BRUSSELS – NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has delivered one of the starkest warnings heard in Europe since the end of the Cold War, telling EU leaders that the continent must be ready for the possibility of a large-scale war with Russia within the next five years.

Speaking at a closed-door meeting of EU defence ministers in Brussels, later confirmed by several officials present, the former Dutch prime minister dropped the cautious language that usually shapes NATO messaging.

“We are no longer in a grey zone,” Rutte said, according to sources. “Europe has to rearm at a speed and on a scale not seen since the 1930s, or we risk facing a war we are not prepared to fight, and almost certainly not prepared to win.”

The remarks mark a sharp shift in tone from the alliance. For nearly two years, NATO leaders have argued that extensive military aid to Ukraine would be enough to deter Russian President Vladimir Putin from attacking any NATO member. Rutte’s warning suggests that faith in that assumption has weakened inside the organisation.

Three senior diplomats who attended the meeting told reporters, on condition of anonymity, that Rutte shared new intelligence suggesting Russia is rebuilding its armed forces far faster than Western officials expected, despite heavy losses in Ukraine.

These assessments indicate that Moscow could have a conventional force, able to conduct operations against the Baltic states and carry out sustained long-range strikes across Europe, by around 2029 or 2030.

Dangerous Complacency

“Russia isn’t just swapping one destroyed tank for one new tank,” Rutte reportedly told ministers. “They have moved their whole economy onto a war footing. Their defence sector now produces more artillery shells in a single month than the entire European Union turns out in a year.

If we don’t match that kind of effort, the balance of power will shift firmly against us.”

Rutte singled out Germany, France, Italy, and Spain for pointed criticism, accusing them of “dangerous complacency” over defence spending and arms procurement.

He praised Poland, the Baltic states, and the Nordic countries for moving quickly to raise their military budgets and bring back or strengthen conscription, but warned that, taken together, Europe remains “woefully unprepared” for a high-intensity conflict.

The most sensitive moment came when Rutte spoke about the possible impact of a second Donald Trump term in the White House. “We must plan for every scenario, including one where America is distracted or decides not to honour Article 5,” he said, referring to NATO’s mutual defence clause.

The remark caused clear unease among several southern European ministers, some of whom later described it in private as “unhelpful scaremongering”.

After the meeting, Rutte softened his language in public but did not back away from his main message. “Europe must be ready to defend every inch of allied territory, with or without outside support,” he told journalists outside the European Council building.

“That takes money, political courage, and a deep change in how Europeans think about security. The time of peace dividends is over.”

NATO Target Spending

His warning comes as several European governments are already, albeit slowly, increasing defence budgets. Germany said last month that it will hit NATO’s target of spending 2% of GDP on defence by 2027, three years later than it had initially pledged.

France has promised to raise its defence spending to 3% of GDP by 2030, while Poland already spends more than 4%. Security analysts say that even these higher figures still fall well short of what would be needed to narrow the gap with Russia’s growing arsenal.

Experts interviewed by Reuters said that Rutte’s five-year timeline is “completely realistic”. Dr Claudia Major, of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, said Russia’s ability to absorb huge losses and keep expanding its defence industry has “shocked” many Western intelligence services. “They are not just rebuilding,” she said. “They are innovating and growing at a scale we have not seen since the Second World War.”

As Europe moves into 2026, facing weak growth, political division, and public fatigue over the war in Ukraine, Rutte’s comments set out a stark choice. Either the continent rearms quickly at great financial and political cost, or it risks becoming exposed to Russian pressure, or even direct military attack, within a few years.

For now, his warning appears to have prompted at least some immediate reactions. Late on Wednesday, the defence ministers of Spain and Italy announced fast-track reviews of their military procurement plans. The European Commission also confirmed that it is putting together a proposed €100 billion “ReArm Europe” loan package, which EU leaders are expected to debate next month.

Whether Europe can find the unity and determination to act before the window closes has now become the central security question facing the continent.

Related News:

Trump Calls European Leaders Weak, Warns Over Mass Migration

ST. PAUL, Minn. – Governor Tim Walz, a Democrat, is pushing back hard against former President Donald Trump’s comments about widespread fraud in Minnesota’s public assistance programmes.

Walz accuses Trump of using the problem for political gain while highlighting large, costly failures in the state system. At the same time, the Governor is rolling out new, broad anti-fraud measures across state agencies, a move that feels more urgent as similar large-scale fraud cases surface in places like Ohio.

