The Weekly Telescope

Category: Russia

  • BRICS in Rio: A Rising Bloc’s Bid to Reshape the World Order

    BRICS in Rio: A Rising Bloc’s Bid to Reshape the World Order

    As the leaders of an expanded BRICS convene in Rio de Janeiro this July 6-7 for the 17th BRICS Summit, the world watches closely. What began in 2009 as an informal coalition of emerging economies is now growing into a geopolitical force, aiming to challenge the dominance of Western institutions like the G7, the IMF, and SWIFT.

    With major issues on the table—including currency de-dollarization, cross-border payment systems, and development finance—the BRICS bloc appears more ambitious than ever.

    The BRICS—originally Brazil, Russia, India, and China—held their first summit in 2009. South Africa joined the following year, completing the initial five-member alliance. Over time, BRICS built real institutional capacity, establishing the New Development Bank (NDB) and Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) to promote development and economic resilience among its members.

    A major expansion took place in 2023, when Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates were granted full membership. Indonesia joined in early 2025, bringing the group to eleven. With ongoing interest from countries like Vietnam, Bangladesh, and Argentina, BRICS is quickly turning from a bloc into a movement.

    BRICS’ accomplishments over the last 16 years include:

    • Financial Infrastructure: The NDB has funded more than $30 billion in development projects, while the CRA provides a $100 billion reserve pool to guard against financial crises.
    • Alternative Payment Systems: With growing distrust of Western-dominated platforms like SWIFT, BRICS members have begun developing BRICS Pay, a decentralized payment messaging system allowing trade in local currencies.
    • Strategic Partnerships: Dozens of working groups and institutions now foster cooperation on energy, health, digital governance, and more—advancing what some have called a new “Global South consensus.”

    Despite progress, the Rio 2025 summit reveals fault lines:

    • Leadership Absences: Neither Xi Jinping nor Vladimir Putin is attending in person. Putin faces travel limitations due to international sanctions, and Xi reportedly cited scheduling conflicts. Their absence reflects the bloc’s internal tensions.
    • Ideological Divide: While nations like Iran and Russia advocate a confrontational stance toward the West, others like India, Brazil, and Indonesia prefer a more balanced approach. This divergence hampers consensus on issues like UN reform, Ukraine, and Gaza.
    • Competing Interests: India’s growing ties with Western powers contrast with China’s ambitions, and Brazil, the host nation, has tried to focus this year’s agenda on neutral topics like climate finance, AI governance, and healthcare.

    With 11 member nations representing over 40% of global GDP (PPP) and more than half the world’s population, BRICS is no longer a marginal force. It’s now a serious contender in shaping global governance.

    Key differences with the G7 include:

    • Development Focus: While G7 prioritizes legacy institutions like the IMF and World Bank, BRICS centers its efforts on flexible South-South cooperation.
    • Financial Sovereignty: Tools like BRICS Pay and the NDB enable countries to bypass traditional Western financial systems.
    • Multipolar Vision: BRICS advocates for a more equitable world order, with power shared among emerging and developing nations—not monopolized by the West.

    After Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Western sanctions cut off many Russian banks from the SWIFT network. In response, Russia turned to:

    • SPFS: Its own financial messaging system.
    • Bilateral Trade Deals: Using rubles, yuan, and other local currencies with BRICS members.
    • BRICS Pay: A system still in early rollout but with growing support. China, Brazil, and Iran have all agreed to increase usage in 2025.

    Though not yet a global replacement for SWIFT, BRICS Pay offers a real alternative for countries under sanctions—laying the groundwork for a parallel financial system.

    If BRICS can overcome its divisions, the economic integration of Russia, India, and China could mark the emergence of a powerful Eastern economic bloc. With joint development banks, currency swaps, and shared digital platforms, this bloc would rival any Western alliance economically and geopolitically.

    Such a scenario aligns with what many Bible students interpret as an end-time prophecy: an Eastern power—“kings from the East”—rising to challenge a revived Roman Empire (see Revelation 16:12).

    The BRICS summit in Rio showcases both promise and peril. Its expansion, financial innovation, and strategic agenda give it the tools to build a new world order. But internal rivalries, absent leaders, and divergent visions threaten to stall momentum.

