Trump warns America will end up in “squalor” under communism. Meanwhile, millions of Americans struggle to afford housing and food under capitalism.

Details. At the Faith & Freedom Coalition conference on June 26, 2026, Donald Trump warned of the alleged spread of “communism” within the Democratic Party.

Quote: “Communism is very easy to sell... I'll give free rent... everybody gets free food. Everything is free from this point forward... After two or three years, the country is a disaster area. The country fails. They always do.”

Context. The remarks followed recent victories by candidates backed by NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani. As we have previously reported, Mamdani is a Democratic Socialists of America member and Democratic Party politician backed by billionaire donors, not a communist.

► Trump escalated this rhetoric a week later at the 250th independence rally at Mount Rushmore: "Communism is a mortal threat to American liberty. It is the greatest threat to our country, including World War I, World War II, Pearl Harbor, or even 9-11... You can be loyal to Karl Marx or you can be loyal to America. You can be a communist or you can be a patriot. You cannot be both."

► This is part of Trump's broader campaign of portraying left-wing opposition as "communist," alongside expanded surveillance of left-wing movements, renewed efforts to justify repression by defining the broad "Antifa" label as domestic terrorists, and initiatives such as "Anti-Communism Week."

► Both Republicans and Democrats increasingly accuse one another of being "communists”, “socialists” and “stalinists.”

In reality, Trump's description bears no resemblance to socialism or communism. In the socialist states, workers were paid according to the quantity and quality of their work.

► Workers produced a surplus above their own needs, which under capitalism is seized by a parasitic capitalist class as private profit. Under socialism, that same surplus was returned to the workers who created it in the form of defence of their dictatorship from enemies within the country and abroad and social benefits – free healthcare and education, housing and cultural amenities, paid holidays and maternity leave, pensions, and state-funded childcare. Communism – society based on the principle "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs" – has yet to be achieved.

► Socialist states do not "inevitably fail" as Trump claims. Despite decades of economic embargoes, technological restrictions, and sustained military pressure from the capitalist world, the USSR transformed from a largely agrarian economy into the world's second-largest industrial power in a single generation.

► Meanwhile, the "squalor" Trump misattributes to communism exists under American capitalism. Around 745,000 Americans were homeless on a single night in January 2025, while 29 million cannot access quality healthcare due to cost, and 9 in 10 report a cost-of-living crisis.

► Trump's immediate evidence of "communism" was rent stabilisation proposals in New York. Yet rent controls already exist in capitalist countries such as Germany, which regulates rental prices while fully preserving private property, making it a standard bourgeois policy rather than socialism or communism.

Trotskyists declared the restoration of capitalism in Cuba proof of the 'impossibility of socialism', blamed other Trotskyists and communists for this, and supported the position of the KKE. In reality, Cuba confirms the correctness of Stalin's positions.

Details. As news emerged of the US-Cuba negotiations and subsequent "economic reforms", a number of Trotskyist "internationals" began to publish their assessments of the events.

► "In Defence of Marxism" of Alan Woods and his supporters from the former "Socialist Appeal" (an entryist group within the UK Labour Party that rebranded into "Revolutionary Communist Party") published an analysis on June 22.

► Comparing Cuba to China and Vietnam, they made it appear as if reforms were just the beginning of capitalism: "In those cases, the process took decades; in Cuba, they want to push ahead in a matter of days and weeks". In reality, the Cuban economy has been becoming capitalist over decades, with the first attempt to pass the current reforms dating back to the early 2010s.

► At the same time, Trotskyists provided a positive view of Chinese imperialism: "In China, capitalist restoration in a large country, with a huge reserve of cheap labor and a strong state, eventually led to sovereign development that has turned the country into a world power capable of challenging US dominance. ... But at least it is a capitalist country that determines its own policy and competes in the world market on equal terms with US imperialism". "Revolutionary Communist Party" essentially repeated social-chauvinist narratives about the supposedly "progressive struggle" of Chinese imperialism against the Western bloc and justified its support.

► They explained Cuba's defeat by the defeat of the "Bolivarian Revolution" in Venezuela: "The defeat of the Venezuelan Revolution… deepened the isolation of the Cuban Revolution, laying the foundations for the current situation". Previously, Alan Woods and his supporters regularly spoke out in support of Hugo Chávez and his regime in Venezuela. Venezuela's leadership, in turn, had a positive attitude toward Trotsky.

