Global Research

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky made a surprise video appearance at the Doha Forum in Qatar on 26 March to plead with the oil-producing Arabian Peninsula nations to increase their oil output.

Oil prices have seen record increases since the start of the Russian special military operation in Ukraine and the unprecedented sanctions placed on Russia since then.

Alternative supplies of fuel to Europe serve as a counterweight to Russia’s ability to use European and global dependency on its fuel to maintain economic viability during the global economic boycott of Russia.

Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) member states are torn between their loyalty to Washington and their partnerships with Moscow.

Most visibly, Saudi Arabia and the UAE have snubbed Washington in favor of Moscow. Saudi Arabia has refused requests to increase output, even snubbing phone calls from US President Joe Biden. The UAE has similarly refused to increase output and has reaffirmed its ties with Moscow.

Qatar’s Minister of State for Energy Affairs Saad Sherida Al-Kaabi said in a CNN interview on 25 March that they will continue to supply Europe with gas.

Qatar, however, balances its ties with Moscow. A recent meeting between Russian and Qatari foreign ministers on 14 March demonstrated that the two seek cooperation in the energy market.

The meeting came after President Biden designated Qatar as a major non-NATO ally of the US on 10 March.

Kuwait leans considerably more towards the US. Aside from Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain share similar designations as major non-NATO allies of the US.

Nikkei Asia reported on 26 March that major Japanese banks are teaming up with banks from the US and Europe to lend Kuwait $1 billion and bolster its oil output, in the hopes of increasing crude production in order to weaken Russia’s position in the energy markets.

Western powers continue to pressure GCC member states to increase crude output. Under NATO pressure, German Economy and Climate Minister Robert Habeck visited Qatar and the UAE on 19 March to urge them to increase oil output.

NATO expects Germany to boycott Russian gas, a move that would leave the EU member state with insufficient fuel to heat homes during winter or to power industrial centers. Neither Qatar nor its neighboring states have the capacity to replace Russian oil and gas in a short period of time.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Featured image is from AMMAR ABD RABBO / MOFA / DOHA FORUM

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The war in Ukraine has placed U.S. and NATO policy toward Russia under a spotlight, highlighting how the United States and its allies have expanded NATO right up to Russia’s borders, backed a coup and now a proxy war in Ukraine, imposed waves of economic sanctions, and launched a debilitating trillion-dollar arms race. The explicit goal is to pressure, weaken and ultimately eliminate Russia, or a Russia-China partnership, as a strategic competitor to U.S. imperial power.

The United States and NATO have used similar forms of force and coercion against many countries. In every case they have been catastrophic for the people directly impacted, whether they achieved their political aims or not.

Wars and violent regime changes in Kosovo, Iraq, Haiti and Libya have left them mired in endless corruption, poverty and chaos. Failed proxy wars in Somalia, Syria and Yemen have spawned endless war and humanitarian disasters. U.S. sanctions against Cuba, Iran, North Korea and Venezuela have impoverished their people but failed to change their governments.

Meanwhile, U.S.-backed coups in Chile, Bolivia and Honduras have sooner or later been reversed by grassroots movements to restore democratic, socialist government. The Taliban are governing Afghanistan again after a 20-year war to expel a U.S. and NATO army of occupation, for which the sore losers are now starving millions of Afghans.

But the risks and consequences of the U.S. Cold War on Russia are of a different order. The purpose of any war is to defeat your enemy. But how can you defeat an enemy that is explicitly committed to respond to the prospect of existential defeat by destroying the whole world?

This is in fact part of the military doctrine of the United States and Russia, who together possess over 90% of the world’s nuclear weapons. If either of them faces existential defeat, they are prepared to destroy human civilization in a nuclear holocaust that will kill Americans, Russians and neutrals alike.

In June 2020, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree stating,

“The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction against it and/or its allies… and also in the case of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons, when the very existence of the state is put under threat.”

U.S. nuclear weapons policy is no more reassuring. A decades-long campaign for a U.S. “no first use” nuclear weapons policy still falls on deaf ears in Washington.

The 2018 U.S. Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) promised that the United States would not use nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state. But in a war with another nuclear-armed country, it said, “The United States would only consider the use of nuclear weapons in extreme circumstances to defend the vital interests of the United States or its allies and partners.”

The 2018 NPR broadened the definition of “extreme circumstances” to cover “significant non-nuclear attacks,” which it said would “include, but are not limited to, attacks on the U.S., allies or partner civilian population or infrastructure, and attacks on U.S. or allied nuclear forces, their command and control, or warning and attack assessment.” The critical phrase, “but are not limited to,” removes any restriction at all on a U.S. nuclear first strike.

So, as the U.S. Cold War against Russia and China heats up, the only signal that the deliberately foggy threshold for the U.S. use of nuclear weapons has been crossed could be the first mushroom clouds exploding over Russia or China.

For our part in the West, Russia has explicitly warned us that it will use nuclear weapons if it believes the United States or NATO are threatening the existence of the Russian state. That is a threshold that the United States and NATO are already flirting with as they look for ways to increase their pressure on Russia over the war in Ukraine.

To make matters worse, the twelve-to-one imbalance between U.S. and Russian military spending has the effect, whether either side intends it or not, of increasing Russia’s reliance on the role of its nuclear arsenal when the chips are down in a crisis like this.

NATO countries, led by the United States and United Kingdom, are already supplying Ukraine with up to 17 plane-loads of weapons per day, training Ukrainian forces to use them and providing valuable and deadly satellite intelligence to Ukrainian military commanders. Hawkish voices in NATO countries are pushing hard for a no-fly zone or some other way to escalate the war and take advantage of Russia’s perceived weaknesses.

The danger that hawks in the State Department and Congress may convince President Biden to escalate the U.S. role in the war prompted the Pentagon to leak details of the Defense Intelligence Agency’s (DIA) assessments of Russia’s conduct of the war to Newsweek’s William Arkin.

Senior DIA officers told Arkin that Russia has dropped fewer bombs and missiles on Ukraine in a month than U.S. forces dropped on Iraq in the first day of bombing in 2003, and that they see no evidence of Russia directly targeting civilians. Like U.S. “precision” weapons, Russian weapons are probably only about 80% accurate, so hundreds of stray bombs and missiles are killing and wounding civilians and hitting civilian infrastructure, as they do just as horrifically in every U.S. war.

The DIA analysts believe Russia is holding back from a more devastating war because what it really wants is not to destroy Ukrainian cities but to negotiate a diplomatic agreement to ensure a neutral, non-aligned Ukraine.

But the Pentagon appears to be so worried by the impact of highly effective Western and Ukrainian war propaganda that it has released secret intelligence to Newsweek to try to restore a measure of reality to the media’s portrayal of the war, before political pressure for NATO escalation leads to a nuclear war.

Since the United States and the U.S.S.R. blundered into their nuclear suicide pact in the 1950s, it has come to be known as Mutual Assured Destruction, or MAD. As the Cold War evolved, they cooperated to reduce the risk of mutual assured destruction through arms control treaties, a hotline between Moscow and Washington, and regular contacts between U.S. and Soviet officials.

But the United States has now withdrawn from many of those arms control treaties and safeguard mechanisms. The risk of nuclear war is as great today as it has ever been, as the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists warns year after year in its annual Doomsday Clock statement. The Bulletin has also published detailed analyses of how specific technological advances in U.S. nuclear weapons design and strategy are increasing the risk of nuclear war.

The world understandably breathed a collective sigh of relief when the Cold War appeared to end in the early 1990s. But within a decade, the peace dividend the world hoped for was trumped by a power dividend. U.S. officials did not use their unipolar moment to build a more peaceful world, but to capitalize on the lack of a military peer competitor to launch an era of U.S. and NATO military expansion and serial aggression against militarily weaker countries and their people.

As Michael Mandelbaum, the director of East-West Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, crowed in 1990, “For the first time in 40 years, we can conduct military operations in the Middle East without worrying about triggering World War III.” Thirty years later, people in that part of the world may be forgiven for thinking that the United States and its allies have in fact unleashed World War III, against them, in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Somalia, Pakistan, Gaza, Libya, Syria, Yemen and across West Africa.

Russian President Boris Yeltsin complained bitterly to President Clinton over plans for NATO expansion into Eastern Europe, but Russia was powerless to prevent it. Russia had already been invaded by an army of neoliberal Western economic advisers, whose “shock therapy” shrank its GDP by 65%, reduced male life expectancy from 65 to 58, and empowered a new class of oligarchs to loot its national resources and state-owned enterprises.

President Putin restored the power of the Russian state and improved the Russian people’s living standards, but he did not at first push back against U.S. and NATO military expansion and war-making. However, when NATO and its Arab monarchist allies overthrew the Gaddafi government in Libya and then launched an even bloodier proxy war against Russia’s ally Syria, Russia intervened militarily to prevent the overthrow of the Syrian government.

Russia worked with the United States to remove and destroy Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles, and helped to open negotiations with Iran that eventually led to the JCPOA nuclear agreement. But the U.S. role in the coup in Ukraine in 2014, Russia’s subsequent reintegration of Crimea and its support for anti-coup separatists in Donbass put paid to further cooperation between Obama and Putin, plunging U.S.-Russian relations into a downward spiral that has now led us to the brink of nuclear war.

It is the epitome of official insanity that U.S., NATO and Russian leaders have resurrected this Cold War, which the whole world celebrated the end of, allowing plans for mass suicide and human extinction to once again masquerade as responsible defense policy.

While Russia bears full responsibility for invading Ukraine and for all the death and destruction of this war, this crisis did not come out of nowhere. The United States and its allies must reexamine their own roles in resurrecting the Cold War that spawned this crisis, if we are ever to return to a safer world for people everywhere.

Tragically, instead of expiring on its sell-by date in the 1990s along with the Warsaw Pact, NATO has transformed itself into an aggressive global military alliance, a fig-leaf for U.S. imperialism, and a forum for dangerous, self-fulfilling threat analysis, to justify its continued existence, endless expansion and crimes of aggression on three continents, in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Libya.

If this insanity indeed drives us to mass extinction, it will be no consolation to the scattered and dying survivors that their leaders succeeded in destroying their enemies’ country too. They will simply curse leaders on all sides for their blindness and stupidity. The propaganda by which each side demonized the other will be only a cruel irony once its end result is seen to be the destruction of everything leaders on all sides claimed to be defending.

This reality is common to all sides in this resurgent Cold War. But, like the voices of peace activists in Russia today, our voices are more powerful when we hold our own leaders accountable and work to change our own country’s behavior.

If Americans just echo U.S. propaganda, deny our own country’s role in provoking this crisis and turn all our ire towards President Putin and Russia, it will only serve to fuel the escalating tensions and bring on the next phase of this conflict, whatever dangerous new form that may take.

But if we campaign to change our country’s policies, de-escalate conflicts and find common ground with our neighbors in Ukraine, Russia, China and the rest of the world, we can cooperate and solve our serious common challenges together.

A top priority must be to dismantle the nuclear Doomsday machine we have inadvertently collaborated to build and maintain for 70 years, along with the obsolete and dangerous NATO military alliance. We cannot let the “unwarranted influence” and “misplaced power” of the Military-Industrial Complex keep leading us into ever more dangerous military crises until one of them spins out of control and destroys us all.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Nicolas J. S. Davies is an independent journalist, a researcher for CODEPINK and the author of Blood On Our Hands: the Invasion and Destruction of Iraq. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

---

“Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War” 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-5-3
Year: 2012
Pages: 102

PDF Edition:  $6.50 (sent directly to your email account!)

Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which hosts the critically acclaimed website www.globalresearch.ca . He is a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.

Reviews

“This book is a ‘must’ resource – a richly documented and systematic diagnosis of the supremely pathological geo-strategic planning of US wars since ‘9-11’ against non-nuclear countries to seize their oil fields and resources under cover of ‘freedom and democracy’.”
–John McMurtry, Professor of Philosophy, Guelph University

“In a world where engineered, pre-emptive, or more fashionably “humanitarian” wars of aggression have become the norm, this challenging book may be our final wake-up call.”
-Denis Halliday, Former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations

Michel Chossudovsky exposes the insanity of our privatized war machine. Iran is being targeted with nuclear weapons as part of a war agenda built on distortions and lies for the purpose of private profit. The real aims are oil, financial hegemony and global control. The price could be nuclear holocaust. When weapons become the hottest export of the world’s only superpower, and diplomats work as salesmen for the defense industry, the whole world is recklessly endangered. If we must have a military, it belongs entirely in the public sector. No one should profit from mass death and destruction.
–Ellen Brown, author of ‘Web of Debt’ and president of the Public Banking Institute  

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The takeaway from the US President Joe Biden’s European tour on March 25-26 is measly. Dissenting voices are rising in Europe as western sanctions against Russia start backfiring with price hikes and shortages of fuel and electricity. And this is only the beginning, as Moscow is yet to announce any retaliatory measures as such. 

The unkindest cut of it all is that the Russian Defence Ministry chose Biden’s trip as the perfect backdrop to frame the true proportions of success of its special operation in Ukraine. The US and NATO’s credibility is perilously close to being irreparably damaged, as the Russian juggernaut rolls across Ukraine with the twin objectives of ‘demilitarisation’ and ‘denazification’ in its sights. 

The Russian General Staff disclosed on Friday that the hyped up Ukrainian Armed Forces, trained by the NATO and the US, have sustained crippling losses: Ukrainian air force and air defence is almost completely destroyed, while the country’s Navy no longer exists and about 11.5% of the entire military personnel have been put out of action. (Ukraine doesn’t have organised reserves.) 

According to the Russian General Staff’s deputy head Colonel General Sergey Rudskoy, Ukraine has lost much of its combat vehicles (tanks, armoured vehicles, etc.), one-third of its multiple launch rocket systems, and well over three-fourths of its missile air defence systems and Tochka-U tactical missile systems. 

Sixteen main military airfields in Ukraine have been put out of action, 39 storage bases and arsenals destroyed (which contained up to 70% of all stocks of military equipment, materiel and fuel, and more than 1 million 54000 tons of ammunition.)

Interestingly, following the intense high-precision strikes on the bases and training camps, foreign mercenaries are leaving Ukraine. During the past week, 285 mercenaries escaped into Poland, Hungary and Romania. Russian forces are systematically destroying the Western shipment of weapons. 

Most important, the mission to liberate Donbass is about to be accomplished. Simply put, the main objectives of the first phase of the operation have been achieved.

Apart from Kiev, Russian troops have blocked the northern and eastern cities of Chernigov, Sumy, Kharkov and Nikolaev, while in the south, Kherson and most of Zaporozhye region are under full control — the intention being to not only to shackle Ukrainian forces but to prevent their grouping in Donbass region. (See my article Dissecting Ukraine imbroglio, Tribune, March 21, 2022)  

“We did not plan to storm these cities from the start, in order to prevent destruction and minimise losses among personnel and civilians,” Rudskoy said. But, he added, such an option is not ruled out either in the period ahead.

It stands to reason that Washington and European capitals are well aware that the Russian operation is proceeding as scheduled and there is no stopping it. Thus, the NATO’s extraordinary summit on March 24 confirmed that the alliance is unwilling to get into a military confrontation with the Russian Army. 

Instead, the summit decided to strengthen the defence of its own territories! Four additional multinational NATO combat groups of 40,000 troops will be deployed in Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia on a permanent basis. Poland’s proposal to deploy NATO military units in Ukraine was outright rejected.

However, Poland has certain other plans, namely, to deploy contingents to the western regions of Ukraine to support the ‘fraternal Ukrainian people” with the unspoken agenda of reclaiming control over the historically disputed territories in the those regions. What Faustian deal has been struck in Warsaw on March 25 between Biden and his Polish counterpart Duda remains unclear. Clearly, vultures are circling Ukraine’s skies. (See my blog Biden wings his way to the borderlands of Ukraine, March 24, 2022) 

Indeed, if Poland makes a bid for Ukrainian territory (with Biden’s tacit support), would Belarus be far behind to take control of the regions of Polesie and Volyn in Ukraine? Possibly not. Suffice to say, in the period since the CIA-backed coup in Kiev in 2014 when the US moved into the driving seat, Ukraine has lost its sovereignty and is now perilously close to vanishing altogether from Europe’s map! 

Washington — Biden personally, having been the Obama administration’s point person in Kiev in 2014 — should carry this heavy cross in history books. 

As for European leaders, they find themselves in a surreal world, out of touch with the stunning realities of a new world order. Eighty-year old Biden with limited grasp of the torrential flow of events, made an astounding proposal in his press conference in Brussels on Thursday that Ukraine should replace Russia in the G20! 

But Biden has a soulmate in the European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen whose latest threat is that Russian oil and gas companies “will not be allowed to demand payment for fuel in rubles.” She is blissfully unaware that the EU has no more effective means to pressure Russian companies! 

Russian President Vladimir Putin caught the western leaders huddled in Brussels by surprise with his announcement that Russia will promptly start charging “unfriendly” countries in rubles for gas supplies. There are over 45 unfriendly countries on the list — the US and EU members plus the UK, Australia, Canada, Singapore, Montenegro and Switzerland. (See the RT’s explainer What buying gas in rubles means for Russia and the West.)

Effectively, Moscow is on the one hand strengthening the weakened ruble, while on the other hand, messaging that it is pioneering a new wave internationally to bypass the dollar as  commodity currency. 

Yet, Moscow is also continuing to routinely supply Russian gas for transit to Europe through Ukraine to meet the requests of European consumers (109.5 mln cubic meters as of March 26!) The point is, despite rhetoric and grandstanding, Europe recently increased its gas purchases from Russia significantly against the backdrop of astronomically high spot prices! 

The European Council meet at Brussels on March 25 with Biden in attendance failed to adopt any concrete measures to address the energy price growth, and could not come up with a unified approach to Russia’s decision to receive payments for its gas only in rubles. 

Apropos the European Commission’s proposal to establish a new system of common purchase of gas to prevent outbidding, the final statement of the European Council merely says that the leaders agreed to “work together on voluntary common purchase of gas, LNG and hydrogen,” meaning that common purchases may be carried out only by those EU countries who are willing to unite. [Emphasis added.] 

It is a long haul for Europe to dispense with Russian gas. Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic said yesterday:

“There are gas shortages, and that is why we need to talk to Russians. Europe will move towards reducing its dependence on the Russian gas, but can this happen in the coming years? This is very difficult.”

“Europe consumes 500 billion cubic meters of gas, while America and Qatar can offer 15 billion, up to the last molecule… That is why German and Austrian politicians told me: “We cannot just destroy ourselves. If we impose sanctions on Russia in the oil and gas domain, we will destroy ourselves. It’s like shooting yourself in the foot before rushing into a fight.” This is how certain rational people in the West see it today.” 

With the doomsday predictions of Russian military failure in Ukraine coming unstuck and the blowback from Russia sanctions beginning to bite, Europeans are caught in a bind. They will be resentful as time passes. 

