Alexandre Dugin. Géopolitique de la troisième guerre mondiale. 9/4/26, dans https://www.geopolitika.ru

Alexandre Dugin continua diariamente a dialogar em entrevistas, ou a escrever para alguns espaços da web, transmitindo a sua clara visão da luta do capitalismo globalista e sionista contra a multipolaridade, ou contra os países que se lhe opõem. Eis um texto publicado a 9 de Abril, na versão francesa, no valioso site https://www.geopolitika.ru

 Alexandre Douguine

«De nombreux analystes avancent actuellement l’hypothèse que la troisième guerre mondiale a déjà commencé et que nous en sommes à sa première phase. Que ce soit vrai ou non, nous le saurons dans un avenir proche, mais supposons pour l’instant que cette hypothèse est fondée et tentons d’en examiner les contours géopolitiques.
La signification de la troisième guerre mondiale réside dans un changement radical de toute l’architecture de la politique mondiale. Les institutions internationales existantes depuis longtemps ne correspondent plus à la réalité. Elles sont toujours structurées selon la logique du système de Westphalie et du monde bipolaire. Le modèle de Westphalie repose sur la reconnaissance de la souveraineté de tous les États reconnus au niveau international. L’ONU est bâtie sur le même principe.
Cependant, dans la pratique, au cours des cent dernières années, le principe de souveraineté est devenu une pure hypocrisie. Dans les années 1930, en Europe, un système s’était formé où seuls trois forces étaient souveraines, et de manière strictement idéologique : 1) l’Occident bourgeois-capitaliste (Grande-Bretagne, États-Unis, France, etc.) ; 2) l’URSS communiste ; 3) les pays de l’Axe, avec une idéologie fasciste.
Une telle situation a perduré après la fin de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, mais un seul de ces pôles idéologiques — le fasciste — a disparu. Cependant, les deux autres — capitaliste et socialiste — se sont renforcés et étendus. Mais là encore, aucun État-nation en soi n’était souverain. Certains étaient dirigés depuis Moscou, d’autres depuis Washington. Le mouvement de non-alignement oscillait entre ces deux pôles.
L’auto-dissolution du Pacte de Varsovie et l’effondrement de l’URSS ont éliminé le bipolarisme, et à partir de ce moment, seul les États-Unis ont été porteurs de la souveraineté. L’ONU et le modèle de Westphalie sont devenus de simples paravents de l’hégémonie mondiale. Ainsi est apparu un monde unipolaire.
Dès les années 1990, il est devenu évident qu’il fallait revoir le droit international au profit soit d’un gouvernement mondial (version libérale de la fin de l’histoire selon Francis Fukuyama), soit d’une hégémonie occidentale directe (les néoconservateurs américains). Les pays européens ont suivi le scénario du gouvernement mondial, en cédant leur souveraineté en faveur de l’UE, en tant qu’étape préparatoire à celui-ci. À leur tour, il a été suggéré discrètement à tous les autres de se préparer à la même chose.
Cependant, au début des années 2000, une nouvelle tendance a émergé: la volonté de restaurer la souveraineté en Russie et en Chine. Moscou et Pékin ont tendu vers la réalisation de la souveraineté non plus comme une fiction, mais comme une réalité. C’est ainsi que la multipolarité s’est manifestée. Désormais, il était proposé que les porteurs de la souveraineté deviennent des États-civilisations — aussi bien déjà constitués (Russie, Chine, Inde) que potentiels (monde islamique, Afrique, Amérique latine). Et c’est ainsi qu’ils se sont constitués en BRICS.
En conséquence — le projet unipolaire est entré en collision avec le multipolaire. Tant les globalistes que les néoconservateurs s’opposaient au multipolarisme. Le potentiel de conflit était évident, et les anciennes normes et règles, encore issues des périodes géopolitiques précédentes, n’étaient plus applicables.
Il n’importe pas de savoir si la troisième guerre mondiale a déjà commencé ou non, mais sa teneur géopolitique est claire : c’est une guerre entre l’unipolarité et le multipolarisme pour une nouvelle architecture mondiale, pour la répartition des centres de décision souverains — soit uniquement à l’Ouest, soit parmi les États-civilisations en pleine montée en puissance.
Donald Trump est arrivé à la Maison-Blanche pour un second mandat en 2024 avec un programme qui laissait penser qu’il adopterait le multipolarisme: refus des interventions, critique des globalistes, conflit direct avec les libéraux, attaques virulentes contre les néoconservateurs, concentration sur les problèmes intérieurs des États-Unis, appel à revenir aux valeurs traditionnelles — tout cela laissait penser que Trump et son administration prendraient partie pour le multipolarisme, tout en cherchant à assurer aux États-Unis des positions aussi avantageuses que possible dans cette nouvelle configuration.
Cependant, très vite, l’administration américaine a commencé à se rapprocher des néoconservateurs et à s’éloigner de sa position initiale. Par la suite, elle a soutenu le génocide à Gaza, poursuivi l’approvisionnement de Kiev en renseignements, capturé Maduro, préparé une invasion de Cuba, et enfin déclaré la guerre à l’Iran avec l’assassinat des dirigeants politiques de la République islamique d’Iran.
La troisième guerre mondiale a été déclenchée par les États-Unis dans le contexte de la préservation, du renforcement et même de l’affirmation définitive du modèle unipolaire de l’ordre mondial. On propose à tous les autres d’être soit des vassaux obéissants, soit des ennemis. C’est avec ces adversaires du monde unipolaire que Washington mène cette troisième guerre mondiale. En jeu, il y a la souveraineté. Il n’existe pas encore une seule puissance capable de faire face de manière symétrique aux États-Unis, c’est pourquoi ceux-ci déploient des actions militaires sur plusieurs fronts simultanément.
Le premier front de cette guerre du monde unipolaire contre un monde multipolaire est l’Ukraine. Cette guerre a été provoquée par les néocons dès l’époque d’Obama, et ce sont surtout les globalistes qui y ont pris part, voyant en la Russie non seulement un obstacle géopolitique à l’établissement d’un gouvernement mondial, mais aussi une menace idéologique. Trump a hérité cette guerre, et il ne s’en réjouit pas vraiment (la Russie étant une puissance nucléaire avec une idéologie conservatrice, contre laquelle le président américain n’a rien à redire). Mais Moscou n’est manifestement pas prête à reconnaître sa vassalité envers Washington, insistant sur la souveraineté et la multipolarité, ce qui est incompatible avec l’hégémonie unipolaire. Quoi qu’il en soit, Washington continue de soutenir le régime de Kiev, tout en transférant l’initiative aux pays européens de l’OTAN, pour lesquels ce conflit revêt un caractère à la fois essentiel et idéologique. Ce front demeure important, et plus Moscou défend sa souveraineté, plus Washington sera dur avec la Russie.
Le deuxième front des États-Unis concerne l’hémisphère occidental: l’enlèvement de Maduro et la prise de contrôle du Venezuela, la préparation d’une invasion de Cuba, des actions contre les cartels au Mexique, en Colombie, en Équateur, etc. En substance, c’est une guerre contre toute l’Amérique latine dès lors qu’un pays tente de résister au diktat direct des États-Unis.
Le troisième front, actuellement à la phase la plus intense, est l’attaque israélo-américaine contre l’Iran, qui a enflamé tout le Moyen-Orient. Cela inclut également la poursuite des opérations militaires de Tel-Aviv à Gaza, au Liban, au Yémen, ainsi que la refonte de toute la carte du Moyen-Orient.
En substance, l’Occident mène actuellement une guerre simultanée contre trois pôles du monde multipolaire (Russie, monde islamique, Amérique latine). À l’ordre du jour, l’ouverture d’un quatrième front — dans le Pacifique. Le conflit avec la Chine est inévitable selon la logique globale des changements en cours dans la politique mondiale.
L’Inde — un autre État-civilisation — adopte encore une position fluctuante et, en raison des contradictions avec la Chine et le Pakistan, penche vers les États-Unis et Israël. Mais pour jouer le rôle de vassal docile, l’Inde, avec son potentiel, ne semble guère adaptée, d’autant plus que la multipolarité constitue la ligne officielle de son gouvernement.
Ainsi, la carte de la géopolitique de la troisième guerre mondiale est esquissée dans ses grandes lignes. La faction du monde unipolaire y est représentée par les États-Unis, l’Occident dans son ensemble et leurs vassaux, y compris le Japon et la Corée du Sud en Extrême-Orient. Ils se battent selon deux scénarios qui ne sont pas totalement identiques: le mondialisme (l’UE et le Parti démocrate des États-Unis) et l’hégémonie américaine directe (les néocons).
Par ailleurs, Netanyahu a dans cette configuration ses propres plans autonomes pour la construction d’un grand Israël, ce qui est difficilement conciliable avec le mondialisme libéral, mais tout à fait soutenu par la Maison-Blanche, les néocons et les chrétiens sionistes. Cependant, dans l’ensemble, cette coalition reste relativement solidaire face au monde multipolaire et, à mesure que l’escalade augmente, elle sera contrainte d’agir de plus en plus de manière unie, en laissant les contradictions internes pour plus tard.
Le camp du monde multipolaire est beaucoup plus dispersé. Ses principaux centres sont la Russie et la Chine. La Russie mène déjà sa guerre en Ukraine, tandis que la Chine évite pour l’instant une confrontation directe. Le monde islamique est divisé, une partie des pays musulmans étant sous contrôle total des États-Unis. L’Iran et le monde chiite en général sont les plus radicaux, ils sont en première ligne de la confrontation contre l’Occident, mais les Iraniens ne comprennent pas encore totalement que d’autres fronts de cette guerre, notamment l’Ukraine, les touchent directement.
La direction de la RPD Chine comprend parfaitement la situation géopolitique globale, étant la plus ouverte à soutenir la Russie dans la confrontation contre l’Occident sur le front ukrainien.
L’Amérique latine est également fragmentée. Le gouvernement de Lula au Brésil penche vers la multipolarité, tandis que le régime de Milei en Argentine soutient, au contraire, l’axe américano-israélien.
En Afrique, la multipolarité est la plus fortement ressentie par les pays de l’Association du Sahel (Mali, Burkina Faso et Niger). La position leur est proche, tout comme celle de l’Afrique du Sud, de la Centrafrique, de l’Éthiopie et de certains autres pays. Mais aucun d’eux ne possède une position consolidée.
L’Inde adopte une position neutre — d’un côté, en tant que membre du bloc multipolaire, et de l’autre, en raison de ses relations étroites avec les États-Unis et Israël.
Globalement, les forces unipolaires, malgré toutes leurs contradictions internes, sont plus consolidées et ont une vision plus claire de contre qui, pour quels intérêts et quelles valeurs elles combattent. La divergence de priorités et même de visions sur le modèle final de l’ordre mondial souhaité par l’Occident — les États-Unis — ne constitue pas un obstacle à leur stratégie commune, à leur coopération étroite dans le domaine du renseignement, à l’échange de technologies militaires, etc.
De leur côté, le camp multipolaire est beaucoup plus dispersé. Même les pays directement attaqués par l’Occident unipolaire ne se précipitent pas pour intégrer leur potentiel ni pour soutenir directement les autres.»