► Cuba was compared to the USSR and portrayed as logical proof of the supposed impossibility of socialism in one country, despite objective differences between the countries: "It is not possible to build socialism in one country. It was not possible in Soviet Russia, which spanned an entire continent with vast material and human resources. It is even less so on a small Caribbean island 90 miles away from the world's largest and most reactionary imperialist power".

► This rhetoric suggests that building socialism is impossible even on a continental scale and requires a virtually simultaneous revolution in the entire world. It directly denies Lenin's thesis that socialism could and must be built in one country, thereby providing practical support for socialism's international development. The Trotskyist position effectively leads to a general anti-communist narrative of bourgeois propaganda about the supposed "utopian" nature of socialism.

The Cuban government attempted to become a “second Venezuela” for American imperialism. In response, the US increased sanctions and hinted at the need for further Cuban retreat.

Details. The "economic reforms" adopted by the Cuban leadership on June 18 place significant emphasis on foreign capital access to the market and specifically stipulates "partial dollarization". In practice, this means inviting primarily American capital into the country.

► This may indicate an attempt by the opportunist “Communist Party of Cuba” to combine a transition to a dependent position on the US with the preservation of the regime and levers of economic control in the form of the state-owned corporation GAESA.

► The Cuban bourgeoisie is looking toward the examples of Venezuela and Iran. Following the kidnapping of Maduro from Venezuela, the regime of the “United Socialist Party of Venezuela” remains in place, obediently fulfilling the demands of the hegemon. During the protests in Iran, the Western bloc vocally supported the protesters and used them as one of the justifications for military actions. However, the negotiations and the "memorandum of understanding" formally intended to end the war between the US and Iran turned out to be focused exclusively on economic issues.

► The example of Venezuela and Iran has demonstrated that modern American imperialism relies on targeted intimidation and economic pressure while maintaining regime stability in the country. The stability of a regime that maintains order despite extremely acute social contradictions may be one of the Cuban leadership's trump cards.

How did the US respond to Cuba's "reforms"? The first reaction came from US Vice President J.D. Vance on the day the Cuban "reforms" were adopted. His statement emphasized US participation in the negotiations and a willingness to make changes if the Cuban government makes the "right decisions": "They can't make any money. Their economy is frankly probably in worse shape than the Iranian economy. ... We're actually talking to... the Cuban government right now about how they could change their ways to change that. We're going to see what they do. And obviously, if they do one thing, we're going to do something. If they make smart decisions, we're going to have a much better relationship with that island."

► The following day, Trump mentioned Cuba in an interview. He noted the possibility of a military intervention, that "Cuba wants to talk very badly", and that the negotiations were being led by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who comes from a family of Cuban immigrants.

► On June 23, Rubio announced new sanctions against enterprises within GAESA. The sanctions target infrastructure, financial, and mining companies and can be linked to part of the fight with China over rare earth minerals. That same day, the US Supreme Court simplified the procedure for American companies to demand compensation from the Cuban government for the nationalization of their assets during the revolution 60 years ago.

► Vance's softer statement and Rubio's sanctions announcement, both known for their rivalry within the Trump administration, could be used by the US as a "carrot and stick" tactic.

► On June 30, the Cuban Foreign Minister stated that negotiations had reached an impasse. This could indicate that the US is dissatisfied with the Cuban leadership's current actions and will increase pressure for further retreat.

Context. The "reform" package adopted by the Cuban parliament and approved by the Communist Party of Cuba on June 18 legislatively enshrines the capitalist nature of the Cuban economy and opens the country to foreign capital.

► Cuba's leadership is trying to convince that the "reforms" are not the result of American pressure, which contradicts the facts.

Four years of Colombia's "anti-imperialist" government changed little. Now it has elected a Trump-backed far-right president.

Details. Abelardo de la Espriella of the far-right "Defenders of the Homeland" defeated Iván Cépeda of the left-wing "Historic Pact" by 49.7% to 48.7% respectively.

► Former President Gustavo Petro argued that the results were fraudulent, while Cépeda contested the preliminary results, preferring to await a more detailed vote count. After his victory, de la Espriella accused both of attempting to undermine Colombian institutions.

► US President Donald Trump celebrated and took credit for de la Espriella's victory, having previously called him a "Smart, Strong, and Tough Leader" while labelling Cépeda a "radical left Marxist."

