Zero Hedge

Kremlin Mocks European 'Illusions' For Wanting Own Nuclear Umbrella

Kremlin Mocks European 'Illusions' For Wanting Own Nuclear Umbrella

Currently France and Britain are in talks to potentially extend their nuclear arsenals to protect Europe as a defense 'umbrella' - at a moment some officials have questioned the United States commitment to leading NATO.

Politico wrote in the aftermath of the Munich Security Conference, "Multiple European countries are publicly backing talks on a homegrown nuclear deterrent to complement American atomic weapons following an erosion of trust in a Donald Trump-led US."

Russian Ambassador to the UK Andrey Kelin has issued the Kremlin's reaction to these latest developments, asserting that the British ‘nuclear umbrella’ will fail to provide extra security to other NATO members.

Russian Ambassador to the UK Andrey Kelin, via Al Jazeera screenshot.

The diplomat's words were captured in an interview with Russian newspaper Izvestia on Tuesday. Kelin described that it is "obvious that the British 'nuclear umbrella' will not be able to provide any additional material security guarantees" to Europe.

Moscow meanwhile continues to closely monitor the moves by "states pursuing an overtly anti-Russian policy" - he emphasized.

"The possibility of the expansion of nuclear safeguards will be taken into account in our military planning as well as in further discussions of the strategic stability issues," the ambassador added.

Kelin then took a swipe at Britain's hawkish stance in the context of the Ukraine war: "The strengthening of such potential apparently instills in London an illusory hope of leadership in ensuring European security," he said.

Moscow's growing concerns over British policy is in part related to plans to purchase a dozen F-35 fighter jets from the US, capable of carrying missiles tipped with nuclear warheads.

Additionally, when the tiny but outspoken Baltic states - directly on Russia's doorstep - try to tout NATO 'nuclear deterrent' talking points, it seems natural that Moscow would be extremely concerned

Estonia isn’t ruling out joining early-stage talks on a common nuclear deterrent in Europe, Deputy Defense Minister Tuuli Duneton said in an interview. "We are always open to discuss" with partners, she said, while emphasizing the U.S. was still "committed to providing nuclear deterrence for allied nations."

Latvia’s Prime Minister Evika Siliņa echoed that. "Nuclear deterrence can give us new opportunities. Why not?" she said, while cautioning that any steps would have to be in compliance with "our international commitments."

NATO top leadership has still signaled no change in direction on the conventional US nuclear umbrella, however.

In the backdrop is the fact that that the landmark New START nuclear treaty between Washington and Moscow has ceased to exist as of this month. Russia is offering that it won't expand its arsenal so long as the US does the same. But this is still dangerous, uncharted territory.

Tyler Durden Wed, 02/18/2026 - 04:15

White House Voices Strong Support For Hungary's Orban Ahead Of Elections

White House Voices Strong Support For Hungary's Orban Ahead Of Elections

Via The Libertarian Institute 

Secretary of State Marco Rubio voiced strong support for Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. Orbán is seeking a fifth term as leader in the April election.

"I'm going to be very blunt with you. The prime minister and the President have a very, very close personal relationship and working relationship," Rubio said in a press conference with Orbán on Monday.

via Associated Press

"I think it has been incredibly beneficial to the relationship between our two countries, and it’s important to understand how important the relations between leaders are to the relations between countries." He continued, "President Trump is deeply committed to your success."

While Orbán has a strong relationship with President Donald Trump, he has been a roadblock to European leaders' efforts to increase Western support for Ukraine. Hungary has used its position in NATO and the EU to slow or limit aid to Ukraine and the economic war against Russia.

Some EU members were attempting to use frozen Russian assets as collateral for a massive loan to Ukraine. Orbán was key to preventing the EU from moving forward with the loan.

Budapest has repeatedly expressed displeasure with Kiev over Ukraine's disabling of the Russian pipeline that carries oil to Hungary. Hungary is now requesting that Croatia allow Russian oil transit to bypass Ukraine.

President Donald Trump has been willing to use his leverage to influence elections around the globe. In Argentina, he conditions a $20 billion assistance package on President Javier Milei’s party winning elections. The President has also voiced strong support or opposition to candidates in Honduras and Iraq.

Rubio told Orbán that Hungary could receive similar support as Argentina.

"If you have financial struggles, if you face things that are impediments to growth, if you face things that threaten the stability of your country, I know that President Trump would be very interested because of your relationship with him and because of the importance of this country to us," the Secretary of State said.

Tyler Durden Wed, 02/18/2026 - 03:30

More "Secret Investments" By Adani Family Associates Revive Market Manipulation Allegations

More "Secret Investments" By Adani Family Associates Revive Market Manipulation Allegations

In early 2023, as scrutiny mounted around India’s Adani Group, two close associates of the Adani family acknowledged to their bankers that they controlled billions of dollars in the conglomerate’s shares through hedge funds.

The admission — found in records reviewed by OCCRP, who called them "secret investments" in a new investigative piece— came soon after Hindenburg Research accused the group of inflating its stock through “brazen” manipulation that included promoters and insiders holding more of the float than was publicly disclosed. 

The allegations sparked international attention, amplified by the company’s perceived ties to Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Although Adani shares initially fell, they later rebounded. The group dismissed the claims as an “attack on India,” and India’s market regulator, SEBI, eventually cleared the company on two specific issues, while other investigative strands have not been publicly detailed.

The investors, Nasser Ali Shaban Ahli of the UAE and Taiwan’s Chang Chung-Ling, had long-standing business links to the Adani family. Previously reported holdings in the hundreds of millions now appear far larger: internal documents from Swiss bank REYL Intesa Sanpaolo show that as recently as 2023, the two held roughly $3 billion in Adani-related investments through Dubai-based accounts. In written statements to their bank, they said their positions stemmed from personal and professional trust in the family and denied Hindenburg’s allegations.

Both men have surfaced in past Indian investigations into alleged Adani misconduct — cases that were ultimately dropped. A 2007 diamond-trading probe and a 2014 over-invoicing inquiry connected them to companies tied to Vinod Adani, the chairman’s brother. Vinod was at the heart of many Hindenburg allegations, with the firm questioning his management of overseas shell companies and alleging financial improprieties relating to potential manipulation of Adani shares.

Hindenburg also identified Chang as linked to a disclosed “related party.” Earlier reporting cited evidence that their trades were coordinated with Adani-linked entities.

OCCRP writes that Swiss prosecutors are now examining Chang on suspicion he acted as a “front man” to help insiders exceed ownership limits. More than $310 million has been frozen, though no charges have been filed. Authorities confirmed an ongoing investigation into money laundering and document forgery. The Adani Group denies any role.

Abroad, U.S. prosecutors in 2024 charged founder Gautam Adani and his nephew in a bribery case the company calls “baseless,” alongside a related SEC civil action. In India, however, consequences have been limited. The Supreme Court declined to order a separate probe, noting SEBI’s progress on “twenty-two out of twenty-four” inquiries and saying its work “inspires confidence.” In 2025, SEBI ruled certain allegations “not established,” though other matters reportedly remain pending.

Bank records show Ahli held about $2 billion and Chang about $1 billion through British Virgin Islands companies, largely invested in hedge funds likely focused on Adani stocks. After meeting bank officials in February 2023, they confirmed ownership of the accounts, rejected wrongdoing, and said they would diversify “in the short term.” The bank tightened oversight of their transactions.

In an August 2024 ruling, Switzerland’s Federal Criminal Court upheld the freeze on Chang’s funds, stating investigators must be allowed time to proceed and observing that the appellant had not provided documentation sufficient “to dispel the doubts legitimately raised.”

Ahli and Chang declined to comment. The bank cited legal restrictions on disclosure.

Meanwhile, days ago, it was announced that the reporter on the byline to this new story had been sentenced to a year for "defamning" Adani Group on X:

On February 10, a magistrate court in the western state of Gujarat convicted Nair and sentenced him to jail and a fine of 5,000 rupees (US$55) for his posts between October 2020 and July 2021 on the X platform and articles on the Australian nonprofit Adani Watch investigative site, according to a copy of the judgment, reviewed by CPJ.

Nair frequently uses social media to comment on the Adani Group, owned by billionaire Gautam Adani. The conglomerate has come under sustained scrutiny over allegations of financial irregularities, which it has denied.

Nair’s posts cited or linked to reports by established publications, including The Times of India and Bloomberg, sometimes accompanied by commentary questioning Indian government policies and the Adani Group’s environmental compliance and alleged monopolistic practices.

The case against Nair was initiated by Adani Enterprises Limited, the group’s flagship firm.

On February 10, the court concluded that the journalist’s comments and publications were defamatory and made with knowledge of their likely impact on the company’s reputation.

Tyler Durden Wed, 02/18/2026 - 02:45

18 Ways To Reverse EU's Immigration Crisis And Give Power Back To Member States

18 Ways To Reverse EU's Immigration Crisis And Give Power Back To Member States

Via Remix News,

Due to years of uncontrolled mass migration, many Europeans are asking what concrete options there are to reverse course, with many feeling that the situation is hopeless and cannot be significantly reversed.

However, a new report titled “Taking Back Control from Brussels: The Renationalization of the EU Migration and Asylum Policies” - produced by the Mathias Corvinus Collegium (MCC), Hungary’s Migration Research Institute, and Poland’s Ordo Iuris Institute - provides comprehensive solutions to the crisis.

The paper’s core thesis offers bold and practical solutions today, noting that the power still rests with member states.

The authors write: “European Union member states can reclaim effective authority over migration and asylum policy without changing the EU treaties.”

The report outlines how asylum policy has “completely collapsed” in the EU and reached a point of “total failure.” The authors contend that the current system lacks democratic legitimacy and has turned the Schengen area into a “sieve” that facilitates illegal migration and prevents effective border protection. Given the recent legalization actions of the far-left Spanish government, aimed at regularizing approximately 500,000 migrants who can then move freely across Europe, the paper’s proposals may be more relevant than ever.