Alexandre Dugin. 

On espere que les membres plus forts du BRICS manifestent plus dynamiquemente l'unité du project si desirée par l'Humanitéet soutiennent plus ceux qui sont attaqués par USA, Israel e NATO. 

O Prefácio (3ª e última p.) ao Livro da Sabedoria Oriental, de Sohrawardi, por al-Shahrazuri. A escola da sabedoria iluminativa, ou al-Ishraq.

 

Página inicial do manuscrito do Hikmat al-ʿIshraq de al-Suhrawardi, transcrita em escrita taliq por Sayyid Muhammad Munshi. Istambul, 1477-8. TSM A3267, f. 1b

 Eis-nos com a 3ª e última parte do prefácio de Al-Sharazuri ao Kitab hikmat al ishraq, o Livro da Sabedoria Oriental, de Sohravardi, que temos traduzido e comentado a partir da versão francesa apresentada por Henry Corbin, Le Livre de la Sagesse Orientale. Sublinhamos as partes mais significativas e inserimos breves anotações.

No curto 10º parágrafo Sharazuri lembra que Sohravardi fez um trabalho de ressuscitar o que estava morto e abolido, dos símbolos e semelhanças, e no 11º parágrafo, e vamos transcrever até ao último, começa assim: «Ele manifestou um apaixonado zelo pelos sábios antigos, fortíssimo na sua defesa, enfrentando quem quer que os atacasse, e usando de todos os seus recursos para o triunfo da sua causa. Tudo isto com uma clarividência e uma experiência segura de si mesma, não à cega e de modo baralhado; não, pois foi o resultado de um desvendamento, no fim dum treino espiritual, subtil e prodigioso, e ao mesmo tempo através duma construção filosófica autêntica e perfeita. Porque Sohravardi escreveu igualmente nas duas sabedorias, a que se revela na visão interior (kashfiya) e a que depende da dialéctica filosófica (bathîya), com uma  profundeza idêntica nos dois tipos de sabedoria, o limite do seu pensamento não poderá ser sondado nem o fundo aproximado. Isto reconhecerás em ti mesmo, quando  mergulharmos no comentário da sua exposição e ao ser exposto à luz o seu desejo-intenção. Reconhecerás que falou de aspectos sublimes, de segredos preciosos e bem guardados, que, no nosso parecer, ninguém senão ele declarou, e atingiu, nem entre os filósofos nem entre os místicos. Isso mostrar-te-á que ele teve o pé firme na Sabedoria mística (hikmah)  e a mão poderosa na filosofia (falsafa),  o coração constante na visão-interior, a penetração gnóstica na  inteligência das Luzes. [Valioso este discernimento de quatro níveis de trabalho: a via contemplativa e mística, o conhecimento filosófico, e sobretudo o ter o coração constante na visão interior, que pode significar estar constantemente consciente do amor e aspiração do seu coração, ou ainda ter constantemente a visão interior direcionada para o Alto, seja para as inteligências Arcangélicas, seja para a Luz da Luz, ou ainda conseguir penetrar gnosticamente no sentido e essência das luzes que se lhe desvendam]

- Tal como ele disse uma vez: "Os sinais da profecia do Amor apareceram comigo.
Antes de mim estavam escondidos, no meu tempo foram divulgados."

Tudo isto compreenderás, quando tiveres realizado em acto esta via, e compreendido alguns dos seus segredos e estados. Os livros deste eminente Sábio são todos preciosos e de grande proveito, e muito em especial o Livro da Sabedoria Oriental, que encerra em si todo o tipo de maravilhas misturadas com subtis pensamentos invulgares, e ensinamentos tais que não se conseguirá ver algo de mais autêntico e de perfeito na terra, no que diz respeito à teologia bem como às outras ciências. Este livro trata da questão maior, é entre todos os assuntos o mais sagrado, e contudo é um tesouro escondido, um segredo envolto, que não se pode atingir senão pelos caminhos apropriados. É uma minoria quem se dedica a eles e os conhece. Para a maioria dos que vieram na pista de Sohravardi, não foi mais fácil reunirem-se com ele do que deslindar os símbolos, ou descobrir a profundidade do seu pensamento, porque estavam demasiado absorvidos pelos assuntos da pátria terrestre [daí a valorização na sua ida do recolhimento solitário, e o desprendimento do envolvimento terrenos excessivo] e também porque estavam demasiado habituados aos livros dos Peripatéticos [Aristóteles e a sua escola, mais de dialéctica racional discursia] e uniformemente familiarizados com eles. Eis porque  este livro foi negligenciado e esquecido inevitavelmente, pela dificuldade do que é o fundamento (ma'khadh) e a subtileza da sua abordagem.