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Featured image is by TASS

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

Here is my analysis of what’s going on in Ukraine after one month. It may not prove acceptable to many. Certainly not liberals, the ruling elite in Washington, or even some left liberal and socialist left. But I’ve always spoken my mind on this blog and will continue to do so, with no allegiances to any political forces or organizations. So here goes:

First, this is a proxy war engineered by US neocons and political elites, that has its origins going back as far as 1999, when the neocons began to gain greater control over US foreign policy. The dress rehearsal for the current conflict originates with the Clinton administration. Once Clinton could not keep his zipper shut and the radical right used the opportunity to exact whatever concessions they wanted from him in his final two years in office, the shift in US foreign policy began and has gained momentum ever since.

In Bill’s last two years, in domestic policy a shift began to a more hyper neoliberalism in tax, spending, war, monetary, industrial and trade policy. In foreign policy, the main elements were a rejection of the prior US position not to move NATO east that was given to the remnants of the Russian elite in 1991-2 after the collapse of the USSR. The ‘old guard’ of US foreign policy, led by advisers like George F. Kennan and other US ambassadors was abandoned in the late 1990s. NATO led by the USA became an offensive organization. Its first victim was Yugoslavia-Serbia and the bombing of Servbia-Kosov0. That same year the march of NATO east also began.

In 2005 the US supported the so-called ‘Orange Revolution’ in Ukraine that ended in a stalemate between pro-US and pro-Russian forces in Ukraine. The US next moved on Georgia encouraging it to invade south Russia, which it did but lost. NATO moved further into east europe in the wake of that conflict. In the Ukraine in 2010 the pro and anti-US elements came to an uneasy truce. The US then built up its influence by courting the ground forces of fascists as a popular uprising force, led by US under secretary of state, Victoria Nuland, who bragged the US had spent $5 billion financing the coup that occurred in 2014. The election of that year was narrowly won by the pro-Russian president. The street forces were then unleashed in mass protests in Kyiv that winter, 2014-15 and the pro-Russian president fled the country. Buttressed by publicly declared fascist elements in the street, many of whom then took seats in the new Parliament, the US deepened its economic and political involvement in Ukraine further. Victoria Nuland was appointed by the new Kyiv government as ‘economic czar’ over the Ukraine economy. (Made possible by Ukraine suspending its constitution that foreigners could not assume such a position. She was made an honorary citizen). Following her appointment the floodgates of US capital and business opened wide and US companies absorbed, purchased, and joint ventured with former Ukrainian companies. The US military advisers descended on Ukraine.

Russia responded by supporting the pro-Russia Donbass region. A local war in that area began. 14,000 pro-Russian Ukrainians died, as the fascist forces were organized in special military units and unleashed on the Ukrainian east (aka the Azov battalion). A peace armistice was arranged at Minsk in 2016 and the fighting and attacks slowed but never ceased. NATO moved east once again, a third time since 1999, absorbing the three Baltic countries after having already brought the rest of eastern Europe into the NATO fold.

Trump was elected president in 2017 and for the next four years a hiatus of sorts in the conflict followed. The Democrats believed Russian intervention in the US election of 2016 stole the presidency from Hillary Clinton and they never forgot. They waited their turn.

In 2020 Biden won and the preparation to step up the political pressure on Russia began anew: In late summer-fall 2021 the Biden administration deepened its military and political cooperation with Ukraine, as it pulled out quickly from Afghanistan. Joint US-Ukraine military exercises occurred. More US advisers poured into Ukraine to train the Ukrainian army. In November 2021 a preliminary agreement was signed by the US with Ukraine to bring it into the European Union, a necessary precursor to NATO membership. (Over the previous two decades the US withdrew from several missile treaties with Russia and set up advanced early warning radar in Poland and Romania.) All of eastern europe and baltics was now under NATO by 2021. Only Ukraine, which had repeatedly requested membership remained.

The US refused to acknowledge that NATO membership would not be offered to Ukraine, and repeatedly in 2021 refused when asked to clarify. Encouraged by these US statements and actions, Ukrainian president, Zelensky, became more strident in his request for US military protection, membership into NATO, and even began publicly saying Ukraine should be given nuclear weapons. Zelensky was being played like a violin by the US. A plausible explanation is the US was taunting and provoking Russia to invade. It had much to gain by a Russian invasion on a proxy country soil. (See my prior article ’10 Reasons Why the US May Want Russia to Invade Ukraine’ posted on this blog in February)

Russia began its military build up last winter in response. The US and neocon elements running US foreign policy used the threat of a Russian invasion to re-establish its hegemony over NATO among European nations which were showing signs of distancing from NATO, especially under Trump. US business interests, especially the oil and gas companies, had much to gain from a US policy of driving Russian out of Europe–not only in energy but in all areas of business. There was much profit to be gained by US corporations entering the European economic vacuum that would be left by a Russian exit.

Russia took the US bait and invaded on February 24, 2022. The US media-propaganda corporation machine immediately went to work to freeze out any and all global alternative commentary on the origins and state of the military conflict. The American public was force fed carefully selected stories about the plight of refugees, estimates of civilians killed, heroic Ukrainian fighters, and how the US was again the leader of protecting Democracy and Freedom. Little or nothing slipped through the US media to provide an actual picture of what was going on in Ukraine on the ground. The story was Russian military forces were bogged down, poorly equipped and led, being killed by the thousands and about to be defeated. Much of the reporting taken directly from Ukrainian government press releases.

Then the US media drumbeat began to assume an ominous character: the Russians were preparing chemical or biological weapons under a ‘false flag’ (but whose?); the Russians were prepared to continue on to invade NATO countries; and, most concerning, talking heads began to appear increasingly proposing how a tactical nuclear war could be won with Russia. Biden in recent days assumed the even more disconcerting public position declaring Putin was a ‘war criminal’ and that ‘Putin had to go’. The former declaration made it difficult to negotiate a truce at some point; the latter a virtual declaration of ‘regime change’ for Russia that would make Russia assume no hope in negotiating a truce whatsoever. It almost amounts to evidence the US does not want a truce or end to the conflict. It wants to debilitate Russia economically with its sanctions for some time to come, foment popular unrest in Russia, and humiliate it into a virtual surrender instead of a negotiated compromise at some point. The US still has much to gain geopolitically and economically from an extension (and perhaps even intensification) of the Russian-Ukraine conflict. How else can one interpret the US president’s declaration of Putin as ‘war criminal’ and need for ‘regime change’?

But Putin and Russia are not Milosevic and Yugoslavia. Nor Quaddaffi or Saddam Hussein. Nor Noriega of Panama. Nor the Taliban. Russia is one tenth of the global economy and source of much of its economic resources. And it’s a country with 6500 nuclear weapons.

One may ask, how can US neocons pushing the conflict in Ukraine be so short sighted? To that one can only recall their disastrous invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan that they drove the US into. Biden appears increasingly unable to halt the US neocon insistence on further extending NATO and provoking Russia into a deeper conflict. Thoroughly neutralizing Russia is a necessary strategic precursor to taking on China in Taiwan or South China sea.

We are in an era of US imperialism running amuck. The same year, 2021, that the US ended its 20 year long disastrous war in the middle east, it is slouching toward another in Ukraine. Biden says US won’t get involved in Ukraine directly. But it already is. Ukrainian forces have many US advisors fighting side by side, directly tactics on the ground and use of US made weapons. US weapons like drones are likely US directed, being used with some effect to ambush Russian advanced forces. There’s also the very likely use of US satellites and AWACs helping Ukrainian forces identify where Russian forces are advancing on the ground so they can be ambushed. The US is sending thousands of javelin and stinger missiles, and training thousands of Ukrainian troops is the far west of Ukraine. As the conflict continues, it is almost inevitable NATO & even US forces will be drawn into the fight–under the cover as mercenary or volunteers.

My Position on the Conflict

Ukraine is a proxy war between US and Russia that has its origins in the US, going back to 1999 and continuing and growing ever since. It is US imperialism that is at play here. It’s not a Russian imperialism. Russia is desperately trying to prevent further penetration of US imperialism, not advance to the west. Russia lost whatever empire it had with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. The US media-Neocon narrative that Russia in planning to restore the former Soviet empire into the baltics and eastern europe is nonsense. Russia clearly lacks the military resources to do so if it wanted. Even its 150,000 troops in Ukraine are dangerously spread thin along four fronts. Russia has plans to attack the baltics or Poland is a neocon narrative used to restore US leadership over NATO and serves as an excuse to increase US military combat forces in eastern europe.

The foregoing is not to approve of the current Russian invasion. It is just to acknowledge the Russian security reasons, fears and concerns driving it. One can only imagine if Mexico joined the former USSR ‘Warsaw Military Pact’ and began joint military exercises with the former Soviet Union, what the US response would have been. It would have been a US Mexico invasion in a New York minute, as they say. That’s how Russia views the situation in Ukraine. It knows if Ukraine joins NATO, then Finland and Sweden would quickly follow. The next US/NATO destabilization ‘targets’ would be Belarus and Kazakhstan (where popular uprisings have already occurred with no doubt some degree of US encouragement). A Ukraine in NATO would mean a Russia completely surrounded by NATO and it would either have to capitulate to US/NATO demands (including demobilizing its nuclear forces) or else in desperation fight a war next time using those nuclear weapons–an even worse scenario than the present. Russia no doubt believes it is either a fight in Ukraine now, before Ukraine joins NATO, or a much worse conflict later. Today’s Ukraine proxy war may be the last non-nuclear war in the 21st century.

To continue to see the conflict as a moral issue of unjustified invasion will not bring a resolution to the conflict any closer; in fact, it will perpetuate and risk a deeper conflict as public opinion is corralled in support of war hawks, neocons, and elites’ plans to continue it.

This is not to deny that Russia is a capitalist country and economy and its government deeply integrated with greedy capitalist Oligarchs. But the US is not any different: it’s a capitalist country with its own gaggle of even greedier oligarchs (bankers, shadow bankers, oil corps, and the more visible tech versions-Musk, Zuckerman, Bezos, et. al.)

Leftists and socialists are wrong to assume the position of “a plague on both their houses. They’re both capitalists and oligarchic and therefore we should support neither and call for a workers revolution to overthrow them all (as per Lenin’s call in 1914).” Their demand is Europe out of NATO! And Russia out of Ukraine!

But a workers revolution is not even remotely on the agenda anywhere. That therefore will not stop the conflict from escalating into an even wider, or more dangerous nuclear, confrontation.Nor is Europe about to exit NATO. Quite the opposite. So this left position sounds good but is completely naive. The demand should be to oppose US imperialism, even if it means another capitalist country (in this case Russia) is being attacked by that imperialism. The socialist left position sees Russia and US imperialism as equivalents. And in taking that view it in effect abstains. But to take an abstentionist position with regard to US imperialism, which is now running amuck in the 21st century, is tantamount to supporting it. It ignores which is the greater threat to world peace? Russia’s invasion of Ukraine or US imperialism intent on driving NATO east into Ukraine (and likely points to follow)? It should be asked which policies originated the conflict and now show indication of a desire to perpetuate and even deepen the crisis?

The demand should be an immediate truce and halt to the fighting. Ukraine and US/NATO should immediately sign a formal agreement of no extension of membership in NATO and no US military presence in Ukraine as part of the truce agreement. Ukraine should assume a model of Finland neutrality in its relation to Russia. Finally, Russian speaking areas of eastern and southern Ukraine should be allowed an independent international observed vote as to what country they want to join as independent republics. All sanctions should be rescinded within 30 days of a settlement. And no Ukrainian military units should tolerate soldiers or officers with extremist political associations or views.

There is no denying that fascist elements have been present in Ukraine since 2014 at least, and have a deep role within the Ukrainian military and influence within the Ukrainian Parliament and government itself. The US and west does not understand how deep the memory and fear of anything fascist runs in Russia. Russia may be over-estimating the fascist threat. But what the unleashing of the Azov battalion and other such forces did in 2015-16 and after is a stark reminder. And is it also a fact that the Azov and other forces were once again shelling and attacking the eastern provinces of Donetsk and Lughansk in 2021.

The greatest danger to world peace is US imperialist interests now reacting irrationally to growing indications that the American empire is now under threat like never before; that the US global unipolar world order since 1991 can no longer be sustained. With neocons largely in control of US foreign policy since the late 1990s it is likely the US is about to engage in another, even more dangerous adventure in Europe than it did in the middle east in the previous two decades. That conflict ended with a tremendous loss of life, trillions of dollars of wasted US resources, a region left in shambles from Libya to Syria to Iraq to Afghanistan. A repeat of that policy on the Eurasian continent will prove many times more destructive and very likely lead to a tactical nuclear conflict that cannot be contained.

This proxy war in Ukraine is not at all about freedom or democracy. That’s just bullshit propaganda. It’s about money and power. It’s about restoring US imperial hegemony over Europe, breaking Russia as a global challenger to the US, and a dress rehearsal for then going after China.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Jack Rasmus blogs at http://jackrasmus.com and hosts the weekly radio show, Alternative Visions, on the Progressive Radio Network every Friday at 2pm eastern time. Join him at twitter for daily updates at @drjackrasmus.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

 

Within days of the Russian invasion of the Ukraine, the US and the European Union imposed a series of sweeping sanctions on Russia aimed at crippling its economy by cutting off major banks from the SWIFT international financial messaging system and preventing the Russian central bank from using its foreign currency reserves to prop up the rouble.

The rapid action was the outcome of planning that had been developed for at least three months. The expectation was that the refusal of the US and NATO to even consider Russian demands for an end for NATO’s continued expansion to the east and engage in negotiations to address its legitimate security concerns would soon provoke military action.

Details of the considerable planning that went into the sanctions, involving the US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and top intelligence and military personnel, together with EU officials, were revealed in an article published in the Wall Street Journal on March 18.

According to the article, the planning began shortly before Thanksgiving (the last Thursday in November) when Yellen met with senior officials and said she would contact her counterparts in Europe and elsewhere “to urge them to begin preparations for an economic response” to a Russian invasion.

The meeting was the launch of “an unprecedented financial sanctions program by the West aimed at a major economy” and “that program, along with [a] massive arms shipment, were the front lines of the West’s engagement.”

The senior Treasury officials involved in the planning were Yellen, her deputy Wally Adeyemo, who oversees sanctions operations, and Elizabeth Rosenberg, assistant secretary on terror financing issues.

Contact with the White House was through Daleep Singh, a former Federal Reserve and Treasury official who is now at the National Security Council. He was in constant touch with Björn Seibert, a former German defence official, who is head of cabinet to the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

The working out of an agreement with the EU was crucial to the implementation of the sanctions because of the impact they would have on the EU economy—particularly for Italy and Germany that are heavily dependent on natural gas supplies from Russia. Singh and Seibert began discussions on the effects of any blowback in December.

According to the WSJ article, citing several of the participants, there was an “unprecedented level of co-operation and scope between the Treasury, the White House, the Commerce Department and the European Commission.”

The US was able to bring to the table its experience in imposing sanctions and other measures directed against Iran, North Korea and Venezuela, as well as the action it has taken to cripple the giant Chinese telecommunications maker Huawei.

However, the action against Russia, the world’s 12th largest economy, and a major supplier of oil, gas, grains, and many important industrial metals, took these operations to a new level.

In early February, several weeks before the Russian invasion, key US officials went to Brussels where they “spent hours at European Commission headquarters thrashing out the plan.”

Throughout this period, the White House insisted that Russia was set to invade based on “intelligence” reports.

But the certainty with which these pronouncements were made was not the result of any advanced spying operations. It was grounded on the understanding that the US refusal to entertain any diplomatic negotiations had backed Russia into a corner. As Biden said on January 20, Putin would have to “do something.”

Further plans are now being made to extend the sanctions both against Russia and more broadly.

Yellen said earlier this month that it was “certainly appropriate for us to be working with our allies to consider further sanctions.”

China is coming into the firing line. Last week US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said the US was considering “secondary” sanctions directed against countries deemed by the US to be providing aid to Russia by assisting it to circumvent the measures applied to it. In effect, this means the US can interpret normal trade and financial dealings as providing such assistance if it chooses to do so.

“We have a number of tools to ensure compliance, and one of those tools is the designation of individuals or entities in third-party jurisdictions who are not complying with US sanctions or are undertaking systematic efforts to weaken or evade them,” he told reporters.

Secondary sanctions are a controversial subject in the EU because it opposed their imposition on European companies dealing with Iran after the Trump administration had sanctioned it. However, the EU was not able to do anything about it.

Asked about the issue on Friday, von der Leyen said the allies were looking “deep” into the sanctions regime to see if there were any loopholes. Action would be taken to close them, he added, making circumvention impossible.

On the issue of China, the US President Biden has said Beijing will face “consequences” if it were to assist Russia.

Speaking to the business channel CNBC on Friday, Yellen said it was premature to impose sanctions on China and it would be inappropriate at this point. But her remarks carried an implicit threat.

“We, as senior administration officials, are talking privately and quietly with China to make sure they understand our position,” she said.

In other moves, the G7 grouping of major imperialist powers has said it will act against any sale of Russian gold reserves aimed at supporting its currency.

A statement from the White House said G7 leaders and the EU would work jointly to blunt Russia’s ability to deploy its international reserves to prop up its economy. It made clear that “any transaction involving gold related to the Central Bank of the Russian Federation is covered by existing sanctions.”

The sanctions regime imposed by the US has implications that go far beyond Russia.

The measures imposed so far make clear that any country, including major powers, that crosses the path of US imperialism in its drive to open new regions of the world for plunder can be immediately excluded from the global financial system based on the US dollar.

In a significant comment in his letter to shareholders last week, Larry Fink, the head of the giant investment fund BlackRock, said: “The Russian invasion of Ukraine has put an end to the globalization we have experienced over the last three decades.”

In other words, the period that followed the dissolution of the Soviet Union, supposedly based on market mechanisms and the free movement of finance, is over and a new situation is emerging.

Fink said companies and governments would be looking to onshore or nearshore more of their operations. As it did in the 1930s, this movement back to the “national hearth” has geo-economic and strategic implications.

The US actions against Russia constitute a major blow to the international financial system. Henceforth every country must consider that its foreign reserves, denominated in dollars, can be rendered essentially worthless overnight.

The outcome will not be the establishment of a new global financial system based on another currency such as the euro, let alone the Chinese yuan.

Rather the tendency will be towards the division of the world into conflicting currency and economic blocs, akin to those of the 1930s, which played a significant role in creating the conditions for World War II.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Featured image is licensed under public domain

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

In the now month-long mainstream media coverage of the Russian military intervention in Ukraine, much attention has been paid to the actions of the ‘Ukrainian Resistance’.

In a manner not dissimilar to its coverage of the ‘Syrian rebels’ a decade ago, a romanticised image of ‘Ukrainian freedom fighters’ fighting bravely against a militarily superior Russian foe has been widespread amongst corporate outlets, alongside their fawning over Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in his calls for the implementation of a No Fly Zone – a move that would undoubtedly trigger nuclear war.

This Hollywood-style PR makeover of the Ukrainian military by the corporate media, including the notorious neo-Nazi Azov Battalion, also shares a strong similarity with the aforementioned ‘Syrian rebels’ in that it highlights the strong presence of CIA involvement in the background.