The paper calls for a fundamental “paradigm shift” to restore migration sovereignty to individual nation-states, asserting that renationalization is a necessity for Europe to regain control over its borders and territory.

The following 18 proposals from the second part of the paper outline a roadmap for this renationalization. The paper itself provides far more details about each proposal and is recommended reading for any European party looking for a blueprint to regain control of immigration.

I. Opt-out and Derogations to Legal Frameworks

Grant Member States an Opt-in/Opt-out

Allow all Member States to request an individual opt-in or opt-out from the common EU migration and asylum policy, similar to the existing status of Denmark and Ireland.

Insert a “Notwithstanding Clause”

Amend the treaty to allow national parliaments to temporarily suspend EU migration rules when public order, security, or pressing national interests are at stake.

Unilaterally Disapply problematic EU Acquis

If treaty reforms are blocked, Member States should unilaterally stop applying the most problematic elements of the existing EU migration legal framework.

Withdraw from or Suspend the ECHR

Consider partial or total withdrawal from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights or temporarily suspending its application to regain border control flexibility.

Derogate from the 1967 Protocol to the Geneva Convention

Denounce this protocol to restore national flexibility and move away from “untouchable dogmas” regarding universal asylum obligations.

II. A New Migration and Asylum Paradigm

Restore National Competence for Readmission Agreements

Return the power to negotiate and conclude readmission agreements with third countries to individual Member States, as the centralized EU model has failed.

Condition EU Funding on Third-Country Cooperation

Legally mandate that EU funding to third countries be strictly conditional on their effective cooperation in migration, particularly regarding returns and readmissions.

Restore National Competence Over Returns

Grant Member States full control over the detention and expulsion of illegal migrants without interference from the EU or the European Court of Justice.

Outsource Asylum Processing to Safe Third Countries

Enable Member States to establish mechanisms to outsource the processing of asylum requests to safe third countries outside the EU territory.

Amend the Schengen Borders Code

Revise the code to eliminate legal ambiguities that currently hinder border guards and lead to “abusive” claims of refoulement.

Limit Free Movement to European Citizens

Restrict the right of free movement within the Schengen area strictly to EU citizens to prevent illegal secondary movements.

Prohibit Asylum Applications After Illegal Entry

Enact rules that bar individuals from lodging asylum claims if they have entered the Union territory illegally.

Radically Amend the Search and Rescue (SAR) Framework

Change SAR rules to ensure the duty to rescue does not equate to a right of entry and prohibit any collusion with smugglers.

Abolish EU Competence on Family Reunification and Integration

Return full control over family reunification and integration policies to national governments, arguing these areas bring “no added value” at the EU level.

Earmark EU Funding for Physical Border Infrastructure

Specifically designate European funds to finance physical barriers like fences and walls at external borders.

III. Reconsidering Civil Society and Agency Roles

Reform Frontex to Help Member States

Ensure the EU border control agency Frontex serves to assist rather than control member states and remove all NGO presence from its internal structures.

Strict Transparency and Accountability for NGOs

Subject any organization receiving European funds to rigorous rules on transparency, traceability, and accountability.

Prohibit EU Funding for Pro-Migration Organizations

Ban any direct or indirect EU funding for organizations that promote or facilitate illegal migration.

“The time for decisive action is now.”

One of the core points the paper tries to outline is that “contrary to popular belief, the EU does not possess exclusive competence in this field. While the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides for a common asylum policy, it does not abolish national sovereignty over border control, internal security, or the determination of who may enter and remain on national territory.”

In other words, there is an extraordinary amount that EU member states can accomplish in the area of migration policy if a determined national government is in place.

One of the authors of the report, Jerzy Kwaśniewski, an attorney and the president of the Ordo Iuris Institute for Legal Culture, said:

“Europe is facing an unprecedented legal crisis that is depriving member states of their ability to protect their own borders and citizens. After years of a common EU migration and asylum policy, the system has completely collapsed. The Schengen area has turned into a sieve through which illegal migrants move freely. Return procedures for illegal migrants are largely illusory. Meanwhile, overlapping international obligations have made effective border protection almost impossible from a legal standpoint.

To make matters worse, European taxpayers are financing NGOs that directly facilitate illegal migration and obstruct effective border control. Given the total failure of the European Union’s common migration and asylum policy, further reforms within the current EU framework are no longer possible. A fundamental paradigm shift is needed — the restoration of migration sovereignty to nation-states, which alone possess the democratic legitimacy to decide who has the right to enter and reside on their territory.

He added that “the renationalization of migration policy is no longer an option; it is a necessity. The alternative is a complete loss of control over Europe’s borders and the definitive end of our ability to manage our own territory. The time for debate is over. The time for decisive action is now.”

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Wed, 02/18/2026 - 02:00

EU Investigates Shein Over 'Addictive Designs' And Sales Of Childlike Sex Dolls

EU Investigates Shein Over 'Addictive Designs' And Sales Of Childlike Sex Dolls

Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The European Union has opened an in-depth investigation into online fashion retailer Shein over the sale of illegal items and what it calls the Chinese-owned platform’s “addictive design.”

A Shein pop-up store at a mall in Singapore, on April 4, 2024. Edgar Su/Reuters

The probe, announced on Feb. 16 by the European Commission, marks the bloc’s first formal proceeding against the company under the Digital Services Act (DSA), a set of sweeping online regulations that governs nearly all corners of the digital ecosystem, from e-commerce platforms to social media networks.

Brussels said it is investigating the sale of illegal products “including child sexual abuse material,” citing in particular child-like sex dolls that were found on Shein’s marketplace. The company came under scrutiny in France in late 2025 after authorities discovered lifelike sex dolls resembling young girls on the site, along with illegal weapons. The French government moved to suspend access to Shein’s website, but a court blocked the move and instead asked Brussels to step in under the DSA.

The controversy, EU officials said, exposed broader concerns about whether Shein poses “a systemic risk for consumers across the entire European Union.” They have asked the company to provide information on how it ensures that minors are not exposed to age-inappropriate content, as well as how it prevents the circulation of illegal products on its platform.

Investigators will also look into Shein’s “addictive design,” including the use of gamified features such as points, rewards, and other incentives for frequent engagement. EU officials have said that such designs may encourage excessive use, particularly among younger users, and undermine consumer protection and users’ mental well-being.

Another focus of the inquiry will be the alleged “lack of transparency” around the algorithms Shein uses to recommend content and products to users. Under the DSA, “very large platforms,” defined as those with over 45 million users in the EU, must disclose the main parameters of their recommender systems and offer at least one easily accessible option that is not based on profiling.

A spokesperson for Shein said the company takes its “obligations under the DSA seriously” and will cooperate with investigators.

“Over the last few months, we have continued to invest significantly in measures to strengthen our compliance with the DSA. These include comprehensive systemic-risk assessments and mitigation frameworks, enhanced protections for younger users, and ongoing work to design our services in ways that promote a safe and trusted user experience,” the spokesperson said in a statement to The Epoch Times.

The investigation is the latest in a series of actions the EU has taken that affect Chinese-owned tech and e-commerce firms.

From July 1, 2026, Brussels will begin collecting a flat 3-euro (about $3.55) charge on each low-value item in small parcels worth under 150 euros (about $178) sent directly from non-EU countries to consumers in the bloc, a measure widely seen as aimed at platforms such as Shein, Temu, and AliExpress. According to official figures, about 4.6 billion such parcels entered the EU in 2024, an overwhelming 91 percent of them from China.

Temu is also under DSA investigation over alleged “addictive design” and the sale of unsafe or illegal goods. A separate probe into AliExpress, owned by China-based e-commerce giant Alibaba, produced preliminary findings that the platform is “in breach of its obligation to assess and mitigate risks related to the dissemination of illegal products under the DSA.”

More recently, on Feb. 6, the commission warned popular video-sharing platform TikTok that it must overhaul its “addictive design” to comply with the DSA. The service, whose European operations are owned by Chinese firm ByteDance, could face a fine of up to 6 percent of its global revenue if it fails to address those concerns.

“In the EU, illegal products are prohibited—whether they are on a store shelf or on an online marketplace. The Digital Services Act keeps shoppers safe, protects their well-being and empowers them with information about the algorithms they are interacting with,” Henna Virkkunen, the EU tech commissioner, said on Feb. 17.

Chinese authorities have been critical of EU efforts to tighten digital regulations. In January, the Chinese Foreign Ministry accused the EU of “blatant protectionism” and “political manipulation” after the bloc, citing risks of cyberattacks, recommended that all member states remove Huawei and ZTE from their telecom networks within the next three years.

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 23:25

WEF Rocked As CEO Faces Investigation Over Ties To "Davos Concierge" Epstein

WEF Rocked As CEO Faces Investigation Over Ties To "Davos Concierge" Epstein

The World Economic Forum (WEF) quietly launched an independent review earlier this month into its CEO, Børge Brende, over his past interactions with Jeffrey Epstein, Bloomberg reports.



Files released by the Department of Justice show Epstein and Brende had three dinners in 2018 and 2019, and exchanged various text messages. One dinner occurred in September 2018, more than a decade after Epstein's 2008 conviction and guilty plea in Florida for procuring a child for prostitution, and another on June 13, 2019, shortly before Epstein's final arrest on federal sex-trafficking charges.

Like many powerful figures, Brende has claimed that he was unaware of Epstein's criminal history at the time of their meetings, and is said to have ordered the probe into his communications with Epstein.

"I was completely unaware of Epstein’s past and criminal activities," Brende said in a statement to Bloomberg. "Had I known about his background, I would have declined the initial invitation and any subsequent dinner invitations or other communications.”

"I recognize that I could have conducted a more thorough investigation into Epstein’s history, and I regret not doing so,” he added.