Pela nossa parte, a graça divina permitiu-nos aceder a tudo o que ele contém de marcante e extraordinário; foi-nos dado alcançar pela hermenêutica espiritual (kashf) as realidades essenciais e as subtilezas abstrusas. Pela intelecção especulativa aprofundada, apareceram-nos o magro e o gordo e, por uma outra via [a mística, contemplativa, da visão espiritual (kashfiya)], o que ele  apresenta de subtil e de forte.  Mas guardamos ciosamente os segredos do livro sem os divulgar, e selando-os com rigor durante muito tempo, certamente não por avareza ou mesquinhice, mas por causa da abscondidade da sua fonte, da subtileza da sua profundidades e das suas discussões, e do pequeno número de discípulos verdadeiramente livres, capazes e valentes, enfim por causa da morte de ciência e da sabedoria e do número ínfimo das pessoas de coração, de inteligência, nesta época onde os assuntos de filosofia estão em completa estagnação.

Mesmo assim, após a multiplicação das viagens e mudanças nos diferentes países, da frequência da movimentação dos mais Capazes e Valentes, dotados de alma penetrante e de altos desígnios-aspirações, eis chegado o pleno meio do dia deste homem superior. O entusiasmo multiplicou-se a propósito dos seus livros e das suas exposições; tornou-se imperiosa a vontade dos espíritos sagazes de estudar as sentenças e os encadeamentos; os desejos de se colherem o fruto dos seus ensinamentos e doutrinas multiplicaram-se, particularmente em relação ao Livro da Sabedoria Oriental. Mas não se poderia abordar o livro senão depois de se terem abolido os próprios traços de ciência habitual, de  se terem expulsado de si-mesmo a sabedoria vulgar e do saber estabelecido até ao seu esgotamento, pois este livro é a quinta-essência da Sabedoria e do saber, um tesouro de maravilhas, o tipo por excelência das coisas estranhas. Nem nós próprios nem outros, jamais reencontrámos um livro  mais autêntico no que diz respeito à ciência teosófica e mistagógica.

Nesta situação, decidi-me a escrever um comentário que abraçasse tanto os fundamentos como as deduções, englobando as teses da Sabedoria mística e da Sabedoria filosófica, eliminando a casca  e as superfluidades, detendo-me em todos os livros e capítulos, projectando a claridade sobre as profundezas, fazendo cair o véu diante o enigma dos símbolos e das alusões, perscrutando as fontes mesmas das teses. 

Tudo o que se pretende com isto, é a verificação do Verdadeiro, a obtenção da veracidade (sidq), é transmitir com precisão as indicações e facilitar assim a rota aos Itinerantes, em marcha para a Majestade  divina sacrosanta.»  

Assim termina o prefácio de al-Azuhrari ao Kitab Hikmat al-Ishraq, o Livro da Sabedoria Oriental, de Sohravardi, o shaykh ou mestre da Ishraq, ao qual se segue, na versão traduzida por Henry Corbin que consultamos, o Prólogo e os cinco Livros, a que acrescentou os comentários de dois dos fiéis da tradição ou linha Ishraq, da Sabedoria Oriental ou Iluminadora, ambos da mesma cidade, Qotboddin Shirazi e Molla Sadra Shirazi. É possível que venha a traduzir e a comentar ainda alguma parte deles. Muitas luzes das Inteligências Angélicas e Arcangélicas e da Luz da Luz, e boas inspirações e comunhões dos Ishraqat...                                                                              

O prefácio (2ª p.) ao Livro da Sabedoria Oriental, de Sohrawardi, por al-Shahrazuri. A escola da sabedoria iluminativa, ou al-Ishraq.

                                                                  

Vamos avançar com a 2ª parte da tradução do excelente prefácio de Shamsoddin Muhammad al-Shahrazuri al-Ishraqi, ou mais simplesmente Shahrazuri, de origem curda, filósofo místico do séc. XIII, ao livro do seu mestre  Sohrawardi, o fundador da escola Ishraqi, seguindo a tradução para francês redigida por Henry Corbin, do Kitab hikmat al ishraq, o Livro da Sabedoria Oriental, dado à luz na editora Verdier, em 1986, selecionando contudo apenas as melhores partes, e com breves comentários. 

 No 1º artigo e parte, transcrevemos os cinco primeiros parágrafos, nos quais Shahrazuri, um profundo conhecedor da obra de Sohrawardi, já que publicou dois grandes comentários a ela,  realça a necessidade de termos uma vida equilibrada, ética, para podermos chegar ao conhecimento das essências através de uma sabedoria íntima, resultante   da visão interior das luzes (kashifya) e do discernimento dialéctico, a qual chegada a hora da morte é sabedoria e luz iluminadora ascensional do caminho para os mundos angélicos, espirituais, divinos.

Nos três parágrafos seguintes, 7º, 8º e 9º,  Shahrazuri diferencia os conhecimentos técnicos instrumentais e institucionais mutáveis com o tempo, tal a gramática, a poesia e o direito,  dos conhecimentos essenciais,  os respeitantes à verdade e realidade, que são do domínio do imutável ou perene, tal Deus, os anjos, o espírito e considera portanto que são estes que  levam à perfeição plena, al-kamâl al-haqîqî, ou à felicidade.

Avancemos então para o 10º parágrafo que começa assim, e sublinhamos o mais importante: «Por sua vez os conhecimentos essenciais subdividem-se em duas categorias: a 1ª, um saber que é dwawqiya, sapiência íntima [ou teosofia mística], e kashfiya, revelação interior; e a 2ª categoria, um saber hahthya, dialéctico racional e nazariya, intelectual. Pelo primeiro saber  entende-se a visão directa das Ideias e Essências imateriais num face a face íntimo, não por  reflexão dialéctica (fikr) nem pela construção de argumentos silogísticos (dalil qiyasi), ou estabelecendo uma notificação definidora ou descritiva, mas pela answar ishraqiyat, as Luzes orientais ou iluminantes,  que se sucedem por intervalos [ou espaçadamente, segundo a merecida graça divina], extasiando a alma fora [ou acima] do corpo, enquanto a alma se elucida a si mesma como que em suspensão, contemplando a sua solitude (esseulement) e o que está acima dela, contemporânea [ou sentida nesse presente] da inâya, da pronoia  divina [percepção subtil ou contemplativa da providência divina benfazeja em ação.] 

 Esta Sabedoria que é teosofia mística (hikma dhawqîya), pouco numerosos são os Sábios que a alcançam. Ela só foi dada aos que foram solitários (afrad) entre os mais eminentes dos teósofos (hakim, plural, hakma). Entre os quais os Antigos Sábios que precederam Aristóteles no tempo, tais Agathadaimon [o anjo bom, cultuado entre os gregos, tal Sócrates, e alexandrinos], Hermes, Empédocles, Pitágoras, Sócrates, Platão, e alguns outros ainda entre os Antigos sábios eminentes, a eminência dos quais prestam testemunho os diferentes povos. Se bem que a principal preocupação deles fossem os aspectos ou coisas da teosofia, eles não ignoraram a dialéctica racional. Longe disso, eles deixaram controvérsias, escritos, indicações, a partir dos quais o Imam [o mestre, o polo] da filosofia racional, Aristóteles, teve então a força de elaborar correcções e análises. É por isso que ele próprio, Aristóteles, declarou: «Quão se excederam em resolver as questões metafísicas os Antigos que filosofaram a filosofia do Verdadeiro, mesmo que enganando-se sobre algumas questões físicas.» 

[Anote-se que a obra de al-Shahrazuri mais conhecida, embora também tenha escrito também de medicina, é Nuzhat al arwâḥ wa rawḍat al-afrâḥ, um dicionário bio-bibliográfico dos grandes filósofos e teólogos gregos e islâmicos, donde a sua familiaridade nas citações dos elos gregos da Prisca Teologia, ou Philosophia perennis, embora os mesmos elos tenham sido referidos por Sohrawardi.]