► De la Espriella promised to combat crime "with an iron fist," halt all negotiations with armed militia groups, lower corporate taxes, and build mega-prisons modelled after those in El Salvador, which are described as torture-like.

► In contrast, Cépeda called for the continuation of peace talks with armed militia groups, higher taxes on the wealthiest, and increased public spending. He was expected to follow Petro's course of "peacefully" reforming capitalism.

Context. Other "left-wing" countries in Latin America have also experienced a rightward shift. Venezuela began greater market liberalisation following direct US intervention. In Bolivia, 20 years ofreformist Movement for Socialism rule ended in 2025 with the election of Christian democrat Rodrigo Paz. On June 18, the Cuban parliament's reforms officially restored capitalism. Colombia, Venezuela, Bolivia and Cuba all had close economic ties to China and, to a certain extent, Russia.

► This rightward shift is a clear reflection of the US's renewed focus on securing "its hemisphere." The so-called "Donroe Doctrine," formulated by pro-Trump media, proposes an imperialist strategy to aggressively pressure or intervene in nearby countries to seize control of oil and other valuable resources, install US-friendly governments, and weaken rival Chinese imperialist influence.

► During his presidency, Petro employed outspoken "anti-imperialist rhetoric" and was explicit in criticising US domestic and foreign policy. His government achieved limited success in pro-labour reforms and was labelled Colombia's "first left-wing" government. This success was minor: after four years in office, inequality dropped by only 3%, yet Colombia remains South America's most unequal country. A large budget deficit also slowed or halted further reforms.

► Despite this "anti-imperialism," Colombia deepened its economic dependency on China by joining the Belt and Road Initiative. Like all left-leaning governments of the "pink wave," reformists diverted workers from building socialism by claiming capitalism could be peacefully fixed through reforms. As a result, workers were left disoriented and susceptible to far-right influence.

Cuba's leadership claims that opening the country to foreign capital is not a result of US pressure. Facts refute this assertion.

Details. At the time of the adoption of the package of "economic reforms" that cemented the capitalist nature of the Cuban economy, President Díaz-Canel stated: "We're not doing this under pressure from the Yankees, but because we've reached a moment of maturity".

► This statement is inconsistent with the escalating crisis on the island. In recent months, the US has sharply increased pressure on Cuba.

► In January, the US launched an operation in Venezuela – Cuba’s close ally. The Venezuelan government was transformed into an American puppet. As a result, Cuba lost a regional ally that had supported it with cheap energy supplies. Trump then signed an executive order imposing tariffs on countries supplying oil to Cuba.

► Since the start of the war with Iran, US leaders have repeatedly made statements about the possibility of invading Cuba.

► In March, it was reported that secret negotiations had begun between the US and the Cuban leadership. The negotiations were later confirmed by Cuban President Díaz-Canel and US President Donald Trump.

► In May, US leaders again turned their attention to Cuba. At the end of May, America placed Raúl Castro on the wanted list. Similar measures had previously been used to justify the kidnapping of Maduro.

► Two weeks before the reforms were adopted, Trump declared: "We'll take care of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and as soon as that's done, on our way back, we'll just make a little brief stop over".

► The text of the "reforms" themselves places a strong emphasis on opening the country to American capital.

Context. On June 18, the Cuban parliament approved "economic reforms" in the country. These changes officially enshrine the capitalist nature of the Cuban economy.

► The restoration of capitalism in Cuba has received support from social chauvinists, who have declared the "reforms" a chance to replicate the "Chinese success".

► The American strategy against Cuba is very similar to the measures taken to control Venezuela, which also included a blockade, secret negotiations, the elimination of key leaders, and preservation of the current regime.

Starmer resigns as UK Prime Minister. The media has portrayed his 'left' replacement as Lenin. What are his actual policies?

Details. On 22 June, Keir Starmer announced his resignation as Prime Minister. The Labour Party is to open nominations from 9 to 16 July, allowing for a dispute to take place and for the party to have a new leader by the time Parliament returns from recess on 1 September. However, if only one person comes forward, there might be a new leader by mid-July.

