this post was submitted on 24 Nov 2025
92 points (100.0% liked)

news

24463 readers
499 users here now

Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.

Rules:

-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --

Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed.

All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body.

If you are citing a Twitter post as news, please include not just the twitter.com URL but also Xcancel.com (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance, such as Libredirect or archive them as you would any other reactionary source (archive.today, web.archive.org, ghostarchive.org). Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed.

Mass-tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken Markov chain bot will result in a comm ban.

Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.

Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned.

Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A reminder that as the US continues to threaten countries around the world, fedposting is to be very much avoided (even with qualifiers like "in Minecraft") and comments containing it will be removed.

Image is from this article, of protestors in Mexico tearing down a steel fence.


While military, economic, and covert pressure on Venezuela and nearby countries in South America proper continues to mount, a similar process is occurring against Mexico, currently under the leadership of the very popular Sheinbaum, who has generally followed the footsteps of AMLO in terms of policies.

While figures in the Trump administration have made statements to the effect of wishing to bomb Mexican territory, internal pressure within Mexico is rather hard to generate when the government is doing generally positive things for people. As such, protests - comically denoted "Gen Z protests" despite young people being a vanishingly small proportion - have arisen in Mexico, very obviously astroturfed by pro-US and anti-Sheinbaum interests. The first protest, on November 15th, gathered less than 20,000 people, while the second, on November 20th, gathered perhaps 200. Article headlines suggesting that Mexico was "on the verge of collapse" have proven rather sensational and wishcast-y.

While it's easy to poke fun at these farces (I certainly am), it's important to keep in mind that soft coups have long been part of the American strategy in Latin America, and with unlimited money and many resources to throw at a project, even incompetent forces can eventually create enough chaos that it can make the ruling president or party feel forced to resign. Such eventualities are certainly not inevitable, and even weak states can provide enough resistance to force the US to try a hard coup instead, with outright bombing campaigns and covert military operations. Cuba has provided perhaps the best example in the western hemisphere of how such plots can be subverted with enough national support (e.g. the hundreds of times the CIA tried to kill/maim Castro, plus the Bay of Pigs debacle), but you do have to be willing to take extraordinary measures to do this - the sorts of measures figures like Chile's Allende did not take in the 1970s, and the measures Venezuela's Maduro appears to be taking right now. We shall see what path Sheinbaum takes.


Last week's thread is here. The Imperialism Reading Group is here.

Please check out the RedAtlas!

The bulletins site is here. Currently not used.
The RSS feed is here. Also currently not used.

The Zionist Entity's Genocide of Palestine

If you have evidence of Zionist crimes and atrocities that you wish to preserve, there is a thread here in which to do so.

Sources on the fighting in Palestine against the temporary Zionist entity. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:

UNRWA reports on Israel's destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.

English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news.
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.

Mirrors of Telegram channels that have been erased by Zionist censorship.

Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict

Sources:

Defense Politics Asia's youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don't want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it's just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists' side.

Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.

Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:

Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.

https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR's former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR's forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster's telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a 'propaganda tax', if you don't believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.

Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:

Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.


you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Tervell@hexbear.net 42 points 3 days ago (1 children)

whoopsie! stonks-down https://archive.ph/nSyr7

European Defense Stocks Take a Nosedive

Peace is bad for business

more

In the midst of sudden and chaotic peace negotiations between the US, EU, Ukraine, and Russia, astute observers have been quick to dismiss the likelihood of a negotiated settlement happening any time soon. While this cynicism has a solid grounding in the lengthy legacy of failed negotiations in the war so far, European markets are reacting as if a conclusion to – or at the very least a shift in – the war is a real possibility.

...

