REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA JOINS SHIELD OF THE AMERICAS

 After announcement made by the President of the Republic of Colombia, Ebelardo de la Espriella, of joining Shield of the Americas, implications concerning the South American Country’s request and authorization to conduct joint military action aiming ‘Narco terrorists’ ‘disidents’ and ‘Fuerza Armada Revolucionaria de Colombia’ was approved after the result of investigation made by Secretary of Defense of the United States of America, Pete Hegseth during the month of August, 2026.

 

Considering transition of mandate and Institutionalism after a pacific Presidency of leftist, Gustavo Petro, the initiation of Military Action conducted by Colombia as member of Regional Alliance Shield of the Americas was conducted successfully following a Multinational Strategic Operation order.

 

Albeit juridical analysis concerning processed Administrative permission to evaluate Constitutionalism determined order of operation according to a logistic approach of permission of a Foreign Troop in relation to the National Army of the Republic of Colombia, authorization provided to multilateral Alliance transcended according to organization, direct participation, definition of concrete objectives, economic strategy and Operation’s reach  (Blu Radio, 2026).

 

According to Political Analyst, Simon Whistler, the definition of profile of President Ebelardo de la Espriella, develops after constituting War Advocacy labeling Total War as a National Front nevertheless including clearance of domestic facts and guerillas to confront new Military Direction.

 

First Military Action from multilateral organism was conducted by U.S. SOUTHCOM and Fuerza Naval del Pacífico (FNP) of the Republic of Colombia nevertheless the interception of ‘cargo vessel’ carrying chlorohydrate of cocaine and capture of suspects was executed in the Pacific Ocean (NTN24, 2026).

 

Initial Action, according to de la Espriella, represents an 'Institutional Dialogue', the respect for the 'independence' of command and 'Constitutional division of powers and responsibilities', as well as, 'Justice' in a democratic regime developing War Advocacy far from undermining democratic parameters. According to War Fronts Analyst, Simon Whistler, the President’s new identity is distinguished in a multilateral order transcending Executive Decrees and Security Pacts to position government in accordance with ‘narco insurgence’ (Espriella, 2026) (x.com @ABDELAESPRIELLA)(Whistler, 2026)[1] (War Fronts).

Albeit joint publication was held according to bilateral and multinational agenda, President of the United States, Donald Trump, agreed to liberate tax to the South American Country during humanitarian crisis. 

 

Key Words

---

[1] Total War       War Advocacy        Triple C Hemisferio Occidental

 

ARTICLE 5. MEMBERS OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION RESETTLING UKRAINE

 

Since the occupation of Crimea (2014) the State of the Republic of Ukraine and the Russian Federation have developed conflict and War concerning the extent of sovereignty and constitutionalism.

 

According to multilateral confrontation of War, Article 5. of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), has determined the involvement of the Allies of the Republic of Ukraine considering the defense principles after the attack of a Country member of the Alliance specifying the Republic of Ukraine after the occupation of Crimea.

 

After years of War the implication of multilateralism guiding Frontline to execute direct attacks to the Russian Federation has determined a change, according to U.S. Air Force Veteran and Nuclear and Missile Operation Officer, Jake Broe, referring to a ‘pre-mobilization’ or ‘mobilization’ to resettle Crimea as a territory of the Republic of Ukraine (Broe, 2026)[1].

 

Albeit sovereignty determined the population of Crimea represented a ‘cleavaged’ debate  concerning Constitutionalism, territorial laws, maps and War the non-binding movement that approved Crimea to be territorial part of the Russian Federation lacked free elections nor other binding mechanisms of, plebiscite, to modify written norm, Constitution or legal status of territory that has already initiated a counter movement to determine if legal re-settlement of Ukraine would End War.

 

U.S. Air Force  Veteran, Jake Broe, analyzes in transmission “August Q/A” the extent of Article 5. Of NATO if non annexation is accepted and occupation of Crimea is outlawed identifying Article 5. as the normed multilateral confrontation for Defense as the formal approach for International Law and territorial Ukraine.

 

Considering annexation as a sovereign movement justifying Russian defense of citizens, the legal notion of property rights and guarantees does not refer to a territory albeit is scrutinized if other legal status, such as, deportation vs. leaving occupied territories and Ukraine accepting citizens or a resettling movement as Resolving status to end War repositions the State as the most relevant form of organization and peace.

 

Albeit negotiation has been appointed by multilateralism, Russians were expelled from 26 villages claimed under their control as well as an official rejection of Ukraine describing the Black Sea as area of interest to achieve ceasefire defining attacks during the month of August as a meticulous matter for the definition of the Air Defense System and leveling of maps.

 

To compliment analysis of International Law, Broe, adds Reuters Headline to illustrate status to Organize Military Action after notion of “fearing a Russian false flag strike” (Strzelecki, 2026) (Sytas, 2026) (Reuters) appealing to movement to re-settle Ukraine and identity as a variable of War.

 

 

Key Words

 Multilateralism                Civil War                  identity                  mobilization          liberation of villages

---

[1] https://youtu.be/BMspMxAXQEM?si=HEUHkzEIQt3PXMMJ

LEGISLATION CONCERNING ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN

 

U.S. Senator, Ted Cruz, referred to War between the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran signaling Legislation and Constitutional approach towards the President’s Authority. According to the Constitution of the United States the President is entitled to Direct the Army of the United States from Executive branch as well as to create a normed approach towards sanctions.

 

Even though Senator identifies Theocracy as a threat, the Constitution and division of powers appoint the President as the leading command to determine launching Military Action towards the Islamic Republic of Iran (Cruz, 2026) (Iranintlenglish).

 

Albeit the Constituent and Covenant of the civic development of the American Nation is the guiding principle to defend the Alliance of the United States with the State of Israel, Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, manifested during the month of August 2026 the status of an unsettled negotiation between the American Authority and Arab Partners (Netanyahu, 2026) (Iranintlenglish).

 

Even though Diplomatic development has concurred ceasefire, President of the Republic of Iran, Masoud Pezeshkian, agreed to the defense the fundamental rights of its citizens as well as promote diplomacy and resist external forces (Pezeshkian, 2026) (Brics_Countries).

 

Key Words

  Covenant          Theocracy