Klaus Schwab, who founded the WEF in 1971, has maintained that he is “certain” that he never met with Epstein, a press representative told Bloomberg.

Beyond Brende's direct contacts, the released files highlight Epstein's broader efforts to leverage the prestige of the WEF's annual Davos meeting. Despite reportedly claiming to "hate" the Forum in private, Epstein positioned himself as a self-described "Davos concierge" to facilitate access for his associates.

For instance, in late 2009, months after his release from Florida incarceration, Epstein corresponded with Boris Nikolic, an immunologist and regular Davos attendee, offering to arrange one-on-one meetings. "I can organize a 1:1 meeting with most people there. One 'virtual currency' I have is access ;)," Epstein wrote while sharing a participant list, according to Bloomberg.

In 2011, Nikolic turned to Epstein for help securing time with Bill Gates, lamenting the difficulty of reaching the billionaire. Epstein suggested pitching Gates on attending a dinner, listing potential attendees, and signed off as "your truly, the davos concierge.”

UK broadcaster Channel 4 News reported that the Justice Department has so far released 3.5 million files, amounting to more than 300 GB, representing roughly only 2 percent of the total data volume that investigators referenced as recently as last year. Internal emails indicating that federal investigators expected to handle between 20 and 40 terabytes of data seized from Epstein's properties, the report said.

Earlier estimates from 2020 put the total volume of files at up to 50 terabytes. More recently, in 2025, officials referred to approximately 14.6 terabytes of archived data under review.

The release of additional Epstein-related documents by the Department of Justice continues to draw attention to a range of high-profile individuals from business and politics, whose names appear in the files.

Thomas J. Pritzker, the longtime executive chairman of Hyatt Hotels Corporation, announced his immediate retirement on Monday and confirmed he will not seek re-election to the company's board.

In a statement to the board and released publicly, Pritzker expressed regret over his past association with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Pritzker described maintaining contact as "terrible judgment" and acknowledged there was no excuse for not distancing himself sooner.

“I condemn the actions and the harm caused by Epstein and Maxwell, and I feel deep sorrow for the pain they inflicted on their victims,” he added.

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 23:00

Google Warns Chinese And Russian Hackers Are Targeting US Defense Companies

Google Warns Chinese And Russian Hackers Are Targeting US Defense Companies

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

An analysis released by Google this month showed that the U.S. defense industrial base—a network of public and private entities used to develop or maintain military weapons systems—has sustained cyberattacks from groups and criminal organizations from China, Russia, and North Korea in recent months.

The report, released on Feb. 10 by Google Threat Intelligence, found that the Chinese regime and associated groups continue “to represent by volume the most active threat to entities in the defense industrial base,” which it said can pose “significant risk to the defense and aerospace sector.”

Google’s report added that it “has observed more China-nexus cyber espionage missions directly targeting defense and aerospace industry than from any other state-sponsored actors over the last two years,” as such groups have “used a broad range of tactics in operations.”

“But the hallmark of many operations has been their exploitation of edge devices to gain initial access,” it said, referring to hardware components positioned at the edge of a network.

“We have also observed China-nexus threat groups leverage ORB networks for reconnaissance against defense industrial targets, which complicates detection and attribution.”

Late last year, Canadian and U.S. officials warned that Chinese state-backed hacking groups have targeted U.S. government entities and private companies, gaining long-term access to their systems.

In July 2025, Microsoft also warned it had observed two China-based hacking groups, Linen Typhoon and Violet Typhoon, using vulnerabilities in SharePoint, Microsoft’s collaboration software.

As for Russia, Google said in its report that groups associated with Moscow have focused on defense companies that support technologies used in the Russia–Ukraine war, namely companies linked to drones.

“As next-generation capabilities are being operationalized in this environment, Russia-nexus threat actors and hacktivists are seeking to compromise defense contractors alongside military assets and systems, with a focus on organizations involved with unmanned aircraft systems (UAS),” the tech giant said.

“This includes targeting defense companies directly, using themes mimicking their products and systems in intrusions against military organizations and personnel.”

State-sponsored hackers, meanwhile, have leveraged Google’s own AI tool, Gemini, during cyberattacks, it found.

One Chinese-linked organization known as “UNC2970” has frequently targeted defense companies and impersonated corporate recruiters in hacking campaigns, Google said.

They’ve used Gemini to conduct open-source intelligence to “profile high-value targets to support campaign planning and reconnaissance,” including searches for relevant information on defense and cybersecurity companies, it said.

The threat posed by North Korea has grown since 2019 as officials in the regime have attempted to pose as IT workers to apply for jobs at defense-related organizations, Google said.

Last July, the Department of Justice announced it had disrupted an operation that included searches of 29 locations in more than a dozen states suspected of being connected to laptops used, in part, to obtain remote jobs at more than 100 American companies.

In one instance, North Korea-linked actors stole sensitive data from a California defense company that was involved in AI development, according to Google.

In a separate incident, a Maryland-based individual was sentenced to 15 months in prison for facilitating a North Korean-linked scheme and coordinating with an alleged regime IT worker. The person, Minh Phuong Ngoc Vong, was hired by a Virginia-based company to perform software development for a defense contractor, it added.

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 22:35

Kansas Woman Jailed For Fabricating Claims That Astronaut Hacked Her Bank Account From Space

Kansas Woman Jailed For Fabricating Claims That Astronaut Hacked Her Bank Account From Space

A Kansas woman has been sentenced to federal prison after admitting she fabricated claims that astronaut Anne McClain accessed her bank account from orbit, the U.S. Department of Justice said.

Summer Heather Worden, 51, of Sedgwick County, Kansas, pleaded guilty on November 14, 2025, to making false, fictitious, and fraudulent statements to law enforcement, according to KBTX.

Alfred H. Bennett sentenced her to three months in prison, followed by two years of supervised release, and ordered her to pay $210,000 in restitution.

Worden had alleged in July 2019 that her estranged spouse guessed her password and illegally viewed her account while stationed aboard the International Space Station. Court evidence later established the accusation was unfounded. Records showed Worden opened the account in April 2018 and that both women used it until January 2019, when she changed the login information. Investigators determined she had shared access to her banking details, including credentials, as early as 2015.

KBTX writes that even after an internal review cleared McClain, Worden continued promoting the allegations in the media, hired a consultant to amplify them, and publicly disclosed her former spouse’s personal information.

“This case demonstrates the serious consequences of making false accusations to law enforcement,” said U.S. Attorney Nicholas J. Ganjei.

The case was investigated by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Office of Inspector General. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Richard D. Hanes and Brandon Fyffe prosecuted it. Worden remains free on bond and is expected to report voluntarily to a facility designated by the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 22:10

Winter Storm Fern Proved Coal Is Still the Power Grid's Reliable Backbone

Winter Storm Fern Proved Coal Is Still the Power Grid's Reliable Backbone

Authored by Emily Arthun via RealClearEnergy,

When Winter Storm Fern swept across much of the United States in mid-January 2026—bringing snow, ice, and sustained sub-zero temperatures from Texas to New England—millions of Americans braced for power outages. In some areas, those fears were realized. Tennessee alone reported more than 245,000 customer outages at peak conditions. At the same time, natural gas prices spiked dramatically, exceeding $30 per MMBtu at certain constrained delivery points within the PJM Interconnection.

Yet despite the severity and duration of the storm, the national electric grid largely held. Hospitals remained open. Emergency services stayed online. Most homes stayed warm. That outcome was not accidental. It was the result of dependable, dispatchable generation—chief among it, coal.

During the coldest days of the storm, coal-fired generation across the Lower 48 surged, rising from roughly 70 gigawatt-hours per day to approximately 130. That additional generation represented a massive increase in available power at precisely the moment when electric heating demand spiked and system margins tightened. In practical terms, coal generation helped keep power flowing to tens of millions of households nationwide, sustaining heat and essential services during the most extreme conditions of Winter Storm Fern.

Coal plants responded exactly as they are designed to do: steadily, predictably, and at scale. In the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) region, coal supplied as much as 40% of electricity during peak hours. In PJM, coal accounted for roughly one-quarter of total generation. These were not marginal contributions—they were foundational to grid stability.

The contrast with weather-dependent resources was unmistakable. Wind generation declined as turbines iced over or were curtailed for safety. Solar output fell sharply as panels were covered by snow and daylight hours shortened. Hydropower faced limitations from frozen waterways and constrained inflows. Each of these resources plays a role in the broader energy mix, but Winter Storm Fern underscored their limitations during prolonged, widespread cold.

Coal’s advantage in these moments is straightforward: on-site fuel. Stockpiled coal insulated power plants from supply chain disruptions at precisely the moment when other fuels faced constraints. This is not a theoretical benefit. It is a practical one that has been demonstrated repeatedly during extreme weather events.

That lesson should sound familiar. After Winter Storm Uri in 2021, coal was often blamed for grid failures. Subsequent analyses showed the most significant disruptions stemmed from widespread natural gas system freeze-offs—not coal plant performance. In the years since, coal facilities invested in winterization, fuel access, and operational readiness. During Winter Storm Fern, those preparations paid off.

Federal policymakers recognized this reality in real time. The U.S. Department of Energy issued emergency orders under Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act, temporarily allowing certain coal units to operate at higher output to maintain grid stability. Similar actions in 2025 prevented the premature retirement of coal plants in Colorado, Indiana, Washington, and Michigan—preserving more than 17 gigawatts of firm coal capacity that otherwise faced near-term shutdown.

These decisions were not ideological. They were driven by reliability.

Warnings from grid authorities reinforce the point. The Department of Energy and the North American Electric Reliability Corporation have both cautioned that continued coal retirements—without equivalent replacement by firm, dispatchable resources—increase the risk of outages, particularly during extreme winter conditions. At the same time, electricity demand is rising rapidly due to data centers, electrification, and industrial growth. The margin for error is shrinking.