Indeed, the training of Ukrainian military personnel by the CIA to engage in guerrilla warfare against Russia was recently outlined in a Western corporate media report, indicating that a plan was in place to draw Moscow into an Iraq-war style military quagmire in Ukraine – the second largest country in Europe.

Such a tactic has historical usage against the Kremlin, when in 1979, then-US President Jimmy Carter would launch Operation Cyclone, a CIA programme which would see the arming, funding and training of Wahhabi insurgents known as the Mujahideen, who would go onto wage war on the USSR-aligned government of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan – with Kabul, previously Western-friendly, having come under Soviet influence following the 1978 Saur Revolution.

This romanticised image of ‘Ukrainian freedom fighters’ by the corporate media however, lies in stark contrast to their coverage of Ansar Allah, more commonly known as the Houthis, currently waging an armed resistance campaign against Western-allied Saudi Arabia’s seven year long war and blockade on neighbouring Yemen – leading to mass-starvation in what is already the most impoverished country on the Arabian Peninsula.

Indeed, this was evidenced as such on Friday, when the Yemeni armed forces launched air strikes against a key oil refinery in the Saudi city of Jeddah, to a noticeable absence of articles by the Western media celebrating the actions of the Yemeni resistance against the Western-backed might of Riyadh, unlike their coverage of Ukraine and Russia.

To understand this contrasting approach to both Yemen and Ukraine by the corporate media, one must look further into the wider geopolitical and historical context in the West’s relationship with both countries.

In 1979, the same year as the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, the Islamic Revolution in Iran saw the anti-Western and anti-Zionist Ayatollah Khomeini come to power in Iran following the overthrow of the US and UK-aligned Shah Pahlavi – who had himself come to power following 1953’s Operation Ajax, an MI6 and CIA-orchestrated regime change operation launched in response to then-Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh’s decision to nationalise Iran’s vast oil reserves.

In order to counter the influence of Khomeini’s newly-established anti-Imperialist state and to maintain hegemony in the Middle East, the United States adopted the strategy of using Saudi Arabia – separated from the Islamic Republic by the Persian Gulf – as a political and military bulwark against Iran.

This is where the media coverage of the Yemen conflict comes into play, with Tehran long being accused of backing the Houthis, whose seizure of the capital Sana’a in March 2015 led to Riyadh launching its current air campaign – involving US and British-supplied bombs – in a bid to restore its favoured Presidential candidate, Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi, to power.

Therefore, with the aims of Ansar Allah consequently being opposed to the aims of the US-NATO hegemony, this explains why no heroic descriptions such as ‘Yemeni resistance’ or ‘freedom fighters’ are ascribed to the Houthis by the Western media, in stark contrast to their coverage of the Armed Forces of Ukraine – supported by the West since the 2014 Euromaidan colour revolution and their subsequent war on the breakaway Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk, a situation that has escalated to the point where nuclear war has now become a distinct possibility.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Gavin O’Reilly is an activist from Dublin, Ireland, with a strong interest in the effects of British and US Imperialism. Secretary of the Dublin Anti-Internment Committee, a campaign group set up to raise awareness of Irish Republican political prisoners in British and 26 County jails. His work has previously appeared on American Herald Tribune, The Duran, Al-Masdar and MintPress News.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from South Front

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Americans and anyone living in the US should listen intently to this one because according to Charles Gave of Gavekal, one of the world’s leading independent providers of financial research, there are very tough times ahead for us all.

He explains how the US has triggered the dollar’s demise, lost reserve currency hegemony, and has hallmarks of a third world country.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

This was originally published on TNT Radio.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Below are excerpts of  an important article by London’s Daily Mail. Our thanks to the Daily Mail for having brought this article to our attention

***

Moscow’s claim that Hunter Biden helped finance a US military ‘bioweapons’ research program in Ukraine is at least partially true, according to new emails obtained exclusively by DailyMail.com.

The commander of the Russian Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Protection Forces, claimed there was a ‘scheme of interaction between US government agencies and Ukrainian biological objects’ and pointed to the ‘financing of such activities by structures close to the current US leadership, in particular the investment fund Rosemont Seneca, which is headed by Hunter Biden.’

Intelligence experts say the Russian military leader’s allegations were a brazen propaganda ploy to justify president Vladimir Putin‘s invasion of Ukraine and sow discord in the US.

But emails from Hunter’s abandoned laptop show he helped secure millions of dollars of funding for Metabiota, a Department of Defense contractor specializing in research on pandemic-causing diseases that could be used as bioweapons.

He also introduced Metabiota to an allegedly corrupt Ukrainian gas firm, Burisma, for a ‘science project’ involving high biosecurity level labs in Ukraine.

And although Metabiota is ostensibly a medical data company, its vice president emailed Hunter in 2014 describing how they could ‘assert Ukraine’s cultural and economic independence from Russia’ – an unusual goal for a biotech firm.

In April 2014, Metabiota vice president Mary Guttieri wrote a memo to Hunter outlining how they could ‘assert Ukraine’s cultural and economic independence from Russia’. ‘Thanks so much for taking time out of your intense schedule to meet with Kathy [Dimeo, Metabiota executive] and I on Tuesday. We very much enjoyed our discussion,’ Guttieri wrote

Click here to read the full article.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Eighteen months ago, reports started to surface that Boris Johnson’s Conservative government in the U.K. was planning to detain would-be asylum seekers in places as far away as the South Atlantic. Some sites, such as Ascension Island, are 4,000 miles from Britain.

Johnson’s plan was actually a spinoff of a never-implemented idea put forward by the Labour government back in 2003 to “offshore” the country’s asylum process to “regional protection zones” in the vicinity of the conflicts and collapsing economies that were sending hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers to the U.K. and other European countries. Then-Prime Minister Tony Blair and his colleagues backed off of that idea after it received tremendous pushback from social justice and immigrant rights organizers, who averred that it would place large and unfair financial burdens on poor countries that had the geographic misfortune to be located on the periphery of war zones.

Since those initial reports — with asylum seekers finding ever-more creative ways to cross over to England from the continent, either via boats or, in some instances, being smuggled through the Channel Tunnel — Home Secretary Priti Patel has increasingly looked to penalize asylum seekers, to render their actions criminal and to deny them the right to a fair hearing in the U.K. The British government is mirroring U.S. government actions taken during the Trump administration against would-be asylees attempting to traverse the southern border into the U.S., such as the Orwellian-named Migrant Protection Protocols.

This past summer, Patel unveiled plans, contained in legislation called the Nationality and Borders Bill, to criminalize asylum seekers entering the country without the correct paperwork and to make it easier to deport them. The plans also sought to house asylum seekers in offshore facilities such as abandoned oil rigs, or on Ascension Island off the coast of southern Africa, while their cases slowly wend through the court system. This sort of offshore detention — a practice long utilized in Australia, and currently being proposed in Denmark — is one that immigrants’ rights groups view with deep suspicion. If implemented, it would also give the British home secretary unprecedented powers to revoke the citizenship of certain U.K. citizens deemed politically undesirable, a move that picked up steam in the wake of a number of high-profile cases of U.K. citizens operating within the ranks of ISIS.

So desperate is Johnson’s government to deliver on its electoral promise to anti-immigrant voters of curtailing immigration that it has reportedly turned to a range of countries, from Norway to Rwanda to Albania to host its detention facilities. All, apparently, have turned down the U.K.’s overtures, leaving the remote Ascension Island, with its once-a-week flight to South Africa, as choice number one. If this tough-on-asylum proposal becomes law, it could end up costing the U.K. a fortune: A similar offshoring policy in Australia ultimately cost the Australians roughly 2 million pounds per person per year held at these remote detention sites, and helped shred the country’s human rights record in the process. In addition to the immorality of such a measure, as a deterrent system this sort of off-shoring policy is shockingly expensive to implement.

Since the bill was first proposed, opposition parties, combined with a number of rebels from within Conservative ranks, have fought a rearguard action to try to prevent it being enacted into law.

Now, with war raging once again on the European continent and displacing millions of people, and with tens of thousands of British families having signed up for a government program to host Ukrainian refugees in their homes, one might imagine that Prime Minister Johnson and Home Secretary Patel would use the moment as cover to back off of the more inflammatory of their anti-immigrant proposals.

To the contrary, they have doubled down. Earlier this month, the government repeatedly made it clear that it was sticking by this bill, and sent the legislation over to parliament’s upper chamber, the House of Lords, to be debated, amended and voted upon. But members of the House of Lords weren’t happy about the legislation, and in a series of hearings successfully defeated or amended many of its more contentious, more anti-democratic, provisions.

Unfortunately, that doesn’t mean the bill is dead. The House of Lords is, these days, more of an advisory chamber than an institution with veto powers over legislation. And, at this point, it’s looking as if Johnson’s government intends to try to steamroll the legislation through Parliament later this month, when members of Parliament once more debate the merits of the proposals.

Yet, Johnson is, after months of political scandals, a wounded leader, and his hold on the Conservative Party is nowhere near as total as it was last year. In recent days, more than two dozen of his members of Parliament have indicated their discomfort with key parts of the legislation, including the part which refuses to grant asylum seekers temporary work permits while they are waiting for their cases to be heard.

The war in Ukraine is rapidly shifting the dynamics around refugees and asylees. For years, a growing number of countries in Europe, pushed by electorates increasingly wary of large-scale migration, locked down against poor (mainly non-white) migrants seeking asylum. But Ukrainians, forced to flee suddenly before a staggeringly violent Russian onslaught, aren’t seeking asylum, a process that can take years of legal hearings to complete; rather they are heading west as refugees — into refugee camps in countries bordering Ukraine, and then westward into other countries in Europe. And, unlike with the victims of other conflicts in previous years, aid agencies in Europe are watching, somewhat amazed, as governments welcome these displaced Ukrainians with open arms. This treatment is far cry from how European countries’ response to the civil war in Syria — a year after a mass migration into Europe in 2015, one country after another began locking its borders down against the refugees — and the Saudi-led war in Yemen.

In contrast, Ukrainians are being met with work permits, with free public transit passes and so on, despite the fact that these same European governments have steadily been turning away refugees from Syria, Afghanistan, Yemen, and other non-European conflict zones in recent years after a populist backlash against the liberal entry policies of 2015.

After a slow start denounced by opposition politicians as “shameful,” Britain has begun easing its rules-of-entry to allow for large numbers of Ukrainians to be temporarily resettled in the U.K. As a result, somewhere in the region of 200,000 Ukrainians could end up living in the country over the coming months and years — a number roughly equal to the number of EU nationals who left the U.K. in 2020 as Brexit’s provisions began to kick in, and one that might go a long way to fill the labor shortage in key sectors of the economy that Britain has repeatedly experienced post-Brexit.

Some relief workers and experts argue that this is a moment for Europe to fundamentally rethink its obligations to those fleeing persecution and violence, finally bringing the continent more in line with the spirit of the 1951 Refugee Convention.

But, at least in the short term, that seems an unlikely outcome. In Britain, the political tradeoff is, perhaps, most obvious. The home secretary, with Prime Minister Johnson’s backing, is continuing to push the noxious Nationality and Borders Bill in the same month that the government has been forced, by public opinion as much as by internal party dissent, to roll out a much larger welcome mat for Ukrainians than it had initially intended.

The U.K. is rightly responding with generosity to the victims of Russia’s violence in Ukraine. But, unless the Conservative parliamentary rebels pick up more followers in the coming weeks, it will soon be going down an even nastier road than before in its responses to other displaced, traumatized people fleeing non-European conflicts, non-European economic collapse and non-European zones of despair.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Sasha Abramsky is a freelance journalist and a part-time lecturer at the University of California at Davis. His work has appeared in numerous publications, including The Nation, The Atlantic Monthly, New York Magazine, The Village Voice and Rolling Stone. He also writes a weekly political column. Originally from England, with a bachelor’s in politics, philosophy and economics from Oxford University and a master’s degree from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, he now lives in Sacramento, California.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

As the Russia-Ukraine war enters its third week, and the number of Ukrainian immigrants has increased under the strain of war, Israel is witnessing sharp differences between one group that supports the reception of all immigrants and another that supports accepting only Jewish ones. A third group warns against dispersing the efforts of preserving the state’s so-called “ethnic purity”.

Meanwhile, this growing dispute within the Israeli government indicates a state of divergence on the Israeli vision of the ongoing war and the lack of consensus on its position. There is a division between those who reject the Russian invasion, those who consider that this position may incur Israel considerable prices and a third group that calls for a total alignment with the West.

When the war between Ukraine and Russia becomes bloodier, Israel is preparing for new waves of Jewish immigration from Ukraine. The population of the Jewish community in Ukraine is 48,000, and the Israeli government started to realise the need to prepare for the increase in applications to immigrate to Israel. These waves of migrations began to be organised by the Ministry of Immigrant Absorption, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Diaspora Affairs, the Ministries of Immigration, Foreign Affairs and Diaspora, the Jewish Agency for Israel and the prime minister’s office to communicate between Jews and their families in the former Soviet Union. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, 6,000 new Jewish immigrants from Ukraine have immigrated to Israel.

In 2021, 3,080 new Jewish immigrants immigrated to Israel from Ukraine, but due to the war between Russia and Ukraine, Jewish immigration officials believe there will be a dramatic increase in the applications of migration requests by Ukrainian Jews. The Ministry of Aliyah and Integration stated a rise of 12 per cent in applications to open migration files, and the numbers are expected to increase further.

The Israeli currents that support receiving Ukrainian refugees claim that Israel is the protector of every Jew wherever they may be. Therefore, hundreds of Israelis in Ukraine assist at a field hospital on the border. Every day, 12 to 16 flights from Russia and the countries around Ukraine land at Ben Gurion Airport. It is expected that around 2,000 to 3,000 immigrants may arrive, besides those entitled to the racist “law of return”, specific to Jews and Jews alone.

The group with reservations about the comprehensive reception of refugees from Ukraine called for a ministerial committee to form a clear immigration policy for Israel to adapt to the situation and set parameters on the number of refugees received. So far, Israel does not have a specific and clear immigration policy, and the Ukrainian refugee crisis necessitates a governmental decision based on an agreement between the different components of the government. They do not agree on the current situation, but rather seem indifferent to what they call a “humanitarian disaster”.

A third Israeli current considers the request to implement a plan for refugees as “shameful” because it distorts Israel’s reputation and undermines its immigration policy since it cannot afford the cost of receiving refugees coming from Ukraine. This prompted hundreds of demonstrators to protest in front of the home of the Minister of Interior Ayelet Shaked, accusing her of discriminating between refugees according to religion, race and gender. This group believes that any government’s discrimination based on these grounds is shameful.

This Israeli racist policy towards Ukrainian refugees, compared with other policies regarding immigrants coming from other countries such as Ethiopia, has caused all ministers of the government to be accused of committing a “scandal” and causing a “disgrace” to Israel because they have demonstrated a racist policy separating Jews from others.

It is clear that Israel, the country that cared about its citizens in Ukraine and the Jews there, has closed its doors to victims more than any other country has. Israel has remained silent, turned its back and closed its doors. The world will not forget Israel’s silence. There will come a day when the world will hold Israel accountable because it has evaded punishment for its endless occupation.

Being aware of the Israeli concern about the Jews impresses those described as “lovers of the Jewish race”. But when the war refugees arrive at the Israeli airport and are requested to deposit a huge amount of money to experience freedom and security, it is evident that something in the Israeli conscience is completely distorted. Is there really a difference between a child from Ukraine who fled to search for security and safety, who does not have a Jewish grandmother, and a child from Ukraine who has a Jewish grandmother? What is the difference? Racism.

The Israelis fear that Ukrainian refugees will face personal difficulties, health conditions and other difficulties in Israel, such as not speaking Hebrew or understanding Israeli mentality and culture. As a result, Israeli studies reveal an increase in the diagnosis of depression among Jewish immigrants, and even suicide cases, prompting the Ministry of Aliyah and Integration to launch a health centre to deal with this. Based at the centre are mental health specialists, operating five days a week, offering services in five different languages: English, French, Spanish, Amharic and Russian.

At the same time, recent days have revealed that Israeli human trafficking networks are actively working to lure Ukrainian women and girls to work in prostitution under the guise of receiving them as refugees. The trafficking networks are based at Ben Gurion Airport and nearby hotels designated by the authorities to host refugees.

During their testimonies at Ben Gurion Airport, about a hundred female Ukrainian refugees mentioned that people offered them money to help flee the war areas in Ukraine. The women crossed the border and boarded a plane heading to Israel. However, upon their arrival, the same people informed the women that they would be forced to provide sexual or domestic services to pay back the money.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Featured image is from Twitter

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

A proposed amendment to a 2019 federal law would have allowed federal agencies to conduct vague, pandemic-related “drills and operational exercises” just before the onset of the COVID crisis – and an amendment eventually included in the bill may have had a similar effect.

This article provides more significant information which suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic may be a falsified national and international hoax, ruse, ploy, national security operational exercise, or other falsified “activity.” While this article does not thoroughly discuss the question, one might reasonably ask if a falsified pandemic committed by U.S. government national security officials, public health officials, and politicians would be terrorism. Without being an expert, one could predict that a falsified pandemic would greatly harm America and other countries and thus could be used as terrorism.

FBI ‘linking public health and law enforcement’

Before getting to the information suggesting COVID-19 is a falsified exercise, it is necessary to mention again that in 2016, the Obama-Biden administration ordered the FBI and Department of Justice to link “public health and law enforcement” and to coordinate with countries such as China, Iran, Russia, Ukraine, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and other potentially terroristic governments, through the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), “on the Global Health Security Agenda and its successful implementation.”

This may be significant in part because if the implementation of the Global Health Security Agenda included a falsified pandemic and is therefore terrorism and a crime against the United States, then the FBI would apparently be the entity to investigate such potential terrorism committed by U.S. government officials. But if the FBI is coordinating the terrorism, then, of course, there probably won’t be an honest investigation.

The Obama-Biden administration’s ordering of the FBI to “coordinate with INTERPOL on the Global Health Security Agenda and its successful implementation” may also refer to the use of law enforcement/police and intelligence entities to intimidate and/or eliminate potential whistleblowers; history shows that it sometimes only takes one good and honest person to bring down widespread corruption. “Successful implementation” of a falsified pandemic or “global health security agenda” might require intimidation and/or elimination of whistleblowers, judges deciding cases on government forced injections, etc.

The FBI’s and DOJ’s recent history suggests the use of covert “law enforcement” as corrupt political entities; and the U.S. federal government’s anti-freedom response to COVID-19 in itself suggests widespread corruption. Thus, the methods and advanced technologies used by the FBI and other law enforcement entities may be relevant to this discussion.

Discussing this topic often leads to the false label of paranoia, but it is going to be asked anyways: why do the FBI and other entities keep methods and technologies secret? What do they have to hide? Some might say that persons who do wrong might be able to avoid punishment if methods and technologies are known; that is unlikely due to the advancement in technologies. But hiding methods and technologies does allow entities like the FBI to hide their own crimes, which the FBI has done in the past.