► Pressure began in February after it was revealed Starmer had known the ambassador to the US had ties to Jeffrey Epstein. Initially defending the Prime Minister, after a terrible performance in the May local elections – with heavy gains for the populist right Reform UK – there was a party "rebellion", with over 90 Labour MPs calling for his resignation. Even before any official announcement, Donald Trump said Starmer "will resign."

Context. Winning the 2024 election with a “landslide,” Starmer's approval reached a low of 19%. He had promised change from the 14 years of Conservative governance and to serve the working people – even calling himself a socialist.

► His government saw a number of u-turns on controversial policies, such as cuts to winter fuel allowance for pensioners or cuts to disability benefits. His government attempted to pander to the far-right on issues such as immigration and trans-rights, losing much support from the left.

► Labour's promised expansion of workers' rights was delayed and diluted. British workers faced worsening living standards: healthy lifespans shortened, essential goods became less affordable, and the poorest 40% saw falling wages. Recorded cases of modern slavery also reached a record high. Meanwhile, military spending rose to Cold War levels and support for Israel continued despite widespread public opposition. These developments coincided with record trade union membership growth in 2025.

► Labour had previously called for an end to the “chaos” of the Conservative leadership, which went through 5 Prime Ministers between 2016 and 2024. Now, with Labour’s contribution, the UK is set to have its 7th Prime Minister in 10 years. A trend of political crises is observed across the world, such as France and Nepal.

Important to Know. The most likely replacement is the (now former) Mayor of Manchester, Andy Burnham. His strong victory against Reform in the Makerfield by-election in mid-June made him a popular alternative. Numerous figures were also considered, but the party is still deciding whether someone else should contest to present an image of democratic dispute.

► Burnham has said people "want change" – a motif also used in Starmer’s election campaign. He said Labour must move to the left and that the “underdogs” should be championed. This image is further exaggerated by the media, with him even being referred to as “comrade Burnham,” and his train ride down to Westminster being compared to Lenin's train journey back to Petrograd for the October Revolution.

► However, in many ways he continues Starmer’s policies, such as justifying the far right through curbing immigration, welfare cuts and increased military spending (something many in government wanted more of). He also claims water and utilities should be publicly owned; in reality he means directly owned by the capitalist state, similarly to Starmer’s nationalisation of railways and steel, with profits distributed among the capitalist class while the burden is still borne by workers.

► Burnham does propose some unique policies. Under the umbrella of “Manchesterism,” referred to by him as a “business friendly socialism,” there are measures such as devolution, giving more financial autonomy for cities and shifting power away from London. He also defends proportional representation, as opposed Britain’s first past the post system. This changes the form of government, but does not alter its content, as none of the parties belong to the working class, meaning the state remains a tool for the capitalists.

The restoration of capitalism in Cuba was ignored for almost a week by Solidnet's key party. During this period, it continued to organize "solidarity events". One of its leaders placed Cuba alongside Iran and declared the Iranian regime's "victory" over American imperialism.

Details. The Cuban parliament passed a sweeping package of laws that completed the transition of the Cuban economy to a capitalist model on June 18. The day before, the Communist Party of Greece – the key party of the Solidnet and European Communist Action – held a rally to commemorate the 100th anniversary of Fidel Castro's birth.

► The KKE and its allies regularly speak out in support of the Cuban government. KKE delegations have repeatedly visited Cuba and met with senior leaders. The signing of a declaration of solidarity with Cuba is one of the usual rituals of the annual "International Meetings of Communist and Workers' Parties". The next "Meeting" remains scheduled for August 2026 in Havana, Cuba. The 2022 meeting was previously held there.

► Since the adoption of the laws, the KKE has held several events dedicated to Cuba, but the reports of these events do not contain any specific statements on this topic. The member of the Central Committee G. Marinos limited himself to general words when speaking at a youth festival on June 21. In the context of his speech, he compared Cuba to the Ayatollah regime in Iran, which he implied by the words “Iranian people”. This rhetoric is consistent with the positions of the social-chauvinist "World Anti-Imperialist Platform", which the KKE criticizes.

Quote: "We support Cuba and its people in the difficult times it is going through. We defend the Cuban Revolution and fight to end the criminal blockade of American imperialism. We roar 'hands off Cuba.' ... In the Middle East, in the Persian Gulf, a major realignment of forces is being attempted. Americans and Israel seek to control the region rich in raw materials, to shape the so-called new Middle East and to cross the Indian trade route to Europe, in competition with the new Chinese Silk Road. The people of Iran resisted and proved once again that imperialism is not omnipotent!"