Public anger has grown after federal prosecutors charged dozens of people in what they call the largest single pandemic fraud case in the country. The case centres on the non-profit “Feeding Our Future” and an alleged $250 million scheme involving federal child nutrition funds.

The total losses across different state-run benefit programmes remain disputed, but a former U.S. Attorney for the District of Minnesota has said the full amount could top $1 billion, a figure Trump has repeated often.

Trump has stepped up his focus on the scandal in recent weeks. He has used the Minnesota fraud cases to launch harsh attacks on the state’s large Somali community, where many of the defendants come from.

His comments, including a threat to end Temporary Protected Status for Somalis in Minnesota and calling the community “garbage”, have drawn criticism from both parties, while also putting even more national attention on Minnesota’s oversight problems.

“The buck stops with me, and my focus now is on making sure not a single pound is stolen,” Walz said last week, accepting responsibility for failures on his watch. He then turned sharply to Trump’s role, arguing that the former President’s words are a harmful distraction.

“What is not helpful is the President of the United States demonising an entire community or pardoning someone single-handedly responsible for $1.6 billion in fraud,” Walz wrote in a recent opinion piece, referring to separate federal matters. He argues that Trump is turning a serious policy issue into a political weapon, while the root problem stems from rushed federal relief money with weaker safeguards during the pandemic.

A New Push Against Fraud In State Programmes

With Republicans making fraud a centrepiece of their campaigns against him, Walz is trying to show firm leadership by building new layers of protection. On Friday, he announced a centralised anti-fraud structure and appointed the state’s first Director of Program Integrity.

Walz chose Tim O’Malley for the job, a former FBI agent and former head of the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. O’Malley has worked for both Republican and Democratic governors. He stressed that he is politically neutral and said his only goal is to serve Minnesotans and rebuild trust in public institutions.

As Director, O’Malley will work across every state agency to create shared standards for investigations, reporting, and data sharing. A key aim is to block fraudsters who move between different programmes at the same time.

Minnesota has also hired the forensic firm WayPoint, Inc. to help build a full fraud prevention “toolkit” that will be used across the state government. These moves are meant to go beyond the high-profile Feeding Our Future scandal and tackle deeper weaknesses in programmes such as Medicaid and Housing Stabilization Services, where credible fraud claims have also surfaced.

A National Pattern Shows Wider Risk

Federal officials often point to the Minnesota case as the largest single scheme of its kind, but the state is not alone. Walz himself has noted a string of large Medicaid fraud cases around the country, naming Ohio, Arizona, Nebraska, and Texas as examples.

The Ohio case, which echoes some of the same problems seen in Minnesota’s pandemic schemes, involves alleged false claims in the Medicaid system. The details are different, often tied to overcharging or billing for care that never took place in disability and behavioural health services, but the basic pattern is similar.

A huge, complex benefits system, combined with fast government spending, gave criminals room to slip through weak controls. The spread of these multi-state schemes shows that the problem is national, rooted in rapid government payouts without strong enough checks.

By appointing a new integrity chief, Walz is trying to show that he is taking charge and not just reacting to criticism from Trump and Republican challengers. His administration is counting on O’Malley’s experience and new central controls to restore public trust and push back on claims that Minnesota has become a “hub of fraudulent money laundering activity”.

Conservative critics argue that the actions come too late and say the state allowed years of large losses before acting. The real test will be whether these new steps reduce fraud in a clear way, protect public money, and help decide Walz’s political fate.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Federal watchdogs and members of Congress are pursuing “pass-through” fraud within Small Business Administration (SBA) diversity programs, many of which expanded significantly during the Biden administration’s “equity in procurement” strategy.

A major accountability effort is unfolding across federal contracting. Evidence suggests widespread deception and misuse within the SBA’s primary diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. These programs saw rapid expansion under the previous administration’s focus on equitable procurement.

The central issue in the emerging controversy surrounds the 8(a) Business Development Program. This decades-old initiative aims to provide federal contract preferences to firms owned by people considered “socially and economically disadvantaged.”

Lawmakers and investigators assert that the program, which granted over $40 billion in contracts in Fiscal Year 2024, became a way for large, unqualified corporations to misuse taxpayer money. They allegedly used small, disadvantaged businesses as facades.

