By Gustavo de Arístegui, as published in Negocios.
December 26, 2025
I. BRIEF INTRODUCTION
The last 24 hours have presented a particularly revealing picture: Washington has decided to tighten the noose around the Chavista narco-regime with a de facto oil “quarantine” that Moscow is quick to label “piracy,” while in Ukraine the most delicate phase of the peace plan is beginning, with Zelensky determined to discuss territory directly with Trump, without intermediaries or technocratic euphemisms. At the same time, North Korea displays submarines and missiles as if they were dynastic symbols, Pope Leo XIV places the suffering in Gaza at the moral heart of Christmas, and the United States is bombing the Islamic State in Nigeria to defend Christian communities too often abandoned to their fate.
Meanwhile, Jordan is forced to bomb drug and arms trafficking routes on the Syrian border, China attempts to present structural pressure on India as “responsible management,” Israel takes a hard look at itself after months of war, and Sudan is mired in a forgotten war that opens the door to jihadists, traffickers, and revisionist powers. The common denominator is clear: either Atlantic liberal democracy regains the strategic and moral initiative, or it will cede decisive ground to narco-states, theocracies, and regimes that make cynicism their official doctrine.
II. MOST IMPORTANT NEWS OF THE LAST 24 HOURS
1. Oil “quarantine” for Venezuela and the pulse in the Caribbean
Facts
The White House has ordered the United States Armed Forces to focus “almost exclusively” on enforcing a “quarantine” on Venezuelan oil for at least the next two months, prioritizing economic pressure through sanctions and maritime control over any direct military strikes against the Nicolás Maduro regime.
The U.S. Coast Guard acknowledges that, for now, it lacks sufficient means to board and detain a Venezuelan-linked oil tanker attempting to evade interdiction, while considering the deployment of additional assets.
– Caracas has approved a law “against piracy and blockades” as a political and propaganda response to the campaign to interdict ships and cargoes, trying to legally shield its transport network and its international partners.
– Russia has accused the United States of reviving “piracy” and “banditry” in the Caribbean through the de facto blockade of Venezuelan oil, calling Washington’s actions “totally illegal” and presenting itself as a defender of Maduro’s “sovereignty”.
Implications
– This oil “quarantine” is, in practice, a selective narco-energy embargo: it is not an imperial whim, but the legitimate use of economic and maritime pressure against a narco-dictatorial regime that has turned Venezuela into a gigantic mafia organization with a destabilizing vocation for the entire region.
– The Russian discourse on “piracy” reveals Moscow’s hypocrisy: the same Kremlin that violates borders in Ukraine pretends to give lessons on international maritime law to protect an ally that launders money, finances criminal networks and relies on Iran, Russia and Cuba to perpetuate its impunity.
– If the operation is carried out with intelligence, coordination with Caribbean allies, and legal transparency, the “quarantine” could become a turning point to financially strangle Chavismo; if it is managed clumsily, it will leave room for Maduro’s victimhood narrative and the propaganda of Moscow, Beijing, and Havana about an alleged “imperialist blockade.”
2. Peace plan for Ukraine: Zelensky wants to discuss territory face-to-face with Trump
Facts
– Volodymyr Zelensky has demanded a direct meeting with President Trump to address “the most sensitive issues” of the future peace agreement with Russia, particularly territorial control, following a round of negotiations in Miami where delegations from Kyiv and Washington made progress on a 20-point plan to end the war.
The plan under discussion includes a cessation of fighting along current lines, security guarantees, financing for reconstruction, and the future status of critical infrastructure such as the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, but leaves border adjustments and the possible demilitarization of certain areas up in the air.
The Kremlin has confirmed that it is “analyzing” the US documents on the peace plan, stressing that it sees “slow but steady progress” in the talks, without giving up for now on its objectives of control over Donbas and other occupied areas.
Implications
– That the debate on territory moves to the leader-to-leader level is inevitable, but extremely dangerous: a peace that legitimizes any form of annexation or “freezing” of front lines imposed by force would break a fundamental taboo of the European order and become an instruction manual for future aggressors.
– The Atlanticist editorial line requires us to be very clear: supporting Trump’s ambition to end the war and rebalance security in Europe is compatible with a firm critique of any temptation to sacrifice Ukrainian sovereignty in exchange for a short-term “peace deal” that leaves Kyiv mutilated and Moscow rewarded.