Coal is not static. Modern coal plants operate with advanced emissions controls, improved efficiency, and increasingly sophisticated monitoring. Mining practices have evolved, and research into carbon management and advanced coal technologies continues. Coal also remains essential for steelmaking and other industrial uses, making domestic production a matter of economic and strategic importance.

Affordability matters as much as reliability. Regions that retired coal prematurely have often experienced higher electricity prices and greater exposure to fuel volatility. Coal’s stable fuel costs and on-site inventory provide a measure of price certainty that consumers increasingly lack—especially during weather emergencies, when energy costs hit household budgets the hardest.

Winter Storm Fern delivered a clear message. When the grid was under maximum stress, coal did not merely contribute—it carried a substantial share of the load. A resilient energy strategy does not eliminate reliable resources before dependable replacements are ready. It builds a diversified generation portfolio that includes coal, natural gas, nuclear, and emerging technologies, each performing the role it does best.

America’s energy future depends on reliability first. During one of the harshest winter tests in recent years, coal proved once again that it remains an essential part of keeping the lights on—and the heat running.

Emily Arthun is current CEO of the American Coal Council, she brings over twenty years of experience across the coal and hard-rock mining sectors  Prior to her role at ACC, she worked with the Women’s Mining Coalition, supporting advocacy for domestic mining. Her industry experience includes Stillwater Mining Company and Cloud Peak Energy.  She serves on the Washington Coal Club and Women’s Mining Coalition boards.

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 21:45

Stephen Colbert Throws Tantrum After CBS Blocks Interview Over Equal Time Concerns

Stephen Colbert Throws Tantrum After CBS Blocks Interview Over Equal Time Concerns

Stephen Colbert threw a tantrum Monday night after CBS lawyers pulled the plug on his planned interview with Texas Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico, citing concerns about the FCC's equal time mandate. The late-night host, who has built his late-night career on partisan snark, was not happy about it.

Colbert told his audience that Talarico was "supposed to be here,” but CBS lawyers informed the production team "in no uncertain terms…that we could not have him on the broadcast." The network also instructed Colbert not to mention the situation on air, an instruction he promptly ignored with theatrical defiance.

"Because my network clearly doesn't want us to talk about this, let's talk about this," Colbert announced before launching into his grievance session.

The FCC's equal time rule requires broadcast networks to provide equal airtime to opposing political candidates. According to the Philadelphia Enquirer, the FCC hasn’t applied the rule to late-night television since 2006, when it determined that then–California gubernatorial candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger’s appearance on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno counted as a “bona fide news interview.”

But FCC chair Brendan Carr sent a notice last month suggesting talk shows should no longer qualify for this exemption. Carr argued some programs were "motivated by partisan purposes"—a claim that seems difficult to dispute given Colbert's nightly content.

Colbert fired back at the Trump-appointed FCC chair with predictable venom. "FCC you…because I think you are motivated by partisan purposes yourself," he said, before pivoting to his standard Trump material.

"Let's just call this what it is. Donald Trump's administration wants to silence anyone who says anything bad about Trump on TV, because all Trump does is watch TV. He's like a toddler with too much screen time…So it's no surprise…that two of the people most affected by this threat are me and my friend Jimmy Kimmel," Colbert declared.

This accusation falls apart under scrutiny. Colbert has continued to have elected Democrats and far-left celebrities on his show without issue. In fact, he had Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro on The Late Show last month. During the interview, he blasted President Trump’s immigration crackdown in Minneapolis as “pure evil” while calling Vice President JD Vance a “sycophant” and a “suck-up.”

Shapiro’s interview didn’t trigger equal time requirements because the equal time rule applies only to a “legally qualified candidate for any public office.”

Shapiro had announced his reelection bid in Philadelphia last month, but he wasn’t officially a candidate at the time of the appearance. He only became one when Pennsylvania’s formal filing period opened Tuesday. 

But Colbert’s tantrum also ignored an obvious solution. Colbert could have simply invited the Republican U.S. Senate candidates in Texas onto the show to comply with equal-time requirements. But that would require actually giving airtime to conservatives, something Colbert apparently finds unthinkable. Instead, he chose faux martyrdom.

Carr responded to the controversy by proposing another solution: that if Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel did not want to comply with broadcast regulations, "then they can go to a cable channel or podcast or a streaming service." 

The suggestion seems reasonable given the proliferation of digital platforms, but Colbert treated it as an outrage.

"Great idea, man whose job is to regulate broadcast TV, suggest everyone just leave broadcast TV," Colbert shot back.

The interview was ultimately posted to The Late Show's YouTube page, where equal time rules do not apply. Colbert criticized CBS for what he characterized as premature compliance with an FCC notice that has not yet officially eliminated the talk show exception.

"Now, as I said, at this point, he's [Carr] just released a letter that says he's thinking about doing away with the exception for late night. He hasn't done away with it yet, but my network is unilaterally enforcing it as if he had," Colbert said.

When the audience booed CBS's decision, Colbert delivered a sarcastic jab at his own employer. "I want to assure you, this decision is for purely financial reasons," he quipped, an obvious reference to the fact that his show was cancelled because the network was losing money on the show.

The controversy reveals an awkward reality for partisan late-night hosts. Broadcast television operates under different regulatory standards than cable or streaming platforms precisely because it uses public airwaves. Equal time rules exist for a reason: to prevent networks from weaponizing access to those airwaves for political advantage.

That means Colbert's complaint essentially amounts to a demand for special treatment so that he can promote Democratic candidates without offering Republicans the same opportunity for an interview.

CBS's legal team appears to have calculated that preemptive compliance carries less risk than gambling on regulatory exemptions that may soon disappear. There’s no guarantee that Carr's proposed rule change will survive legal challenges, but networks clearly view the threat as credible enough to alter programming decisions.

Colbert, an old hand at playing the victim card, couldn’t help but frame the situation as censorship and authoritarianism. Yet, the only thing that prevented the interview from getting aired was himself and his refusal to give equal time to the Republican candidates in that election. 

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 21:20

Judge Orders ICE Not To Re-Detain Abrego Garcia

Judge Orders ICE Not To Re-Detain Abrego Garcia

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,

A federal judge has blocked U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) from re-arresting Kilmar Abrego Garcia, one of the men at the center of the Trump administration’s deportation battles.

The Salvadoran national’s case attracted attention across the country, including widespread protests, after the federal government detained him in March 2025 and shipped him to El Salvador’s maximum security prison, the Terrorism Confinement Center, along with an airplane full of other deportees.

He was later returned to the United States, where he has had long-running legal battles with the administration.

U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis, who ordered the administration to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return last year, ruled on Feb. 17 that he cannot be deported again because the federal government has not presented a feasible plan for removing him from the country.

The judge said that despite releasing Abrego Garcia, the government appeared to be making plans to re-detain him, so Abrego Garcia filed an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order to prevent being re-detained.

The court previously granted the requested order.

In the new order, the court granted Abrego Garcia’s request to upgrade the temporary restraining order to an injunction to prevent him from being re-detained.

Abrego Garcia, who entered the United States illegally more than a decade ago, had been living in Maryland when federal agents arrested him.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security takes the position that Abrego Garcia is a “violent criminal illegal alien, and MS-13 gang member,” who “belongs behind bars and off American soil.”

Abrego Garcia, who is facing separate criminal charges, denies being a member of MS-13, which has been designated a terrorist organization.

Xinis previously ordered his release on Dec. 11, 2025, finding that because the federal government had never issued a final order of removal against him, it could not detain him in order to force him from the country.

The government said in a brief last month that Abrego Garcia may be detained because an immigration judge issued an order of removal on Dec. 11, 2025, that became final on Jan. 13 of this year.

Detention after that order “does not require that the country of removal be certain in order for detention to be lawful,” the brief said.

The judge suggested the federal government is not serious about removing Abrego Garcia from the United States.

Since he secured release from criminal custody in August 2025, the government has “made one empty threat after another to remove him to countries in Africa with no real chance of success,” she said.

The judge said that, given the federal government’s maneuvering in the case, it was doubtful that Abrego Garcia would be deported in the “reasonably foreseeable future,” so he may not be re-arrested or put into immigration detention.

“Respondents have done nothing to show that Abrego Garcia’s continued detention in ICE custody is consistent with due process,” Xinis said.

In April 2025, Xinis had ordered that Abrego Garcia be returned to the United States from the prison in El Salvador.

The same month, the Supreme Court ordered that the federal government take steps to bring him back to the United States.

The government of El Salvador cooperated, and Abrego Garcia was returned to the United States in June 2025.

At the same time, Abrego Garcia is currently facing federal criminal charges in Tennessee related to the alleged unlawful transportation of undocumented aliens.

He has entered not guilty pleas to the charges.

The May 2025 indictment brought against Abrego Garcia alleges that he “conspired to bring undocumented aliens to the United States from countries such as Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Ecuador, and elsewhere, ultimately passing through Mexico before crossing into Texas.”

It alleges that Abrego Garcia and his co-conspirators obtained financial payments from the undocumented individuals for unlawfully transporting them into and around the United States.

The indictment also alleges Abrego Garcia was “a member and associate of the transnational criminal organization ... [known as] MS-13,” which it describes as “a criminal enterprise engaged in ... acts and threats involving murder, extortion, narcotics trafficking, firearms trafficking, alien smuggling, and money laundering.”

Abrego Garcia “used his status in MS-13 to further his criminal activity” over the life of the criminal conspiracy during which he and co-conspirators “knowingly and unlawfully transported thousands of undocumented aliens ... many of whom were MS-13 members and associates,” according to the indictment.

Abrego Garcia’s attorneys have called the case “baseless.”

“There’s no way a jury is going to see the evidence and agree that this sheet metal worker is the leader of an international MS-13 smuggling conspiracy,” attorney Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg said.

The Epoch Times reached out for comment to the U.S. Department of Justice, which represents federal agencies in court. No reply had been received as of publication time.

