By Gustavo de Arístegui, as published by Negocios.
December 19, 2025
I. BRIEF INTRODUCTION
The last 24 hours have painted a clear—and worrying—picture of the state of the world: war is being fought with drones and debt, and Europe is still learning, belatedly, that geopolitics isn’t managed; it’s wielded. In Brussels, after hours of negotiation, the EU has opted for joint borrowing to guarantee €90 billion to Ukraine in 2026–2027, postponing—for now—the direct use of frozen Russian assets, although the issue remains open.
On the front lines, Moscow persists with its most cynical strategy: disrupting electricity, transportation, and civilian life. Kyiv, in turn, demonstrates that it is not willing to be a passive victim: it is striking Russian logistics with drones in Rostov.
In the Middle East, the humanitarian dimension is once again a strategic vector: the UN and more than 200 organizations warn of a possible operational collapse in Gaza due to administrative and registration obstacles imposed by Israel.
And in Asia, the world enters a phase of industrial deterrence: Washington approves the largest arms package for Taiwan; Beijing responds with fine-tuning of rare earths, steel export licenses and a technological “Manhattan Project” effort to break the Western monopoly on advanced chips.
II. MOST IMPORTANT NEWS OF THE LAST 24 HOURS
1. The EU changes course: from Russian assets to joint borrowing to finance Ukraine (2026-2027)
Facts
The EU agrees to €90 billion in support for Ukraine for 2026–2027 and, faced with the complexity and political cost of the plan to use frozen Russian assets as immediate collateral, decides to finance itself through joint borrowing in the markets, secured against the EU budget.
The text excludes Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic from obligations and guarantees, a formula that unlocks unanimity.
At the same time, the EU and Parliament will continue working on a loan “based on” the frozen assets of the Russian central bank, with one key rationale: Ukraine would only repay it when it receives reparations from Moscow, and, until then, the Russian assets would remain frozen.
The sticking point remains Belgium: 185 billion out of a total of 210 billion are in Euroclear, and Brussels is demanding guarantees against legal and liquidity risks; Russia has already made its move with lawsuits, including a $230 billion claim against Euroclear.
Implications
Europe avoids the financial vacuum of 2026–2027, but the message is ambiguous: it guarantees money, but delays the most morally justified action, which would be to use the aggressor’s money as structural leverage to defend the victim. In the short term, this is good; strategically, it is insufficient.
Furthermore, “unity by exception”—excluding three member states from the effort—buys time, but also normalizes internal sabotage. If the EU does not
prioritize strategic cohesion, it will end up governed by blocking minorities.
2. Russia intensifies the “electricity war”: 180,000 consumers without power after nighttime attacks
Facts
Ukraine reports 180,000 consumers without power after a Russian overnight attack, affecting five regions (including Mykolaiv, Zaporizhzhia, Cherkasy, Dnipropetrovsk and Sumy).
In the Odesa area, a drone attack kills a woman and injures her three children, damaging energy infrastructure and causing prolonged blackouts, as well as affecting routes to the Danube.
A “massive” assault on Cherkasy is also reported, with injuries and power outages.
Implications
This is not a side effect: it’s doctrine. Moscow seeks social exhaustion, political pressure, and logistical collapse in winter. The Western response must be twofold: air defense and industrial-scale repair capabilities. Otherwise, the war will be decided in substations and transformers, not on maps.
3. Kyiv deals a blow to Russian logistics: three dead in drone attacks in Rostov
Facts
Drone attacks attributed to Ukraine in Russia’s Rostov region leave three dead, including two crew members of a cargo ship set on fire in the port of Rostov-on-Don; there are injuries among the crew and in Bataysk.
Implications
Ukraine is trying to break the Kremlin’s psychological monopoly: the war is also reaching the Russian rear. It is a legitimate instrument of pressure in an existential war, but it must be wielded with discipline: military and logistical objectives, not indiscriminate spectacle. Every miscalculated step is propaganda ammunition for Moscow.
4. Gaza on the verge of operational collapse: UN and more than 200 NGOs warn of Israeli obstacles
Facts
The UN and humanitarian organizations warn that the aid operation in Gaza could collapse if impediments are not lifted, including a registration policy described as “vague, arbitrary and highly politicized,” which would put numerous NGOs at risk of closure.