Europe must abandon the comfort of the “restless spectator” and accept that, if it does not set its own red lines, others will decide for it what price it is willing to pay for peace, opening the door to a dangerous doctrine of borders revisable by arms.
3. North Korea: nuclear submarine and long-range missile
Facts
Kim Jong-un has overseen the construction of a potentially nuclear-powered, 8,700-ton submarine and witnessed the firing of a long-range surface-to-air missile, according to the KCNA news agency; in the images he appears accompanied by his daughter, presented de facto as his political heir.
The missile, launched near the east coast, reportedly hit targets 200 km away in a test to validate new altitude and range capabilities, while the South Korean Armed Forces confirmed the test and stressed that they were prepared to respond.
Implications
North Korea is sending a message on several levels: growing technological capabilities, a desire to build a more credible naval force, and the construction of a dynastic narrative around Kim’s daughter; all this at a time of tension on the Washington-Beijing axis and a realignment of alliances in the Indo-Pacific.
– For Japan, South Korea and, ultimately, Europe, this development confirms that proliferation is not on pause: while semantic nuances about “denuclearization” are being discussed in diplomatic forums, Pyongyang continues to develop vectors that could destabilize the regional balance and open the door to a wider arms race.
4. Trump’s coup in Honduras: Asfura wins after contentious recount
Facts
Nasry Asfura, backed by Trump, has been declared the winner of the presidential elections in Honduras after weeks of delays, appeals and allegations of fraud; the electoral authority has confirmed the result in a climate of strong polarization.
The United States has urged all parties to accept the outcome and channel their disagreements through institutional means, while making it clear that it will continue to support Honduras on security, migration and the fight against organized crime.
Implications
The triumph of a candidate aligned with the White House shows that, even in a Central America saturated with populism and criminal gangs, there is room for pragmatic center-right formulas if messages of order, growth and cooperation with the United States are combined.
The key will be to see if the new government translates Washington’s support into real reforms against drug trafficking and corruption, or if it simply changes friends in the elite while everything remains the same: the worst scenario for the region is a “pro-American” facade that doesn’t touch the interests of the mafias.
5. Fight against terrorism: Washington’s blow to ISI in Nigeria
Facts
– The United States has launched an airstrike against fighters of the so-called Islamic State in northwest Nigeria, at the request of the Nigerian government, following a series of massacres against Christian communities.
– President Trump has stressed that the goal was to punish “terrorist scum” who were murdering mainly Christians “at levels not seen in many years, even centuries,” reinforcing his message that Christianity faces an “existential threat” in that country.
Implications
– This type of operation embodies the policy we defend: cooperation between democracies —albeit imperfect— to strike at jihadist organizations that mix murderous ideology, territorial control and criminal connections; it is the opposite of relativistic defeatism that reduces them to “insurgents” or “militants”.
– Nigeria is a laboratory for something bigger: if jihadism consolidates sanctuaries in the Sahel and West Africa, the next chapter will be an increase in attacks, uncontrolled migration flows and the presence of Russia, China and Iran as supposed “security partners” filling the void left by the West and local elites.
6. Jordan cracks down on drug and weapons trafficking on the Syrian border
Facts
Jordan has carried out bombing raids against drug and arms trafficking facilities in southern Syria, describing the operation as a defensive measure against the flow of captagon, weapons and networks linked to both pro-Iranian militias and transnational criminal organizations.
Implications
– Amman demonstrates that a serious state cannot resign itself to seeing its territory become a highway for drug trafficking and militias: either the routes, laboratories and depots are attacked, or the border becomes a black hole that corrodes institutions, security forces and social fabric.
– For Europe, Jordan is a key piece: if it falls or is seriously weakened, the vacuum will be filled by Tehran’s proxies, traffickers and jihadist networks, with a direct impact on the eastern Mediterranean, the stability of Israel and migratory pressure towards the continent.
7. Trump and the “diplomatic purge”: ambassadors in the crosshairs
Facts
A group of Democratic congressmen has asked Trump to reverse the mass withdrawal of some 30 political ambassadors announced by the White House, denouncing the move as a “purge” that weakens professional diplomacy and damages the United States’ international image.