European markets reacted quickly to the rumors. The STOXX European Aerospace and Defense index (SXPARO), which tracks a basket of major defense stocks within the EU, began to slide on the 14th. The decline accelerated on the 19th with the appearance of rumors that the US proposal came with a “deadline” issued to Zelensky to sign a deal by the 28th. While the negotiations have now apparently devolved into a series of increasingly unrealistic European and Ukrainian counter-proposals, there’s been no reversal in this trend. The EUAD ETF, which closely tracks the index, has posted a 12% loss in the past month. This is a larger drop than the fund has experienced since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, and comes on the back of a 5% decline in the first half of October. There’s reason to think that the markets are reacting to more than just the latest rounds of (possibly futile) peace negotiations.

Pump and Dump

Over the past few months, major European defense concerns have announced the signing of letters of intent with the Ukrainians for defense deals of unprecedented scale. The first of these came in late October, as Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson held a joint press conference with Zelensky to unveil a potential purchase deal through which Saab AB would provide the Ukrainians with up to 150 new Gripen E multirole fighter aircraft. This announcement raised eyebrows for several reasons. First, if the deal were to come to fruition, it would be the largest defense procurement order in Sweden’s history. The value of just the aircraft, discounting maintenance contracts with Saab, would well exceed $20 billion. With Ukraine facing a $60 billion budget shortfall for 2026 alone, they do not have the means to pay for the aircraft, even in small installments. Swedish officials have made vague references to using the windfall from the deadlocked reparations loan to finance the deal, but as we’ve covered previously, the loan isn’t even enough to fund Ukraine’s current levels of expenditure, let alone a new $20 billion procurement contract. The Swedes have tried to build support for EU funding for the deal by suggesting production could take place across the continent, but with EU budgets already stretched to their limits, it’s not clear where the money would come from. Second, the rate of delivery for these aircraft seems wholly disconnected from the realities of the war itself. Swedish officials have suggested that the deliveries will only take place “after the war ends,” while “limited access” to older Gripen C/D airframes may be provided in the meantime. With current production rates of the aircraft being only in the low teens a year, delivering 150 of them would take as long as 15 years, according to the Swedes. Messaging from Zelensky seems disconnected from these statements – he says he hopes Ukraine will be operating the fighter “as soon as next year.”

Saab posted a sharp initial 7.8% gain as the letter of intent was announced, but that gain has now been erased, with a 15% loss month over month, as its share price declined precipitously with the announcement of renewed peace negotiations. This is unfortunate news for Saab, which has faced a long string of setbacks in Gripen sales. Without the Ukraine deal becoming a reality, the future financial success of the platform is uncertain. The Swedes are currently lobbying the Canadian Air Force to acquire the Gripen E. Not to be outdone, the French announced on the 17th the signing of a letter of intent for a similar deal to provide Ukraine with up to 100 Rafale F4 fighters. If the prospect of one procurement deal for aircraft valued in the tens of billions seems implausible, the simultaneous procurement of two incompatible platforms defies belief. Just like Saab, Dassault estimates it will take at least a decade to deliver the quantity of airframes specified in the letter of intent, with the first deliveries being years away. And just like the Swedes, the French point to the reparations loan scheme as the way to finance the deal. These two announcements, which involve no obligations for any parties involved, and only constitute vague commitments to explore future deals, paint a strange picture of the European defense industry. France and Sweden are now competing for the same potentially non-existent pool of funding. The Ukrainians are signaling their intent and ability to place $40 billion or more of procurement orders while being steadily cut off from debt financing and facing a $60 billion hole in their 2026 government budget. Prior transfers of western fighter jets have failed to gain them a noticeable operational or strategic advantage. And operating such a large fleet of hundreds of incompatible fighter aircraft would place enormous strain on their finances, even in peacetime.