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 20:55

Steam Deck Handheld Gaming PC "May Be Out-Of-Stock" As Great Memory Crunch Deepens

Steam Deck Handheld Gaming PC "May Be Out-Of-Stock" As Great Memory Crunch Deepens

The high-bandwidth memory (HBM) crunch is finally being noticed by mainstream consumers. It's not just soaring HBM prices; the availability of certain consumer electronics is now being affected.

Valve's popular handheld gaming PC is reportedly out of stock in some regions - an early warning that other consumer electronics may soon face similar disruptions.

"Note: Steam Deck OLED may be out-of-stock intermittently in some regions due to memory and storage shortages. Steam Deck LCD 256GB is no longer in production, and once sold out will no longer be available," a new note Valve added to their sales page, according to tech blog Rock Paper Shotgun's Mark Warren.

The Steam Deck OLED has become one of the first consumer electronic devices to feel the effects of the memory crunch, driven by surging demand for AI data centers. We have warned for months that this moment was coming and recently cited industry insiders urging consumers to bring forward purchases: "If you want to buy any consumer goods, PCs, or smartphones, do it now," because memory chips are becoming scarce.

Related:

Goldman's Allen Chang recently revised his global PC shipment forecast lower for 2026-2028 due to the HBM crunch.

Chang warned clients, "The memory shortage is real and accelerating due to AI infrastructure demand, leaving a significant shortage for the conventional side of the industry. Think smartphones, PCs, and other consumer electronics that require high-bandwidth memory..."

Earlier this month, Goldman analyst Katherine Murphy told clients the memory crunch will likely persist for roughly two years and is "reminiscent of the Covid-19 era" shortages.

Murphy warned it's not just memory chips; she said the entire data center buildout supply chain is becoming increasingly snarled. Read her full note here for a rundown of what's already running tight.

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 20:30

"Game On!": High Schoolers To Be Tested On Nation's Founding In National Competition Marking America's 250th

"Game On!": High Schoolers To Be Tested On Nation's Founding In National Competition Marking America's 250th

Authored by Aaron Gifford via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

High school students across the nation this month will test their knowledge of America’s founding in a contest that ultimately rewards the top three finishers with college scholarships.

In 1783, Representative James Madison introduced a resolution to create a library that would give the Congress access to works about the laws of nations and about American history and affairs. The Library of Congress was then founded in 1800. This mural depicts the library in the Capitol in 1890. Public Domain

The first round of the Presidential 1776 Award takes place online the week of Feb. 22–28, according to the program website. In the second round, winners from each state advance to one of five regional semifinals in May. Round three, the national finals, are planned for late June in Washington, just ahead of America’s semi-quincentennial.

“What better way to get our students excited about learning more of our nation’s deep and rich history than a friendly competition meant to challenge high schoolers to show off their knowledge of our great nation’s founding ideals?” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a news release.

“As we prepare to celebrate America’s 250th birthday, this competition is an opportunity for young people to push themselves, learn our history, and take pride in the principles that unite us. Game on!”

The James Madison Memorial Fellowship Foundation will provide the scholarship money.

The foundation’s Executive Secretary and CEO Julie Adams said the aim of this program extends far beyond just recognizing and awarding three top students.

“The knowledge of American civics and history is vital to the survival of the Republic,” she said in a news release. “We agree with our namesake James Madison, who wrote in 1822, ‘Knowledge will forever govern ignorance.’”

Teacher-scholars from the foundation wrote “challenging but fair questions” for the young competitors, Adams said.

The upcoming qualifying round, the “Impossible Civics Test,” is an electronically proctored multiple-choice online exam. Students will have 90 minutes to answer up to 4,000 questions on U.S. history across three 30-minute sections of increasing difficulty.

Top-performing students from every state who advance to the second round will engage in a short-answer verbal competition held in five regional locations simultaneously across the country. The top four students from each region will advance to the finals.

The championship in the nation’s capital is a short-answer verbal competition. The finalists get one point for each correct answer. The three winners will receive scholarships totaling $250,000.

The program website notes that the window to register for the qualifying online test, which is free to take, is still open.

Its study library page provides digital access to the Magna Carta, the Mayflower Compact, the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, a summary of battles from the Revolutionary War, papers from 18th-century American leaders, and many other documents from the critical period and pre-colonial, colonial, and Revolutionary eras.

Its study tips page provides a roadmap to required readings, suggested practice, and test-taking strategies, along with several tips for parents and teachers.

Parents and teachers for the support system that helps students thrive,” the page says. “With your guidance, they can deepen their knowledge, strengthen their skills, and step into this competition ready to perform at their best.”

While the James Madison foundation has worked for several decades to improve the teaching of the U.S. Constitution in high schools, the federal government’s push for civics education is very recent. It includes McMahon’s “History Rocks” tour across several states so far, and the America 250 Civics Education Coalition, a partnership of more than 50 state and national organizations dedicated to providing instruction about the ideas, individuals, and events that define the American story.

K-12 civics education is gaining ground across the nation. The National Conference of State Legislatures reported that, since 2023, at least 23 states and the District of Columbia passed laws requiring the curricula. This was, in part, a response to a 2022 report from the National Center for Education Statistics revealing that one in six Americans could not name any branches of the U.S. government. On Sept. 15, McMahon announced that $160 million in competitive grants will be available for U.S. history and civics instruction as the federal government shifts money away from education programs based on racial and ethnic quotas.

Education policy experts say that, given the nation’s deep political divisions and lack of confidence in the U.S. education system, civics lessons are needed now more than ever.

America’s faith in institutions is at a low ebb,” Jenna Robinson, president of the James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal, previously told The Epoch Times.

“Increased education on our constitutional history and traditions can help public knowledge and public trust.”

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 20:05

US Military Blows Up 3 Alleged Drug Boats, Killing 11, After Lull Since January

US Military Blows Up 3 Alleged Drug Boats, Killing 11, After Lull Since January

The Pentagon's whole anti-narco boat operations fell relatively silent for the past more than a month in the wake of the January 3rd US military raid on Venezuela to overthrow the Maduro government. Surely there was still drug trafficking off Latin America, but with 'mission accomplished' in Caracas the public PR 'anti-drug' pretext was no longer needed, apparently.

But suddenly, this week, the US military has begun its strikes on alleged drug boats again, with US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) on Tuesday having announced its forces launched drone assaults on three alleged drug smuggling boats in the eastern Pacific and the Caribbean on Monday.

In total eleven people were killed in the renewed operation. "Intelligence confirmed the vessels were transiting along known narco-trafficking routes and were engaged in narco-trafficking operations," SOUTHCOM said Tuesday in a post to X.

Illustrative narco-boats file, via X.

The military statements said the three boats were allegedly "operated by Designated Terrorist Organizations." The post further referred to those killed as "male narco-terrorists," detailing that eight were killed on two boats in the eastern Pacific - or the Western side of Latin America - and three were killed on a boat in the Caribbean.

No American forces were harmed, the post said, in the assault conducted at the direction of Marine Corps Gen. Francis Donovan, who serves as the commander of Southern Command.

War (Defense) Secretary Pete Hegseth celebrated the fresh strikes in a post on X, writing, "Turns out President’s Day — under President Trump — is not a good day to run drugs."

For all the momentary celebrations at the Pentagon, the supposed 'war on drugs' will be circular and never-ending, as it's been over the past many decades, spanning presidencies.

But this is really about American influence and 'ownership' of the region and total dominance of the Western hemisphere.

From Vietnam to Iraq to Libya to Syria to Iran, Washington is always looking for some kind of casus belli - even if it has to be manufactured - to sell war to the American people. 

Going back several years, the single biggest sources of the world's fentanyl trade have been consistently identified as China and Mexico.

At this point it's impossible to know, and hasn't been disclosed, whether any of the well over 25 boats blown up by US military action off Latin America since September were actually loaded with fentanyl, or in what quantities

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 19:40

Berkshire Dumps Most Of Its Amazon Shares, Sells More Apple And BofA; Buys Small New York Times Position

Berkshire Dumps Most Of Its Amazon Shares, Sells More Apple And BofA; Buys Small New York Times Position

In Warren Buffett's last quarter as CEO of Berkshire, the Omaha conglomerate slashed several key positions, most notably Amazon which was reduced by over 77%, as well as core holdings Apple and Bank of America, while adding modestly to a handful of stakes such as Chevron and Chubb, and entering a tiny new position in the New York Times, the just published 13F for Q4 2025 revealed. 

Berkshire's most notable moves were all sales, led by a 7.7 million share dump of AMZN, a 77.2% drop in Berkshire's holdings, to just 2.28 million shares from 10 million as of Q3. Berkshire first bought a stake in Amazon in 2019; at the time Buffett said that despite his historical aversion to technology stocks, he’d been “an idiot for not buying” the online retail giant’s shares sooner. Six years later, Buffett - or whoever runs the stockpiking there - has clearly decided they would be an idiot to keep holding on to Amazon. 

Also in Q4, Berkshire continued cutting its stakes in Apple (its largest holding) and Bank of America (its 3rd largest position), trimming these by 4.3% and 8.9% to 227.9 million shares and 517.3 million shares, respectively.  Buffett first started cutting those positions in 2024, after initiating the AAPL position in 2015.

Other holdings that were trimmed included Davita, Constellation Brands, AON, Pool and Liberty Latin. 

It wasn't all sales: in Q4, Berkshire increased its stakes in oil producer Chevron and insurance firm Chubb during the period, to 6.5% and 8.7%, respectively. The conglomerate unveiled its initial investment in Chubb in May 2024, after secretly building it the previous year. Chubb’s shares rose roughly 11% over the fourth quarter after a trade publication reported that the firm made an informal approach to buy American International Group. Berkshire also added modestly to its Dominos Pizza stake. 

Berkshire also launched a small new position in New York Times, adding 5.1 million shares valued at $352 million at the end of Q4, making it Berkshire's 29th largest holding out of 38.