Implications
Israel has the right—and the duty—to defend itself against Hamas, a terrorist organization. But strategy cannot be divorced from reality: without operational humanitarian capacity, stabilization is impossible, and the resulting vacuum is filled with radicalization and jihadist networks. Humanitarian aid is not charity: it is security.
5. Venezuela: “blockade” of sanctioned oil tankers, tension with Moscow and maneuvers towards China
Facts
Trump’s order for a “total and complete blockade” of sanctioned oil tankers entering or leaving Venezuela has paralyzed some traffic for fear of seizures, increasing pressure on the regime’s main source of income.
Meanwhile, PDVSA authorizes the departure to China of two non-sanctioned supertankers with cargoes of around 1.9 million barrels each, while the phenomenon of the “shadow fleet” and the shutdown of transponders persists.
Implications
Let’s be blunt: Chavismo is a narco-dictatorship . Attacking its financial muscle can be effective if done intelligently and with regional coordination. The risk lies in the regime’s asymmetric response and its search for support in Tehran and Moscow. Precisely for this reason, the pressure must be sustained, legal, and operational, not merely rhetorical.
6. Taiwan: Washington approves the largest arms package in its history ($11.1 billion)
Facts
The United States announces an $11.1 billion package of HIMARS missiles, howitzers, anti-tank missiles and drones, aimed at reinforcing Taiwan’s “asymmetric warfare”; China reacts with condemnation.
Implications
Deterrence in the Strait cannot be sustained with press releases. It requires capability, ammunition, social resilience, and political clarity. For Europe, this is a warning: if the Indo-Pacific becomes destabilized, the cost will reach our ports in the form of inflation, shortages, and industrial crisis.
7. China loosens with one hand and tightens with the other: “fast” licenses for rare earth elements
Facts
Beijing confirms it is beginning to issue general licenses to expedite exports of rare earth elements, essential for automotive and high-tech industries; the EU says there are reports, but no full clarity on beneficiaries.
Implications
The lesson is simple: dependency isn’t negotiated, it’s paid for. Today it accelerates; tomorrow it slows down. If Europe doesn’t reduce its exposure, it will remain hostage to an administrative stamp issued in Beijing.
8. China will regulate steel exports with licenses starting in 2026
Facts
China will introduce an export licensing system for some 300 steel products starting in 2026 to monitor exports and trade frictions, claiming alignment with WTO rules.
Implications
This isn’t just “technicality”: it’s both defensive and offensive industrial policy. China’s overcapacity is putting pressure on markets; the world is responding with barriers; Beijing is perfecting its control. Europe must strengthen its industry—without hesitation—if it doesn’t want to become a museum with impeccable regulations and closed factories.
9. China’s “Manhattan Project” for chips: advances in EUV, but still far from a Western monopoly
Facts
An investigation describes a Chinese state effort to develop EUV lithography: an operational prototype that generates EUV light, with an official target of advanced proprietary chips by 2028 (sources suggest closer to 2030).
Implications
Sanctions slow things down, but they don’t stop China. China is playing the long game, using state resources, and with a clear objective: technological independence with military and industrial reach. The West can only respond with serious investment, alliances, and protection of critical supply chains.
10. EU-Mercosur stalls: France is not ready; Brazil presents it as a geopolitical priority
Facts
Macron reiterates that France is not prepared to sign the agreement, citing reciprocity and stricter controls; Brazil insists that the pact is a geopolitical priority and regrets the delay in signing.
Implications
Europe has the wrong enemy: inaction opens the door for China in Latin America. Safeguards, yes; reflexive blockades, no. Mercosur is about geopolitics, not just tariffs.
11. US-China Rivalry: Geoeconomics, Gold and Technology
Facts
Macroeconomic analyses for the end of 2025 point to a global “soft landing”: reasonable growth, further interest rate cuts and trade resilience despite tariff threats, although with serious medium-term risks due to excessive public debt.
Geoeconomics is consolidating as a central tool in the US-China rivalry, with tensions surrounding supply chains, technological control, and the use of precious metals and strategic raw materials as instruments of power.
Implications
A world fragmented into trade and technology blocs favors organized autocracies that know how to play with the dependence of supply chains; therefore, the answer cannot be indiscriminate protectionism, but an intelligent strategy of diversification, industrial resilience and defense of free but not naive trade.
Chinese expansionism in Asia, the Indo-Pacific, and Africa cannot be countered with solemn declarations, but with economic presence, solid investment agreements, credible maritime security, and a transatlantic alliance that recovers strategic ambition; otherwise, Beijing will continue to buy silence and goodwill with credit and infrastructure projects.