    Still, if BRICS succeeds, it won’t just change economics. It could reshape the balance of global power—perhaps even fulfilling ancient biblical prophecies about a world divided between East and West in the final days before Christ’s return.

  • Spiderweb Over Russia: A Drone Strike, a Prophecy, and Europe’s Ascendancy

    Spiderweb Over Russia: A Drone Strike, a Prophecy, and Europe’s Ascendancy

    In one of the most audacious and sophisticated operations since the Ukraine-Russia war began, a fleet of Ukrainian drones recently struck deep into Russian territory, destroying over 40 military aircraft — including strategic bombers and radar surveillance planes — parked at airbases once thought untouchable. Known as Operation Spiderweb, this strike not only dealt a blow to Russia’s military capability but shattered its assumption that the heartland of its empire was beyond reach.

    But what truly makes this operation historic is not just Ukraine’s execution. It is what it signals: the emergence of a European military that is able to cripple Russia’s military.

    Beyond Ukraine: The Rise of European Military Power

    At first glance, it appears to be a Ukrainian success story. But beneath the surface, Europe’s fingerprints are all over it.

    After the Trump administration cut off intelligence-sharing and military support to pressure Ukraine into a negotiated peace, it was France and the United Kingdom that stepped in to keep Ukraine informed. (Although the US has suspended its intelligence support to Ukraine from March 3-11, its intelligence support resumed after Ukraine agreed to the Trump administration’s 30-day ceasefire proposal. By the time Ukraine executed Operation Spider’s Web on June 1, US intelligence support has resumed for over two months. Likewise, the operation has been in planning for more than a year and it has benefitted from US intelligence provided for several years prior to its execution. The fact however remains that European military intelligence support to Ukraine has remained consistent and robust whether US support was there or not.)

    The Drone Coalition for Ukraine, spearheaded by the UK and Latvia and joined by Germany, Belgium, and Turkey, has funded over €1.8 billion in drone warfare innovations — the very capabilities that made Operation Spiderweb possible.

     European intelligence satellites, logistical frameworks, encrypted communication systems, and battlefield coordination tools filled the vacuum left by the U.S. withdrawal.

    This was not just a Ukrainian strike. It was a European-enabled blow against Russia’s strategic depth. And it was devastating.

    Russia’s False Sense of Security is Gone

    The targets included Tu-95 and Tu-160 bombers — Russia’s nuclear-capable aircraft — and A-50 early-warning planes, essential for commanding airspace and coordinating attacks. In one night, Ukraine managed to destroy approximately one-third of Russia’s long-range bomber fleet. These aren’t assets that can be easily or quickly replaced. Many were Soviet-era, and the factories that built them no longer exist.

    With the United States uninvolved, this blow was delivered largely through European intelligence, European drone design, and European coordination. The operation shattered the illusion that Russia’s vast geography offers security — and marked the first strategic-level success of a European-backed military force since World War II.

    A Glimpse into the Future: Europe Without America

    Europe’s military awakening is no accident — and it’s accelerating:

    • The Galileo satellite network, the IRIS² secure communications constellation, and nationally operated reconnaissance satellites are enabling Europe to be independent of U.S. space assets.
    • Germany’s Sky Shield Initiative, Airbus’s A400M strategic airlift, and the Multinational MRTT air-refueling fleet now give Europe global logistics reach.
    • France, with its independent nuclear arsenal, is now leading talks on a pan-European nuclear deterrence umbrella.

    What we are witnessing is the rapid formation of an autonomous European military force — one no longer under the U.S. defense umbrella, and increasingly capable of replacing it.

    In the near future, Europe may very well decimate Russia in a head-to-head war. And it wouldn’t need the United States to do it.

    This, Too, Was Prophesied

    Long before this shift, the Bible foretold of a coming superpower in the end time — a “Beast” power rising out of Europe (Revelation 17:12–13). This power would consist of “ten kings” — a coalition of nations that give their authority to a central military leader. It would wield immense force and shake the earth with its dominion.

    We are watching that prophecy unfold.

    Russia, despite its nuclear bravado, is crumbling before a resurgent Europe. And America, once the dominant force for world order, is stepping back — politically, economically, and militarily.