Buffett, who stepped down as CEO at the end of 2025, appeared to be back on the hunt for purchases in recent quarters, reaching a deal to buy Occidental Petroleum's petrochemical business for $9.7 billion and building a $5.6 billion stake in Alphabet. Both positions were unchanged in Q4.  

The full breakdown of Berkshire's Q4 13F is below.

Source: Edgar

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 19:15

Zelensky Slams Trump Pressure As 'Not Fair' - Says Ukrainian Public Won't Let Him Cede Land

Zelensky Slams Trump Pressure As 'Not Fair' - Says Ukrainian Public Won't Let Him Cede Land

Ukraine's President Zelensky has over some four years of war with Russia made very clear his unbending stance that Ukraine will never cede territory for sake of achieving peace under his watch. Yet reaching a peace settlement precisely hinges on this, as Russia will also not give up the territory it has conquered in the Donbas, including the four eastern territories in declared part of the Russian Federation in a 2022 'popular referendum'.

The White House finally appears to be ratcheting up the pressure on Zelensky to make some kind of serious land concession, however. This was evident in the latest comments by President Trump on the topic of Geneva talks this week. Frustration with Kiev was evident he told reporters aboard Air Force One, "Well, we have big talks." He stated that "It’s going to be very easy. I mean, look, so far, Ukraine better come to the table fast. That’s all I’m telling you."

This raised eyebrows among Western allies given Trump seemed to put blame squarely on Zelensky and Ukraine for failing to advance the talks, and the Trump-backed 20-point peace plan which is on the table.

via Associated Press

This unexpected statement of Trump's was serious enough for Zelensky to issue a response later the same day. The Ukrainian leader said in a just published interview with Axios that the Ukrainian public itself won't let him cede territory.

It seems this is his way of evading the mounting criticism and pressure from Trump - basically by passing it off as unpopular domestically. According to Axios:

  • Zelensky said U.S. mediators Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner have told him Russia genuinely wants to end the war, and that he should coordinate with his own negotiating team on that basis ahead of the talks.
  • But Zelensky made clear he's much more pessimistic. He also advised Witkoff and Kushner that they shouldn't try to force him to sell a vision of peace his own people would see as an "unsuccessful story."

He went so far as to proclaim to Axios that it was "not fair" for President Trump to continually call out Ukraine to make concessions, when Moscow is the aggressor.

Ukraine has recently offered a 'freeze' of the front lines, but not permanent and political recognition of territory, which has been long sought by the Putin government. Zelensky has also lately urged a face to face meeting with President Putin, but the Kremlin has made clear nothing of the sort will happen until an acceptable deal is ready to be signed.

In the interview Zelensky suggested that given Russia's size and power, it is easier for the US leader to lean on much smaller Ukraine to make big sacrifices at the negotiating table. 

"I hope it is just his tactics and not the decision," Zelensky said. "We respect each other," he said of Trump, while again thanking the US for seeking to arrange a peace agreement. According to Axios, here's where things stand on the territorial question amid talks in Geneva:

The U.S. mediators have proposed that Ukrainian forces withdraw from the parts of the Donbas they currently hold and allow that area to become a demilitarized "free economic zone." Washington has not taken a position on which country would hold sovereignty there.

At the moment, Russian forces hold some 90% of the Donbass, but are still demanding Kiev cede the whole thing. It is the ten percent which Ukraine forces still possess that Zelensky fears would be ceded over the Russia if he hastily agrees to the current form of Washington's deal.

"This is part of our country, all these citizens, the flag, the land," Zelensky said, and explained that the Ukrainian people would never go for this. That's when he specifically said that only a popular referendum where the people gave its direct input would resolve it.

But he then also stressed Ukrainians "can't understand why" their country would have to give up territory to the invader. Instead, "I think that if we will put in the document ... that we stay where we stay on the contact line, I think that people will support this [in a] referendum. That is my opinion," Zelensky explained.

That's when he basically put the onus on the Ukrainian public, suggesting his own decision-making is not of prime relevance here:

"Emotionally, people will never forgive this. Never. They will not forgive... me, they will not forgive [the U.S.]."

This begs the question: it is truly the common people who would "never" forget? Or does Zelensky more immediately fear the far Right, hawkish anti-Russian sectors within his own government and military? It's long been speculated that if he signed a deal to hand territory to Russia, it wouldn't take long for some Azov assassin to go after him.

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 18:50

2 More High-Profile Transgender Surgery Cases Head To Trial

2 More High-Profile Transgender Surgery Cases Head To Trial

Authored by Darlene McCormick Sanchez via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Two high-profile “detransitioner” cases involving young women whose bodies were irrevocably altered as teens by transgender surgery are expected to go to trial in early 2027.

Chloe Cole, an 18-year-old woman who regrets surgically removing her breasts, holds testosterone medication used for transgender patients, in Northern California on Aug. 26, 2022. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

Chloe Cole, who drew national attention after speaking out against subjecting children to gender-reassignment procedures such as hormones and surgeries, has an April 5, 2027, trial date, according to Mark Trammell, CEO of the Center for American Liberty, which represents several detransitioners.

​Cole and others, known as detransitioners, stopped or reversed a medical gender transition that they started earlier.

She sued Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and other health care providers in California after receiving life-altering hormones and a double mastectomy when she was 15.

​“Kaiser has done everything in its power to keep Chloe out of a courtroom and to ensure that members of the press are not in the gallery,” Trammell told The Epoch Times.

​For Cole, getting a trial date signifies a victory after years of legal wrangling and delays, she told The Epoch Times via text.

After years of fighting for the voices of my generation to be heard, I’ve been given a date for trial. Every victim, every family who spoke up, every step in the culture, all led to this moment,” she said.

​“I’ve waited for my day in court, not just for my sake, but for that of every child who should’ve been protected from irreversible harm.”

Kaiser Foundation Hospitals did not immediately respond to a request for comment regarding the lawsuit moving forward. However, the medical group told local news outlets in 2023 that it followed medical standards of “gender-affirming care.”

​Trammell also represents Luka Hein, whose case is expected to head to trial in early 2027.

​Hein’s Nebraska case names the University of Nebraska Medical Center Physicians, the Nebraska Medical Center, doctors, therapists, and others as defendants.

Like others, Hein had both breasts removed in 2018, when she was 16, as the first step in her “gender-affirming care,” according to the lawsuit.

Building Momentum

Both medical malpractice cases could solidify gains made in the landmark Fox Varian v. Kenneth Einhorn case, which went to trial in New York last month. It marked the first time that a detransitioner case received a jury verdict.

​The Jan. 30 verdict held a surgeon and psychologist liable for malpractice surrounding the double mastectomy that Fox Varian received when she was 16.

The jury found her psychologist, Kenneth Einhorn, and plastic surgeon, Dr. Simon Chin, liable for failing to communicate as required about Varian’s condition. One example was laid out in an October 2019 letter that Einhorn wrote to Chin in support of Varian’s surgery, which contained errors and omitted coexisting mental issues, including autism and depression.

Chloe Cole stands near her home in Northern California on Aug. 26, 2022. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

The New York jury awarded Varian $2 million—$1.6 million for pain and suffering, and $400,000 for future medical expenses.

​The Fox verdict sent shockwaves through the gender medicine industry, while offering hope for other detransitioners.

​Trammell said that while medical negligence lawsuits aren’t new, those involving transgender medicine are.

​“How do you put a price tag on a young woman having her breasts amputated and potentially never being able to have a child?” he asked.

​The hope is that detransitioners will now see that they can win a legal victory.

​“I look at that as a tremendous, tremendous victory, not just for Fox Varian, but for other detransitioners who are maybe thinking about filing lawsuits,” he said.

Chloe Cole holds a childhood photo in Northern California on Aug. 26, 2022. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

Trammell said that the success of medical negligence cases depends on establishing that doctors and hospitals failed to meet the standard of care. That’s why reviews of gender medicine, such as the recent one by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), are important, he said.

​That federal report rejected medical interventions for children with gender dysphoria, recommending therapy instead.

​The HHS report noted that evidence underpinning the alleged benefits of medical interventions in pediatric gender dysphoria was “very uncertain.”

​Trammell said the pediatric gender industry appears to be based more on politics than science.

​He pointed to European countries’ changing of their policies after studies showed problems with medical interventions for childhood gender dysphoria. The United States has lagged behind Europe in adjusting its approach to pediatric gender medicine, Trammell said.

​“It’s taken the U.S., unfortunately, years to even begin to catch up. And even still, there’s a ton of money and political power behind it,” he said.

Tools for Justice

​Civil lawsuits can be tools for changing behavior on the market level, and the landmark Big Tobacco lawsuit settlement in 1998 is a case in point, Trammell said.

​“I think these cases uniquely present the opportunity to put an end to this barbaric industry because ... it’s driven by money and power,” he said.

When doctors, hospitals, and insurers become financially liable for pediatric gender procedures, it will have a chilling effect, Trammell said.

Chloe Cole speaks in support of the Protect Children's Innocence Act as Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) looks on outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Sept. 20, 2022. Terri Wu/The Epoch Times

​Trammell said states have already helped protect vulnerable children by passing laws banning transgender-related hormone treatments and surgery for minors.

However, state lawmakers could have a bigger impact by creating a carve-out on the statute of limitations for medical malpractice.

In many states, lawsuits must be filed within two years of the alleged malpractice, but it can take children much longer to realize the harm they suffered.

In Texas, 60 lawmakers signed a letter supporting a detransitioner’s case, heard on Feb. 11 by the Texas Supreme Court, that was originally dismissed based on the expiration of the statute of limitations. The state lawmakers vowed to support legislation next year to extend the statute of limitations for detransitioners.

Soren Aldaco filed a lawsuit in 2023 asking for more than $1 million in damages, claiming that doctors pressured her into gender-reassignment procedures, gave her “life-altering” hormones at 17, and later “botched” a double mastectomy.