False investigations can be used as a weapon against innocent Americans in that they may involve stalking and harassment with covert law enforcement or intelligence community employees. “Investigations” also may involve stalking and harassment of acquaintances of the target of the false investigation. (Page 5) Such methods, including deliberate committing of crimes, were used by the FBI or other intelligence agencies in the past. (Pages 5, 10-12, etc.)

One problem with the Obama-Biden Administration’s ordering of the FBI to link law enforcement with public health and successfully implementing the Global Health Security Agenda might be summarized best by a document from the U.S. Senate describing previous crimes committed by the FBI and U.S. intelligence community:

intelligence activity in the past decades has, all too often, exceeded the restraints on the exercise of governmental power which are imposed by our country’s Constitution, laws, and traditions. Excesses in the name of protecting security are not a recent development in our nation’s history…Intelligence activity, on the other hand, is generally covert. It is concealed from its victims and is seldom described in statutes or explicit executive orders. The victim may never suspect that his misfortunes are the intended result of activities undertaken by his government, and accordingly may have no opportunity to challenge the actions taken against him. (Pages 2-3, emphasis added)

The U.S. Senate document indeed implies that covert stalking with the intent to cause harm was used by the FBI and other entities. It is documented that the ultimate intent might have been to cause the targeted person to harm themselves. (Page 11) And rather than eliminate such covert activities, it appears as though President Joe Biden (as a U.S. Senator) and others U.S. officials greatly expanded the use of potentially covert intelligence and/or law enforcement personnel across the nation. (108 STAT. 1807-1808) The law implies potential use of covert employees. (Not all opinions in linked sources are endorsed.)

Here’s one way in which such covert government actions could cause harm and potentially death: as the above-mentioned U.S. Senate document mentioned, people who are victims of the covert actions of law enforcement or intelligence agencies like the FBI “may never suspect that…misfortunes are the intended result of activities undertaken by [the U.S.] government.” “Misfortune” often causes suffering.

In the modern Big Pharma society such suffering may be much worse. What is one possible consequence of a person experiencing “misfortunes” and covert stalking and/or harassment? Sometimes the victim may begin using illicit chemicals. (The contents of this article or other articles by this author are not medical advice.) Or, because the government actions may involve covert stalking or harassment with not-in-uniform law enforcement or intelligence agency personnel, others may be misdiagnosed and may be wrongly prescribed certain chemicals. And what is one of the common consequences of using certain illicit chemicals? And what is a major “adverse effect” of certain prescribed chemicals which act on the brain? Remember, the FBI’s previous intent was to cause misfortune and attempt to convince targeted persons to harm themselves.

In other words, if the U.S. federal and/or local governments wanted to remove certain political opponents or other persons from society as they did in the past, such covert methods that they have used in the past, combined with chemicals with sometimes torturous effects, may be a way to do so.

And, again, due to the potential use of advanced technologies that may remotely and covertly act on the human brain and/or body, the current actions of the FBI and other intelligence or covert law enforcement entities may be even worse than the past. Covert and remote torture is not beyond the realm of possibilities. It seems that Americans should demand that such entities are no longer allowed to operate with such secrecy.

Proposed amendment before COVID again suggests pandemic ‘exercise’

Those subjects cannot be further discussed here, though. This article provides even more information which suggests that COVID-19 may be a falsified pandemic. Previous articles discussed significant information in the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act of 2019. Before that became law, though, there was another version of the bill which implies that a falsified operational exercise with “emerging infectious disease” enacted by the U.S. government and others may have been in the planning phase. An “emerging infectious disease program” was proposed to be established as follows:

“(e) EMERGING INFECTIOUS DISEASE PROGRAM.—  The Secretary [of Health and Human Services], acting through the Director of BARDA,  shall establish and implement a program that supports research and development, and manufacturing infrastructure, activities with respect to an emerging infectious disease.” (Page 88, emphasis added)

And what was one of these potential “activities with respect to emerging infectious disease”? The same bill provides the suggested amendment entitled “Strengthening National Preparedness and Response for Public Health Emergencies” which would have enhanced the duties of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response to include “comprehensive, synchronized, and mutually supportive” “drills and operations exercises” with the “emerging infectious disease program.” The proposed amendment (Pages 3-4) is difficult to understand without the wording of the law to be amended. The proposed amendment is emphasized as it would have appeared if it was passed:

[Subject to the authority of the Secretary, the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response shall utilize experience related to public health emergency preparedness and response, biodefense, medical countermeasures, and other relevant topics to carry out the following functions:]

(G) Drill and operational exercises

Carry out drills and operational exercises, in consultation with the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and other applicable Federal departments and agencies, as necessary and appropriate, to identify, inform, and address gaps in and policies related to the pandemic influenza and emerging infectious disease program established under section 319L(d), or all-hazards medical and public health preparedness and response, including exercises based on—

(i) identified threats for which countermeasures are available and for which no countermeasures are available; and

(ii) unknown threats for which no countermeasures are available.

Such drills and operations exercises shall be comprehensive, synchronized, and mutually supportive. (42 U.S. Code § 300hh–10(b)(4)(G), proposed amendment emphasized, from pages 3-4)

The proposed amendment suggests that the U.S. federal government, apparently including at least some members of Congress, intended the U.S. government to “carry out drills and operational exercises…related to…the emerging infectious disease program” mentioned above. Coronaviruses are in the realm of “emerging infectious diseases.”

The proposed amendment also wanted to make sure it was written into law that “such drills and operations exercises shall be comprehensive, synchronized, and mutually supportive.” “Synchronized…and mutually supportive” appears to imply that different government entities – potentially including the Department of Homeland Security/FEMA’s National Exercise Program – should synchronize and support “comprehensive” exercises with the Department of Health and Human Services’ exercises, including exercises related to “emerging infectious disease.”

Like other articles mentioned, why would it be necessary to attempt to put such wording into law unless a “comprehensive, synchronized, and mutually supportive” exercise was being planned and required more legal protection for those planning it?

And soon after the proposed amendment, of course, the COVID-19 pandemic – an “emerging infectious disease” pandemic – reportedly emerged. The timing of the proposed amendment followed by the emerging infectious disease pandemic could be coincidence but the reasonable person may suggest otherwise.

And while the proposed amendment was not included in the enacted law, one specific amendment was included which may have been intended to have the same effect as the proposed amendment above but with more broad language to provide secrecy for government officials potentially planning a falsified pandemic “operations exercise.” The amendment included in the enacted law is as follows:

(b) PROTECTION OF NATIONAL SECURITY FROM THREATS.—Section 2811 (42 U.S.C. 300hh–10) is amended by adding at the end the following:

“(f) PROTECTION OF NATIONAL SECURITY FROM THREATS.—

“(1) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out subsection (b)(3), the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response shall implement strategic initiatives or activities to address threats, including pandemic influenza and which may include a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear agent (including any such agent with a significant potential to become a pandemic), that pose a significant level of risk to public health and national security based on the characteristics of such threat. Such initiatives shall include activities to—

“(A) accelerate and support the advanced research, development, manufacturing capacity, procurement, and stockpiling of countermeasures, including initiatives under section 319L(c)(4)(F);

“(B) support the development and manufacturing of virus seeds, clinical trial lots, and stockpiles of novel virus strains; and

“(C) maintain or improve preparedness activities, including for pandemic influenza. (133 STAT. 948-949, emphasis added)

The approved amendment included in the enacted law is broader than the initially proposed amendment, but it appears to have a similar effect: strategic initiatives and “preparedness activities” may include exercises (133 STAT. 940) and “any such agent with a significant potential to become a pandemic” would likely include coronaviruses. Thus, the amendment, like several other amendments, could be interpreted to mean that the U.S. government was planning a falsified pandemic exercise as a “strategic initiative” or “preparedness activity.”

When taken together, the proposed amendment and the approved amendment in light of the soon-to-follow COVID-19 pandemic are again extremely significant indications that the COVID-19 pandemic may be a falsified exercise. Of course, if it is a falsified exercise, it is likely being used as a form of terrorism to coerce large populations into doing things they would otherwise not do.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Featured image is from LSN

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

According to a 2019  Rand report titled  “Overextending and Unbalancing Russia”,  the US goal is to undermine Russia just as it did the Soviet Union in the cold war. Rather than “trying to stay ahead” or trying to improve the US domestically or in international relations, the emphasis is on efforts and actions to undermine the designated adversary Russia. Rand is a quasi-US governmental think tank that receives three-quarters of its funding from the US military.

The report lists anti-Russia measures divided into the following areas:  economic, geopolitical, ideological/informational, and military.  They are assessed according to the perceived risks, benefits and “likelihood of success”.

Screenshot from RAND

The report notes that Russia has “deep seated” anxieties about western interference and potential military attack. These anxieties are deemed to be a vulnerability to exploit. There is no mention of the cause of the Russian anxieties: they have have been invaded multiple times and had 27 million deaths in WW2.

Significance of Ukraine

Ukraine is important to Russia. The two countries share much common heritage and a long common border.  One of the most important leaders of the Soviet Union, Nikita Khrushchev, was Ukrainian. During WW2, Ukraine was one of Hitler’s invasion routes and there was a small but active number of Ukrainian collaborators with Nazi Germany. The distance from the capital of Ukraine, Kiev, to Moscow is less than 500 miles.

For these same reasons of geography and history, Ukraine is a major component of a US/NATO effort to undermine Russia.  Current Under Secretary for Political Affairs, Victoria Nuland,  said that over 20 years the US invested $5 billion in the project to turn Ukraine. The culmination was a violent coup in February 2014.  Since 2015, the US has been training ultra nationalist and Neo-Nazi  militias. This has been documented in articles such as “U.S. House admits Nazi role in Ukraine” (Robert Parry, 2015),  “The US is arming and assisting neo-nazis in Ukraine while the House debates prohibition.”(Max Blumenthal, 2018),  “Neo Nazis and the far right are on the march in Ukraine” (Lev Golinken in 2019) and “The CIA may be breeding Nazi terror in Ukraine” (Branko Marcetic Jan. 2022).

Rand suggested provocations

Prior to 2018, the US only provided “defensive” military weaponry to Ukraine. The Rand report assesses that providing lethal (offensive) military aid to Ukraine will have a high risk but also a high benefit.  Accordingly, US lethal weaponry skyrocketed from near zero to $250M in 2019,  to  $303M in 2020,  to $350M in 2021.  Total military aid is much higher.  A few weeks ago, “The Hill” reported, “The U.S. has contributed more than $1 billion to help Ukraine’s military over the past year”.

The Rand report lists many techniques and “measures” to provoke and threaten Russia. Some of the steps include:

• Repositioning bombers within easy striking range of key Russian strategic targets
• Deploying additional tactical nuclear weapons to locations in Europe and Asia
• Increasing US and allied naval force posture and presence in Russia’s operating areas (Black Sea)
• Holding NATO war exercises on Russia’s borders
• Withdrawing from the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty

These and many other provocations suggested by Rand have, in fact, been implemented. For example, NATO conducted massive war exercises dubbed “Defender 2021” right up Russia’s border.  NATO has started “patrolling” the Black Sea and engaging in provocative intrusions into Crimean waters. The US has withdrawn from the INF Treaty.

Since 2008, when NATO “welcomed” the membership aspirations of Ukraine and Georgia, Russia has said this would cross a red line and threaten its security. In recent years NATO has provided advisers, training and ever increasing amounts of military hardware. While Ukraine is not a formal member of NATO, it has increasingly been treated like one. The full Rand report says “While NATO’s requirement for unanimity makes it unlikely that Ukraine could gain membership in the foreseeable future, Washington’s pushing this possibility could boost Ukrainian resolve while leading Russia to redouble its efforts to forestall such a development.”

The alternative, which could have prevented or at least forestalled the current Russian intervention in Ukraine, would have been to declare Ukraine ineligible for NATO.  But this would have been contrary to the US intention of deliberately stressing, provoking and threatening Russia.

Ukraine as US client

In November 2021, the US and Ukraine signed a Charter on Strategic Partnership. This agreement confirmed Ukrainian aspirations to join NATO and rejection of the Crimean peoples decision to re-unify with Russia following the 2014 Kiev coup. The agreement signaled a consolidation of Washington’s economic, political and military influence. 

December 2021 Russia red lines followed by military action

In December 2021, Russia proposed a treaty with the US and NATO.  The central Russian proposal was a written agreement that Ukraine would not join the NATO military alliance.

When the proposed treaty was rebuffed by Washington, it seems the die was cast. On February 21, Putin delivered a speech detailing their grievances. On February 24, Putin delivered another speech announcing the justification and objectives of the military intervention to “demilitarize” and “denazify” Ukraine.

As Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov later said, “This is not about Ukraine. This is the end result of a policy that the West has carried out since the early 1990’s.”

Afghanistan again?

As earlier indicated, the Rand report assesses the costs and benefits of various US actions. It is considered a “benefit” if increased US assistance to Ukraine results in the loss of Russian blood and resources. Speculating on the possibility of  Russian troop presence in Ukraine, the report suggests that it could become “quite controversial at home, as it did when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan.” (p 99 of full report)

That historical reference is significant. Beginning in 1979, the US and Saudi Arabia funded and trained sectarian foreign fighters to invade and destabilize the progressive Afghan government. The goals were to overthrow the socialist inclined government and lure the Soviet Union into supporting the destabilized government. It achieved these Machiavellian goals at the cost of millions of Afghan citizens whose country has never been the same.

It appears that Ukrainian citizens are similarly being manipulated to serve US  goals.

A “disadvantageous peace settlement”

The Rand report says,  “Increasing U.S. military aid would certainly drive up the Russian costs, but doing so could also increase the loss of Ukrainian lives and territory or result in a disadvantageous peace settlement.”

But who would a peace settlement be “disadvantageous” for? Ukrainian lives and territory are currently being lost. Over fourteen thousand  Ukrainian lives have been lost in the eastern Donbass region since the 2014 coup.

A peace settlement that guaranteed basic rights for all Ukrainians and state neutrality in the rivalry of big powers, would be advantageous to most Ukrainians.  It is only the US foreign policy establishment including the US military media industrial complex and Ukrainian ultra-nationalists who would be “disadvantaged”.

Since Ukraine is a multi-ethnic state, it would seem best to accept that reality and find a compromise national solution which facilitates all Ukrainians. Being a client of a distant foreign power is not in Ukraine’s national best interest.

The Rand report shows how US policy focuses on actions to hurt Russia and manipulates third party countries (Ukraine) toward that task.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Rick Sterling is an independent journalist based in the San Francisco Bay Area. He can be contacted at [email protected]. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, the sword of Damocles of a nuclear exchange between the great powers USA and Russia has been hovering over humanity. According to the American international law expert Francis Boyle, the very threat of nuclear weapons is “nuclear terrorism” and, since the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal in 1945, a crime against peace and humanity. Boyle said this about ten years ago during a lecture at the XVIII “Courage to Ethics” Conference in Feldkirch, Austria.

Professor Boyle accused the US government of,

“after the atomic bombs of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the incineration of 250,000 innocent people, to persist in the development of these weapons which threaten all humanity and thus to commit verifiable crimes like the Nazis. (…) Therefore, the government officials in all nuclear weapons states, not only those of the United States – they are of course the worst – (…) are criminals. They are criminals! For their threat to destroy all humanity! For their threat to repeat the Nuremberg crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide! (…).”

Then Boyle made an urgent appeal to all people:

“Humanity must abolish nuclear weapons before nuclear weapons abolish humanity!

Everyone around the world has the basic human right to be free from the criminal practice of nuclear threat/nuclear terrorism’ and its spectre of nuclear extinction. All human beings (…) possess the fundamental right under international humanitarian law to engage in civil resistance to either prevent, impede or end these threatened acts of international crimes.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Dr. Rudolf Lothar Hänsel is a teacher (retired headmaster), doctor of education (Dr. paed.) and psychologist (specialising in clinical, educational and media psychology). As a retiree, he worked for many years as a psychotherapist in his own practice. In his books and educational-psychological articles, he calls for a conscious ethical-moral values education and an education for public spirit and peace.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Source

Transcript of the lecture by the author as well as article in the “Neue Rheinische Zeitung” (NRhZ) of 13 01 2016: http://www.nrhz.de/flyer/beitrag.php?id=22455&css=print

Featured image: ICAN (International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons)

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida is exploiting his now-American ally’s atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in order to add credence to the false speculation that Russia might end up using nuclear weapons in Ukraine or elsewhere. This is similar in spirit to what two German states just did in equating the Russian ‘Z’ with the Nazi swastika.

Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida said on Saturday while visiting Hiroshima with US Ambassador Rahm Emanuel that “the possible use of nuclear weapons by Russia is increasingly real” even though it was his country’s post-World War II mutual defense American ally that dropped atomic bombs on that city and Nagasaki in the final days of that global conflict. President Putin actually spoke about those unprecedented war crimes last week when reminding everyone that:

“When Japan annually commemorates the victims of the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August, they either bashfully keep silent about who dropped the bombs on their cities, or they write flagrant nonsense, that some abstract allies did it. This is what their textbooks say. They simply prefer not to talk about the fact that it was the United States that committed such as a terrible and unjustified massacre at the end of World War II. They have cynically decided to ‘cancel’ this truth as well.”

It’s therefore not unsurprising to those who are aware of this historical truth and the “politically correct” historical revisionism that followed to find out that Japan is nowadays fearmongering about Russian nuclear weapons instead of American ones. Tokyo is motivated by its desire to become the “Asian Poland” in the sense of doing everything it possibly can to show fealty to its overlords in Washington vis-à-vis their top rival in each respective Eurasian theater of the New Cold War.

It seems inevitable that the Russian scenario of provoking Moscow into undertaking kinetic action in the region through its ongoing special military operation in Ukraine aimed at ensuring the integrity of its national security red lines will be replicated with China in the coming future. In preparation of that, Japan wants to play a leading role in provoking that sequence of events from China in East and/or Southeast Asia exactly like Poland presently is when it comes to Russia in Eastern Europe.

Russia just broke off peace talks with Japan after the US-led West’s unprecedented and preplanned sanctions campaign against it. Japan’s reversion to its fascist ways threatens regional peace, which is evidenced by Tokyo encouraging Washington to step up its meddling in the legitimately Russian-administered Southern Kuril Islands over which Japan recently reaffirmed its unilateral claims. Moscow’s response was to conduct more military drills there.

Former Russian President and current Deputy Chairman of the Security Council Dmitry Medvedev reviewed the circumstances under which his country would employ nuclear weapons in an interview with RT late last week. There’s no shift in its respective policy but the US-led Western Mainstream Media (MSM) misportrayed his citing of the preexisting facts as some kind of “nuclear saber-rattling” that in turn facilitates their ability to mislead their targeted audience with Kishida’s fearmongering.

Returning back to the topic of this analysis after having explained the strategic context in which the Japanese leader’s information provocation was unleashed, he’s exploiting his now-American ally’s atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in order to add credence to the false speculation that Russia might end up using nuclear weapons in Ukraine or elsewhere. This is similar in spirit to what two German states just did in equating the Russian “Z” with the Nazi swastika.