Implications
– The simultaneous dismissal of 30 ambassadors cannot be condoned without qualification: although there may be cases in which some representatives, due to ideological sectarianism or incompetence, deserve to be replaced, a massive and abrupt decapitation introduces noise, resentment and a sense of arbitrariness into a foreign service that needs predictability and professionalism.
The responsible course of action would be to combine three steps: first, to issue clear and binding instructions to eliminate leftist propaganda, gender ideology, and activist activism in foreign policy; second, to demand strict institutional loyalty to the president and the Constitution; and only third, to dismiss—with evidence of disloyalty or serious deviation—ambassadors who refuse to comply with these guidelines; 30 dismissals at once are excessive and could give ammunition to those who caricature any attempt to de-ideologize diplomacy as political vendetta.
8. Pope Leo XIV and Gaza: Christmas among tents and ruins
Facts
– In his first Christmas homily, Pope Leo XIV denounced in very direct terms the conditions of the Palestinians in Gaza, asking how one could not think of the tents subjected to rain, cold and wind, and speaking of the “fragile flesh” of defenseless populations punished by wars that leave “rubble and open wounds”.
The Pope reiterated that any solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must include the creation of a Palestinian state, while condemning the suffering of young people forced to go to war by leaders who hide behind grandiloquent rhetoric.
Implications
– The voice of Pope Leo XIV places the focus where it should be: on the dignity of civilian victims caught between Hamas terrorism and Israel’s need to guarantee its security; remembering this dimension does not amount to whitewashing the terrorists or questioning Israel’s right to defend itself, but to demanding that the military response be combined with a serious political horizon.
The Vatican’s message is also directed at democracies: if moral discourse is abandoned to the radical left and to the “wokism” movement, the cause of freedom and of Israel will be hijacked by those who only accept it as a pretext to demonize the West; what is needed is an ethic of security that recognizes the suffering of Gaza without silencing the barbarity of Hamas.
9. China, India and the Pentagon report: diplomacy of suspicion
Facts
– Beijing has accused the United States of trying to create “discord” between China and other countries after the publication of a Pentagon report suggesting that China would try to dissuade India from strengthening its ties with Washington.
Spokesperson Lin Jian stressed that border tensions with India have decreased and that the Line of Control — the scene of deadly clashes in 2020 — is now “stable”, presenting the Sino-Indian relationship as an example of “responsible management of differences”.
Implications
– The Chinese message is clear: deny that there is a strategic problem while consolidating military infrastructure, dual capabilities and economic presence in the Indian Ocean and the Himalayas; anyone who believes that the border is “stabilized” because Beijing says so has not understood anything about the doctrine of salami slicing (accumulation of small advantages).
For India, the dilemma is clear: either it consolidates an axis with the United States, Japan, and European partners to curb Chinese expansionism, or it will accept living in the shadow of an authoritarian neighbor that combines military pressure, economic coercion, and disinformation campaigns; Beijing’s angry reaction to the Pentagon report confirms that the real battle is for New Delhi’s strategic loyalty.
10. Israel looks inward
Facts
The Economist describes Israel at a moment of painful introspection, marked by a long and costly war, a poisoned political climate and a bitter debate over accountability, intelligence failures and the future of settlements in the West Bank, as the country tries to define the “day after” in Gaza without clear consensus.
Implications
Israel faces a triple existential challenge: credibly defeating Hamas terrorism, preserving its status as a liberal democracy in an environment of constant threats, and rebuilding a minimal internal pact between a traumatized security field and an exhausted civil society; if it fails on any of the three fronts, its enemies will present the crisis as proof of the unviability of the Zionist project.
– For its Atlantic allies, supporting Israel cannot be reduced to mere rhetorical gestures: it demands firm military and diplomatic backing, but also a clear message in favor of reforms that strengthen the rule of law and prevent internal divisions from eroding the image of a country that, despite all its mistakes, remains one of the few full democracies in a region plagued by dictatorships and theocracies.
11. Sudan cries out for peace
Facts
– In Sudan, the war between the regular army and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has generated millions of displaced people, growing famine, destruction of basic infrastructure and a dynamic of ethnic cleansing and looting reminiscent of the worst moments in Darfur, leaving the state virtually collapsed.
