vision and execute a courageous strategic pivot to save face, anchored on three inevitable realities:

• First – Realism in the Energy File: It must be acknowledged that the United States is incapable of providing a sustainable and affordable energy alternative for Europe, especially with global maritime straits – like the straits of Hormuz, Bab al-Mandeb and the Suez Canal – remaining at the mercy of regional powers and sudden closures at any time.
• Second – Strategic Reconciliation with Moscow: Europe’s industrial survival depends entirely on abandoning the framework that treats Russia as a permanent strategic enemy, and reintegrating it as a vital, indispensable partner for achieving economic stability and energy security.
• Third – Accepting the Eurasian Reality of Ukraine: The West must stop the futile pursuit of integrating Ukraine into the Western system. History and geography prove that Ukraine’s long-term stability lies in its return as a bridge state that achieves balance alongside Russia and Belarus, rather than remaining a depleting front line for a NATO alliance going through its worst structural and logistical crises.

Featured image via Diego Fedele / Getty Images

By Mohammad Fakih

Source link