The average member of Western society naively assumes that post-World War II Germany become the global vanguard of anti-fascism in order for its society to eternally atone for the sins that the Nazis committed in their name. Similarly, they also naively assume that post-World War II Japan is the global vanguard of nuclear non-proliferation, with neither exploiting these artificially manufactured reputations. Nevertheless, exploit them they do, as evidenced by both examples.

Combining the equally false narratives being pushed by German and Japanese officials nowadays, who not coincidentally are the inheritors of the same two states that sparked World War II in their respective Eurasian theaters, the emerging weaponized information warfare narrative is that Russia is basically a “nuclear-armed Nazi state that already started World War III”

Add to it Poland’s de facto declaration of Hybrid War against Russia and Biden’s Warsaw speech where he articulated America’s aims and motivations in the New Cold War’s Western Eurasian theater, and it’s clear to see that this sequence of events was very likely preplanned for maximum impact in terms of comprehensively manipulating its targeted audience’s perceptions about Moscow. Untold millions will likely be misled by these interconnected psy-ops, but the truth is available for those who want to know.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

This article was originally published on OneWorld.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: In this handout picture released by the U.S. Army, a mushroom cloud billows about one hour after a nuclear bomb was detonated above Hiroshima, Japan on Aug. 6, 1945. Japanese officials say a 93-year-old Japanese man has become the first person certified as a survivor of both U.S. atomic bombings at the end of World War II. City officials said Tsutomu Yamaguchi had already been a certified “hibakusha,” or radiation survivor, of the Aug. 9, 1945, atomic bombing in Nagasaki, but has now been confirmed as surviving the attack on Hiroshima three days earlier as well. (AP Photo/U.S. Army via Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, HO) ** NO SALES, CREDIT MANDATORY **

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

While the US seeks to distance China from Russia over the issue of Ukraine, the Chinese see Ukraine as a harbinger of things to come in the Pacific. By failing to communicate over the Ukraine issue, the US and China are inching closer to a direct military conflict over Taiwan.

On Mar. 18, US President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping spoke via video link. The primary topic, according to a White House readout, was “Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.” Biden reportedly outlined the view of the US and its allies that the best way to respond to the invasion is to impose costs on Russia. Biden, the White House stated, “described the implications and consequences if China provides material support to Russia.”

Biden’s threatening language echoed that of National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan at a Mar. 14 meeting with the Director of China’s Office of the Foreign Affairs Commission, Yang Jiechi, in Rome. While the White House’s succinct readout merely said the talks involved “substantial discussion of Russia’s war against Ukraine,” the meeting lasted some seven hours, implying a conversation of much greater complexity. State Department spokesperson Ned Price hinted at this to the press in Rome:

“The national security adviser raised directly and very clearly our concerns about the [People’s Republic of China’s] support to Russia in the wake of the invasion, and the implications that any such support would have for the PRC’s relationships around the world.”

Biden and Sullivan’s concern reflected intelligence reports that China had received a request from Russia for military aid and had indicated a willingness to grant this request. Both Biden and Sullivan apparently emphasized to China that any such assistance would provoke US economic sanctions.

Every story has two sides. However, the Chinese version of the talks sounded like it was reporting on a completely different event. According to China’s official Xinhua News Agency, far from being a passive receptor of US angst, Yang controlled the tempo and tone of the Rome meeting, calling on the international community to “jointly support the Russia-Ukraine peace talks so that substantive results can be achieved as soon as possible,” and encouraging all parties to “exercise maximum restraint, protect civilians and prevent a large-scale humanitarian crisis.”

Yang also said the “historical context of the Ukraine issue” needs to be “straightened out.” He encouraged all parties to “get to the bottom of the problem’s origins” and respond to “the legitimate concerns of all the parties.”

This point was driven home by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi. A few days after the Rome meeting, he stated that

“China is not involved in the [Ukraine] crisis, and we do not wish to be affected by the sanctions.” China “has the right to defend its own interests,” Wang declared, adding “[t]he Ukrainian crisis is a result of the accumulation of Europe’s security conflicts.” Both Wang and Yang avoided labeling the Russian operation in Ukraine as either an invasion or war, stating that “While China encourages Russia and Ukraine to cease fire, we wish to see fair peace talks between Europe and Russia.”

Xi left even less doubt as to whom he held responsible for the Ukraine crisis. The Chinese readout of the Biden-Xi phone call said the Chinese leader told Biden that, while China wants peace in Ukraine, it strongly opposes US and European sanctions against Russia. The US and Nato sparked the conflict and should take responsibility for solving it:

“He who tied the bell to the tiger must take it off,” Xi told Biden, using a Chinese aphorism. The US and Europe should “conduct dialogue with Russia to solve the crux of the Ukraine crisis and resolve the security concerns of both Russia and Ukraine.”

Russian-Chinese Partnership

If Sullivan and Biden’s goal was to create a divide between China and Russia over Ukraine, they failed. The Biden administration often appears indifferent to Xi’s characterization of Sino-Russian ties as the “best in history,” with both nations “each other’s most trustworthy strategic partners.” The concept of Xi and Russian President Vladimir Putin having “built good working relations and a close personal friendship” seems foreign to both the US president and his national security adviser.

Xi and Putin in Beijing on Feb. 4 issued a 5,000-plus word joint statement detailing the substance of, and the common impetus behind, the Russian-Chinese partnership: It provides a vital counterforce to what they view as the unilateralist, aggressive global agenda of the US, which threatens not only their two nations, but the peace and security of the world.

The notion that China would be willing to desert Moscow over matters of critical national-security importance to Russia is all the more dubious given the emphasis China placed in the joint statement with Russia to its own national-security priority: the status of Taiwan. For Xi, there is an echo between how the US used Nato in Europe, and US efforts to rally regional support in the Pacific through quasi-alliances such as the “Quad” — comprised of the US, Japan, Australia and India — and the newer Aukus collaboration between Australia, the UK and US to confront China over its claims over both Taiwan and the South China Sea.

From the Chinese perspective, the same strangulation tactics used against Russia in Europe are being mirrored in the Pacific. There, the US and its allies have begun to aggressively challenge China militarily through freedom of navigation exercises in the Strait of Taiwan and South China Sea, and by the deployment of new advanced submarines, hypersonic missiles, and amphibious forces specifically acquired and configured for a military confrontation with China.

Actions Speak Louder

Biden repeatedly informed Xi during their call that the US is not seeking to have a new Cold War or conflict with China, alter its system of government, revitalize alliances against China, or support Taiwan independence. However, in his very first press conference as president, back in March 2021, Biden took an aggressive tone on China.

“They [China] have an overall goal to become the leading country in the world, the wealthiest country in the world, and the most powerful country in the world. That’s not going to happen on my watch.”

Biden criticized the Chinese system of government as “autocratic” and held a global “Summit for Democracy,” where he actively promoted American-style democracy over Chinese autocracy. He has sought to strengthen the military aspects of the Quad, and created a new military alliance, Aukus, solely focused on China. The US continues to sell weapons to Taiwan and has dispatched US troops there on training missions, violating a long-standing taboo against such deployments. Finally, the US is acquiring long-range missiles, including hypersonic weapons, and has reconfigured the Marine Corps force structure in the Pacific for a military conflict with China in the South China Sea.

From Xi’s perspective, the US is saying one thing, and doing another.

According to Xinhua, Xi informed Biden that, in his view, the “direct cause” of the current strain on China-US relations is that “some people on the US side have not followed through on the important common understanding reached by us, neither have they acted on President Biden’s positive statements. The US has misperceived and miscalculated China’s strategic intention.” America, Xi added, has failed to deliver on virtually all of its promises to China regarding the avoidance of conflict, while simultaneously promulgating deep-seated notions of China as an “imagined enemy.”

The US, Xi added, is sending the wrong signal to “Taiwan independence” forces, which is “very dangerous.” Continuation of this would “exert a disruptive impact on China-US relations.” Xi’s remarks, made in the context of a Russian invasion of Ukraine, should not be seen as anything less than a clear warning that the US needs to start taking China’s security concerns seriously and exercise greater caution over its words and actions — lest it find that it has, again, tied a bell onto a tiger.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Scott Ritter is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer whose service over a 20-plus-year career included tours of duty in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control agreements, serving on the staff of US Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf during the Gulf War and later as a chief weapons inspector with the UN in Iraq from 1991-98. The views expressed in this article are those of the author.

Featured image is from Energy Intelligence

Dear Readers,

As everyone faces difficult times, the company which deals with the fulfillment of book sales on behalf of Global Research is no longer able to provide its services. We are unfortunately suspending the sale of print books until further notice.

Meanwhile, PDF versions are still available for purchase.

Thank you for your valuable support.

***

The History of Nazism in Ukraine. Who Is Stepan Bandera?

By Timothy Alexander Guzman, March 27, 2022

It’s a tragedy in the making. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is reprehensible and should never have happened, but it is a fact that Russian President Vladimir Putin for several years had been warning Washington and its allies of an impending danger, that NATO expansion to its borders could lead to military confrontation.

Tens of Thousands Threatened with Property Tax Foreclosures in Detroit

By Abayomi Azikiwe, March 28, 2022

March 31 has been designated as the deadline for Wayne County residents to pay back property taxes from 2019 and before despite the failure of the relevant authorities to provide adequate assistance to working and impoverished households.

Uncovering the Corona Narrative

By Dr. Robert Malone and Ernst Wolff, March 28, 2022

Many who have followed this coronavirus “public health crisis” and the non-sensical response provided by most of the western nations (including the USA) have been perplexed by two big questions – how was this done (in such a globally coordinated fashion), and why was it done?

Will Humans be the Next ‘Freedom Fries’?

By Ray McGovern, March 28, 2022

Here’s the thing: the Russians have good reason to be on hair-trigger alert. Their early-warning radar system is so inadequate that there are situations (including those involving innocent rocket launches) under which Russian President Putin would have only a few minutes – if that – to decide whether or not to launch nuclear missiles to destroy the rest of the world – on the suspicion that Russia was under nuclear attack.

Reporting From Southern Ukrainian City of Henichesk along the Sea of Azov: “Russians Welcomed as Liberators”

By Sonja van den Ende, March 27, 2022

The Russian army, patrolling the city, went with us—the embedded journalists—for protection. But actually the protection was not really needed; the people in Henichesk, at least the majority with whom I spoke, were very happy that the Russian army was there.

Nightmare Scenario: Operational Miscalculation Triggering Nuclear War

By Nauman Sadiq, March 27, 2022

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Gen. Mark A. Milley, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have tried to set up phone calls with Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and Gen. Valery Gerasimov but the Russians “have so far declined to engage,” said Pentagon spokesman John Kirby in a statement Wednesday, March 23.

95% of Committee Members Advising on U.S. Dietary Guidelines Had Ties to Big Pharma, Big Food

By Michael Nevradakis, March 27, 2022

Describing their findings as “particularly worrisome,” the authors of a study published Monday in Public Health Nutrition noted that in the U.S., the Dietary Guidelines for Americans form “the foundation for all national nutrition programs,” which amount to nearly $100 billion annually.

Aroused by Power: Why Madeleine Albright Was Not Right

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, March 27, 2022

The late US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright will always be tied with the appallingly named humanitarian war in Kosovo in 1999, one that saw NATO attacks on Serbian civilian targets while aiding the forces of the Kosovo Liberation Army.  It was a distinct backing of sides in a vicious, tribal conflict, where good might miraculously bubble up, winged by angels.  Those angels never came.

NATO Wants a Ground-War in Ukraine?

By Mike Whitney, March 26, 2022

Didn’t Putin say that pouring arms into Ukraine would increase the likelihood of war? Yes, he did, but the US and NATO continue sending more shipments anyway. Why? And why does Ukraine need more weapons?

White House Plans Major Escalation of NATO’s Proxy War with Russia

By Andre Damon, March 27, 2022

One month since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, US President Joe Biden will begin a tour of the continent this week in an effort to mobilize the NATO powers in a major escalation of the conflict against Russia.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

March 31 has been designated as the deadline for Wayne County residents to pay back property taxes from 2019 and before despite the failure of the relevant authorities to provide adequate assistance to working and impoverished households.

For the last two years, Wayne County Treasurer Eric Sabree has not foreclosed on properties due to the COVID-19 pandemic which has had a disproportionate impact on area residents, particularly African Americans who make up approximately 80 percent of the Detroit population.

This issue is not a new one in Detroit and Wayne County. Since 2005, there have been tens of thousands of homes and small businesses seized due in part to over assessments which grew out of the mortgage crisis during the first decade of the century. Values of homes were artificially inflated by financial institutions in order to sell more first-time and refinancing loans which proved beneficial only to the banks and insurance companies.

Detroit and the state of Michigan were at the epicenter of the economic crisis leading up to and during the so-called “Great Recession” from 2007 to 2010. The impact of the mortgage home foreclosures was to create even more neighborhood abandonment and blight. Successive state and local officials refused to take effective measures through the implementation of long-term moratoriums along with legal actions against the banks which created the housing crisis.

Moreover, the working and poor people of the United States were saddled with bailing out the banks and insurance firms that engineered the economic downturn. Legislation passed by Congress during the final quarter of 2008 placed the burden of the recession on taxpayers within the proletariat. This bailing out of the banks coincided with similar efforts related to the automotive industry where both General Motors and Chrysler were subsidized by public funding in order save them from consolidation or liquidation.

These factors are largely responsible for the housing situation in Detroit and Wayne County where more than a quarter of the population (240,0000) were driven out of the region between 2000-2010. In Detroit, the population, according to the latest Census figures, has declined an additional 80,000 since 2010. At present, population estimates indicate that the state’s largest municipality has a population of 635,000.

Detroit demonstration outside Wayne County Treasurer’s Office downtown (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

Detroit’s population reached its maximum in 1950 with approximately 1.8 million. Therefore, over the last 72 years, 1.2 million people have been relocated from the city. This massive displacement was both voluntary and forced when government entities such as the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) and the National Interstate and Defense Highway Act facilitated the destruction of majority African American communities and the suburbanization of whites outside the city limits.

The deliberate downsizing and disinvestment in heavy and light industrial production from inside the city center to suburban, out-of-state and offshore locations fueled the migration from the municipality by workers seeking viable employment. The current property tax foreclosure crisis will only further depopulate and impoverish the city.

Corporate Restructuring and the Legacy of Residential Depopulation

Since the contrived and illegal bankruptcy which was imposed on Detroit during 2013-2014, the city has fallen into deeper poverty and community underdevelopment. The appropriation of city assets such as Belle Isle, public works, lighting, the Detroit Institute of Arts, and other institutions, has not reversed the economic trajectory of the municipality.

Tax incremental funding, popularly referred to as “tax captures”, are touted for their utility in fostering “development” largely centered in key areas of the city such as downtown, Midtown, New Center and industrial sites including the new Flex-N-Gate, Stellantis, and the now under construction Amazon facilities located on the eastside of Detroit. Yet these plants and the opening of three casino hotels since 1999, has not fostered sustainable development and a rise in household incomes.

These prestige projects where the owners are largely absolved from paying corporate and other taxes are profiting at the expense of the majority Black population. At present some plants have been forced to lay-off workers as a result of supply chain problems stemming from the continuing impact of the pandemic since 2020. Noise and other forms of environmental pollution caused by these plants are also forcing people from neighborhoods.

Moratorium NOW! Coalition Calls for Mobilization Against Tax Foreclosures

On March 30, the Moratorium NOW! Coalition and other housing activists are holding a press conference and rally outside the Wayne County Treasurer’s Office located at 400 Monroe in Greektown section of downtown. Sabree says he is being pressured to not extend the moratorium on home seizures despite the ongoing crisis related to the pandemic and the overall economic situation.

In a statement issued by Moratorium NOW! Coalition on March 23, it says that:

“There is no reasonable cause for the home seizures to resume when many households have not recovered from the economic and social impact of a public health crisis not witnessed in more than a century. We are calling on the Wayne County Treasurer to stop the foreclosures; protect renters from evictions where taxes are delinquent; and to work towards a long-term plan to put an end to the housing property tax disaster which has been in existence for more than a decade-and-a-half. A list of over 17,000 homes is being threatened with seizure. The problem is so severe that the Treasurer’s Office is not answering calls from the public seeking assistance. This is totally unacceptable. The only solution is to halt the foreclosures and work towards a sustainable solution.”

The ultimate solution to the housing crisis in Detroit lies within the necessity to change the rubric which guides property rights. Housing should be considered a human right and not a profit-making mechanism controlled by real estate firms and financial institutions. The existing model has only forced more people into homeless and poverty.

Housing Remains a National Crisis

Property tax foreclosures, rising rents, the current inflationary spiral plaguing the U.S. and the subsequent social instability, are all manifestations of the failure of the current administration of President Joe Biden and the Congress to pass legislation that would assist millions of households. None of the social spending initiatives proposed by progressive elements within the House of Representatives and the Senate have passed into law.

Therefore, the striking down of a public health moratorium enacted through the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) by the Supreme Court has never been reversed through legislative measures. This holds true as well for the programs to provide permanent child tax credits to working families along with investments in childcare and the lifting of the minimum wage to at least $15 per hour.

The Supreme Court since 2013 has eviscerated the enforcement provisions of 1965 Voting Rights Act while Congress even with a democratic majority in both the House and Senate have failed to take action to guarantee universal suffrage. A series of Civil Rights bills passed by Congress between 1957 and 1968 are effectively null and void. Due to the passage by states of restrictive voting laws, millions of African Americans and other people of color communities will be subjected to massive disenfranchisement across the U.S. in 2022 and 2024.

Yet these issues have been taken off the agenda by the Biden administration and the corporate media which are exclusively promoting sanctions and war against the Russian Federation. Biden travelled to the Western European North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) countries during late March to drum up support for further hostilities against Russia and the People’s Republic of China. Meanwhile, workers are paying more than $6 per gallon for gasoline in California along with astronomical inflationary increases for the prices for automobiles, auto services, food and housing expenses throughout the length and breath of the U.S.

Consequently, the struggle to win housing rights is an important aspect of the overall movement against austerity and imperialist war. Working people and the nationally oppressed must organize independently of the Democratic and Republican parties in order to wage the necessary campaigns aimed at improving living conditions and social stability.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Abayomi Azikiwe

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Many who have followed this coronavirus “public health crisis” and the non-sensical response provided by most of the western nations (including the USA) have been perplexed by two big questions – how was this done (in such a globally coordinated fashion), and why was it done?

In my case, I have tried to follow the various threads of facts and logic, to confront the perplexingly dysfunctional public policies, and to make sense of what is so deeply illogical. What I have found has been layers of lies, one on top of another, which seem to require an amazingly coordinated and globally comprehensive control and shaping of information in the form of propaganda and censorship on a scale which was previously unimaginable. Total information control, and total unrestricted, all encompassing information warfare. Modern media manipulation of thought and minds without boundaries, and without any ethical constraints.

One constant thread which runs through all of the mismanagement, all of the authoritarian policies, all of the totalitarian logic and messaging, has been the role of the World Economic Forum (WEF) and its acolytes.