Implications
Sudan is today the most brutal example of what happens when the state breaks down: the vacuum is filled by militarized factions, ethnic militias, traffickers and potentially jihadist cells, while Russia, China and other actors look for opportunities in the chaos to secure access to minerals, ports and strategic positions in the Red Sea.
– For Europe and the Atlantic world, treating Sudan as a “distant conflict” is a strategic error: from there will emerge new waves of migration, new routes for arms and human trafficking, and new opportunities for revisionist powers to present their “mediation” as an alternative to the supposed moral exhaustion of the West; ignoring this cry for peace is, in practice, leaving the field open to those who believe neither in peace nor in freedom.
III. MEDIA RACK
Structured around key sources, highlighting dominant perspectives in the last 24 hours. A broad approach is prioritized, avoiding woke or relativistic biases, and emphasizing relevant facts.
– NYT, Washington Post, USA TODAY, POLITICO, The Hill, The Daily Beast, Newsweek :
They focus their criticism on Trump’s interventions in Honduras and Nigeria, which they portray as meddling and politicizing foreign policy, downplaying the fight against drug trafficking and jihadism. They are moderately positive about the progress in the peace negotiations in Ukraine, although they insist on the risk of Zelensky being pressured by Washington. They maintain a highly critical stance regarding the mass withdrawal of ambassadors.
– The Times London, The Telegraph, The Guardian, BBC, The Mail and the Globe :
They highlight the Venezuelan blockade as a significant escalation, with The Guardian describing it almost as “economic aggression,” while The Times and The Telegraph emphasize its geopolitical significance in relation to Russia and Cuba. The British media underscore Pope Leo XIV’s sermon on Gaza as a profound moral appeal and adopt a more technical than alarmist approach regarding North Korea, although they are concerned about the drones and missiles surrounding the Ukrainian conflict.
– WSJ, Financial Times, CNBC, CBS, CNN, Fox News :
The Wall Street Journal and Financial Times analyze in detail the economic implications of the Venezuelan oil “quarantine” and the North Korean tests, highlighting the risks of energy volatility and new geopolitical risk premiums. Fox News wholeheartedly praises the strikes against ISIS in Nigeria, framing them as a defense of Christians and “Western civilization.” CNN, for its part, focuses its criticism on the recalls of ambassadors, which it considers a dangerous erosion of professional diplomacy in favor of domestic politics.
– Le Monde, Le Figaro, Libération, LCI, BFM, France Info, La Tribune de Genève :
The French-language press picks up on the Russian narrative of “piracy” in the face of the blockade against Venezuela, without fully endorsing it but giving it more space than it deserves. Le Figaro and some audiovisual segments emphasize the moral dimension of the Pope’s message on Gaza and connect it to Ukraine and Sudan. Regarding Ukraine, they welcome the diplomatic progress but explicitly warn that any territorial concession would set a very dangerous precedent.
– FAZ, Die Welt, Die Zeit, DPA, Helsingin Sanomat :
Major German media outlets highlight the combination of the North Korean threat and Chinese pressure as proof that Europe cannot remain in a state of strategic complacency. They criticize European lack of coordination on defense and warn of the risk that American diplomatic vacuums will strengthen Russian and Chinese influence in multilateral forums. Helsingin Sanomat emphasizes the risks to European security stemming from a poorly designed Ukrainian peace process.
– Corriere della Sera, L’Osservatore Romano :
Corriere focuses on the broader Mediterranean: Venezuela, Gaza, migrations and the pressure on Southern Europe, while L’Osservatore Romano concentrates on the spiritual and moral content of Leo XIV’s message, summarizing the pain of Gaza and other conflicts without going into great geopolitical details.
– Russia Today, TASS :
They construct a narrative of “American piracy” in the Caribbean and portray Russia as a defender of international law and the “Venezuelan people” against Washington. Regarding Ukraine, they insist on a supposed implicit recognition by the West of the “realities on the ground” and downplay both Russian attacks and humanitarian risks.