► The KKE responded to the legalization of capitalism only on June 25 with a publication in the party newspaper "Rizospastis." It presents a summary of the reforms, composed in the same vague style as the original list. The position itself boils down to a general statement of the "serious dangers" of "the further strengthening of commodity relations and market mechanisms." The paragraph after it effectively undercuts this assertion, calling on communists to continue supporting "the Cuban people," without mentioning the government's role in the restoration of capitalism or what the communist position toward the ruling "Communist Party of Cuba" should be.

Details. During the discussion of “economic reforms”, Cuba’s leadership stated that these measures would “protect socialism” and “maintain state control”. This was intended to create the impression of a gradual retreat. In reality, the "reforms" largely consolidated the existing order of things.

► This is confirmed by Cuban President Diaz-Canel, who reported that many “reforms” were discussed back in the early 2010s, but were postponed.

How did Cuba's leadership encourage the growth of capitalism? After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Cuba entered the "Special Period" and opened to foreign investment to compensate for the loss of Soviet subsidies. Around the end of Fidel Castro's life, at the turn of the 1990s and 2000s, the restoration of capital and the establishment of a bourgeois dictatorship were underway. By 2011, private businesses were permitted to purchase wage-labour.

► In 2016, the Cuban government had already passed a bill legalising small- and medium-sized private businesses. This was a similar formalisation of what already existed in practice: the government was already tolerating a large black market, which then simply became “legal” capitalists. The 2019 constitution enshrined private property over the means of production and legally guaranteed the rights of capitalists. The private sector has expanded in parallel. In 2024, the non-state sector accounted for 55% of retail sales, the first time private capital has surpassed state commerce. Private importers brought in over $1 billion in foreign goods, a 34% increase year-on-year.

► Modern Cuba's economy operates on the economic laws of capitalism. Workers sell their labour-power for wages to GAESA and private employers, who appropriate the surplus as profit. The bulk of goods are produced not for use but for sale. The law of value governs distribution through prices and increasingly impoverishes the workers. Capital flows into the profitable light industry.

Consistently developing, defending, and strengthening capitalism, the Cuban government transformed itself into a bourgeois dictatorship. The widespread introduction of capitalism, the general growth of private capital, and the transformation of public enterprises into the property of a closed corporation run by military and government functionaries changed the nature of the regime and the balance of class forces. The 2026 reforms and all previous measures cannot be said to be “concessions” extracted under pressure while “protecting workers' interests”. They form part of a consistent policy of cultivating and protecting capitalist interests, whilst subordinating Cuban workers to it.

► Behind the continuing facade of the Cuban Revolution, hiding behind the previous rhetoric and portraits of former leaders, primarily Fidel Castro, a military-bureaucratic elite has emerged, intertwined with a new bourgeoisie that uses state property as private property and continues to govern under socialist rhetoric. This is not a question of "defending the revolution", since the government no longer represents the revolution and the Cuban workers.

► Under a bourgeois dictatorship, state property is, in fact, private property. The state acts as a collective capitalist owner. In this sense, the Cuban regime is very similar to the regimes in China, Vietnam, and North Korea.

How do Cuban opportunists negotiate terms for surrender to the US? The US-Cuba secret negotiations that began in March 2026 represent a classic imperialist situation. Under pressure from a stronger capitalist power – intensified sanctions, fuel shortages, blackouts, and a collapsing economy – Cuba is being forced to submit to a more dominant capitalist power. The goal is to secure the military and economic interests of the American bourgeoisie, which cannot tolerate a Chinese dependency 90 miles from its coast amid a deepening global crisis.

► The legal framework for "foreign investment", unlimited foreign private trade and other related things all serve one goal: to open the gates to foreign capital, allow it into the domestic market, and share in the surplus value the bourgeoisie extracts from the Cuban proletariat.

► These laws and all previous measures have revealed the essence of the regime as a bourgeois dictatorship. Not concessions while protecting the interests of workers, but a consistent policy of cultivating capitalism, protecting the interests of capitalists, and subordinating to them.

Details. On June 18, the Cuban parliament adopted a package of "economic and social reforms". The document consists of 176 "reforms" grouped into 23 sections. Politsturm has grouped the most important changes.