WEF is a key think tank and meeting place for global capitalism management, and arguably qualifies as the leading global Deep State organization. Under the leadership of Professor Klaus Schwab, it has played an increasingly important role in coordinating the globalized hegemony of transnational capital and large corporations over Western democracies during the last three decades.

Many of its members actively use Covid-19 as cover to carry out a “Great Reset” as described in Schwab’s writings.

This Great Reset involves implementation of digital tracking and control of people, ushering in techno-feudalism, and the WEF objective of a fourth industrial revolution incorporating technologies collectively referred to as “transhumanism.”

Western governments and WEF have identified genetic mRNA vaccines as a first step toward an inevitable transhuman society which they seek to guide us towards. The WEF has developed and implemented a training program which has yielded thousands of acolytes who have been placed into positions of power throughout the western world. A small representative sampling of these includes the following drawn from the ranks of the United States government and industry:

• Politics and policy: White House coronavirus response coordinator Jeffrey Zients, lobby group #Masks4All co-founder Jeremy Howard, California Governor Gavin Newsom, 2020 presidential candidate and U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, Chelsea Clinton, Hillary Clinton confidante Huma Abedin, former U.S. ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley, former U.S. ambassador to the UN and USAID administrator Samantha Power, Eurasia Group founder Ian Bremmer, U.S.-British financier Bill Browder, Jonathan Soros (son of George Soros), Human Rights Watch director Kenneth Roth, economist Paul Krugman, former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, Black Lives Matter co-founder Alicia Garza, Ivanka Trump, and former U.S. Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii).
• Legacy media: CNN medical analyst Leana Wen, CNN chief medical correspondent Sanjay Gupta, Twitter personality Eric Feigl-Ding, New York Times financial columnist Andrew Ross Sorkin, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, ABC News commentator George Stephanopoulos, Fox CEO and News Corp co-chair Lachlan Murdoch, Bloomberg columnist Justin Fox, and CNN commentator Anderson Cooper.
• Technology and social media: Microsoft founder Bill Gates, former Microsoft CEO Steven Ballmer, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page, Tesla and SpaceX founder Elon Musk, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel, eBay co-founder Pierre Omidyar, Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg, Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, and Pfizer VP Vasudha Vats.

So how does this all tie together? How does reading and listening to the pronouncements of Klaus Schwab and his WEF organization help make sense out of the otherwise nonsensical? What is the underlying answer to the big “how” and “why” questions?

In August 2021, German author, journalist, International Monetary Fund and financial expert Ernst Wolff provided his explanation and hypotheses in a seminal lecture which many find useful as they try to make sense out of all that we have experienced and continue to find ourselves having to adapt to. The following is English language translation of the lecture, which was provided in German. Whether you agree or disagree, I suggest that his insights deserve consideration. I always recommend that you do your own thinking, and some may dismiss his thoughts as conspiracy theories, but this presentation certainly provides plenty to think about.

***

August 2021 presentation given by Ernst Wolff

The American president Franklin Delano Roosevelt, once said:

“Nothing happens accidentally in politics, and when something happens, you can bet on it that it was exactly planned that way.”

When one looks at what happened in the last year and a half, then these words are especially alarming.

Can it really be the case, that everything that we’ve experienced was planned?

I’ll say one thing right away. I can’t produce any evidence for such a plan, in the form of verified documents, but after studying this topic in detail for 18 months, I must say that there is an impressive number of signs and indications pointing in exactly this direction.

It is this and the consequences thereof that I want to talk about today. The current situation we find ourselves in is unique in the history of mankind. Never before has the whole world been thrown under the rule of this type of coercive regime as now in our time, and never have so many measures been taken which at first glance appear so unintelligible, partly so nonsensical, and in many cases so contradictory.

Officially, this is about the most serious health crisis in living memory, but the measures being used against this have not improved the situation but continuously made things worse. Every doctor today can confirm the health condition of people, the majority of people, is worse than before the crisis, and even from the point of view of those who ordered the measures we are faced with a shamble. The allegedly threatening 4th wave, and the announcement of the need for 3rd, 4th and 5th vaccinations, show that the purpose of the measures up to now, namely preventing the illness, has failed completely.

But that is not all by far.

As a consequence of the lockdowns up to now, we have a severe global economic crisis to manage.

Worldwide production hangs in complete disarray. Global logistics is on the floor, supply chains are broken, harvests are being lost, food supply bottlenecks, and on top of this a scarcity for a large part of the economy of essential semi-conductors. But also, in this we are seeing the problems are not being addressed and solved, but multiplied and magnified, via the application of further measures, and the constant threats of new restrictions.

The most recent example, in China, a port freight terminal, the 3rd largest in the world, has been closed down due to a single positive test from a worker there. Or, take New Zealand, where in all seriousness during the last week, 5 million people were put in lockdown for 3 days, because a single 58-year-old had a positive test.

A further crisis is affecting the small to medium business sector, which by a long way provides the most jobs worldwide and additionally, supplies the largest share of tax revenues. The Mittelstand (small to medium industry sector), is being driven from week-to-week further to the wall, through the incessant uncertainty and new regulations, and has never before been stuck in such a deep crisis as today.

But that is not all.

We are experiencing at present, a brutally increasing worldwide inflation, especially for raw materials, with produce prices and with food products. But also, here, nothing is being done to alleviate the situation. But rather the opposite. The flood of money printing continues, and will even be further increased. Countries and central banks, have, since the start of the crisis, thrown in almost USD 20 trillion into the worldwide monetary system. Without any end in sight! And the International Monetary Fund, as the most powerful financial organization in the world will give out next Monday, with USD 650 billion, the largest amount ever of its own currency under special withdrawing rights.

And the situation in society is no better.

Just one example.

In the USA, the strongest economy in the world, almost 4 million people are threatened with eviction because they cannot pay their rent or cannot cover their mortgage costs. And more than ten times as many, in the USA, note in the richest country in the world, are not in a position to feed themselves from their own income, and that, which the intentional destruction of the economy and the rising inflation have not managed to accomplish, politicians have managed to do.

A country wide fracture of the population as we have never witnessed before, and now, on top of this come vicious measures as the crowning of the whole thing. The premeditated change of power in Afghanistan managed by the USA. There, the Taliban have been deliberately handed military materials, to the value of $20 billion, a complete air force, with 11 airfield support bases available for use, which with absolute certainty will cause the next enormous flood wave of refugees. Why this, one asks oneself?

Why were worldwide measures taken which have caused one disaster after another and pushed the majority of humanity deeper towards the abyss, instead of lifting them out of their misery?

To answer this question, one has to ask two further questions, namely: Who has an interest in this global agenda, and who profits from this?

The answer to both questions is clear. The biggest profiteer of the current crisis, and the most important string puller behind the scenes, is the digital-financial complex. So, a type of special interest community, with the largest IT corporations and the largest asset managers of our time at its head.

The largest IT concerns, include: Apple, the Google parent company Alphabet, Amazon, Microsoft and Facebook. The market capitalization of these 5 companies alone at present amount to an incredible USA 9.1 trillion. Just for comparison, the gross GDP of Germany, France and Italy is USD 8.6 trillion.

Along with these digital concerns, we also have the large asset managers, namely, BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street and Fidelity. They are significantly involved in all IT companies, and not only this, these four companies alone, currently manage a total USD 220.6 trillion. Again, for comparison, the GDP of all 28 nations of the EU last year amounted to USD 15.7 trillion.

But it is not just the monstrous financial clout of these concerns which makes the digital-financial complex so powerful.

Let’s first take the IT corporations. They don’t just have an enormous power themselves. They also control hundreds of thousands of other companies, because they organize the digital systems of these other businesses, and in this way have a constant overview of their data streams. The IT industry is nothing other than a tumor, which, in the course of the past years has metastasized into all other branches of the economy, to make them dependent upon it and in the meantime to completely dominate them.

And it is not any different with the asset managers They are involved in every large company in the world, and able to influence every popular brand in the world. The largest of them, BlackRock, supplies with the more than 40 years old data analysis system “Aladdin Data Cloud”, the greatest fund and financial information the world has ever seen. And in the background, BlackRock uses this knowledge, to advise the largest central banks in the world, the Federal Reserve and the EZB (European Central Bank). Through the huge information advantage which BlackRock has, it is very clear who is dependent upon whom.

So, this has to do with a unique historic mix, of raw financial power and the discretionary power over an unimaginable huge data pool. This combination allowed these corporations to make a business upswing, since the beginning of the crisis as never before.

And not only that. Their advantage is accelerating continuously. Alone, in the last quarter of this year, April, May and June, these companies have made the largest profits in their whole history and also, in view of these facts, there’s not much left to the imagination.

And to come to the conclusion, it is this digital-financial complex which is a global power center which drives everything.

The digital-financial complex stands far above all governments, and is ready at all times to bring every government cabinet in the world to its knees and make it compliant.

One must wonder, however, all the more about the methods introduced by the digital-financial complex since the start of the crisis. Because it seems almost as if, as if it is undermining the very system from which it benefits.

Here are a few examples:

If the digital-financial complex destroys small to medium businesses, then really it is destroying its own livelihood, because, s we just heard, the small to medium business sector (Mittlestand) pays the greatest share of taxes revenues and creates the most jobs, and when inflation increases that also hurts the digital-financial complex, and when it destroys social peace through increasing inequality, then it also destroys those who it makes its business from.

All these are valid objections. But they miss the reality.

Namely, this is how it works.

The digital-financial complex has no other choice other than to do what it does at present. What we currently experience is namely, is not something which is a formulated written agenda with which it will accumulate yet more money and power and then sit back to enjoy the fruits of its labors. What we are experiencing at this time is a gigantic act of desperation, probably the biggest that has ever occurred in the whole history of mankind.

The cause of this act of desperation, is that the system to which the digital-financial system owes its existence, can no longer be kept alive with the previous business model. It was very close to its demise already during the world financial crisis of 2007-8. If governments back then had not mobilized huge amounts of tax money and the central banks instructed oodles of money to be created out of nothing the system would have collapsed there and then.

But salvation was only temporary.

The amounts of money had to be continuously increased over a period of 12 years and the interest rates had to be reduced several times. So, the system was made ever more unstable. In the long term that could not go well. And last year it was to the point that the next collapse was threatening. And this collapse has been postponed through a final feat of strength namely the reduction of interest rates to zero and the injection of billions and billions for one final time.

With that however, a qualitatively new situation has come about. A further deferral would require interest rates to be dropped into the minus range, and this would destroy the foundation of the current banking system. Banks cannot operate long-term with negative interest rates. This means that a further deferral with the previously used approach will not be possible. In the present situation one can inject billions and billions into the system at maximum one more time. However, with the result that the already strongly growing rate of inflation will further overhead and will be driven into hyperinflation.

The situation in which the digital-financial complex finds itself is between the alternatives of, on one side the final collapse and hyper-inflation on the other side. So, the total loss of value of money. That means, historically we’ve arrived at a point in which the digital-financial complex, in the framework of the existing system, only still has the choice between two various forms of collapse.

So, what can they do?

Quite clearly, they have, in this situation, chosen to install a new system and a double strategy. On one side, in the background and away from public view, they are preparing a new system. And on the other side, they are using the end phase of the present dying system, to plunder it using all tricks at their disposal. This is exactly what we’ve seen since March 2020. The quite deliberate and premeditated destruction of the world economy, for the exclusive expansion of the digital-financial complex, with simultaneous preparation via the central banks of a new system and in collaboration with the IT corporations. And we already know how this system will look. It is about the complete removal of cash and banks in their previous form, and the introduction of digital money from central banks. The end goal as it appears, is that we will all have just a single account through which all transactions run. And this account will not reside in a business or high-street bank but with the central bank.

The background to this plan is the following: Digital central bank money is programmable, and because central banks can create unlimited money out of nothing, one can indeed operate in this way with negative interest rates without having to destroy the system. But that is furthermore, not the only feature of digital central bank money. It will allow governments to watch over all transactions made.

To assign us various tax rates and impose upon us individual fines. Governments can also place an expiry limit on a part of our money and require that we spend certain amounts within certain time periods. But it can also require the money to be used for specific purposes, and require that specific amounts be paid only for certain products, or that they be sourced only from certain regions. Above all, government will be in the position to cancel our ability to make all transactions with a single mouse click, and so, shut us down financially. Digital central bank money would be the most efficient tax collection method for society that has ever occurred in the whole history of man, and with that, nothing more and nothing less than the realization of an all-encompassing dictatorship brought about through money.

However, the whole thing has a huge snag. Namely, the expected resistance from the public. One can be very certain that a large proportion of people won’t accept this form of disenfranchisement. So, the introduction of digital central bank money would be expected to produce huge social unrest. And it is exactly this problem that the digital-financial complex has quite obviously thought about, to reverse the process of introducing this (digital) currency. So, they won’t try to make this switch to digital currency gradually, but and thereby risking huge resistance will do it exactly the other way around. They will drive society into chaos, in order to present the introduction of digital central bank money as the solution to all problems. Namely, in the form of a Universal Basic Income (UBI).

For anyone who thinks this is a “conspiracy theory” pulled out of the air, I recommend that you once again, take a close look at everything we’ve experience in the past 18 months. Under the pretext of fighting an illness devastating and irreparable damages have been done to health, economy and finances, whose full effects are only beginning to show up so far in traces. But at the same time, day by day work is being done to increase these damages, and in parallel, the social rift in society is being systematically deepened, by constantly driving new wedges between people. All of this leades us purposefully in one single direction, social unrest to the point of a civil war, and indeed, worldwide. Exactly that, according to all available information I have, is what is wanted (by the other side).

We are experiencing today is that by using all conceivable means, one is trying to create the maximum social chaos, and then at the high point of this chaos, bring in a panacea with the name “Universal Basic Income”, and in this way effect a change, from maximum chaos to maximum control.

By the way, there is a second reason why, from the perspective of these power brokers UBI must come. We are sitting right in the middle of the 4th Industrial Revolution, and expect, in the period ahead of us, the loss of millions and millions of jobs, due to the introduction of Artificial Intelligence.

This means, millions of consumers will disappear. The demand for consumer goods will increasingly collapse and because the current economic system is consumer driven, one must, to maintain life, break through this downward spiral. And that can only happen, if all these unemployed consumers who cannot find work are provided with an income.

We see that what has happened in the last 18 months and what is still going on is obviously all following a (prepared) plan. And the name of this plan is: “Deconstruction of the present economic system to the benefit of elites”. The generation of the maximum economic and social chaos and the establishment of a new system, under the guise of wanting to provide humanitarian help. This plan is however available to read and that is in both books about the Fourth Industrial Revolution and The Great Reset, by Klaus Schwab, whose World Economic Forum (WEF) plays a key role in this whole agenda.

The WEF has succeeded over the past 50 years to become the most important control center of the digital-financial complex. First of all, business leaders were brought together, then later all politicians, and still later, media creators, and in commanding roles, and prominent figure all networking with one another.

Additionally, in the 90’s, people were subjected to a targeted training program. We know today that since 1992 the “Global Leaders of Tomorrow” and since 2005 the “Young Global Leaders” always received a systematic onboarding schooling from the WEF, and it is exactly these same people who right now, occupy positions of political power and influence. Whether it is Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos or Mark Zuckerberg from the IT area. Whether it is CEO Larry Rink of BlackRock, head of the IMF Kristalina Georgieva, or former head of the Bank of England Mark Carney from the finance sector. Or Emanuel Macron, Sebastien Kurz, or Angela Merkel from politics. All of these people have been either trained by the WEF or they sit on its leadership board.

And it is not just the 1300 members, of this closely networked elite leader group who pull the strings worldwide. Since 2012, there is also a further ten thousand under 30-year-olds, so-called “Global Shapers” who have joined the club and who have also been brought together by the WEF and in its sense, exert influence on the course of world events. And we know how these events should look. To see this, I recommend looking into the work of WEF founder, Klaus Schwab.

For those who still cannot believe that everything we have experienced follows a plan, they should check the publishing date of Schwab’s work, “The Great Reset”. This book appeared on 20th June 2020, not even 4 months after the worldwide lockdown and already gives exact instructions on how one should use Covid-19 in order to put it darkly creatively destroy the world and build up a new world in the image of the man he (Schwab) has drawn up, which is reminiscent of the darkest times of national socialism.

I know that all of this sounds shocking, like a carefully prepared apocalypse. Indeed, the agenda is being followed here is obviously not only planned but also, can hardly be surpassed in terms of evilness and deceitfulness. Who would ever have suspected that under the guise of protecting mankind from the effects of a disease, the world economy would be driven to a total collapse? To take away: people’s freedom to travel, their rights of association and free speech, their freedom to express opinions, and in addition, to condemn more than 100 million people to starvation, and all this allegedly “for their own protection”!

And who would have thought that an unapologetic eugenicist named Klaus Schwab would be put in a position to not only spread worldwide his gruesome vision of a melding of the human being with machine intelligence (AI), but also to have this vision driven forward by ten thousand helpers. All of these are deeply destructive developments with which we are now living and having to suffer under, and their details are enough to freeze the blood in the veins of any normal thinking and feeling person.

But now I am coming to the most important message that I have to give today.

The whole thing also has another side to it. A quite different side and above all one which gives us a huge boost and a great amount of power for our future work.

The plan of the elites, the visions of Klaus Schwab, are namely, are condemned to fail, and this is for several reasons, the most important is that the narrative of a deadly virus which is an existential threat to humanity cannot be sustained in the long run, we already see how the pack of lies is collapsing in on itself from all sides.

We see how, in efforts to legitimize it, resort is made to ever more absurd arguments and rabid defamation. It is important to recognize here, that the vehemence the media are displaying these days, testifies not to their strength but to their weakness. Whoever, with. Ever more emphasis, spreads ever more grotesque lies, like the pandemic of the unvaccinated, who declares healthy people public enemy number one, and whoever on the basis of a single illness or test “case”, locks down whole countries, they are doing this only because they have run out of arguments and in desperation are blindly lashing out.

Abraham Lincoln once said “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all the people all of the time.”

Exactly that, the truth will appear in our time, and this naturally has an enormous meaning for us, because ironically, it opens up for us that which Klaus Schwab has termed “ a unique window of opportunity”, however, in exactly the reverse dynamic (to what he intended).

Namely, that via the collapsing narrative, the credibility of those who have led us into this situation is being buried by the day, and because of that, a unique window of opportunity has opened for all of us for a vast and comprehensive campaign of enlightenment. The objective conditions to enlighten others about the real background to the alleged “pandemic”, about the real balance of power in the world, and the real threats we face, have never been as good as now and they are getting better day by day because the other side are getting entangled in their increasingly unbelievable lies and even if the digital-financial complex should succeed in introducing the new currency that would also not be the end of the world. Digital central bank money can, namely only function as the basis of a comprehensive coercive system. One will always introduce new price controls, continuously increase the Universal Basic Income and create permanent inflation with emphatic pressure, which in turn will lead to a continuous impoverishment of the population and constant conflict with the state and the authorities.