Trammell said that at the very least, the statute of limitations on cases involving minors shouldn’t start until they turn 18.

“They should have five to 10 years at least to be able to make those decisions for things that happen to them as 13-, 14-, 15-year-olds,” he said.

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 18:25

Trump Threatens Iraq With Crippling Sanctions If Maliki Elected To 3rd Term As PM

Trump Threatens Iraq With Crippling Sanctions If Maliki Elected To 3rd Term As PM

Via The Cradle

Washington has delivered a direct warning to Iraq's Coordination Framework (CF) that Baghdad could face sweeping sanctions if former prime minister Nouri al-Maliki is elected to lead the country for a third term, according to a report in US-government funded Arabic-language Alhurra this week.

An Iraqi government advisor, speaking anonymously, reportedly said the message outlined economic and institutional penalties that could follow if US President Donald Trump’s veto of Maliki's nomination is ignored.

via Associated Press

The advisor said the US threatened measures against the State Oil Marketing Organization (SOMO), the Central Bank of Iraq, as well as security and diplomatic sectors, and unnamed political figures. 

Economic steps could include restricting Iraqi oil sales, limiting Baghdad’s access to US dollars, and targeting banks, which the advisor warned could trigger "an almost complete halt in foreign trade" and create serious obstacles to paying public-sector salaries.

A member of the CF confirmed the authenticity of the message, saying it reached the alliance through a senior figure who met US chargé d’affaires Joshua Harris. 

The US embassy in Iraq later disclosed that Harris had met Abdul Hussein al-Moussawi, head of the National Approach Alliance, and reiterated Washington’s readiness to "use the full range of tools to counter Iran’s destabilizing activities in Iraq."

Trump said on Friday, "We are monitoring the situation regarding the prime minister. We will see what happens. We have some thoughts about it, but in the end, everyone needs America."

Earlier, Maliki said stepping aside would endanger Iraq's sovereignty and that he would withdraw only if the CF formally requested it, condemning what he described as "blatant American interference in Iraq’s internal affairs."

Internal resistance within the alliance has reportedly grown, with one member stating: "No one wants … to risk the collapse of the political system if Washington carries out its threats."

Earlier this month, Washington publicly reinforced its opposition to Nouri al-Maliki’s return as Iraq’s prime minister, with a US official telling Rudaw that Trump’s "policy towards Iraq requires an Iraqi government that is capable of working effectively and respectfully with the United States," and warning that the administration was prepared to use the "full range of tools" to enforce that stance. 

"Because of his insane policies and ideologies, if elected, the United States of America will no longer help Iraq," Trump wrote on Truth Social. “If we are not there to help, Iraq has ZERO chance of Success, Prosperity, or Freedom. MAKE IRAQ GREAT AGAIN!”

A reminder and recent history lesson: one byproduct of Bush's overthrow of Saddam Hussein was that the Americans essentially handed Iraq over to pro-Iran Shia leadership...

Maliki responded in an interview with Al Sharqiya that he would withdraw only if the Shia-led CF that nominated him asked him to do so, warning that stepping aside under foreign pressure would "set a dangerous precedent and undermine national sovereignty."

He described US threats to economically strangle Iraq as "pressure tools," even as the CF affirmed its support for his candidacy despite Washington’s escalating warnings.

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 17:45

China's Unprecedented Oil Stockpiling Sparks Questions If Beijing Is Preparing For War

China's Unprecedented Oil Stockpiling Sparks Questions If Beijing Is Preparing For War

Almost four years ago we pointed out something striking: while the world was still busy recovering from the covid Pandemic and suffering under soaring inflation - as seemingly everything was suddenly in short supply and prices were soaring - China was busy stockpiling pretty much everything at an unprecedented pace. Quoting a JPM report from March 2022 we noted that  "while the world is short on commodities, China is not given they have started stockpiling commodities since 2019 and currently hold 80% of global copper inventories, 70% of corn, 51% of wheat, 46% of soybeans, 70% of crude oil, and over 20% of global aluminum inventories."

Almost as if China was preparing for its inevitable invasion of Taiwan.

But if anyone expected China to ease off the hoarding pedal after its massive stockpiling spree, they would be very disappointed and nowhere more so than oil. As John Kemp of JKemp Energy notes, China has been accumulating crude oil inventories to take advantage of relatively low prices and act as an emergency reserve in any future conflict with the United States and its allies.

China’s stocks of crude oil apparently increased by 54 million tonnes (about 400 million barrels or 1.1 million barrels per day) during 2025 after a similar increase in 2024. China’s massive inventory build-up has helped avert the accumulation of stocks in other areas and limited the fall in prices even as Saudi Arabia and its OPEC partners have boosted production.

Inventory accumulation, Kemp writes echoing what we said years ago, has also been described as a “strategic warning indicator” that could indicate the country’s leaders are preparing for a future conflict with the United States over Taiwan.

“Energy production and stockpile buildups often precede great power industrial wars,” one analyst told the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission established by the U.S. Congress.

In building strategic reserves to enable its economy to keep functioning and armed forces to keep fighting during a future conflict, the country is following long-standing precedent. 

China, of course, is not alone: policymakers and military planners in the United States, Britain, France and other countries in Western Europe as well as Japan have all focused on building oil reserves in readiness for a conflict for almost a century. Yet nobody has taken stockpiling as religiously as Beijing has in recent years. 

SECRETIVE STOCKS

China’s government considers stocks of crude and refined products stored by importers, refiners and distributors as well as its own strategic reserves a state secret. Total inventories are not disclosed which has led to a guessing game about how much oil is stored and its distribution between commercial stocks (held for operational and speculative purposes) and strategic reserves.

But it is possible to obtain some indication about the magnitude and direction of changes from data the government does publish on domestic crude production, imports and processing by refineries.

Crude oil exports and the direct use of crude by industry have fallen to negligible levels in recent years so they can be safely ignored.

In 2025, China’s domestic crude output climbed to 216 million tonnes and the country imported a further 578 million, according to data published by National Bureau of Statistics and the General Administration of Customs.

But the country’s refineries processed only 738 million tonnes, leaving 56 million unaccounted for, of which perhaps 2 million were probably exported with other small volumes used directly in industry.

Meanwhile, since the start of the century, China has apparently increased its crude inventories in 24 of the 25 years, according to an analysis of government data. The exception was 2021, after an unprecedented increase the previous year, during the first wave of the coronavirus pandemic, which caused crude prices to slump to multi-decade lows.

The persistent rise can be explained in part by operational requirements stemming from the growing consumption of gasoline, diesel and other petroleum products. But consumption has grown more slowly in recent years as deployment of electric vehicles and gas-powered trucks has cut into fuel use. 

The apparent increase in stocks during 2024 and again in 2025 is too large to be attributed to operational needs and commercial incentives alone.

The massive accumulation appears to be "a precautionary measure in case imports are disrupted by sanctions or an embargo during any future conflict with the United States and its allies," Kemp writes.

ENERGY SECURITY

China imports more than 70% of the crude processed in its refineries and the government has identified this foreign dependence a critical issue for national security. The Communist Party’s Central Committee recently issued a call for “Building a Strong Energy Nation” as part of its formal input into drafting the Fifteenth Five-Year Plan covering the years from 2026 to 2030:

“[E]nergy security and stability are of paramount importance to the national economy and people’s livelihoods, and are a matter of utmost national importance that cannot be ignored.”

“Currently, the world is undergoing profound changes unseen in a century, with technological revolutions and great power competition intertwined, deeply reshaping the global energy supply and demand landscape.”

There is “an urgent requirement for enhancing energy security and gaining the initiative in great power competition. Currently, frequent regional conflicts exacerbate geopolitical risks, and the United States continues to contain and suppress China, making the politicization and weaponization of energy issues more prominent.”

“To prevent shocks in the energy sector and effectively guarantee domestic development, my country's energy system must improve its own development level and security capabilities.”

“Building a strong energy nation … is the only way for my country to achieve fundamental energy security,” the Central Committee concluded.

OIL IN WARTIME

Throughout history, governments have accumulated stocks of critical materials as well as armaments in preparation for conflicts. Strategic stockpiling is arguably one of the core functions of the state. From antiquity to the medieval period, walled cities and fortresses stockpiled water, food and fuel to help withstand a prolonged siege; defensive walls without stocks of critical supplies were an invitation to famine.

Since the First World War, which saw the first widespread use of oil for battleships and other transport, the preoccupation with stockpiling has applied to oil as well.

Modern governments have accumulated strategic reserves as well as encouraging domestic oil production and incentivising alternative fuels as to protect their economies and warfighting ability in the event of conflict.

“Petroleum will continue to be the most essential fuel of industry in both peace and war,” the U.S. Senate’s Special Committee Investigating Petroleum Resources concluded in 1947. “No nation which lacks a sure supply of liquid fuel can hope to maintain a position of leadership among the peoples of the world.”

“In time of peace a nation, to maintain a first-class rating in the trade and commerce of the modern world, must have access to an abundant supply of oil because mechanized industry and transportation depend upon it. Oil is also of basic importance for purposes other than the provision of energy. Petroleum lubricates the fleets, airplanes, and machines of the world. It is a raw material in the whole field of chemicals. It is used in the manufacture of pharmaceutical products, paints, solvents, plastics, and synthetic rubber.”

“In time of war, as twice demonstrated on a large scale in the present century, a nation, to remain a first-class Power, must have petroleum resources immediately and continuously available in virtually unlimited volume. Oil is the sine qua non of military victory.

For countries with limited production on their own territory, relying on imports, ensuring uninterrupted supplies has usually meant accumulating strategic stocks to be drawn down in the event imports are disrupted.

PRE-WAR PLANNING

Since 1928, French law has required the permanent availability of three months of oil stocks with the aim of being “energy independent in case of crisis”.