Entre os Sábios preeminentes, houve também alguns modernos, posteriores a Aristóteles. Contudo a sua Sabedoria Mística foi extremamente fraca, porque Aristóteles absorveu-os pela discussão e explicação, a refutação e a concessão, as interrogações e respostas, etc., entre outras coisa que impedem a realização duma experiência mística [crítica ao excesso de pensamento e análise discursiva que nos últimos tempos ainda mais se materializou nos estruturalismo, e que se torna um obstáculo à meditação contemplativa e mística interna]. Sobretudo, junto a isto, o amor da política, e por acima disso ainda as  controvérsias que não deixaram de crescer e desenvolver-se, enquanto o conhecimento místico foi-se enfraquecendo, de decadência em decadência, até às proximidades imediatos da nossa época. Com o progresso do tempo e o decorrer dos séculos, desapareceram os traços do rasto dos Antigos sábios, o ensinamento deles  para atingir a visão das Luzes imateriais puras,  a fonte subtil  donde derivava a sua doutrina respeitante à separação da alma - ou ao contrário a sua não-separação -, depois da ruína do corpo; as suas indicações apagaram-se, e o que subsistia foi completamente alterado.

O mal redobrando cada vez mais até a essa época muito próxima de nós [no século XII-XIII], aconteceu que um dos mais Aptos (musta'iddun), entre os que não se satisfazia só pela filosofia racional, decidiu atingir algo da Sabedoria essencial. A tentativa não foi fácil, pois tinha desaparecido o caminho que podia conduzir ao fim procurado. Sim, a via ou caminho da Sabedoria não cessara de ser obstruída e perturbada, até ao erguer das estrelas da felicidade, até  aparecer no horizonte da alma a aurora da Sabedoria. Então, das alturas do mundo celeste, as Luzes das puras Essências iluminaram, com a aparição de nosso Mestre, sultão da realidade-essencial (Sultan al-haqiqat), que primeiro se empenhou no Caminho ou via, o Muzhir al-daqa'iq, o hierofante  dos mistérios (ou o revelador das subtilezas), aquele que derrama profusamente as realidades essenciais (Fâ-id a-haqa'iq), mina da Sabedoria,  Mestre da intenção espiritual (Sâhib al himmat), aquele que se empenhou em guiar para o Malakut (o reino espiritual) e se lançou sobre o sulco de Jabarut (o reino Divino), o mais eminente dos antigos e dos modernos, quinta-essência dos filósofos e dos sábios teósofos, Shihab  al-Milla wa'l Haqq wa'l Din (estrela da religião, da verdade e da fé) Abu'l-Futuh al Sohravardi, que Deus santifique a sua alma e dê o repouso ao seu túmulo».

Continuaremos a traduzir (com a 3ª e última parte) e a comentar brevemente este tão belo quão instrutivo e espiritual testemunho de um discípulo do sultão da sabedoria, Sohrawardi. Que as luzes, sons e perfumes  das sua almas e espíritos, com as bênçãos divinas, brotem do mausoléu dos seus ensinamentos, e irradiem paz, justiça, verdade no mundo conflituoso, e tão traiçoeiro e assassino por parte dos USA e Israel, dos nossos dias. Lux, Nûr.

Dugin: Iran and the Agony of the Unipolar World. War, hegemony, and multipolar Resistance. With some annotations...7/4/2026

 One more very good article of Alexnder Dugin, where he shows how the megalomaniac Trump and his fanaticals advisers are pursuing the same oppressive hegemonic project against the natural growth of the mutipolarity and ask us to see with discernment the fight thatgoing on, and to take position by the side of Iran, of the resistance, the dignity of the independent countries with their civilizations and sane values, or to be by the side of the USA imperialism and Israel nazism.... Be aware of your choice.... Be in the Light, Nûr in persian...

Alexander Dugin argues that Trump has stripped away diplomatic illusions and revealed the raw, brutal essence of American hegemony, turning the conflict with Iran into a decisive battle for the future of multipolarity.

Conversation with Alexander Dugin on the Sputnik TV program Escalation.
Host: Let us begin our discussion with Iran. Breaking news has just come in from the Islamic Republic’s Foreign Ministry: its official spokesperson, Esmaeil Baghaei, stated that Tehran has already formulated its response to the proposals from international mediators regarding a ceasefire.
At the same time, we are observing a parallel process: Donald Trump’s ultimatum, whose deadline expires today, April 6. In his usual style, the American president is threatening Iran with having to live “in hell” if it does not agree to a deal and reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
What is actually happening right now on the diplomatic front between Washington and Tehran? After all, only recently the Iranian side insisted that no negotiations were taking place, and today we’re seeing clear signs of movement and discussion of a possible framework agreement, reportedly prepared with mediation from Pakistan and China. How do you assess this situation?
Alexander Dugin: There is so much disinformation surrounding this war that it is extremely difficult to rely on anyone’s statements. We see negotiators being killed in the very course of the process, and any agreements are violated immediately. There is a sense that with Israel and the United States it is equally difficult both to conduct negotiations and to refrain from them—perhaps the former is even more dangerous. I think the Iranians have already learned this [treacherous nature of Israel, and USA]

The fact that Trump went so far as to post an obscene message on Western Easter clearly shows whom they are dealing with. On the day when Catholics were celebrating the Resurrection of Christ, the U.S. president wrote that the coming Tuesday would be a day of destruction for all of Iran’s bridges and energy systems. I quote: “You’ve never seen what’s going to happen on Tuesday.” This is followed by a profane demand to open the strait and a direct threat: “You crazy bastards will live in hell.” And the final, utterly blasphemous note: “Praise be to Allah. President DONALD J. TRUMP.”
This is a literal quotation from his post on Truth Social. Even many American analysts saw in this signs of a rapidly developing clinical condition: no U.S. president in history has ever allowed himself to speak this way either to enemies or to allies. It shows complete disregard both for his own religion and for the feelings of others.
We are confronted with unprecedented diplomatic conditions. There are no longer any obligations, red lines, rules, or norms. What we are dealing with is harsh, crude, and utterly infernal aggression, where no word carries any weight.
Some might say that something extraordinary is taking place, whereas I would argue that there is nothing fundamentally new here. If we look at how the United States behaved under previous presidents, they expressed themselves diplomatically, politely, observed etiquette and norms. Of course, the current behavior is unprecedented: some kind of “animal” now occupies the White House. But it is important to emphasize that Americans have always behaved this way. The presentation was different; the essence remained the same. [So true. Before a a moree educated level of the elite, now the most crude and wild extracta, but very rich, from the republican party and its adepts]
The West, led by the United States, has always sought to strengthen its hegemony, and when that hegemony began to slip away, it preserved it by any means: demonizing opponents, relying on brute force, and justifying this afterward with false arguments. Trump has introduced nothing essentially new into American policy. He has simply discarded the “humanitarian veil,” the diplomatic camouflage. His methods, ultimatums, and negotiating style are no different from those of his predecessors, whether on the right or the left.
Trump is engaged in a kind of political pornography: he tears away all coverings and says, “Look, this is how things really are—coarse and brutal.” Some like this, others do not, but we have shifted into a blunt, street-level language of international relations. At the same time, the substance of Western policy has remained unchanged.
We had hoped that Trump would change this course, that he would focus on America’s internal problems. But he did not. Internal problems are mounting rapidly; nothing has improved—everything has only become worse. In foreign policy, there are no changes either, except for one: the manner in which actions are presented and, if you will, a peculiar, frightening honesty.
Trump is the embodiment of the aggressor’s “honesty.” He speaks directly: “I will kill you like dogs. Whether you are guilty or not does not matter—I will destroy everything. I will crush you, trample you underfoot. I will control your oil and appoint your leaders. You are nothing, you are my slaves, and if you resist, then you are rebellious slaves.” He behaves this way with everyone—but in fact, this is how all American presidents of recent decades have behaved. I repeat: the form has changed radically, but the essence has not changed one bit.
And this is the most dangerous thing: Trump has not become something fundamentally new in American history. He continues the same aggressive, hegemonic, rigidly unipolar policy as his predecessors—he simply packages it differently. Hence tomorrow’s ultimatum to Iran. Does Trump truly intend to destroy the country’s entire energy system? We know that the Americans have a certain superiority in the air; the extent of their control is significant. We can expect ground operations on islands and massive bombardments.
I believe that very little now depends on negotiations. The Iranians will not acknowledge defeat and will not capitulate before the brute force of a bloody aggressor—they simply cannot do so by their very nature. Most likely, they will advance their own “vigorous Shiite project.” Shiites have often lost in material terms throughout history, yet they have survived under horrific conditions for centuries as a persecuted minority.