What we need to understand is the following:

Without any doubt, we stand before turbulent and also dangerous times, but we hold an historic trump card in our hands. It consists in the fact that the other side does not act according to the rules of reason but strives out of motives of greed and power and therefore, cannot do anything other than bring itself into ever greater difficulties. We should use exactly that (weakness) and always keep in view, that the other side likes more money, more property and additionally, to have available all the weapons in the world. But their power is not based on their money, nor on their possessions or their weapons but relies solely upon one factor: And that is the ignorance of the majority of people. i.e., the majority doesn’t understand the evil game that this minority are playing with them.

As terrible as everything is that the digital-financial complex and it’s helpers have served up in the past 18 months, and still continue to serve up, it has put itself in a situation which it cannot get out of and in which, out of despair it must cross ever more “red lines.”

This means for all of us, that in this exceptional situation we should quite simply, keep the peace, consistently expose all the lies, and show people bit by bit, why, and by whom, they are being deceived.

When we do that, and in doing so reflect on the strength of our arguments, then, we can not only solve the current problem, but possibly, achieve something much bigger, namely, use one of the deepest crises of humanity to turn around the direction of human history, and so, open the door to a new (and better) era.

Thank you.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Featured image is from OffGuardian

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

U.S. pundits and strategic experts seem blissfully unaware of how close we all are to being fried in a nuclear strike by Russia. (Fair Labeling: if you are simply looking for yet another reason to demonize Putin, rather than to understand where he is coming from, save time and read no further.)

Here’s the thing: the Russians have good reason to be on hair-trigger alert. Their early-warning radar system is so inadequate that there are situations (including those involving innocent rocket launches) under which Russian President Putin would have only a few minutes – if that – to decide whether or not to launch nuclear missiles to destroy the rest of the world – on the suspicion that Russia was under nuclear attack.

“If that”? Yes, launch-to-target time is now so short that it is altogether likely that the authority to launch nuclear weapons is now vested in subordinate commanders “in the field,” so to speak. Readers of Daniel Ellsberg’s Doomsday Machine are aware of how the US actually devolved this authority during the days of the first cold war. I, for one, was shocked to learn that. Worse: today the subordinate commanders might be non-commissioned computers.

Russia, of course, is not about to admit that its early-warning system is far inferior to the US’s world-wide, satellite-based capability. But such is the case. The implications could not be more serious.

This came to mind today as former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said the Kremlin would never allow the destruction of Russia. He warned, however, that if Washington did achieve what he described as its destructive aims, the world could face a dystopian crisis that would end in a “big nuclear explosion.”

President Putin addressed this issue four years ago, shortly after unveiling Russia’s new nuclear arsenal, including hypersonic missiles and other highly advanced weapons. Commenting on nuclear war, Putin told an interviewer:

“Certainly, it would be a global disaster for humanity; a disaster for the entire world.” He added that “as a citizen of Russia and the head of the Russian state I must ask myself: Why would we want a world without Russia?”

Use Them or Lose Them

Putin went on to say that, despite the disastrous consequences, Russia would be forced to defend itself using all available means, if its very existence were put at stake:

“A decision on the use of nuclear weapons may only be taken if our ballistic missile attack warning system not only detects a launch, but also predicts that the warheads would hit Russian territory. This is called a retaliation strike.”

That’s the rub. Some radar “detects” and “predicts,” and we’re all toast – or freedom fries. While Russia now has in its operation inventory sophisticated weaponry that can defeat any traditional Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) defense, it lags the US in the capability for early warning.

Think about it. Which should you fear more: getting fried on purpose, or getting fried by mistake? Macabre. Are not these choices incredibly stupid for rational human beings? If forced to choose, though, I think I’d resent much more getting fried by “Opps, pardon our mistake”. Please read what follows and ask yourself whether an immediate ceasefire is needed in Ukraine, or whether those who want to risk war with Russia should be given their head.

Russia: Limited Early-Warning Coverage

The US’s satellite “global situational awareness” alert system enables it to detect immediately the launch and location of a ballistic missile anywhere on the planet, including the sea. Russia lacks that worldwide capability. If this technical shortcoming is not taken into account (and there are signs that the Pentagon is paying it no heed), we could all suddenly be very dead – or “mostly dead” (to quote Billy Christal in The Princess Bride). (Ted Postol spelled this out in some detail at a Committee for the Republic virtual salon on March 17.

Postol, a retired MIT professor of physics and senior Pentagon adviser, provided a brief case study, which I summarize below:

On Jan. 25, 1995, Russian generals were focused on a rocket that was launched from Norway and detected by their automatic-alarm radar. Could this be the opening volley of a large-scale nuclear attack including sea-launched ballistic missiles? Given Russia’s inability to detect missile launches from submarines at sea, those generals could not rule out the possibility that Russia was already under attack by nuclear-armed Trident submarines.

A saving grace in 1995 was that those same generals had reliable intelligence that US ICBMs were not about to attack. At least equally important, in 1995 relations between Russia and the US were on a relatively even keel. Now? Not so much.

Postol added the following to indicate Russia’s redoubled concern over its early warning deficiency: the US has now increased the overall killing power of US ballistic missile forces by a factor of between two or three. This is exactly the kind of capability that a nuclear-armed state would build if it wanted to have the capacity to fight and “win” a nuclear war by a disarming first-strike.

The rocket from Norway? Scientists launched it to study the Northern Lights, but apparently no one had thought to tell the Russians.

Aside from asking the Norwegians to forewarn the Russians next time, what else can be done? The Washington can stop making relations still more tense over Ukraine. The Pentagon may boast about its formidable offensive strategic capabilities, but it has no way to protect us from a Russian nuclear attack. And if a false alert occurs a la 1995, this time sans the “saving grace” of a decent bilateral relationship with Russia, we could all end up as human fries. It should give us zero consolation to know that most Russians would too.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. His 27-year career as a CIA analyst includes serving as Chief of the Soviet Foreign Policy Branch and preparer/briefer of the President’s Daily Brief. He is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

---

“Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War” 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-5-3
Year: 2012
Pages: 102

PDF Edition:  $6.50 (sent directly to your email account!)

Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which hosts the critically acclaimed website www.globalresearch.ca . He is a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.

Reviews

“This book is a ‘must’ resource – a richly documented and systematic diagnosis of the supremely pathological geo-strategic planning of US wars since ‘9-11’ against non-nuclear countries to seize their oil fields and resources under cover of ‘freedom and democracy’.”
–John McMurtry, Professor of Philosophy, Guelph University

“In a world where engineered, pre-emptive, or more fashionably “humanitarian” wars of aggression have become the norm, this challenging book may be our final wake-up call.”
-Denis Halliday, Former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations

Michel Chossudovsky exposes the insanity of our privatized war machine. Iran is being targeted with nuclear weapons as part of a war agenda built on distortions and lies for the purpose of private profit. The real aims are oil, financial hegemony and global control. The price could be nuclear holocaust. When weapons become the hottest export of the world’s only superpower, and diplomats work as salesmen for the defense industry, the whole world is recklessly endangered. If we must have a military, it belongs entirely in the public sector. No one should profit from mass death and destruction.
–Ellen Brown, author of ‘Web of Debt’ and president of the Public Banking Institute  

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Last week I was embedded with the Russian army and visited two towns in southeastern Ukraine. The first town was called Henichesk, a port city along the Sea of Azov in Kherson Oblast (province) of southern Ukraine, bordering on Crimea.

The Russian army, patrolling the city, went with us—the embedded journalists—for protection. But actually the protection was not really needed; the people in Henichesk, at least the majority with whom I spoke, were very happy that the Russian army was there.

The people that I spoke to all said the same thing: They felt protected from the criminal gangs, with their Nazi ideology, who raged the towns. They in turn hoped that Ukraine will prosper again.

Source: wikipedia.org

Since the coup d’état of 2014, the economy of Ukraine has become very bad, according to many citizens in Henichesk.

I could see that people were standing in line to get money from ATM machines outside the banks, money which was barely there.

At the market, the food was scarce. The Russian army is providing humanitarian aid, which they do in every village and town, liberated from these criminal gangs. This is how many Ukrainians call them.

Sonja Vandenende with Henichesk resident. [Photo courtesy of Sonja Vandenende]

Numerous villagers in Henichesk told me that, as the Russians entered their town, they left everything intact. I heard this stated many times. No damage, no dead, no wounded. Most people, they said, are happy that the Russians were there.

The town of Henichesk was undamaged after the Russian army came. People were rushing on the streets to do their shopping or just talking and socializing on the street. The population was very diverse. It included ethnic Russians, Ukrainians and Tatars. They have churches and mosques.

According to residents, before the 2014 coup d’état,^[1] the people lived in harmony. Many Tatars originating from Crimea live in Henichesk. They have been allowed to go back to Crimea since Vladimir Putin became Russia’s president.

Photo courtesy of Sonja Vandenende

Propaganda has been spread on the Wikipedia page of Henichesk, stating the following:

“On 24 February 2022, Henichesk was captured by the Russian Army in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. It was where the famous incident occurred where an old woman confronted Russian soldiers and said ‘Put sunflower seeds in your pockets so they grow on Ukraine soil when you die,’ as well as the death of Vitalii Shakun blowing up a bridge to stop their advance.”

Indeed, Shakun tried to blow up the bridge connecting Crimea with southern Ukraine. But they neglect to say that he was not from southern Ukraine, but from Lviv, in the western part of Ukraine. He was also a combat engineer with the Ukrainian Army. The damage his explosives caused to the bridge was actually minor and the bridge is still passable. It is a pity generally that boys (Shakun was born in 1996) should die for a false ideology, by blowing up a bridge without success.

Fact Versus Fiction

Western propaganda claims that the Russian army is besieging towns and that the population is starving. From my observation, the latter was not true in Henichesk or in the next town called Melitopol, which I also visited (to be discussed in a future article).^[2]

The Western countries are pouring in weapons, most of them old Soviet weapons into Ukraine to shoot at the “evil Russians,” and imposing sanctions. Nothing positive is being done to help the long suffering people of Ukraine.

Photo courtesy of Sonja Vandenende

Waiting for humanitarian aid being distributed by the Russian army. [Photo courtesy of Sonja Vandenende]

Ukraine is left by itself to bleed.

Western countries have no interest in its economy or people, because Ukrainian people have many similarities with their “brother” countries—Russia and Belarus—and would naturally be aligned with them.

They share the same culture, language, and history of being invaded by the Nazis in World War II.

The West is only interested in benefits to their own economies.

Many buildings and factories are left to “rot” away and money for infrastructure was never there. Ukraine has been “bleeding” since 2014 and no one in the West has cared.

Ukraine is the breadbasket of Europe and the largest producer of sunflower oil, while Russia is the largest producer of fertilizer necessary for growing crops. However, with the war, production will be affected and the whole world economy may suffer. But the leaders in the West, who helped provoke the war, do not care—the Ukrainian people to them are pawns in a larger geopolitical game that will cause potential disaster for all humanity.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Sonja is a freelance journalist from the Netherlands who has written about Syria, the Middle East, and Russia among other topics. Sonja can be reached at: [email protected].

Notes

1. In February 2014, the U.S. government supported an insurrection against the legally elected government of Viktor Yanukovych, a pro-Russian leader who spurned an IMF structural adjustment program that would have been terrible for Ukraine. Victoria Nuland famously was photographed handing out cookies to the demonstrators, many of whom worshipped World War II Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera. For more details on these events, see Chris Kaspar de Ploeg, Ukraine in the Crossfire (Atlanta: Clarity Press, 2019).

2. These observations correlate with other eyewitness accounts. The Grayzone Project recently ran an important article pointing to misinformation about the destruction of the Mariupol theater, showing how the Azov Battalion was likely responsible for the destruction.

Featured image: Russian troops in Henichesk. [Photo courtesy of Sonja Vandenende]

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

It’s a tragedy in the making. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is reprehensible and should never have happened, but it is a fact that Russian President Vladimir Putin for several years had been warning Washington and its allies of an impending danger, that NATO expansion to its borders could lead to military confrontation. 

Meanwhile, the Western media is painting a picture of Ukraine as a democracy with a president by the name of Volodymyr Zelenskyy who is a brave soul fighting for freedom and democracy, a small country against the Russian bear, a modern version of David vs. Goliath.

Russia, the bully picking on an innocent Ukraine.  But what does the world know about Ukraine? 

The Western media has kept us in the Dark. Most Americans do not know about Ukraine’s politics or its history.

Do Americans, Europeans and others around the world know the truth about Ukraine and their history of Nazi ideology?

According to The Times of Israel ‘Hundreds in Ukraine attend marches celebrating Nazi SS soldiers’ reported on a Nazi celebration in 2021 in Ukraine’s city of Kyiv:

Hundreds of Ukrainians attended marches celebrating Nazi SS soldiers, including the first such event in Kyiv.  The so-called Embroidery March took place in the capital on April 28, the 78th anniversary of the establishment of the 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS, also known as the 1st Galician. It was a force set up under German occupation auspices comprised of ethnic Ukrainian and German volunteers and conscripts. The marchers held banners displaying the unit’s symbol.

The Kyiv march by about 300 people was an import from the western city of Lviv, which for several years has hosted such events. A day earlier, hundreds attended a larger Embroidery March there.  Ukraine has a large minority of ethnic Russians, who oppose the glorification of Nazi collaborators. Such actions were taboo in Ukraine until the early 2000s, when nationalists demanded and obtained state recognition for collaborators as heroes for their actions against the Soviet Union, which dominated Ukraine until 1991

The Father of Nazi Ideology in Ukraine: Stepan Bandera

His name was Stepan Bandera, considered a Ukrainian hero who collaborated with the Nazis during World War II and who was the leader of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN/B), an extreme far-right organization.  Bandera was born to a Greek-Catholic family in Galicia which was part of the Austro-Hungarian empire, but later in life he became a radical Ukrainian nationalist after his country of birth had collapsed thus becoming the West Ukrainian People’s Republic, but then it became part of Poland after the Polish-Ukrainian war of 1918-1919.

In 1934, Bandera who was very angry with the new geopolitical development had organized the assassination of Poland’s Minister of the Interior, Bronislaw Pieracki.

Bandera was arrested for the crime, found guilty and sentenced to death but his conviction was later commuted to a life sentence.

In 1939, following the German–Soviet invasion of Poland also known as the September Campaign divided the country under the German-Soviet Frontier Treaty.  Soon after, Bandera was released from prison and moved to Kraków, Poland which was already occupied by the Nazis.

Bandera was convinced that working with the Nazis would allow him to establish his own government in Ukraine leading to an independent nation that would be allied with the Nazis and free from Soviet occupation.  It was well-known that the Nazis, Bandera and his lieutenants from his organization blamed Jews for establishing communism in Ukraine as a statement from Bandera at the time read that

“The Jews of the Soviet Union are the most loyal supporters of the Bolshevik Regime and the vanguard of Muscovite imperialism in the Ukraine.”

Then in June 1941, the Nazis invaded the USSR and occupied the East Galician capital of Lvov and this was where the OUN/B and the National-Socialist Greater Germany under Adolf Hitler collaborated and launched ‘pogroms’ of genocide against jews and poles including men, women and children of all ages over the duration of the war.

Then the relationship between the Nazis and the Bandera faction got complicated.  During the war, a declaration of independence or what is known as the Act of Restoration of the Ukrainian State was announced in homage to Bandera by his own lieutenants.

At the same time, the declaration for an independent Ukraine became a serious concern for the Nazi regime since they wanted Ukraine under their sphere of influence.  So, the alliance between the Ukrainian nationalists and the Nazis became problematic.

On September 15^th, 1941, the Gestapo began to arrest its leaders including Bandera and Yaroslav Stetsko who was the prime minister of the Ukrainian National government for refusing to dismiss the Act of Renewal of Ukrainian statehood.

By January 1942, Bandera found himself in the Sachsenhausen concentration camp for high-profile political prisoners.

In 1944, the Soviets and allied forces advanced on Nazi-occupied territories, so the Nazis recruited Bandera and Stetsko to create diversions to help destroy Soviet forces who were gaining ground.

Bandera who was still the leader of the OUN/B moved to West Germany with his family and continued to work with anti-communist organizations or we can say the fascists for many years to come such as the Ukrainian Supreme Liberation Council and the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations.

In 1959, Bandera was poisoned by cyanide gas and two years later, the German judiciary claimed that the KGB was behind his assassination.  In 2022, Bandera remains a hero to the neo-Nazis in Ukraine.  The US and the European Union support Ukraine who happens to be one of the most corrupt countries in the world with proven human rights abuses that has strong ties to neo-Nazis who admire Adolf Hitler and Stepan Bandera, now if that is not hypocrisy, I don’t know what is.

The CIA and the Nazis: A Match Made in Hell  

According to author and journalist Wayne Madsen in 2016 entitled: ‘CIA: Undermining and Nazifying Ukraine Since 1953’ 

“the recent declassification of over 3800 documents by the Central Intelligence Agency provides detailed proof that since 1953 the CIA operated two major programs intent on not only destabilizing Ukraine but Nazifying it with followers of the World War II Ukrainian Nazi leader Stepan Bandera.”

Nazism has been in existence in Ukraine for a long-time under the CIA’s Project AERODYNAMIC which was “to provide for the exploitation and expansion of the anti-Soviet Ukrainian resistance movement for cold war and hot war purposes” it included several groups including the Ukrainian Supreme Council of Liberation (UBVR) and its Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), the Foreign. Representation of the Ukrainian Supreme Council of Liberation (ZPUHVR) in Western Europe and the United States, and other organizations such as OUN/B will be utilized.

We can say that for close to 70 years, the CIA’s operation of Nazifying Ukraine had been a success.

However, the earlier version of Project AERODYNAMIC was intended to destabilize Ukraine with exiled Ukrainians who were trained by the CIA operating inside Soviet-Ukrainian territories.  

The CIA coordinated airdrops of communications, supplies, weapons and ammunition to its operatives inside Ukrainian territory who were trained in West Germany with the US Army’s Foreign Intelligence Political and Psychological (FI-PP) unit.  In other words, the CIA is Guilty as charged for helping cultivate the neo-Nazis or what we can call the ‘fascists’ in Ukraine in order to fight the communists.

Today, far-right neo-Nazi groups are a serious problem for the Ukrainian people since many of these extremists are embedded in various levels of the Ukrainian government including members from the notorious Azov and Aidar Battalions.

Both groups were also involved in the 2014 Maidan coup that overthrew pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych, a coup that was backed by the US and the European Union.

Other far-right neo-Nazi groups who were also involved in the Maidan coup was the Right Sector and the Svoboda Party.  In other words, the US and its European allies have created a monster and it will only get worse for the people in Ukraine in the years to come.

Recently, a Ukrainian television journalist by the name of Fahruddin Sharafmal quoted Adolf Eichmann, a Nazi war criminal on live TV:

Click here to watch the video.

“And Given Russia calls us Nazis, Fascists anyway – I will allow myself to quote Adolf Eichmann who said that in order to destroy a nation, it is imperative to first destroy their children because if you kill parents – these children grow up and seek revenge, but if you kill children – they never grow up and the nation dies out.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Timothy Alexander Guzman writes on his own blog site, Silent Crow News, where this article was originally published. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from SCN

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Gen. Mark A. Milley, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have tried to set up phone calls with Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and Gen. Valery Gerasimov but the Russians “have so far declined to engage,” said Pentagon spokesman John Kirby in a statement Wednesday, March 23.