    These events point to a global realignment of power — exactly as the Scriptures predicted.

    Spiritual Reality

    As Europe grows in power and war looms ever larger, it is easy to marvel at the strategic brilliance or technological advances. But we must not lose sight of the spiritual reality behind these geopolitical shifts.

    Christ warned in Matthew 24:22 that unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved — meaning that humanity, left to its own devices, would annihilate itself. The tools of our destruction — hypersonic missiles, autonomous drones, cyber warfare, biological agents — already exist.

    The question is not if they will be used, but when.

    And yet, there is hope. Not in politics. Not in NATO or the EU or Washington. But in God.

    As the world plunges toward conflict and chaos, God is calling us to repent, to seek His truth, and to prepare spiritually for what lies ahead. Only His intervention will stop mankind from self-destruction.

  • A Glimmer of Hope: Trump, Zelensky, and the Long Road to Peace

    A Glimmer of Hope: Trump, Zelensky, and the Long Road to Peace

    At the sidelines of the funeral of Pope Francis, held at the Vatican — a setting deeply symbolic of hope, reconciliation, and peace — a private and significant meeting took place between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and U.S. President Donald Trump. Although their conversation lasted only around fifteen minutes, it produced key developments that, if sustained, suggest a possible shift in tone regarding the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. This meeting, in its timing and tone, could have lasting implications for Ukraine, Europe, and global peace efforts.

    Key Outcomes of the Meeting

    The Zelensky–Trump meeting achieved several notable outcomes that signal at least a partial change from previous U.S. positions:

    • Private 15-Minute Discussion – The two leaders engaged in a brief but focused conversation aimed at reviving the stalled peace negotiations between Ukraine and Russia. Though details remain limited, both sides characterized the exchange as serious and constructive.
    • Mutual Praise of the Meeting – Afterward, both Trump and Zelensky described their discussion as “productive” and “potentially historic.” This mutual appreciation suggested a desire — at least rhetorically — to move beyond posturing and work toward real diplomatic progress.
    • Emphasis on the Need for a Ceasefire – President Zelensky strongly advocated for a full and unconditional ceasefire to protect Ukrainian civilians and prevent further devastation. Trump, echoing a similar concern, called for immediate steps to reduce violence on the ground, marking a notable rhetorical shift from earlier periods when he emphasized quick deals even at Ukraine’s potential expense.
    • Public Condemnation of Russia’s Attacks – For the first time in a significant international setting, Trump openly criticized Russia’s continued missile strikes on Ukrainian cities. He even hinted at the possibility of imposing secondary sanctions on Russia if hostilities escalated — a firmer line than he had taken during his previous administration.

    These outcomes suggest that while Trump’s overall strategy may not have fully changed, his tone and priorities appear to have evolved — at least in how he publicly frames the conflict.

    Factors That Likely Changed President Trump’s Tone

    Several important forces likely contributed to this adjustment in Trump’s rhetoric and stance:

    • The Symbolic Setting of the Vatican – Meeting during Pope Francis’ funeral inevitably shaped the atmosphere. In a setting dedicated to peace, compassion, and global unity, it would have appeared callous and politically risky for Trump to project a transactional or overly hardline image.
    • International Diplomatic Pressure – Major European powers such as France, Germany, and the United Kingdom had already signaled strong opposition to any peace deal that legitimized Russia’s territorial gains. Trump’s administration would risk significant diplomatic isolation if it pushed for an unjust settlement.
    • Ukraine’s Battlefield Resilience – Ukraine’s ability to hold its ground against Russian aggression impressed even skeptical observers. Zelensky’s ability to represent a nation that refuses to surrender easily likely demanded a more respectful and serious response from Trump.
    • Growing Bipartisan U.S. Support for Ukraine – Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers have increasingly voiced support for Ukraine’s territorial integrity. With elections looming in 2026, Trump cannot afford to alienate a significant portion of the American electorate who sympathize with Ukraine’s struggle.
    • Trump’s Need to Reinforce a Statesmanlike Image – As he looks toward solidifying his legacy and future leadership reputation, Trump understands the value of being seen as a “peacemaker.” This meeting provided an opportunity to bolster that image on a global stage.