For them, they are shaped by the ethic of Karbala: a readiness to accept earthly defeat for the sake of a great spiritual victory, like the early Christian martyrs. This is a particular culture of sacrifice and endurance. And when Trump attacks this society with such open cruelty, he receives in response not fear, but the utmost consolidation and courage. The heroic Iranian people today stand united against pure, unalloyed evil coming from the West. [So true, the futuwwa or jivanmarta, the spirit of chevaltry]

Host: On the day of Western Christian Easter, such messages appear especially symbolic and ominous. Let us return to your thesis that Trump has merely cast aside politeness and begun to speak “more honestly,” while remaining within the familiar pattern of American imperial policy.
But does it not seem to you that such bluntness drastically reduces his room for maneuver? After all, this kind of “candor” in diplomacy could alienate even those U.S. partners who for decades tolerated Washington’s hegemony so long as it was wrapped in the softer rhetoric of his predecessors. Is Trump not pushing himself into isolation, depriving himself of the ability to use the “soft power” that other presidents wielded so skillfully?
Alexander Dugin: Yes, absolutely. This manner alienates many people and creates a strong wave of opposition. This applies both to Democrats and to a significant portion of his former supporters from the MAGA [Make American Great Again] movement, who sincerely believed his promises of a return to traditional values and a rejection of aggressive wars. Today, Trump is turning away a vast number of people—from ordinary Americans and Europeans to the globalists themselves.
Moreover, look at what the ideologues of neoconservatism—the very same Kristol and Kagan—are saying online. In essence, Trump is now embodying their own program: open, unapologetic U.S. hegemony in its harshest form. After all, they always wanted war with Iran, pressure on Russia, a reduced role for European NATO partners, and aggression in the Pacific region. Yet even these theorists of the “iron fist” recoil in horror at how Trump is carrying it out. They say: “We wanted this, but the wild and crude manner in which it is being executed discredits our own plans.” [So true, from the european chihuahua]
It is striking: even those who formulated the current agenda of the White House do not accept the savagery with which it is being implemented. I often ask myself: why is that? If he behaved just a bit more carefully, calmly, and simply more decently—at least within the bounds of minimal diplomatic protocol—he could avoid a great many problems within his own camp, among those who stand on the same side of the barricades as he does.

Why does he not do this? I think the reason lies solely in a shortage of time.[ Or may be he is taken by Netanyahu blakmail, by fears, by crazy dreams of megalomaniac power, by evangalical zealots.] Trump is striving to complete a certain global program by 2028, ignoring any obstacles. In essence, he adheres to a policy of accelerationism—a philosophical and political theory of artificially accelerating historical and social time. He simply pays no attention to details, goes all in, charges forward with eyes shut toward the realization of his objectives, regardless of the colossal opposition from all sides.
But what are these objectives? Gradually, a clear and coherent logic begins to take shape in Trump’s behavior—monstrous though it may be.
The first point is the restoration of the United States’ weakened influence in the Western Hemisphere. We see this in the pressure on Venezuela and Cuba, in the intense confrontation with Mexico and Colombia. Trump wants to establish direct control over Latin America in the spirit of a renewed Monroe Doctrine, which they have openly declared in their new national security concept.
The second point is the restoration of total control over the Middle East through its proxy, Israel. [Or, better, vice-versa...] It can be debated at length who the true initiator is—Washington or Tel Aviv—but the objective is clear: to destroy the main poles of sovereignty in the Islamic world. The number one target here is Iran. And next in line is Turkey. A war with it is effectively already built into their plans for the next stage. [No need about Turkey, as they have been obeying or playing according to Israel...]
Next (we skip the third point—you’ll see why): the fourth goal of Trump’s presidency in this framework is an inevitable war with China in the Pacific region. Beijing is his most fundamental competitor. Trump’s plan is simple and terrifying: to win all the preceding smaller wars in order to unleash a full-scale strategic war against China by the end of his term. [Too much for USA. They would be defeated...]
And here arises that very missing third point: what is to be done about Russia? After all, Russia is also one of the most powerful poles of the multipolar world. And here Trump diverges fundamentally from the globalists. Trump believes that Russia, in itself, is not a fatal problem for him. He hopes that Moscow will ultimately accept U.S. terms—for example, open its airspace to American missiles directed over the North Pole against China, and refrain from interfering in the final stage of global reordering. [No, surely he doesn't think that russians are so desloyal to China...]

If Russia shows resistance, they plan to pressure it from the European side: to provoke a military escalation around Kaliningrad or intensify strikes on energy infrastructure and ports. We already see such attacks, which are clearly backed by American operators. Trump believes that we can be forced into vassal status, mistakenly interpreting our willingness to negotiate as weakness and capitulation. If Russia does not yield, it will be further pressured—but for him this is not an end in itself, only the removal of an obstacle.
For the globalists and liberals, by contrast, Russia appears as the most dangerous opponent, one that must be destroyed first. This is their key difference. Therefore, at the third stage, Trump does not want to expend unnecessary effort: he does not make grand gestures in support of Ukraine, believing that we will be dealt with anyway. For him, the main target is China.
If we combine all four points, we see a strategy of radically preserving a unipolar world through the destruction of the poles of sovereignty: Russia, Iran, and China. The main blows are aimed at our prestige and independence, because the Americans understand that if we endure and grow stronger, the rest of the world will follow us.[As they are following now Iran, and economicaly China]
And here, behind what appears to be Trump’s erratic behavior, a clear and coherent logic emerges. This is a total war against the multipolar world, a struggle to preserve Western hegemony through the sequential—precisely sequential—destruction of opponents. [So true.] Each next actor in line is given a false promise that it will not be affected. First they say: “Do not interfere in Venezuela and Cuba.” Then: “We will deal with Iran; this does not concern you.” Then: “We will subdue Russia, and you, China, wait—we respect you.”
The strategy is simple: once we, one way or another, cease to represent a sovereign force and assert our sovereignty, Washington will turn its full force against China. This is a rational policy, albeit one expressed in hysterical, harsh terms, with a brutal, inhuman character and infernal aggression. What stands before us is a plan—a strategy that may be backed by an even deeper state than the one Trump promised to fight.[He is completely under the deepest state, the zionist globalist.]
Trump himself, with his accelerationism and his particular manner, proves to be merely an instrument of the monstrous agony of the unipolar world. And this agony is extremely dangerous. Many of us believed that Western dominance was already in the past and that multipolarity was an accomplished fact. But it seems we were just as premature as Francis Fukuyama was with his “end of history.”
The multipolar world has not yet arrived—the struggle for it is happening now. [Sure, still a great battle...] If we endure and prevail, humanity will win the right to a multipolar future. But we must be clear-eyed: in this battle, we also have a chance of losing.

Host: A question from our listener, “Alexander, how do you assess the likelihood that Donald Trump might use nuclear weapons in the conflict with Iran? And what exactly did the U.S. president mean when he promised Tehran ‘a real hell’”?
Alexander Dugin: I do not think that Trump is currently directly threatening Iran with nuclear weapons, although their use cannot be ruled out. While we have only spoken about readiness for nuclear tests, the United States has already begun conducting them—this once again shows how rapidly they are implementing their policy. Both Washington and Israel are technically capable of such a step, but for now, “hell for Iran,” in Trump’s understanding, takes a different form.
What this primarily refers to is the total [never can happen..] destruction of Iran’s industrial and logistical infrastructure: bridges, transport hubs, and energy facilities. This implies massive bombardments, missile strikes from all sides, and, most likely, the beginning of a ground operation aimed at forcing open the Strait of Hormuz. [Very, very difficult.And so USA desisted from it on 8/4, even if for the moment]
However, the question of the use of nuclear weapons remains open. If events do not unfold according to the American scenario, then at the next stage of escalation—and the intensity continues to rise—the nuclear arsenal may be brought into play. I do not think this will happen tomorrow, but the threshold for using force has been dangerously lowered.