Both Dassault and Saab face stiff competitive pressure from the F-35 program, as rising manufacturing costs in Europe reduce the low-cost edge platforms like the Gripen and Rafale once had. US political influence and economy of scale has left bleak prospects for both firms in competing with the F-35. Saab recently pitched to the Canadians that local production of the Gripen could create 10,000 new jobs in Canada – an absurd prospect considering localized production in Brazil has created only a few hundred. Though it hasn’t been stated publicly, the Europeans and the Ukrainians fully understand that these deals are fantasies only remotely achievable through the reparations loan, and even then are unlikely. But they announced them all the same in the hopes of boosting the public perception of their domestic defense industries. It’s also possible they’re using these deals to pressure other EU member states into funding the reparations loan, banking on promises of joint-production across the Union.

“There’s no money in the budget, period. Not happening. If the whole Russian assets deal doesn’t go ahead, these deals don’t go ahead.” - Richard Aboulafia, managing director of AeroDynamic Advisory (Kyiv Independent)

For their part, the Ukrainians get an optimistic headline that grants some temporary confidence to their less observant supporters, who often fail to read the fine print. Both Saab and Dassault have also suggested establishing joint production facilities in Ukraine, which plays well in the Ukrainian media. But Ukrainian sources have been less than triumphant about these potential deals.

“From the political leadership’s point of view, this looks like an attempt to offset internal corruption scandals with big foreign-policy signings. These are not shells or equipment that can protect us today. Strategically, yes, it’s important. But does it protect us now? No.” - Mykola Davydiuk (Kyiv Independent)

Of all the European defense contractors to benefit from the war in Ukraine, Rheinmetall has benefitted the most. We’ve previously covered how 2,000% gains since the beginning of the war have catapulted the German firm into “insanely overvalued” territory. German plans for unprecedented deficit defense spending justified by the war in Ukraine undergird its success, and so it’s more susceptible to changing sentiment around the war than any of the other companies we could discuss here. Accordingly, it’s posted a 16% loss in the week since the US peace proposal was unveiled.


While the latest peace negotiations are clearly responsible for the sudden downturn in European defense markets, they’re likely not the sole causative factor, in and of themselves. As we’ve covered extensively over the past few months, the Ukrainians are facing an all-time peak in battlefield, financial, political, and infrastructural pressure. The markets may be taking the negotiations not as a likely conclusion to the war, but a sign that the writing is on the wall for Ukraine. There’s little reason to think the Europeans will execute a total reversal in their plans for debt-driven defense spending. An ambiguous Russian threat can remain even if the war concludes, and pressure from the US to meet new NATO spending targets will ensure governments continue to dump cash into defense concerns. However, the mind-boggling overvaluation of firms like Rheinmetall will likely not survive a conclusion to the war, as a negotiated settlement could force the EU to scale back some of its spending. Other defense firms like Saab (+935%), Leonardo (+833%), BAE Systems (+485%), and Thales (+324%) have all posted enormous gains since 2022, but each has also lost more than 10% of its value in the past week. Unless the Europeans can ensure the war continues for the long term, these defense companies will have a long way to fall.

[–] MarmiteLover123@hexbear.net 28 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

The crazy about of straight up propaganda that SAAB has put out for the Gripen E in Canada is wild. They're making Lockheed Martin look honest, and that's saying something. Anyone trying to pretend that the Gripen and F-35 are operating in the same stratosphere has no idea what they are talking about, the F-35 is obviously the better aircraft and even if you despise the USA, Lockheed Martin, and/or Trump, that fact has to be acknowledged. Canada is tied at the hip with the USA via NORAD and other agreements, and the Gripen uses US engines and avionics, so it's not even breaking dependence there. The Gripen E is very expensive for what it offers, which defeats the whole point of it being cheap like the Gripen C was.

In fact, the US had the Gripen concept 40 years ago, a light fighter with a single engine with good BVR capabilities for the time. It was called the F-5G/F-20A Tigershark. It even used the same engine as the Gripen C. No one bought it.

The most ridiculous thing is that I like the Gripen, my country operates them. It's a great aircraft for us, does everything we need, probably my favourite plane because of that. But I'm under no delusion to think that it's some equivalent to the F-35 or can stand up to the USAF. If the US came knocking, our air force would be destroyed on the ground or shot out of the sky immediately after takeoff, that's just the simple truth. And it will be the same for Canada.