12. India consolidates its position as an Indo-Atlantic pivot
Facts
India and Oman have signed a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement that strengthens India’s presence in the Gulf and consolidates the country as a key player in trade and energy connectivity between Asia, the Middle East and Africa.
The pact comes at a time when New Delhi is balancing its relations with Washington and Moscow, while positioning itself as an alternative to Chinese hegemony in Asia.
Implications
India’s consolidation as an Indo-Atlantic power offers an extraordinary opportunity for the West to forge a democratic axis to counterbalance China, provided that New Delhi is seen as a partner with its own interests, not merely as a “junior ally”.
For Europe and for Spain, the lesson is obvious: whoever arrives late to this new map of alliances will be relegated to irrelevance; the void is not filled by good intentions or pro-European speeches, but by investment, high-level diplomatic presence and the ability to offer real alternatives to Chinese and Russian influence.
III. MEDIA RACK
Reuters
The day is marked by three key issues: (1) the European decision to finance Ukraine with joint borrowing, leaving the direct use of Russian assets for later; (2) the intensification of the Russian energy war and the Ukrainian response with drones; (3) the Indo-Pacific pivot (Taiwan) and the industrial pulse with China (rare earths, steel, chips).
The Washington Post / The Guardian (Taiwan as a strategic red line)
Both emphasize the record size of the package, the logic of deterrence, and the direct impact on the relationship with Beijing.
Al Jazeera and regional press (Venezuela / war and narrative)
Al Jazeera reports on the “blockade” of sanctioned oil tankers and frames it as a political escalation; Reuters provides the operational data on exports and “floats in the shadows”.
Asharq Al Awsat and Arab Circuit (Gaza: Operational Humanitarian Alert)
They echo the UN/NGO warning about registration closures and the impact on essential services.
Straits Times / Asian Echoes (EU-Ukraine and the Assets Debate)
They capture the European pulse on financing and the role of depositaries, with a focus on legal and political risk.
Japan Times / Asian business press (chips and “Manhattan Project”)
They amplify the narrative of China’s technological leap, with the strategic interpretation: sanctions yes, but a structural race is underway.
Xinhua (steel: regulatory framework and legitimation)
It presents the licensing system as “normal” and rules-compliant; Reuters provides the context of global trade frictions.
IV. RISK TRAFFIC LIGHT
| Level | Risk | Operational reading |
| 🔴 | Ukraine–Russia | Energy warfare + drones: sustained escalation and civilian attrition. |
| 🔴 | Loop | Risk of humanitarian-operational collapse and radicalization effect. |
| 🟠 | EU (strategic cohesion) | Joint borrowing unlocks funds, but unity is paid for with “exceptions”. |
| 🟠 | Taiwan Strait | Record package increases deterrence but also friction with Beijing. |
| 🟠 | Supply chain (rare earths / steel / chips) | China refines levers: licensing, control, and technological substitution. |
| 🟠 | Venezuela | Pressure is useful if sustained; risk of asymmetric response from the regime and its allies. |
V. EDITORIAL COMMENTARY
Europe has done what was essential—providing funds—but not what was crucial—demonstrating resolve. Joint borrowing for Ukraine is immediate good news, but it cannot become an excuse to continue postponing the fairest measure: that the aggressor pay. If Russia believes that the threat of litigation and reprisals is enough to deter the EU, what is legal pressure today will become military pressure tomorrow.
Meanwhile, the real battle is being waged in Ukraine: Moscow is cutting off electricity to break the will of the Russians; Kyiv is attacking Russian logistics to demonstrate that the war is not a spectacle televised from Moscow. And we, the West, must choose between two options: to be reliable allies or sophisticated commentators on the tragedy.
In Gaza, the warnings from the UN and NGOs cannot be dismissed as mere noise. Hamas terrorism is a reality; Israel’s right to defend itself is also a reality. But the administrative strangulation of aid—if it leads to closure—does not bring security: it brings hatred, chaos, and a worse future. Strategic effectiveness requires strength and control, yes, but also governance and operational humanity.
And in Asia, the great truth prevails once again: China wields material and technological leverage; the United States responds with military deterrence; Europe cannot simply manage its decline. If we want to continue defending freedoms, prosperity, and human dignity, we must prioritize industry, defense, alliances, and technological sovereignty. Anything else is rhetoric for comfortable times, and those times are over.