Host: Another question concerns the capacity of the United States to sustain a prolonged conflict. Many experts and analysts are already calculating the cost of the current operation: according to some reports, in the first few days alone, spending on munitions has exceeded five and a half billion dollars. There are claims that stockpiles of certain types of missiles—such as Patriot interceptors and precision-guided munitions—are being depleted faster than the defense industry can replenish them.
How prepared is America, in reality, for a long, exhausting war if the diplomatic track fails and Iran does not respond to Trump’s ultimatum? Does Washington have sufficient resources to sustain such a pace of escalation without undermining its combat readiness in other regions?
Alexander Dugin: In my view, America is technically prepared for a long war—perhaps even longer than many of us assume. Despite the “fog of war,” the United States retains vast resources for conducting a large-scale and prolonged conflict with Iran. However, such a strategy will inevitably bring serious political consequences within the United States itself.
We see how the number of Trump’s opponents is rapidly growing. For him, a prolonged war represents a major risk, especially given the approaching midterm elections for Congress, which will take place this fall on November 3. Any prolongation of hostilities will work against him domestically. Therefore, Washington’s technical readiness for a long war is one thing, while its political stability under such conditions is quite another.

 
Host: We have discussed in detail Donald Trump’s global strategy for his current term. And here is what is notable: right now, in the midst of a large-scale conflict in the Middle East, we are witnessing an unprecedented shake-up of the top U.S. command structure.
Why is Trump taking such a risk and changing horses in midstream during a war with Iran? Is this part of that same plan to dismantle the “deep state,” or is there another, purely military necessity behind it?
Alexander Dugin: Within the U.S. leadership, especially in the military sphere, Trump has a vast number of opponents who disagree both with what he is doing and with how he is doing it. Among the military, more balanced and composed figures tend to prevail. But when Trump renamed the Department of Defense as the Department of War and appointed Pete Hegseth—a radical Christian Zionist, a fanatic with a skinhead-like ideology—as head of the department, career American generals were deeply alarmed. [So true, how such a zealot skin head brainwashed can be leading the USA forces? What a decadence...]

  

These people have been through many wars; they are not soft, they are globalists and supporters of American imperialism, yet even they saw that nothing like this had ever happened before. Even Joe Kent, the former head of the Counterterrorism Department who personally participated in U.S. operations in the Middle East, reacted with outrage. Neither he nor the dismissed multi-starred generals are opponents of American power. On the contrary, they believe that Trump’s actions are undermining that power.
Here we see the same situation as with the neoconservatives we discussed earlier in the program. Trump is carrying out their program, yet the theorists themselves watch in horror at the methods of its execution. He seeks to strengthen hegemony, while the military—who have devoted their lives to serving that hegemony—are appalled by the methods and the results. This view is widespread. It is also important that among those dismissed was the head of the chaplain corps: what is happening in the White House today is a full-blown frenzy of so-called evangelicals.

                              
This is a group of extreme Protestant fundamentalists, mainly Baptists and Calvinists, who are convinced that we are living in the end times. For them, the battles and military actions around Israel signify the Second Coming of the one they call Christ. Of course, this has nothing to do with our Lord Jesus Christ, but they use the same name. In their model, this “Protestant Jesus” is supposed to arrive almost in flying saucers to save the “born again.”

In this dispensationalist worldview, the main enemies are declared to be Iranians, Muslims, and Russians. In the White House, they are now conducting outright rituals: speaking in tongues, shouting incomprehensible phrases, frantically blessing Trump and calling him a new messiah. Traditional Christians—above all Catholics, but also more rational and measured Protestants—are horrified by what is happening in the corridors of power and in the new “Department of War.”

                      

In place of the previous functionaries, overt maniacs and possessed fanatics are emerging, who shriek and writhe in hysteria. They shamelessly flatter Trump, deify him, and call him the second incarnation of God. This is no longer politics, and not even religion in the usual sense—it is a kind of dark, ecstatic force that has seized control of the world’s most powerful state. [Paula White, is the so called priestess of zio-evangelical sect...]

 

And of course, in this situation, Pete Hegseth is trying to bring this frenzied, pseudo-religious eschatology directly into the American military. This runs counter to the logic and mindset of career officers, who completely reject it. That is why the head of the chaplain corps, Major General William “Bill” Green, has been dismissed, along with combat generals, including Chief of Staff Randy George. They disagree with Trump, but for him this is part of his own logic.
Previously, he hosted a show in which, after each segment, he could dance around waving chicken drumsticks. But today, when we say that clowns rule the world, these are no longer merely bloody comedians like Zelensky. We are now dealing with figures far more terrifying. After performing in his “Trump show”—this cheap and repulsive parody of The Muppet Show—Trump would usually end each episode with the phrase: “You are fired.” And he would indeed dismiss an employee of his corporation. That was the climax: “You’re fired—get out!” It did not matter that you had served faithfully and done everything required.
Now he has brought this show into the White House. If something displeases him—“You are fired.” That is how he treated Attorney General Pamela Bondi, who had been his loyal lawyer, covering up his scandals and lying relentlessly, provoking widespread hatred. Recently, he told her: “You’re fired, ma’am.” In other words: get out. He treated Kristi Noem the same way, and he acts likewise with combat generals. For him, this is simply an extension of the television screen, where real people and the fate of entire countries are nothing more than props for his endless show. 

 For Trump, kicking someone out the door isn’t just a gesture; he doesn’t even need a reason. You can be endlessly loyal to him, you can grovel before him and fulfill his every whim, but the moment something shifts in his mind, he delivers his trademark line: “You’re fired.” That is exactly how he is now treating combat generals in the midst of the Iranian campaign, triggering a growing wave of resentment within the military.
At the same time, however, the logic we spoke about earlier is becoming increasingly clear. It seems that the real situation in the West is far more dire than we imagine. They are, in fact, hanging by a thread. If the global governing structures have handed power to a man who acts in this manner—swiftly, charging ahead, disregarding all decorum—then they simply have no other choice. There is no longer time for liberal illusions, for humanitarian façades, or for talk of human rights. Trump no longer even pays lip service to such things. Everything now comes down to one thing: “Destroy everything in our path, because our power has been shaken, and we must hold on to it.” [So true, even if some european leaders still try to maintain a certain decorum, by opposing themselves a bit to what Trump is revealing of the huge face of the western oppressiv hegemony that they pursuit with much hypocrisy within democratic and moral aparences.]
The real forces that govern the West have decided that this is precisely the kind of instrument they need at this moment. Later, Trump will be blamed for everything and accused of every possible sin. If he himself has not already passed from this world by then, he and his entourage—these corrupt sadists like Kushner, Witkoff, [so monstruous fake diplomats, in fact dealers, like Rubio] and others with thoroughly compromised reputations—will be dragged through courts and prisons. His entire retinue will be subjected to massive, demonstrative punishment. But the task will have been completed: using them, they will attempt to cement a collapsing hegemony. [Very difficult to happen in USA, as Democrats and Republicans serve the same dark deep state zionized]

                          

And in this, in my view, lies the only rational explanation for what we are witnessing. These brutal, humiliating dismissals even of the most loyal associates—this is his default mode. He does not simply fire people; he seeks to trample and humiliate them. We saw how he threw out Pamela Bondi, who had been his shadow and shield; we saw how he treated Kristi Noem. This is also how he deals with Europeans: for him, they are not allies, but slaves, whom he doesn’t even bother to encourage.[Trump is the most megalomaniac and sociopath of the already so degenerated last USA presidents]
For now, Trump tries to avoid Russia and China in terms of such direct personal insults, but it is clear that he could lash out at any moment. [He has done already sometimes...] For him, this is no problem. And there is a certain logic in this: apparently, by no other means than such blunt, accelerated, and extremely aggressive hegemony can the West preserve its unipolar order. [I think it is much from himself, from his brutal megalomania. ]