    Taken together, these factors likely combined to encourage Trump to moderate his tone and speak more seriously about a diplomatic path forward.

    Personal Values That Helped Soften Trump’s Tone

    Trump’s change in tone wasn’t merely a result of external pressures. Some of his core personal values may also have played a role:

    • Desire for a Legacy of Peace – Trump is deeply concerned about how history will remember him. Securing peace between Ukraine and Russia could be a monumental achievement that cements his place among world leaders who brokered significant peace deals.
    • Sensitivity to Public Image – Trump’s acute awareness of how he is portrayed in the media likely made him realize that appearing compassionate, especially at the Vatican, would play well both internationally and domestically.
    • Respect for Strength and Resilience – Trump’s admiration for strength — whether in individuals, businesses, or nations — likely drew a measure of respect for Ukraine’s unwavering resistance against a much larger military power.
    • Transactional View of Alliances – Trump sees international relationships through the lens of mutual benefit. He understands that maintaining strong European alliances is crucial for America’s broader strategic interests.
    • Competitive Instinct Against World Leaders – Trump views global politics as a contest among strong personalities. His evolving criticism of Putin may not only reflect strategic calculation but also a desire to appear tougher and more effective than the Russian leader.

    These personal values — particularly the desire for a positive legacy and respect for strength — could later motivate Trump to adjust even further on the more contentious areas of the peace negotiations.

    Remaining Areas of Difference

    Despite the softened tone, serious divergences remain between the U.S. and Ukraine’s vision of peace:

    • Recognition of Crimea as Russian Territory – Reports indicate that Trump is still inclined to propose recognizing Russia’s annexation of Crimea — a move Ukraine and nearly all of Europe categorically reject. For Ukraine, such recognition would legitimize illegal aggression and set a dangerous precedent.
    • Permanent Exclusion of Ukraine from NATO Membership – Trump has also suggested that Ukraine should be permanently barred from NATO as part of any settlement. This would leave Ukraine vulnerable to future Russian attacks and could embolden other aggressors worldwide.

    If these areas are not resolved, any peace agreement would be fragile at best — and future conflicts almost inevitable.

    What Could Change Trump’s Mind

    Several dynamics could influence Trump to reconsider these positions:

    • Continued Ukrainian Military Gains – If Ukraine demonstrates continued success on the battlefield, the political cost of asking them to surrender land will become much higher.
    • Strong Legislative and Public Pressure in the U.S. – If Congress ties military aid and diplomatic support to maintaining Ukraine’s sovereignty — and if public opinion stays firmly with Ukraine — Trump will find it harder to push controversial concessions.
    • European Unity and Toughness – A united European stance could make any plan involving territorial compromise diplomatically and economically costly for the U.S.
    • Legacy Motivations – Trump’s desire to be remembered as a historic peacemaker could drive him to accept more principled, lasting solutions, rather than quick political victories.

    Thus, personal ambition for a noble legacy could actually help steer Trump toward better, fairer peace terms.

    How Putin Might React

    Russian President Vladimir Putin is unlikely to ignore these developments:

    • Potential Escalation – If Putin senses that the U.S. position is hardening, he may attempt to escalate militarily to force a settlement while he still holds significant ground.
    • Undermining Trump’s Credibility – Russia’s information networks might try to discredit Trump if they believe he is drifting too far from their strategic goals.
    • Increased Diplomatic Pressure on Ukraine – Expect Moscow to step up efforts to intimidate Ukraine into accepting unfavorable terms before U.S. policy hardens further.

    In short, Russia is likely to respond aggressively, viewing a tougher Trump as a threat to their long-term objectives.

    The Bigger Picture

    Even if a ceasefire is achieved, true and lasting peace will not come merely through negotiations. 

    What is needed is a profound change in the hearts and values of leaders and nations:

    • Leaders must focus on justice and dignity over power and conquest.
    • Nations must seek cooperation and fairness instead of exploitation and fear.
    • Alliances must be built not just on interest, but on principles of mutual respect.

    The Bible points us to a future beyond the broken leadership of today. 

    When Christ returns, He will establish a government where “nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore” (Micah 4:3).