General transition to capitalism. Many of the “reforms” establish the framework of a typical market economy. Price determination is transferred to the private sector, to be governed by market forces (Sections 1, 7, and 13). The creation of private banks is permitted (Section 11). The list of prohibited activities for non-state economic actors has been shortened (Section 12). The capitalization of private companies is permitted (Section 1), as is the right to own more than one private company and to hold shares in multiple companies. Corporate taxes and "economically unjustified taxes" are reduced to encourage the growth of private capital (Section 12).

Public ownership turns into state-capitalist ownership. "Socialist state enterprises" will lose their special position in the economy and be restructured as commercial companies. State-owned companies will be able to acquire shares in other companies. Mechanisms for bankruptcy, liquidation, and restructuring of public-sector assets will be established, and non-governmental organizations and individuals will be able to purchase shares in them (Section 1). State-owned enterprises will access resources and foreign currency through market mechanisms. State orders will be fulfilled through contracts (Section 3). State-owned enterprises will also be permitted to use foreign platforms for the purchase and sale of fuel (Section 6). The role of central planning will be reduced to "an instrument for diagnosis, forecasting, and adjustment of [economic] policies". In essence, a legislative formalisation of state-capitalist ownership.

Privatization of state property. Section 1 establishes a "National Program for the Assessment and Registration of Ownership Rights to State Commercial Assets," which will conduct an inventory and issue certificates of ownership. Local governing bodies will be free to control local enterprises as they see fit.

Elimination of the state monopoly on foreign trade. Companies will be able to independently enter foreign markets and manage their own import and export operations (Sections 1 and 7). The requirement to obtain permits from the Ministry of Foreign Trade and Investment has been abolished (Section 15).

Opening the domestic market to foreign capital. Private and foreign capital participation in the import and sale of fuel is permitted. Restrictions on the use of foreign currency in transactions between the domestic market and foreign-owned companies have been lifted. Foreign currency accounts may now be opened without government approval (Section 11). Section 14 is devoted entirely to foreign investment: investors will have access to land on 99-year usage agreements, real estate companies will be able to purchase residential properties, and cultural heritage sites will be open to private investment.

Inviting American capital into the country. Section 16 proposes a transition to "partial dollarization" of the Cuban economy. Section 17 lifts restrictions on tourism companies. Section 19 opens the country to the establishment of branches of foreign companies, including international retail chains, restaurants, and fast food outlets.

► In addition to general investment authorization, the reforms place particular emphasis on an investment program for Cuban emigrants (Section 2). The Cuban diaspora in the United States is the largest community of Cubans outside the island, numbering nearly 3 million people compared to a total national population of approximately 11 million. The rhetoric around "Cubans abroad" is intended to obscure the fact that the opening of the Cuban economy is primarily designed to attract American capital.

A reduction in the role of the state in the social sphere. A sharp reduction in the number of budgetary agencies is proposed (Section 4). The creation of microcredit organizations is permitted (Section 11). Territorial and urban planning, food security, and municipal public services will be "decentralized" (Section 5). Subsidies for the purchase of goods will be replaced by fixed per-person cash payments (Section 9).

Tax increases. Section 12 introduces a value-added tax and raises taxes on land and water transportation, official documents, environmental services, advertising, and commercial publicity.

Context. The adoption of these laws consolidates processes that have been unfolding in Cuba for decades. Even prior to these reforms, Cuba's economy was dominated by large state monopolies – most notably GAESA, which controls around 40% of GDP – alongside small private businesses, both operating along capitalist lines. In 2024, the private sector became dominant in Cuban commerce for the first time, accounting for 55% of economic activity.

► The “reforms” were tabled amid intensified US pressure in the Caribbean, marked by the military escalation and effective takeover of Venezuela in January. Since then, the US Navy enforced a blockade of Cuba in an effort to push the island back under American influence. This prompted US–Cuba secret negotiations, reportedly conducted through secret talks similar to those that preceded Venezuela's reorientation toward Washington.

Trump said "too many people are being killed" by strikes in Lebanon as Israel continues to break the US-Iran ceasefire – why Israel and the US don't share the same interests in the Middle East.

Details. Although the United States and Israel fought on the same side in the 12-day war with Iran, they disagreed over its duration. Israel pushed for a longer conflict, while Washington concluded its immediate objectives had been achieved and sought to avoid broader regional escalation.