 They simply do not have time to create illusions, to maintain politeness with “noble vassals.” There is no time for liberalism, human rights, and other pseudo-values that once served as a cover for the same harsh dictatorship. The global forces [or, or at least, the brainwashed republicains voters...] have chosen a man capable of carrying out this dirty, unpopular mission—for humanity as a whole and for American society itself—as quickly and ruthlessly as possible. Trump’s true mission, long concealed behind the glitter of his showmanship, is becoming ever clearer: it is a final, desperate attempt to keep the world under a single master’s control.
Today, I even published a post about my conversation with Tucker Carlson, which took place exactly two years ago. At that time, Trump’s full election campaign had not yet even begun, and we assumed that his main opponent would be Biden. We discussed the future with Tucker, and he admitted that what he feared most was the influence of the neoconservatives on Trump. [Very good prevision. And who knows if Tucker Carlson will run for President one day?]
When we turned to the prospects of a multipolar world, Tucker paused for a moment and said: “I think Trump will not accept multipolarity.” At that time, Carlson still supported him, seeing in him a defender of traditional values and an opponent of liberalism. Incidentally, Tucker has a very negative view of Ukrainian nationalism and hoped that Trump would shift the U.S. position in our favor. Nevertheless, on the question of multipolarity, he already had his doubts. [And Dugin had also that hope that Trump was against the deep state...]
Today, Tucker Carlson is in open opposition to Trump within the United States, even though he was one of those who helped bring him to power. Now Tucker openly says that he did not realize who Trump would turn out to be. He believed in him, shared his ideas, but Trump betrayed the MAGA movement and his supporters. Many of them are now in opposition, although Tucker is still occasionally invited to the White House despite his criticism.
Even then, Carlson foresaw that Trump would have problems with the multipolar world. And yet multipolarity is the only form of a truly just world order and the only way to put an end to Western hegemony. [So true.]Most of those who initially supported Trump agreed with this: they only wanted America to take a worthy place in this new world. But at a certain point, Trump declared war on multipolarity. And this is no longer a lie, not an accidental gesture, and not a nervous outburst. This is the core of his policy—a ruthless struggle against the multipolar world.
How might this end? Either Trump will inflict critical damage on multipolarity, pushing this process back by decades—such a scenario cannot be ruled out, given his extreme aggression. Or, on the contrary, his extremely harsh actions will accelerate the collapse of Western hegemony, generating chaos and division within NATO, potentially even leading to civil war within the United States itself. The stakes have been raised to the limit: Trump has put everything on the line, forcing us, the supporters of the multipolar world, to do the same. In this game, it is impossible to remain on the sidelines—those who do not participate simply allow others to make decisions for them.
Trump is going all in to preserve U.S. hegemony at any cost. And we have no choice but to accept this logic of escalation. There is no way to evade it. Much is said now about negotiations, but can the Iranians—a great and proud people with a millennia-long history of the Achaemenid and Sassanian empires—really accept the role of “miserable slaves” that Trump assigns to them? I cannot imagine it. [Sure, never...] Even a small nation would not tolerate such a tone, let alone a great civilization.
Trump does not need negotiations. His ultimatum to Iran is a clear warning to China and to us: “This is what will happen to you if you dare to resist.” This is a direct war against us, and we cannot remain mere observers. It is impossible to pretend that nothing is happening in Venezuela, Cuba, or the Middle East while sanctioned attacks are being carried out against our territory, and our ports and tankers are being blocked.
We are now at the third of the four stages of Trump’s plan [Or better, of USA dark deep forces and state]. At the end lies war with China. Beijing hopes to delay this moment, but the Americans will strike when it suits them. Right now, Iran is what stands between China and the fate of the others, and between us and the fate of Venezuela. Trump apparently believes that we will never dare to use our nuclear arsenal, and therefore he keeps for Washington the right to decide how and when force is to be used. Either he truly does not regard us as a fatal threat, or he is skillfully pretending, postponing the final reckoning for the time being.

Host: Iran today sets an example for many: our fellow citizens sincerely admire how steadfastly Tehran is resisting enormous pressure. I would like, in conclusion, to touch on the issue of strikes on infrastructure, but now in relation to our own region.
Very recently, just days ago, an attempted terrorist attack on the TurkStream gas pipeline was prevented. And now a significant development: several countries—Russia, Turkey, Hungary, and Serbia—have agreed to create a coalition to ensure the physical security of this pipeline.
Is this not a direct response to the aggressive policy of the West and, in particular, to the methods in which the United States may be involved?

Alexander Dugin: I am convinced that this cannot be an initiative of the Ukrainians. [I think it can be from Ukraine and United Kingdom, the most anti-russians] Ukraine is merely a compliant instrument, a technical executor of American policy. It is obvious that the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines was in Washington’s interest. Now, against the backdrop of the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, the United States is trying to create a situation in which Russia will not be able to benefit from a sharp rise in energy prices. Strikes on our infrastructure and ports are a direct initiative of the United States.
As for the coalition to protect TurkStream, with all due respect to its participants, we need to understand how limited their sovereignty is. If the Americans decide to blow up this pipeline, they will do so without paying any attention to the protective alliances of semi-vassal European states. In an extreme case, they will simply replace the governments there if those governments prove too persistent. [Not so easy...]
The situation is critical. It is one thing to fight Ukraine or even the European Union, and quite another to confront the United States, which stands behind them. Although it may seem that Washington is reluctant to enter into direct conflict, all fundamental decisions are made there. Under Trump, only the façade has changed; the essence remains the same: rigid, uncompromising hegemony.
We must recognize the radical nature of this moment. And Iran truly offers an example worth following. Today, humanity faces a stark choice: either you are Iran—that is, resistance—or you are Hitler in a new form of American and Israeli Nazism, which the world is now confronting in full measure.
There is no third path in this escalation. [So true. Victory to the sacred Iran, land of the courageous Shiia and of the great poets and mystical philosophers]

(Translated from the Russian)

Carta de um amigo de Beirute. Letter from Beirut. Bilingual. A circular após os assassinos israelitas terem perdido freio de novo.

  9 de Abril de 2026, o cessar de fogo acordado por 15 dias entre USA-Israel e Irão, foi mais uma vez aproveitado pelos traiçoeiros sionistas israelitas para destruírem e matarem, com 160 bombardeamentos, mais de um milhar de pessoas, indiscrimaidamente. O que dizer, como não protestar contra o que só pode ser interpretado como vingança, por terem sofrido um pouco em Telavive, do que fizeram em Gaza. Invejosos, vingativos, destroem os vizinhos do Líbano, centenas de mulheres e crianças mortas, e milhares de habitações destruídas. Ódio, Satan em acção.   

A carta circula pela net, e vi-a, através da amiga Maren Darc no Vk.com, uma rede alternativa ao repressivo e bloqueador Facebook...

    Carta de um amigo em Beirute:

"Os israelitas bombardearam áreas altamente povoadas e não evacuadas. A última vez que ouvi, havia 254 mortos e 1169 feridos. No dia anterior, no momento em que bombardearam (meu marido) e eu estávamos passando por aquela área. O número de vítimas aumentará porque ainda há pessoas sob os escombros. Isso é maior do que a explosão do porto de Beirute. E eles estão a ameaçar que continuarão seus ataques não anunciados por 48 horas. E ninguém sabe onde eles vão bombardear. Não sabemos  onde é que pode haver um lugar seguro. E o triste é também eles ficarem impunes de tudo o que de diabólico fazem e ninguém ser capaz de detê-los [Só o Irão, além da resistência libanesa e iraquiana, vão fazendo algo, embora, perante a consciência planetária Israel, se tenha desmascarado como o demónio, o anti-Cristo.].