    Under His perfect reign, there will be no more aggressors and no more victims. 

    Bigger nations will no longer oppress smaller ones. Great powers will no longer fear or threaten one another. True, lasting peace will fill the earth — a peace built on justice, love, and eternal strength.

    Cautious Optimism

    The Vatican meeting between Trump and Zelensky offers a rare moment of cautious optimism. 

    But real peace will require more than changed strategies — it will require changed values. 

    Until the Kingdom of God is established on earth, peace among nations will remain fragile. But every step toward justice, compassion, and respect today is a small glimpse of the greater peace that is yet to come.

  • Vacuum of Power: Who Steps in If the U.S. Walks Away from Ukraine Peace Talks?

    Vacuum of Power: Who Steps in If the U.S. Walks Away from Ukraine Peace Talks?

    As the Trump administration threatens to withdraw from peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, a dangerous vacuum is forming. If the U.S. steps back, others are ready to step in—and the one best poised to fill that role is the European Union.

    Europe, more than any other region, has direct security and economic stakes in the outcome of the war. Should the EU, led by nations like France and Germany, manage to broker peace where Washington falters, it would not only mark a diplomatic victory—it would solidify Europe’s emerging role as a global leader in world affairs.

    This shift is not just geopolitical—it aligns with Biblical prophecy. Scripture foresees a powerful union rising from the heart of Europe, more dominant than the United States, just before the return of Christ (Daniel 7:7-8; Revelation 17:12-13). The world may soon witness the rise of a superpower that reshapes global alliances—and prophecy warns that it will wield great influence, for better or worse.

    “The ten horns which you saw are ten kings… they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast. These are of one mind, and they will give their power and authority to the beast.” – Revelation 17:12–13

    As the U.S. recedes from the center of global diplomacy, Europe’s moment may be dawning.

  • Forged in Fire: How Europe Is Building Its Own Military Might Through Ukraine

    Forged in Fire: How Europe Is Building Its Own Military Might Through Ukraine

    The war in Ukraine is reshaping global alliances, military capabilities, and geopolitical expectations—but perhaps nowhere more profoundly than in Europe. While the United States continues to play an important role in Ukraine’s defense, its support under the Trump administration has become more measured, transactional, and at times uncertain. Into this vacuum has stepped a more assertive, rapidly maturing European military framework—one that is not just reacting to Russia, but preparing to stand on its own.

    From Steadfast Ally to Strategic Partner: The U.S. Shifts Gear

    Since 2022, the United States has supplied Ukraine with a formidable array of weapons, intelligence, and training. Systems like the HIMARS rocket launchers—short for High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, a highly mobile and precise long-range rocket artillery platform—Patriot missile defense batteries, Javelin anti-tank missiles, and real-time satellite surveillance have been game-changers on the battlefield. But since 2024, U.S. support has become increasingly conditional and strategically leveraged, with aid packages paused or tied to diplomatic objectives—such as ceasefire compliance or debt repayment proposals.

    This has caused anxiety in Kyiv and among NATO allies, highlighting the risks of over-reliance on a single, politically dynamic superpower. In response, Europe has not just filled the gap—it has transformed the challenge into an opportunity.

    Europe’s Arsenal Awakens: Compatible Yet Competitive

    European nations are rolling out a new generation of weapons systems—interoperable with NATO standards, but increasingly independent of U.S. designs.

    In the field of long-range precision artillery and rockets, Europe is deploying systems like the German PzH 2000, the French Caesar, the Swedish Archer, and a European variant of the Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS). These alternatives offer firepower and accuracy that rival the U.S. HIMARS, with rapid deployment capabilities and growing battlefield efficiency.

    In air defense, the European SAMP/T (Mamba)—short for Sol-Air Moyenne Portée/Terrestre, a medium-range surface-to-air missile system developed by France and Italy—Germany’s IRIS-T SLM—InfraRed Imaging System Tail/Surface Launched Medium-range, a cutting-edge ground-based air defense system—and the UK’s Sky Sabre are all emerging as powerful complements—and in some cases, future replacements—for the U.S. Patriot systems. These European systems are improving in range, reliability, and interoperability, proving effective in live combat scenarios.