– WION, The Times of India, Hindustan Times, Indian Express :
They maintain a watchful tone regarding North Korea and express concern about Beijing’s actions; they note that the Pentagon report on Chinese pressure at the border and in Asian diplomacy is consistent with what India perceives in the Himalayas and the Indian Ocean. The Ukrainian conflict is discussed primarily in terms of sanctions, energy, and diplomatic space for Delhi.
– South China Morning Post, China Daily :
They criticize US military actions as unjustified interference and describe Pentagon reports as attempts to “divide Asia.” They barely mention North Korea and present the relationship with India as being managed in a “mature and responsible” manner by Beijing.
– Tokyo Times, The Straits Times, Yomiuri Shimbun :
They warn about the North Korean submarine and long-range missile, calling for greater coordination within the Quad framework and alliances with Washington. They emphasize that the Indo-Pacific cannot live in a false peace while Pyongyang and Beijing accumulate military capabilities.
– Reuters, AFP, AP, DPA :
They maintain factual and comprehensive coverage of news from Venezuela, Ukraine, North Korea, Nigeria, Gaza, Jordan and even Sudan, striving to separate facts from opinions and offering a mosaic of narratives from the West as well as Russia, China, the Arab world and Africa.
– Gazeta Wyborcza, Ukrainian Pravda, Ukrinform, Fakty i Kommentarii, Vesti, Kyiv Post, The Kyiv Independent :
They welcome the news of progress in the negotiations with hope, but firmly draw the line at any recognition of annexations. They praise Ukrainian resilience, express respect for Trump’s personal involvement, and emphasize that the ultimate goal remains the full restoration of territorial integrity.
– Yedioth Ahronoth, Israel Hayom, Jerusalem Post, Jerusalem Times, Haaretz, Maariv :
The papal sermon is analyzed as another element in the international pressure on Israel, with differing opinions between those who believe it could help legitimize a structured ceasefire and those who fear it will reinforce biased narratives about the conflict. There is broad consensus regarding the danger posed by Iranian proxies and the existential nature of the fight against Hamas and Hezbollah.
– Al-Jazeera, Al-Arabiya, Al-Hayat, An-Nahar Beirut, Orient Le Jour, Daily Star, Jordan Times, Al Rai Jordan, Hürriyet, Al Quds Al Arabi, Al Hayat Al Jadida, Alyyam, Felestin, Peninsula Qatar, Arab News, Asharq Al Awsat, Al Riyadh, Saudi Gazette, Gulf News, Khaleej Times, Gulf Today, Al-Ittihad, Times of Oman :
They vehemently denounce the conditions in Gaza, cite the Pope’s message, and accuse Israel of disproportionately punishing the civilian population, with very little reference to Hamas’s terrorist nature. Regarding Nigeria, some media outlets present the US strikes as “anti-Islamic” actions, avoiding highlighting the jihadist nature of the Islamic State.
– Clarín Buenos Aires, El Mercurio Chile, Reforma Mexico :
They display harsh rhetoric against Maduro, view the US “quarantine” as a necessary—albeit risky—tool to force change in Caracas, and warn of the danger that the Latin American populist left will use the crisis to reinforce its anti-Americanism. They adopt a cautious stance regarding the outcome in Honduras, aware of the influence of organized crime.
– Foreign Affairs, The Economist, The National Interest, Washington Times :
Foreign Affairs analyzes the structural dimension of competition with China, especially in Africa and Latin America. The Economist identifies Ukraine, Israel, and Sudan as the three axes of a partial failure of the international order to manage wars and postwar periods. The National Interest and the Washington Times tend to value Trump’s pragmatism: a hard line against drug trafficking and jihadism, a willingness to resolve conflicts, a rejection of absolute isolationism, and explicit criticism of the Wok movement.