Fraud Becomes Widespread

SBA Administrator Kelly Loeffler suggested the current issue worsened due to the Biden administration’s “aggressive priority for DEI over merit in federal contracting.” This crisis follows several years of warnings from the SBA’s Inspector General and the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

The situation escalated after two recent, highly publicized incidents provided strong evidence for critics.

The first was a U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation in June. It revealed an alleged $550 million bribery plan spanning a decade. The scheme involved a former U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) contracting officer and three company owners who took advantage of the 8(a) program.

This was followed in October by an undercover video. The footage reportedly showed a senior official from a large 8(a) firm, ATI Government Solutions, admitting to defrauding the program to obtain multi-million dollar, sole-source contracts.

The SBA subsequently suspended ATI, a Native-owned enterprise, from receiving new federal contracts. The firm faced allegations that it operated as a “pass-through,” subcontracting almost all of its work while keeping a minor fee.

This action clearly violated the rules meant to protect the program’s integrity. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent immediately ordered the suspension and cancellation of all Treasury contracts with ATI Government Solutions, which totaled more than $253 million.

Treasury and SBA Begin Broad Audits

The new Trump administration quickly ramped up its enforcement efforts.

Treasury Secretary Bessent announced a comprehensive, department-wide audit. The review targets approximately $9 billion in contracts awarded through preference-based programs. Bessent stated the department “will not tolerate fraudulent misuse of federal contracting programs.” According to the Treasury, many of these contracts were granted during the Biden administration’s equity push.

In a related move, SBA Administrator Kelly Loeffler ordered a full review of all 8(a) contracts across every federal agency. Loeffler has already directed the agency to reduce its contracting goal for disadvantaged businesses to the legal minimum of 5 percent, down from the Biden-era high of 15 percent.

Loeffler said, “Evidence indicates that the 8(a) Program, initially designed for ‘socially and economically disadvantaged’ businesses, has become a pass-through vehicle for rampant abuse.”

In an unparalleled action, the SBA sent letters in early December to all 4,300 current 8(a) participants. The letters demand that firms submit extensive financial records by January 5, 2026, or risk being removed from the program. This massive request for documentation signals the administration’s strict policy against widespread program misuse.

Congress Calls for Immediate Business Program Suspension

Congressional reaction to the alleged waste of taxpayer funds has been immediate and strongly critical across both parties.

Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), the Chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, is leading the legislative response. Just this week, Ernst sent letters to 22 federal agency heads. She pushed them to voluntarily cease all sole-source 8(a) contracting. She also urged them to conduct detailed reviews of all sole-source and set-aside 8(a) contracts dating back to Fiscal Year 2020.

“Despite concerns with the 8(a) program, Joe Biden opened the floodgates to fraud,” Ernst told reporters. “I have found evidence of alarming, potentially fraudulent 8(a) awards made across government that need to be investigated. The program must be halted at every agency while a thorough review is conducted to ensure taxpayers are not being ripped off by con artists.”

Ernst criticized the “sloppy oversight and weak enforcement measures.” She claimed these failures permitted “8(a) participants to act as pass-through entities, snagging unlimited no-bid deals with little transparency.”

Constitutional Hurdle Approaches

Beyond the extensive fraud allegations, the legal standing of the DEI-based contracting programs themselves faces a serious constitutional challenge.

A new major lawsuit, filed by the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) and the Center for Individual Rights (CIR), seeks to invalidate a core SBA regulation. This rule creates a “rebuttable presumption of social disadvantage” for people belonging to specific racial and ethnic groups. Plaintiffs argue this mechanism, which was adopted across dozens of Biden-era programs, is a “code word for race discrimination.” They contend it violates the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause.

Federal courts have already ruled against using this presumption in several federal programs, including parts of the 8(a) program. Under the new administration, the DOJ formally informed Congress that it will no longer defend the presumption in certain Department of Transportation programs. This suggests a major policy shift that could end race-based preferences throughout the federal government.

The convergence of massive fraud accusations and a growing constitutional crisis has made the SBA’s diversity programs a central focus of the administration’s commitment. This commitment is to eliminate what it calls “radical and wasteful” DEI-based contracting and to root out waste. The sheer number of contracts now under examination, along with the threat of legal action for firms that fail to comply, suggests this cleanup operation is just beginning.

Trending News:

Trump’s Calls European Leaders Weak, Warns Over Mass Migration