In Britain, the Royal Commission on Fuel and Engines stressed the importance of holding large stocks in reserve as early as 1913 as the Royal Navy shifted its fuel from domestically produced coal to imported petroleum.

In 1934, the Oil Board, a subcommittee of the Committee of Imperial Defence, Britain’s top military planning body, was instructed to prepare plans for a war against a European enemy with a target date of 1 January 1940.

The Oil Board recommended the Royal Navy, the Army and the Royal Air Force should each lay in stocks equivalent to six months of wartime consumption (later raised to as much as one year in the case of the Air Force).

The Oil Board also recommended Britain’s oil companies should raise their own stocks to the equivalent of three months of peacetime consumption, a recommendation subsequently accepted by the industry.

In 1938, Britain’s Parliament approved the Essential Commodities Reserves Act, which gave the government power to obtain information about commodities vital in the event of war and make provisions for reserves.

In agreement with the Treasury, the act authorized the Board of Trade to make payments or loans to traders to encourage them to hold increased stocks of essential commodities, or acquire and own them its own right.

IEA EMERGENCY STOCKS

The idea of holding oil reserves equivalent to three months of consumption or net imports has remained a benchmark incorporated into subsequent iterations of strategic reserves. In 1974, following the Arab oil embargo the previous year, the governments of the United States, Japan and Western Europe concluded an Agreement on an International Energy Program.

Each participating country committed to maintain “emergency reserves sufficient to sustain consumption for at least 60 days with no net oil imports” (later raised to 90 days or three months).

The emergency reserve requirement could be satisfied by oil stocks, fuel switching capacity, or stand-by oil production.

The agreement also created a Standing Group on Emergency Questions and an International Energy Agency (IEA) to oversee and implement the programme.

In the United States, the agreement was given effect by the 1975 Energy Policy and Conservation Act, which established the government-owned and run Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

In the United Kingdom, it was given effect by the 1976 Energy Act, which gave the government powers to order oil suppliers or users to maintain stocks at a minimum specified level.

Similar legislation was enacted in the other participating countries – in most cases requiring oil producers, importers, distributors or users to maintain stocks at minimum levels, either themselves or by agreement with third parties.

CHINA’S ESTIMATED STOCKS

Between 2023 and 2025, China imported between 4.1 billion and 4.2 billion barrels of crude each year, according to data from the General Administration of Customs. China’s supplies are extremely vulnerable given it relies on imports mostly along sea lanes in the Middle East, Indian Ocean and South China Sea patrolled by the U.S. Navy and allies.

Policymakers have followed their western counterparts in trying to lessen the risks by building commercial and strategic reserves at tank farms near ports and refineries as well as below ground to protect them from air attack. By mid-2024, China’s total crude storage capacity at tank farms was estimated at more than 1.8 billion barrels by consultants Kayrros and shared in prepared testimony to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission.

Between 2016 and 2024, China’s observed stocks above ground had ranged between 850 million and a little over 1 billion barrels, according to Kayrros, using geospatial analysis on the roofs of floating roofs at tank farms. Above ground inventories included approximately 200 million barrels of strategic reserves at various sites. There was also below ground storage in at least four locations with the capacity to store another 100 million barrels.

China’s observed and estimated oil inventories are a combination of commercial stocks (held for operational and speculative purposes) and strategic stocks (held in readiness for any future disruption of imports). More recently, in March 2025, the country’s commercial stocks were estimated at around 670 million barrels, with a further 400 million held as strategic reserves, according to Kayrros.

The country also had underground facilities capable of holding a further 130 million barrels with an unknown fill rate.

Total inventories were estimated at between 1.1 billion and 1.2 billion barrels – equivalent to around 100 days or just over three months of imports. But the country’s above ground storage facilities were less than 60% full at the time, implying there was scope to increase stocks further.

China continued to import crude in excess of its refinery requirements throughout the rest of 2025 implying inventories had been raised even higher by the end of the year.

LACK OF TRANSPARENCY

Stockpiling can contribute to strategic stability or instability depending on point of view: it may make governments feel more secure and less prone to strike first, or embolden them to engage in more aggressive and risky behavior.

China’s policymakers have always considered the exact amount of oil held in commercial and strategic storage to be a matter of national security and a state secret. Secrecy is understandable given the country’s extreme vulnerability to any interruption of imports; there is no benefit sharing inventory levels with potential adversaries.

But the lack of transparency has fueled suspicions about the country’s intentions and whether stockpiling is defensive in nature or indicates a more aggressive preparation for war.

“China’s outsized oil storage expansion … has profound strategic implications,” one analyst testified to the Economic and Strategic Review Commission, because it can “dramatically enhance China’s ability to weather an oil blockade.”

There is also ambiguity about the distribution and management of commercial compared with strategic stocks. China’s oil inventories are much less transparent than those of the United States and other IEA members, but the stockholding arrangements themselves are not that unusual.

“Nine clearly demarcated SPR bases exist, but often sit adjacent to far larger commercial tank capacity. The stocks share access to common pipeline infrastructure and refineries.”

The somewhat ambiguous relationship between commercial and strategic inventories is not that unusual. Nor is co-location and sharing pipelines and refineries. Crude oil is not useful without access to refineries and pipelines for long-distance transmission and distribution so sharing infrastructure makes sense.

IEA members themselves employ a variety of models for maintaining strategic reserves - owned and run by the government itself, by industry, or by specialised stockholding agencies and third parties. The purpose of strategic stocks has always been somewhat ambiguous and has become more so over time as policymakers have sought to use them more actively.

Most IEA members hold stocks to deal with military and economic emergencies - outright supply interruptions as well as sudden spikes in prices. It is not always easy to distinguish between them.

GLOBAL MARKET IMPACT

China is the world’s second-largest oil consumer (after the United States) and by far the world’s largest crude importer, so the country’s consumption and inventories have a significant impact on global balances. Lack of transparency about the size of inventories, their purpose, and future trends has become a major source of uncertainty for the oil industry.

There is some evidence purchases by China’s refiners and possibly its stockpile managers have been sensitive to prices – with imports accelerating when prices have been relatively low. But this has been based on empirical observations of the rate of imports rather than a firm understanding of inventory management policies.

China’s rapid imports in 2025 absorbed some of the surplus oil production as Saudi Arabia and its OPEC⁺ partners boosted output rapidly in the face of tepid global consumption.

China’s inventory building has been described as “a secondary source of oil demand” by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). By absorbing some excess production and removing it from the open market, at least for now, stockpiling probably prevented a much faster and deeper decline in prices, especially in the spot market.

China’s inventory accumulation may have helped stabilize prices, informally and unintentionally making the country a market adjuster or buffer stock manager. But the scale and timing of future changes in both commercial and strategic inventories remain unknown and difficult to forecast.

If purchases for inventory are sensitive to prices, China might accelerate them if prices decline further (subject to logistics constraints) or taper them if prices rise. Price-sensitive purchasing policies would help dampen volatility again.

The EIA has said that: “We assume that China will continue building strategic stockpiles at nearly the same rate of about 1.0 million b/d in 2026, before reducing strategic builds in 2027.”

But given the lack of transparency around the stockpiles, it is impossible to forecast purchasing behaviour with a high degree of confidence.

Other than in time of war, the conditions under which China might release oil from commercial and especially strategic stocks are also obscure. 

China has a long tradition of actively employing state-owned reserves of food to manage prices and dampen fluctuations as well as relieving outright shortages. More recently, strategic reserve managers have purchased materials including aluminium and copper to support domestic producers and prices in periods of excess supply, before releasing them later when prices have risen.

But the conditions (if any) under which China would release oil from strategic stocks in response to high prices and shortages other than in a conflict remain unknown.

CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS

China’s reliance on imported crude most of it arriving along sea lanes patrolled by the U.S. Navy and its allies has been identified by the government as one of the top threats to national security. China’s economy and its warfighting ability would both be vulnerable to sanctions or an embargo in the event of a future conflict with the United States over Taiwan.

Like other import-dependent countries, China’s government has responded by accumulating strategic inventories, as well as encouraging greater fuel efficiency, oil substitutes and more domestic production. 

China’s inventories are still rising, but are currently equivalent to slightly more than three months of net imports, which is comparable to stocks planned by other import-dependent countries over the last century.

China treats inventory levels as a national security matter and a state secret, which is understandable given the country’s extreme vulnerability. But the lack of transparency encourages suspicion and speculation about the country’s military planning for future conflicts.

Lack of transparency has also become the single most important source of uncertainty in forecasting future production, consumption, inventory and price balances in the global oil market.

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 17:25

Memory-Holed? Western Digital Dumps $3 Billion Sandisk Stock Stake

Memory-Holed? Western Digital Dumps $3 Billion Sandisk Stock Stake

Almost exactly a year after the spinoff officially closed on Feb. 24 last year, Western Digital is seeking to raise $3.09 billion from the sale of its remaining equity stake in Sandisk.

While WDC has risen dramatically, SNDK has been on quite a tear since the spin-off...

Chief Financial Officer Kris Sennesael said on Western Digital’s quarterly earnings call Jan. 29. that the company planned to sell its remaining 7.5 million Sandisk shares before the one-year anniversary of the separation.

And so, according to a statement Sandisk launched the sale on behalf of its former parent in a statement Tuesday that didn’t disclose how many shares it would sell.

According to the statement, Western Digital is expected to exchange the SanDisk shares for debt held by affiliates of JPMorgan and Bank of America.

For now, WDC is flat in the after-hours trade but SNDK is down around 8%, extending the losses during the day...

Amid a global shortage of flash memory, that has sent DRAM prices soaring since September, demand for Sandisk’s products, which are used in computers and mobile phones, has, as Bloomberg reports, been linked to the tech industry’s characteristic boom and bust cycles, keeping valuations in check.

The banks will sell the stock to the underwriters of the offering, whom they represent.

Did WDC's decision just mark the top in the memory melt-up?

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 17:17

Pages