***
IV. Risk traffic light
(● 🔴 critical risk) (● 🟠 high risk) (● 🟢 controlled or low risk)
| Region / Topic | Level | Main Reason |
|————————————————–|——-|——————|
| Venezuela / Caribbean – oil “quarantine”
| 🔴 | US-Russia economic and maritime escalation; risk of naval incidents, hybrid reprisals, and a hardening of the narco-Chavista regime before it yields. |
| Ukraine / Russia – peace and territory plan
| 🔴 | High-voltage territorial negotiations; a real possibility of consolidating de facto annexations and a transatlantic fracture if sovereignty is sacrificed. |
| Nigeria / Sahel – jihadism (ISIS)
| 🔴 | Renewed operational capacity of the Islamic State; anti-Christian focus and risk of expansion throughout the Sahel and West Africa. |
Gaza / Israel / Lebanon – Iranian proxies
| 🟠 | Humanitarian devastation, Hamas not disarmed, pressure from Hezbollah and pro-Iranian militias; danger of regional escalation with any miscalculation. |
| North Korea / Indo-Pacific
| 🔴 | Development of submarines and strategic missiles; direct impact on regional deterrence and risk of an arms race. |
| Jordan / Syrian border
| 🟠 | Need to attack drug and arms trafficking routes; risk of reprisals and destabilization in a key ally for the security of Israel and Europe. |
| China–India–USA / Asian influence
| 🟠 | Apparent calm on the border, but structural pressure from Beijing; dispute over India’s strategic alignment in the Indo-Pacific. |
| Honduras / Central America
| 🟠 | Presidential victory amid opposition suspicion; high penetration of organized crime and institutional weakness. |
Sudan / Red Sea / Horn of Africa
| 🔴 | State collapse, warlord warfare, risk of vacuums exploited by jihadists and by Russia and China in a critical corridor. |
| Western democracies / diplomacy and cohesion
| 🟠 | Mass dismissal of ambassadors, internal polarization, and the risk of vacuums in international organizations that could be exploited by revisionist powers. |
| Europe (economy and security)
| 🟢 | Precarious but maintained macroeconomic stability; weak strategic leadership and a chronic deficit in defense capabilities. |
***
V. Editorial Comment
The White House’s decision to make Maduro’s Chavista narco-regime the central target of an oil “quarantine” marks a turning point that many in Europe don’t even dare to name: either we acknowledge that Venezuela is now a mafia-like structure with a flag and a seat in Congress, or we will continue to speak of a “humanitarian crisis” as if the tragedy were a product of the weather and not of a corrupt elite protected by Russia, Cuba, and Iran. Moscow’s talk of “piracy” while it plunders Ukraine and protects Caracas only reinforces the certainty that the battle is not semantic, but moral: those who violate borders also want to rewrite the dictionary.
In Ukraine, Zelensky’s demand to discuss the territory directly with Trump reveals both courage and desperation: he knows that if the discussion is left to bureaucrats and polls, the temptation to sacrifice square kilometers in exchange for headlines about “historic peace” will be enormous. The obligation of any honest Atlanticist is twofold: to wholeheartedly support Trump’s leadership in the search for a solution and, at the same time, to draw the red line of territorial integrity; to call the amputation of a country through military pressure “realism” is a polished form of capitulation.
Meanwhile, in Nigeria, the order to attack ISIS to protect Christian communities demonstrates that a firm hand, when exercised within the law and in cooperation with allied governments, is not excessive: it is the bare minimum of decency. It is scandalous that there are still major media outlets and political sectors that speak of the Islamic State as if it were just another armed faction, an expression of abstract “political violence,” when we are facing pure and simple terrorism, with a genocidal agenda and global reach.
The rest of the picture completes the picture: North Korea displays its submarine and missiles as if exhibiting trophies of an inherited personality cult; China denies the evidence of its pressure on India while accusing Washington of sowing discord; Jordan is forced to bomb its border to avoid being dragged down by drug trafficking and Iranian proxies; Pope Leo XIV speaks out about what too many want to silence regarding Gaza, and Sudan languishes in international indifference. This is the true map of contemporary hypocrisy: those who defend their borders are demonized, while everyone looks the other way when the executioners hide behind rhetoric of “resistance” or “multilateralism.”
The line separating firmness from barbarism is clear: no to annexation by force, no to dictatorship with revolutionary trappings, no to terrorism disguised as an identity-based cause; yes to representative liberal democracy, yes to a market economy with a responsible welfare state, yes to the Atlantic alliance and to the example of transitions like Spain’s, which demonstrate that change can be achieved without destroying freedoms. At a time when narco-states, theocracies, and revisionist powers are testing every seam of the international order, neutrality is no longer a prudent position: it is the alibi of those who, out of weariness or self-interest, are willing to leave the century in the hands of those who despise freedom.