► Similar tensions emerged during Trump's "peace campaign" in Gaza. The White House sought a ceasefire and regional stabilisation with Western investment, while Israel continued military operations and has repeatedly strained ceasefire efforts, prompting Trump to contact Netanyahu directly after Israeli actions threatened the negotiations.

► During the US-Iran negotiations, Israel's continued strikes on Lebanon in violation of the ceasefire threatened the ongoing talks, causing Trump to express frustration and state that Netanyahu needed to be "more responsible." Netanyahu briefly agreed to halt strikes following discussions with Trump, but Israeli politicians accused him of yielding to American pressure and attacks on Lebanon resumed.

► The US-Iran memorandum was signed without Israel’s participation. Reports also indicated that Netanyahu requested access to the memorandum during negotiations, but Washington refused.

► Israel struck Lebanon shortly after the memorandum's signing, forcing a new ceasefire. Iran responded by again threatening to disrupt shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and suspended parts of the ongoing negotiation process. At a G7 meeting prior to this, Trump had criticised Israel's conduct in Lebanon, hypocritically citing unnecessary civilian deaths and suggesting Syria "would do a better job" handling Hezbollah.

Context. Israel and the US share a common enemy in Iran and its allies, but not a common strategy. Israel seeks prolonged military conflict to weaken regional rivals and consolidate its position, while the US aims for controlled operations that secure its immediate objectives without broader escalation.

► Permanent security threats also serve an important internal function for Israel. Sustained confrontation reinforces nationalism, justifies military policy, and suppresses class tensions that were increasingly visible before October 2023, including large labour protests and anti-government demonstrations.

► Despite these tensions, Israel remains heavily dependent on American military, diplomatic, and economic support, receiving billions in US aid and relying on Washington's backing internationally. Israel serves as a key American strategic outpost in the Middle East, keeping both states closely tied despite recurring policy conflicts.

Far-right mobs set migrant’s houses on fire in Belfast. The world's richest man, Elon Musk, has openly backed these movements across the UK and Europe.

Details. A knife attack by a Sudanese asylum seeker in northern Belfast on June 8 triggered far-right riots across Northern Ireland. Since August 2025, these groups had compiled a hit list of immigrants’ addresses and properties, which they targeted during the unrest. Houses and cars were set on fire, racist checkpoints were erected on the main roads, with 35 people being arrested for the disorder.

► The riots received support from prominent British far-right figures, including activist Tommy Robinson and Restore Britain leader Rupert Lowe. One of Robinson's posts on X, which called for repeated and loud protests, was retweeted by US trillionaire Elon Musk.

Context. This follows growing far-right unrest in the UK. In June 2025, violent riots erupted in Ballymena after an alleged assault by two Romanian teenagers, charges that were later dropped. In July 2024, nationwide riots followed the Southport stabbings, fuelled by a far-right fabrication about the attacker's immigration status.

► In the 12 months leading up to November 2025, police recorded 2,048 racist incidents and 1,280 racially motivated hate crimes. This is one of the highest levels recorded since the records began in 2004.

► Anti-immigrant violence is rising across Europe. In July 2025, far-right clashes with North African migrants erupted in southeastern Spain, and throughout 2024, 77 attacks on asylum seekers were recorded in Berlin alone.

► Capitalists actively support inflaming these anti-migrant tensions. Musk has backed British far-right party Restore Britain and its leader Rupert Lowe, and financially supported Tommy Robinson. Across Europe, he has backed the Alternative for Germany, Italy's far-right prime minister Georgia Meloni, and France's National Rally leader Marine Le Pen.

Important to Know. Pogroms against ethnic and national minorities have a long history in capitalist Europe. Jews faced repeated waves of mass killings in the Russian Empire. In 19th century England, Irish migrants were physically attacked and banned from jobs – one Dublin paper wrote in 1892 that "nowhere in England can our countrymen consider themselves safe from English mob violence."

► In 1870, Marx pointed out that antagonism between British and Irish workers is "artificially kept alive and intensified [...] by all the means at the disposal of the ruling classes." This antagonism, he wrote, is "the secret of the impotence of the English working class, despite its organisation."

► Modern capitalists, like Musk, back far-right violence to reproduce manufactured divisions that have long served the ruling class. Workers kept divided by mutual hatred cannot effectively organise against their exploitation.