|
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (desktop version)
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Concurrent to rumblings of a color revolution in Georgia earlier this month, a plot attributed to Ukraine’s notorious SBU “national security service” against officials of the “breakaway” republic of Transnistria unfolded in central Tiraspol, according to prosecutors. The foiled assassination attempt targeted Transnistria’s leader, Vadim Krasnoselsky.
“The State Security Ministry of Transnistria has thwarted an assassination attempt on the top officials of the unrecognized republic, which was prepared under orders from the Ukrainian Security Service (SBU),” the Russian news agency TASS reported on March 9.
According to Lucas Leiroz de Almeida, a researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies,
The plan was discovered by the intelligence services of the secessionist republic. According to Tiraspol’s officials, the Ukrainian scheme was discovered in time to avoid the tragedy. It is believed that not only President Krasnoselsky would be targeted by the saboteurs, but also some other top Transnistrian officials would be assassinated. The agents behind the maneuver were linked to the Ukrainian Secret Service.
The attempt is a follow-up to the effort to destabilize Transnistria (officially, the Pridnestrovian Moldovan Republic), a narrow strip of land along both sides of the Dniester river on the border of Ukraine.
The “collective West” considers Transnistria to be part of Moldova, never mind the will of the people who live there. In 1991 and 1995, the population voted overwhelmingly (97.7%) for independence. In 2006, 97.2% of the population voted for “free association with the Russian Federation.” A mere 3.3% voted to become part of Moldova.
In April 2022, prior to the attempt to assassinate Krasnoselsky, Transnistria was the target of several terror attacks, according to TASS.
They started when grenade launchers were fired at the building housing the State Security Ministry. Then, broadcasting antennas [the Grigoriopol transmitter] were blown up at one of the region’s largest radio and TV centers, located in the village of Mayak. As well, military airfields near Tiraspol and Rybnitsa, and the location of the Transnistrian peacekeeping contingent were attacked.
In addition, drones from the direction of Ukraine targeted the Cobasna ammunition depot, in addition to a military reserve in Vladimirovca. As well, attacks were launched against the Cuciurgan power station in Pervomaisc.
The Institute for the Study of War, founded by the neocon Kimberly Kagan and financed by death merchants, insists the attacks were a Russian false flag. This claim is on par with the idiotic neocon claim the NordStream pipeline was destroyed by Russia (now we are told it was the Ukrainians).
It is claimed the CIA and the UK’s MI6 are working with the neo-nazis in Kyiv to carry out terror attacks. “Operatives from American and British intelligence services are directly participating in hatching secret plots with Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) and training personnel to carry them out, SBU ex-employee Vasily Prozorov said at a news conference” held in 2019, well before the Russian SMO.
Vasily provided names:
“To give specific names, specifically MI6 agents—Charles Backford and Justin Hartman—it appears, of course, I may be mistaken, came to the SBU in 2016. I remembered them because they did not only come to a meeting with the leadership of the Ukrainian Security Service but also made visits to the area of the counter-terror operation, the town of Kramatorsk, and permission for visiting this area is granted through the headquarters of the anti-terror center and so these names were mentioned.”
The former SBU employee also said “a member of the Defense Department’s Intelligence Agency Harry Reid also visited Ukraine” and he “directly oversaw the development of the Ukrainian Special Operations Forces… in Berdichev, [and] he checked on the activity of US green berets who were staying there as instructors.”
The New York Times (paywall) admitted last June the CIA is operating in Ukraine. Kelley Beaucar Vlahos writes for Responsible Statecraft,
The news, based on sourcing from current and former U.S. government officials, is part of a broader report about a “stealthy network” of U.S. and European commandos and spies in “cells” run by the Pentagon’s European Command “to speed allied assistance to Ukrainian troops.” Much of this is operating from military bases in France and Germany and elsewhere. But as the NYT points out, there are European commandos and CIA agents working on the inside.
It would be naïve to conclude the CIA is in place merely to “speed allied assistance” to Zelenskyy’s post-coup government. The CIA has a long and sordid history of engineering terror plots, collaborating with brutal dictators, arranging false flags, and drawing up death lists.
Max Blumenthal and Esha Krishnaswamy wrote last April,
The Ukrainian SBU security services has served as the enforcement arm of the officially authorized campaign of repression. With training from the CIA and close coordination with Ukraine’s state-backed neo-Nazi paramilitaries, the SBU has spent the past weeks filling its vast archipelago of torture dungeons with political dissidents.
As usual, cui bono should be considered, but we shouldn’t expect the USG and its corporate propaganda media to draw obvious conclusions. Ukraine and the “collective West” need to sanitize Transnistria of its ethnic Russian population, the same as they are attempting to do in the Donbas and elsewhere in eastern and southern Ukraine.
The warped, neo-nazi mindset actively metastasizing in Ukraine, and promoted by the USG and its “partners” in Europe (also the UK, Australia, and New Zealand), dictates all Russians are to be ethnically cleansed, and Russian troops (specifically, OGRF, or the Operational Group of Russian Forces in Transnistria), assigned to secure the Soviet-era ammunition depot at Cobasna (initially sent as peacekeepers), are to be forced out of the country, as NATO demands. In 1992, elements of the 14th Russian Army participated in the Transnistria civil war (that is to say when Moldova attempted the quash Transnistrian independence).
Compare Russia’s foreign military bases in Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan, under the Collective Security Treaty Organization, and its invited presence in Syria, with the USG’s 750 military bases around the world. USG bases have been used more than 25 times to launch wars and military interventions.
In late February, USG state department honcho Atony Blinken met in Munich with Maia Sandhu, the president of Moldova. Blinken said the USG is alarmed by “some of the plotting that we’ve seen coming from Russia to try to destabilize the government” of Moldova and “support… its territorial integrity,” that is to say, erase Transnistria and its association with Russia.
The USG and NATO are determined to initiate brushfires on Russia’s periphery, violently negate its diplomatic and trade relationships with other nations, destroy its economy, and foment color revolutions and terror attacks, including attacks inside Russia, killing Russian citizens.
Russia will respond. It will fight back, remembering well the last time a belligerent nation attempted to conquer and destroy it (Germany’s Operation Barbarossa, June 1941). The Germans were defeated during the Battle of Moscow. Historians later determined Germany’s defeat was the result of its military unpreparedness for such a large campaign. Likewise, the USG and its “partners,” if drawn directly into a war with Russia, will fail due to a complete lack of preparation, war materiel, and public support (although the latter is considered irrelevant).
That prospect is eminently frightening. Instead of maintaining a posture that nuclear weapons are to be used for the sole purpose of deterrence, the Biden administration “approved a version of a policy from the Obama administration that leaves open the option to use nuclear weapons not only in retaliation to a nuclear attack, but also to respond to non-nuclear threats,” according to the Arms Control Association.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Kurt Nimmo on Geopolitics.
Kurt Nimmo is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Featured image is from the author
|