Ukraine wants to make these deals to get the Europeans to use frozen Russian assets to finance them, it's bait for that.

[–] YEP@hexbear.net 16 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I thought the big selling point was cost to run is much lower over time. There is a small amount of validity that networked aircraft close the gap with stealth, obv not fully, but if a missle can track an aircraft by comunicating with a closer/stronger radar on an awacs or on the ground the plane slinging the missile can be cheaper. also if you have stealthy standoff weapons it also matters less. But like you've pointed out it just isnt the same as a f35.

I guess my point is id rather a bunch of f15/ex and a handful of stealth asfs/bombers than an entire fleet of high maintenance cost stealth fighters just bc of the economics.

[–] MarmiteLover123@hexbear.net 11 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

The F-35 doesn't have the super high sustainment costs it had a decade ago, because of economies of scale. By the end of next year, the US alone would've ordered over 1000 of them. You can see the cost in comparison to other US fighters, and how it has come down.

The F-35 also does networking, much better than other aircraft with it's custom datalink (MADL). It can also do third party tracking for datalinked missiles. (See AIM-174/air launched SM-6 launched from an F-18). The F-35 also gives you access to all kinds of stealthy standoff weapons, stealthy external ones like JASSM, and internal carriage like JSOW. Stealth is just one part of it. There's a reason even Switzerland, the stereotypical neutral country, is buying F-35s, and it's not because they hate Europe or whatever.

The big advantage of fighters like the F-15EX/J-16 over F-35/J-35 is payload capacity, and the reduced need of specialised maintenance/sustainment. The Gripen doesn't have that payload capacity advantage, it's a light fighter. But F-15EX and J-16 will most likely be the last new non stealth aircraft from the US and China for domestic use.

Gripen E could (and should) be cheaper for sustainment if production scales up, but at the moment Sweden got its first fully operational Gripen E a few weeks ago. Brazil have a handful. Not many exist. Almost all Gripens currently in service are Gripen C. But the Gripen C has received extensive upgrades to keep it relevant on the modern battlefield. SAAB would probably sell a lot more of them if they were honest about it's capabilities, instead of pitching it as an F-35 competitor.

[–] skeletorsass@hexbear.net 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

MADL and networking of F-35 is not so special. Can be installed on other plane or use similar system. A lot is marketing. Bandwidth is higher compare with link 16 but principle is the same only more data. Rafale use link 16 for sensor fusion capability. SM-6 data link is also link 16.

Link 16 time resolution is not sufficient for hypersonic weapon. Is not directional signal. There is other downside but Saab can find a good data link before plane arrive in 20 years xhs-doge

[–] MarmiteLover123@hexbear.net 3 points 2 days ago

That's true, the US is even planning to put MADL on the Sniper targeting pods used by 4th gen fighters and bombers, so they can share targeting information gathered (the Sniper targeting pod can also act as an IRST). It's not something that's going to be isolated to just the F-35.MADL has been integrated with AEGIS since 2016, which allowed the F-35 to supply targeting information for an SM-6 launched via a ship, for over the horizon targeting. It's also useful for tracking ballistic missiles, the DAS sensors on the F-35 can track ballistic missiles from very far away, hundreds of miles. It tracked a SpaceX rocket from over 800 miles away. So the US also want to integrate MADL into ICBS for their ground based air defence, along with AEGIS.

Time resolution and data throughput are very important for this kind of thing, Link 16 has a couple of transfer rates, the highest around 115kbps. MADL apparently uses an atomic clock for synchronisation and operates in the Ku band. So on both of those things, it should be far better. Gripen does have a proprietary datalink called TIDLS, but that's much closer to Link 16 than MADL conceptually. Uses UHF/L band, omnidirectional, etc.