    Anti-tank warfare is another area of parity. The British NLAW—short for Next generation Light Anti-tank Weapon, a shoulder-fired, disposable missile system designed for use by infantry against armored vehicles—and French Eryx are proving to be cost-effective, easily deployed, and tactically agile alternatives to the U.S. Javelin. Though Javelin still leads in range and target-lock capabilities, European systems are preferred in close-quarter operations.

    On the drone front, while the U.S. dominates with Switchblade and Phoenix Ghost drones, Europe—along with Türkiye—is catching up. The Bayraktar TB2—a medium-altitude, long-endurance unmanned combat aerial vehicle (UCAV) developed by Türkiye for reconnaissance and precision strikes—supplemented by rapid innovation in FPV (first-person view) drones—small, manually piloted drones equipped with cameras and often used as loitering munitions—along with loitering drone tech from Poland and Ukraine, shows Europe’s ability to adapt and mass-produce effective UAV solutions.

    Europe is also developing its own surveillance and battlefield coordination systems. France’s CERES—short for Capacité de Renseignement Électromagnétique Spatiale, a constellation of French military satellites for electronic intelligence—and the EU Satellite Centre are improving regional intelligence capabilities, although still not at par with U.S. global intelligence networks. Meanwhile, European C4I (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence) systems are being refined for NATO compatibility and AI-assisted command structures.

    These tools are not just theoretical—they are being live-tested on Ukrainian soil, under the harshest real-world conditions. Field results are feeding directly into Europe’s growing defense research, industrial production, and doctrine refinement.

    Learning the Russian Way of War: A Crash Course in Deterrence

    Beyond hardware, European forces are gaining unprecedented insight into Russian military doctrine and operational behavior:

    • Strengths: Effective use of artillery saturation, trench warfare, and electronic warfare (EW); increasing drone adaptability.
    • Weaknesses: Rigid command structure, poor logistics, morale problems, and ineffective air-ground coordination.

    European observers and trainers embedded with Ukrainian units have seen these dynamics up close, allowing them to adapt faster than in any traditional training scenario. In effect, the war has become a real-time strategic classroom.

    And this learning is being added on top of decades of exposure to U.S. military technology, tactics, and interoperability standards. The result is a fusion: a uniquely European doctrine that integrates NATO compatibility with localized resilience, battlefield adaptability, and self-reliance.

    A New European Military Order Emerges

    Europe is no longer merely a supporting actor in NATO—it is becoming a strategic force in its own right. This is evident in:

    • The €800 billion “ReArm Europe” initiative, pooling defense investment across the continent.
    • The Coalition of the Willing, a group of 30+ nations ready to back Ukraine with military and peacekeeping forces, regardless of Washington’s direction.
    • The EU Strategic Compass and PESCO (Permanent Structured Cooperation, a framework for EU member states to collaborate more closely on defense projects and initiatives) provide the backbone for long-term continental defense planning., providing the backbone for long-term continental defense planning.

    More significantly, these steps represent a strategic pivot: from transatlantic dependence to continental autonomy, with the potential to stand alone—not just against Russia, but any global threat.

    Europe as a Global Power

    From a biblical and prophetic standpoint, this development is particularly striking. The Bible speaks of a final world power rising out of Europe, described in the book of Daniel and the Revelation as a “beast” system of immense influence—politically, economically, and militarily.

    In that light, the consolidation of Europe’s military might—sparked by Russia’s war, accelerated by U.S. disengagement, and refined by real-world learning—takes on profound significance. What we are witnessing may well be the emergence of the military dimension of that prophesied power.

    A military that was once fractured, slow, and dependent is now becoming agile, well-informed, technically sophisticated, and integrated—not only in doctrine and equipment but in strategic vision.

    The Furnace That Forges

    As U.S. assistance to Ukraine becomes more measured and transactional, Europe has not only risen to meet the challenge—it is turning the war in Ukraine into the forge of a new military identity. What began as a stopgap has become a transformation.

    Europe is no longer just learning from the U.S.—it is learning from the enemy, innovating from within, and evolving into a deterrent force that could, one day, rival any military on Earth.

    The fire of war is forging Europe’s future—and with it, the world’s direction.