Tudo isso porque Benjamin Netanyahu sabe que a paz, o fim do estado caótico da guerram significará o fim de seu mandato como Primeiro-Ministro de Israel, para ser julgado por corrupção e no Tribunal Penal Internacional de Haia por crimes contra a Humanidade
O povo do Líbano sofre por causa do ego de um homem diabólico.
Um homem que lidera uma nação de demasiados maníacos genocidas.
Onde está a Europa?
Onde está a Rússia?
Onde está a China?
Não se preocupem em perguntar em que posição fica a América, 
Perderam o norte moral há muito tempo. E por isso dizem: 
Estamos com Israel.
Estamos com os assassinos.
                                     

Received in Vk. com, through Maren Darc: 

                       Letter from a Friend in Beirut:
“They bombed highly populated and non-evacuated areas. Last I heard there were 254 dead and 1169 injured. The day before, at the time they bombed, (my husband) and I were passing in that area. The casualties will rise because there are still people under the rubble. This is higher than the Beirut port explosion. And they are threatening that they will continue their unannounced raids for 48 hours. So nobody knows where they are going to bomb today. We don’t know anymore where it’s safe. And the sad thing is that they are getting away with everything they do and no one is able to stop them.”
All this because Benjamin Netanyahu understands that peace will mean the end of his tenure as Israel’s Prime Minister.
The people of Lebanon suffer because of the ego of one man.
A man who heads a nation of genocidal maniacs.
Where is Europe?
Where is Russia?
Where is China?
Don’t bother asking where America is.
We lost our moral compass a long time ago.
We stand with Israel.
We stand with the murderers.

Bombardeiam porque o sionismo é tão diabólico como o nazismo, ambos racistas, supremacistas, do mal.

Karl Richter: O Irão como o Katechon ou restrictor e catequizador mundial e a humilhação do grande Satã.

Neste dia 8 de Abril, quando  um frágil e mais que tudo simbólico cessar-fogo por duas semanas na guerra dos USA e Israel contra o Irão foi ao de leve acordado entre os USA e o Irão (certamente para desagrado de Israel que não deixará de o sabotar), para discutirem os quinze pontos da proposta iraniana, e porque com os fracassos políticos e militares da liderança norte-americana começou-se a erguer uma forte contestação interna e mundial ao megalómano presidente Donald Trump e ao seu primário secretário de Defesa Pete Hegseth, por entre a confluência de tantas vozes discordantes,  ergue-se com simplicidade, discernimento, amor e cautela [ciente da criminalidade do ultra-sionismo de Netanyahu e Givr] a do jovem geo-político alemão Karl Richter, prestando uma bela homenagem ao povo iraniano, num texto intitulado o Irão como o Katechon e a humilhação do Grande Satã.  

Porque estou também do lado da justiça, da fraternidade e da multipolaridade e logo com o povo e regime iraniano, e porque também estive no Irão, não tanto em Meshad como ele mas noutra cidade santa Qom a conferenciar sobre o valor dos místicos, da poesia e do dialogo inter-religioso, resolvi traduzir e partilhar o texto, continuando assim a homenagear e a apoiar continuamente  no blogue - e no campo unitário de energia consciência e informação - o povo e pessoas amigas do Irão e o seu governo, forças armadas e civilização. Oiçamos então Karl Richter na valiosa Multipolar Press, https://www.multipolarpress.com/p/hero-nation-iran:
                                              
   «Na noite passada, testemunhamos um ponto de virada que só pode ser descrito como histórico—um acontecimento do tipo que talvez se vivencie uma vez em cada trinta ou quarenta anos. A abertura do Muro de Berlim em 1989 foi um desses acontecimentos (mesmo que hoje o vejamos de forma diferente), e outro foi a dissolução da União Soviética em 1991.
Mas desta vez, algo ainda maior estava em jogo, e qualquer pessoa com certa sensibilidade poderia perceber: o povo iraniano foi até os limites do que é humanamente possível. Centenas de milhares estavam preparados para defender pontes, fábricas e infraestruturas vitais com suas próprias vidas depois que Trump e o seu aliado Israel anunciaram o plano criminoso de destruírem as fundações da vida iraniana. Trump, aparentemente movido apenas por forças sinistras e sussurros, ameaçou abertamente com “o fim de uma civilização inteira.” Os iranianos estavam prontos para se sacrificar. Deus os ouviu. Quem desejar pode ver um milagre naquela noite.
Nas últimas semanas, os iranianos revelaram-se como o povo heroico do nosso tempo. Quem teria esperado que eles resistissem por cinco semanas contra os militares fortemente armados e as potências nucleares dos Estados Unidos e de Israel? Que eles acabariam prevalecendo? Algo incomparável se desenrolou diante de nossos olhos.
As consequências ainda são difíceis de prever. O "Grande Satã" foi humilhado diante dos olhos do mundo. Agora estão sobre a mesa as exigências de Teerão, que formam a base das próximas negociações de cessar-fogo: a retirada completa de todas as forças dos EUA da região; a libertação total de todos os activos iranianos congelados no exterior; a abertura do Estreito de Ormuz sob as condições iranianas; e a codificação desses termos numa resolução vinculativa da ONU sob a lei internacional. Se os iranianos conseguirem isso, eles emergirão como vitoriosos—como uma nova potência regional e como um membro pleno da comunidade das nações que, após 47 anos de sanções mortais impostas pelo "Ocidente baseado em valores," quebrou as suas correntes e levanta-se com a cabeça erguida. N. b.: recentemente, o economista político americano Prof. John J. Mearsheimer [muito entrevistado no Youtube pois sendo professor universitário judeu nos USA é completamente crítico de Netanyahu e do Israel sionista] lembrou que as sanções dos EUA causaram 38 milhões de mortes nos últimos 50 anos.
38 milhões de mortes....
Se a paz que agora está a ser negociada se mantiver, os historiadores futuros datarão a partir deste momento o início de uma nova ordem no século XXI — uma em que o mundo deixou de dançar ao som do Ocidente. Os Estados Unidos, humilhados no seu domínio mais fundamental — o poder militar — daqui em diante serão um tigre sem dentes [nem 8 nem 80...]. O mundo, além dos europeus completamente esvaziados e impotentes [apenas algo, pois ainda são muito arrogantes e teimosos], não sentirá mais  respeito ou medo dele [algo, mas não tanto ainda, pois o infinito dólar ou euro corruptor continua]. O seu tempo acabou, e isto é para o melhor.

Karl Richter, em Mashhad, em maio de 2018, durante um congresso de comemoração do Dia de al-Quds, isto é, de Jerusalém capital da Palestina, que ocorre anualmente deste 1979 na sexta-feira última do mês do Ramadão.

Admito que não escrevo estas linhas sem emoção e profunda perturbação. Conheço o Irão por experiência pessoal; conheço e respeito a cultura persa de cinco mil anos, que está entre as mais ricas e belas do mundo. Está ligada à nossa através de mil canais subtis e subterrâneos; como é bem sabido, os iranianos são um povo irmão ariano. Eles contam isso aos viajantes alemães a cada passo, porque é importante para eles.

Neste momento, as ruas e cidades do país estão tomadas por uma alegria sem limites. Um povo provou ao mundo que o domínio criminoso do "USrael" não é uma lei da natureza. Pode ser resistido. A sua máscara pode ser arrancada de seu rosto. Vale a pena lutar. Vale a pena estar pronto para o sacrifício. Quando estaremos prontos, como alemães [, como europeus, como cidadãos do mundo]?
Não desejo ser uma [profetiza] Cassandra. O grande Satã não descansará. Exige a grande guerra, o grande massacre, que mais uma vez foi evitado na noite passada. Os iranianos são, no momento, o Katechon—o restrictor [o controlador, o catequizador, muito trabalhado por Alexandre Dugin] que, no fim dos tempos, se opõe por um breve momento à vinda do Anticristo. Pode-se desvalorizar isto simplesmente como uma fantasia. Mas é suficiente para simplesmente abrir  os nossos olhos. E ainda assim, uma pessoa pode, neste preciso momento, sentir-se profundamente feliz.»