“A nightmare scenario would be a Russian missile or attack aircraft that destroys a U.S. command post across the Polish-Ukrainian border,” James Stavridis, a retired admiral who served as the Supreme Allied Commander at NATO from 2009 to 2013, told the Washington Post [1]. “A local commander might respond immediately, thinking the event was a precursor to a wider attack. This could lead to rapid and irreversible escalation, to include potential use of nuclear weapons.”

According to a CNN report [2] detailing a rare face-to-face meeting between Russian and US military officials last week, the US believes that the refusal for high-level meetings is due to Kremlin worries that the encounters would show them to be vulnerable if they allowed such meetings, because it risks a tacit admission that an abnormal situation exists, according to the readout of the meeting.

Though the assumption of vulnerability appears misconceived considering while the Pentagon has allegedly attempted to maintain high-level contacts with Russian counterparts, Secretary of State Antony Blinken has not attempted any conversations with his counterpart, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, since the start of the conflict last month.

The real reason the Russian military leadership has allegedly shunned maintaining high-level contacts with the Pentagon’s top brass appears to be the duplicitous and treacherous role played by the transatlantic NATO alliance of significantly escalating the conflict by substantially increasing the NATO military footprint in Eastern Europe along Russia’s western flank, publicly providing billions of dollars’ worth lethal weapons to Ukraine’s security forces and allied neo-Nazi militias while asininely claiming to be “peacemakers” extending chivalrous courtesies to the arch-rival.

Ahead of the NATO summit attended by President Biden Thursday, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg announced the transatlantic military alliance would double the number of battlegroups it had deployed in Eastern Europe.

“The first step is the deployment of four new NATO battlegroups in Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, and Slovakia, along with our existing forces in the Baltic countries and Poland,” Stoltenberg said. “This means that we will have eight multinational NATO battlegroups all along the eastern flank, from the Baltic to the Black Sea.”

NATO issued a statement [3] after Thursday’s emergency summit attended by Joe Biden and European leaders:

“In response to Russia’s actions, we have activated NATO’s defense plans, deployed elements of the NATO Response Force, and placed 40,000 troops on our eastern flank, along with significant air and naval assets, under direct NATO command supported by Allies’ national deployments. We are also establishing four additional multinational battlegroups in Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, and Slovakia.”

Last week, President Biden announced an unprecedented package of $1 billion in military assistance to Ukraine in addition to $350 million previously pledged which was disbursed within days of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24. The new package includes 800 Stinger anti-aircraft systems, 2,000 anti-armor Javelins, 1,000 light anti-armor weapons, 6,000 AT-4 anti-armor systems and 100 Switchblade kamikaze drones.

Besides providing abundance of anti-aircraft and anti-armor munitions to Ukraine’s largely conscript military and allied irregular militias, a senior US administration official told Reuters [4] Washington and its allies were also working on providing anti-ship weapons to protect Ukraine’s coast. Ukrainian forces claimed on Thursday to have blown up a Russian landing ship in a Russian-occupied port.

Nonetheless, what must have exasperated Russia’s military leadership is a secret plan [5] for a “peacekeeping mission” involving 10,000 NATO troops from the member states surreptitiously occupying western Ukraine and imposing a limited no-fly zone over Lviv and rest of towns which is allegedly being prepared by the Polish government.

The plan is seemingly on hiatus due to a disagreement between Polish President Andrzej Duda and Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the deputy prime minister of Poland and the head of Law and Justice (PiS) Party. Duda wants Washington’s approval before going ahead, whereas Kaczynski appears desperate to obtain political mileage from the Ukraine crisis.

The prime ministers of Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovenia traveled via train to the embattled Ukrainian capital of Kyiv and met with President Volodymyr Zelensky on March 15 in a show of support for Ukraine. De facto leader of Poland, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, accompanied them. Speaking on the occasion, Kaczynski said:

“I think that it is necessary to have a peace mission—NATO, possibly some wider international structure—but a mission that will be able to defend itself, which will operate on Ukrainian territory.”

In response, Russian officials condemned Poland’s proposal to send NATO “peacekeeping forces” into Ukraine as a “very reckless and extremely dangerous” idea that would risk a full-scale war between the alliance and Moscow.

“This will be the direct clash between the Russian and NATO armed forces that everyone has not only tried to avoid but said should not take place in principle,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said.

Regarding how operational-level miscalculations could lead to all-out war between belligerents, it’s pertinent to recall that on February 7, 2018, US B-52 bombers and Apache helicopters struck a contingent of Syrian government troops and allied forces in Deir al-Zor province of eastern Syria that reportedly [6] killed and wounded scores of Russian military contractors working for the Russian private security firm, the Wagner Group.

The survivors described the bombing as an absolute massacre, and Moscow lost more Russian nationals in one day than it had lost during its entire military campaign in support of the Syrian government since September 2015.

Washington’s objective in striking Russian contractors was that the US-backed and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) – which is mainly comprised of Kurdish YPG militias – had reportedly handed over the control of some areas east of the Euphrates River to Deir al-Zor Military Council (DMC), which was the Arab-led component of SDF, and had relocated several battalions of Kurdish YPG militias to Afrin and along Syria’s northern border with Turkey in order to defend the Kurdish-held areas against the onslaught of the Turkish armed forces and allied Syrian militant proxies during Ankara’s “Operation Olive Branch” in Syria’s northwest that lasted from January to March 2018.

Syrian forces with the backing of Russian contractors took advantage of the opportunity and crossed the Euphrates River to capture an oil refinery located to the east of the Euphrates River in the Kurdish-held area of Deir al-Zor.

The US Air Force responded with full force, knowing well the ragtag Arab component of SDF – mainly comprised of local Arab tribesmen and mercenaries to make the Kurdish-led SDF appear more representative and inclusive in outlook – was simply not a match for the superior training and arms of the Syrian troops and Russian military contractors, consequently causing a carnage in which scores of Russian nationals lost their lives.

A month after the massacre of Russian military contractors in Syria, on March 4, 2018, Sergei Skripal, a Russian double agent working for the British foreign intelligence service, and his daughter Yulia were found unconscious on a public bench outside a shopping center in Salisbury. A few months later, in July 2018, a British woman, Dawn Sturgess, died after touching the container of the nerve agent that allegedly poisoned the Skripals.

In the case of the Skripals, Theresa May, then the prime minister of the United Kingdom, promptly accused Russia of attempted assassinations and the British government concluded that Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a Moscow-made, military-grade nerve agent, novichok.

Sergei Skripal was recruited by the British MI6 in 1995, and before his arrest in Russia in December 2004, he was alleged to have blown the cover of scores of Russian secret agents. He was released in a spy swap deal in 2010 and was allowed to settle in Salisbury. Both Sergei Skripal and his daughter have since recovered and were discharged from hospital in May 2018.

In the aftermath of the Salisbury poisonings in March 2018, the US, UK and several European nations expelled scores of Russian diplomats and Washington ordered the closure of the Russian consulate in Seattle.

In a retaliatory move, Russia also expelled a similar number of American, British and European diplomats, and ordered the closure of American consulate in Saint Petersburg. The number of American diplomatic personnel stationed in Russia drastically dropped from 1,200 before the escalation to 120, and the relations between Moscow and Western powers reached their lowest ebb since the break-up of the former Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War in December 1991.

Notwithstanding, five years following a potentially catastrophic incident that could’ve inundated Islamic State’s former capital Raqqa and many towns downstream Euphrates River in eastern Syria and caused more deaths than the deployment of any weapon of mass destruction, the New York Times reported in January [7] that at the height of US-led international coalition’s war against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, US B-52 bombers struck Tabqa Dam with 2,000-pound bombs, including at least one bunker-busting bomb that fortunately didn’t explode.

In March 2017, alternative media was abuzz with reports that the dam was about to collapse and entire civilian population downstream Euphrates River needed to be urgently evacuated to prevent the inevitable catastrophe. But Washington issued a gag order to the corporate media “not to sensationalize the issue.”

The explosive report noted that the dam was contested between the US-backed and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces, the Syrian government and the Islamic State. A firefight broke out in which SDF incurred heavy casualties. It was then that a top secret US special operations unit Task Force 9 called for airstrikes on the dam after repeated requests from the Kurdish leadership of the SDF.

“The explosions on March 26, 2017, knocked dam workers to the ground. A fire spread and crucial equipment failed. The flow of the Euphrates River suddenly had no way through, the reservoir began to rise and authorities used loudspeakers to warn people downstream to flee.

“The Islamic State group, the Syrian government and Russia blamed the United States, but the dam was on the US military’s ‘no-strike list’ of protected civilian sites, and the commander of the US offensive at the time, then-Lt. Gen. Stephen J. Townsend, said allegations of US involvement were based on ‘crazy reporting.’”

It’s worth noting that it was the same rogue Pentagon General Stephen J. Townsend, currently the commander of US AFRICOM and then the commander of Combined Joint Task Force (CJTF) – Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR) responsible for leading the war against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, whose “operational miscalculation” was responsible for the reckless confrontation an year later in February 2018 when US B-52 bombers struck Russian military contractors, killing and wounding scores, a tragic incident that brought two nuclear powers engaged in the Syrian conflict almost to the brink of a full-scale war.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Nauman Sadiq is an Islamabad-based geopolitical and national security analyst focused on geo-strategic affairs and hybrid warfare in the Af-Pak and Middle East regions. His domains of expertise include neocolonialism, military-industrial complex and petro-imperialism. He is a regular contributor of diligently researched investigative reports to Global Research.

Notes

[1] Top Russian military leaders repeatedly decline calls from US

[2] Inside a rare US meeting with a Russian general in Moscow

[3] NATO doubles battlegroups in ‘Eastern Flank’ States

[4] Russia signals scaled-back war aims, Ukrainians advance near Kyiv

[5] Secret Plan to Send 10,000 NATO “Peacekeeping Troops” Into Ukraine

[6] Russian toll in Syria battle was 300 killed and wounded

[7] A dam in Syria was on a ‘no-strike’ list. The US bombed it anyway

---

“Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War” 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-5-3
Year: 2012
Pages: 102

PDF Edition:  $6.50 (sent directly to your email account!)

Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which hosts the critically acclaimed website www.globalresearch.ca . He is a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.

Reviews

“This book is a ‘must’ resource – a richly documented and systematic diagnosis of the supremely pathological geo-strategic planning of US wars since ‘9-11’ against non-nuclear countries to seize their oil fields and resources under cover of ‘freedom and democracy’.”
–John McMurtry, Professor of Philosophy, Guelph University

“In a world where engineered, pre-emptive, or more fashionably “humanitarian” wars of aggression have become the norm, this challenging book may be our final wake-up call.”
-Denis Halliday, Former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations

Michel Chossudovsky exposes the insanity of our privatized war machine. Iran is being targeted with nuclear weapons as part of a war agenda built on distortions and lies for the purpose of private profit. The real aims are oil, financial hegemony and global control. The price could be nuclear holocaust. When weapons become the hottest export of the world’s only superpower, and diplomats work as salesmen for the defense industry, the whole world is recklessly endangered. If we must have a military, it belongs entirely in the public sector. No one should profit from mass death and destruction.
–Ellen Brown, author of ‘Web of Debt’ and president of the Public Banking Institute  

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

One month since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, US President Joe Biden will begin a tour of the continent this week in an effort to mobilize the NATO powers in a major escalation of the conflict against Russia.

The meetings, including those of NATO and the European Council, will seek to galvanize “international efforts to… impose severe and unprecedented costs on Russia,” the White House said.

Ahead of Biden’s trip, NATO military officials have been discussing plans, to be announced at the summit, to vastly expand the positioning of NATO forces on Russia’s borders in Europe as part of an effort to put the continent on a war footing, including potentially doubling the US troop presence in Europe.

The series of meetings being held this week are councils of war. According to the White House:

• On Monday, Biden held a call with French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to discuss “providing security assistance to the brave Ukrainians who are defending their country from Russian aggression.” The same day, the European Union announced that it would send an additional €500 million in weapons to Ukraine
• Later that evening, Biden addressed the CEOs of America’s largest corporations to “discuss the United States’ response to Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified war with Ukraine.”
• On Wednesday, Biden will arrive in Brussels, Belgium, to attend a meeting of the European Council, which will also include UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, despite the UK’s exit from the European Union.
• On Thursday, Biden will attend a NATO summit focused on “ongoing deterrence and defense efforts in response to Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified attack on Ukraine.”
• On Friday, Biden will travel to Warsaw, Poland, where he will hold a bilateral meeting with President Andrzej Duda. Last week, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki proposed the deployment of a NATO “peacekeeping mission” to Ukraine.

This series of meetings was preceded by clear signals from the White House that, despite statements from Ukraine that it is pursuing negotiations with Russia, the United States has no interest in finding a diplomatic solution to the war.

On Thursday, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said,

“From where I sit, diplomacy obviously requires both sides engaging in good faith to de-escalate.” He added, “The actions that we’re seeing Russia take… are in total contrast to any serious diplomatic effort to end the war.”

Following these statements, Biden seemed to do everything he could to personally antagonize Russian President Vladimir Putin, referring to him as a “thug,” a “dictator” and a “war criminal.”

Under conditions where a war is raging out of control, killing hundreds of people, and nuclear tensions are at the highest level since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, these statements are a deliberate effort to escalate tensions. The Kremlin will see them as a US declaration of intent to carry out regime-change in Russia or massively escalate US involvement in the war.

In response to what Russia called “insults,” Russia’s foreign ministry announced that it had summoned US Ambassador John Sullivan to declare that “Russian-American relations [are] on the verge of rupture.” The “rupture” of relations between states generally signifies that war is imminent.

Indeed, Biden’s whirlwind tour of Europe in an effort to mobilize the United States’ European allies for war has been carefully prepared by extensive military discussions.

The Wall Street Journal reported:

“U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin met at NATO headquarters last week with his counterparts from other alliance members to discuss beefing up forces even further. They directed military planners from all of the NATO members to draft plans that are likely to be discussed when President Biden meets with other alliance heads of government in Europe this week.”

“I expect there will be a rough doubling of the U.S. presence,” Douglas Lute, a former US ambassador to NATO and a retired Army lieutenant general, told the Journal.

The United States has deployed more than 15,000 additional troops to Europe since the outbreak of the war, and the US troop levels in Europe have reached over 100,000—the first time this figure has been surpassed since the end of the Cold War. If, as Lute suggests, the number of US troops deployed in Europe will double, this would mean the dispatch of 100,000 more US troops to Russia’s borders.

The Journal wrote:

“Troops deployed in Eastern Europe will likely be augmented with more ground units equipped with tanks, other armored vehicles, artillery and attack helicopters, instead of the primarily light infantry forces that are already positioned close to NATO’s eastern borders, current and former officials said.”

The greater significance and implications of war generally emerge as it develops. While the US succeeded in goading the Russian government to take the first shot, it is clear that the war in Ukraine is the first stage of a much broader conflict. Having provoked the Russian government into a desperate and disastrous invasion of Ukraine, the United States is using the war to reassert its global hegemony, building a war coalition for what the United States has termed “great power conflict” targeting not only Russia, but China as well.

On Friday, in a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Biden threatened China with unspecified “consequences” if it provided any material support to Russia. A day earlier, Blinken declared that the US would “not hesitate to impose costs” on China.

This bullying language was turned into open military threats as Biden prepared to set off to Europe. U.S. Indo-Pacific Commander Adm. John C. Aquilino staged a press conference to the Associated Press aboard a military surveillance aircraft plane over territory claimed by China. “Should deterrence fail,” he declared, “my second mission is to be prepared to fight and win.”

The preparations for world war are being carried out behind the backs of the American population. Biden pledged to end America’s “forever wars,” promising to “close this period of relentless war” and initiate “a new era of relentless diplomacy.” Instead, the Biden administration is carrying out the greatest military escalation since the launching of the “war on terror” in 2001.

In the United States, the 2023 military budget is expected to total $800 billion: $60 billion more than the $740 billion authorized for fiscal year 2022. There are calls for an even more rapid funneling of money into the US war machine.

The bill for this massive expansion of military spending will be paid by the working class. It will be utilized to attack the living standards of the working class, criminalize working class political opposition and distract attention from the deadly surge of COVID-19.

The reckless military escalation threatens to spiral out of control, potentially precipitating the first use of nuclear weapons since the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during the Second World War.

There is no way out of this crisis within the framework of capitalist politics. Only one force can stop the looming catastrophe: the international working class, united in a struggle against imperialism, militarism, the historically obsolete nation-state system and the capitalist social order.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

President Vladimir Putin has accused the West of trying to cancel Russian culture, including the works of great composers such as Pyotr Tchaikovsky, Dmitri Shostakovich and Sergei Rachmaninoff.

At a televised meeting with leading cultural figures on Friday, Putin compared the cancellation of a number of Russian cultural events in recent weeks with the actions of Nazi Germany in the 1930s.

“Today, they are trying to cancel a thousand-year-old country,” Putin said.

“I am talking about the progressive discrimination against everything connected with Russia, about this trend that is unfolding in a number of Western states, with the full connivance and sometimes with the encouragement of Western elites,” Putin added.

“The proverbial ‘cancel culture’ has become a cancellation of culture,” Putin said, adding that works by Russian composers were being excluded from concerts and books by Russian authors were being “banned”.

“The last time such a mass campaign to destroy unwanted literature was carried out was by the Nazis in Germany almost 90 years ago … books were burned right on the squares,” Putin said.

Since Putin sent Russian troops into Ukraine on February 24, the West has piled sanctions on Moscow that have seen Russia increasingly isolated, politically and financially, and extending to spheres such as sports and culture.

Speaking about “cancel culture”, Putin singled out British author JK Rowling, who was criticised following controversial tweets about transgender people.

“Not so long ago children’s author JK Rowling was cancelled because she, a writer of books that have sold millions of copies around the world, didn’t please fans of so-called ‘gender freedoms’,” Putin said.

A number of events involving Russian cultural figures who have voiced support for the war have been cancelled, including some involving Valery Gergiev, general director of the St Petersburg Mariinsky Theatre, who spoke to Putin during Friday’s meeting.

Our thanks to Al Jazeera for bringing this article to our attention

Click here to read the full article.

 

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

When involved in war, those who feel like benefactors are bound to congratulate the gun toting initiators.  If you so happen to be on the losing end, sentiments are rather different.  Complicity and cause in murder come to mind.

The late US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright will always be tied with the appallingly named humanitarian war in Kosovo in 1999, one that saw NATO attacks on Serbian civilian targets while aiding the forces of the Kosovo Liberation Army.  It was a distinct backing of sides in a vicious, tribal conflict, where good might miraculously bubble up, winged by angels.  Those angels never came.

Through her tenure in public office, Albright showed a distinct arousal for US military power.  In 1992, she rounded on the then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell for refusing to deploy US forces to Bosnia.  “What’s the point of having this superb military machine you’re always talking about if we can’t use it?”

Too many apologists have come out to explain why Albright was so adamant about the use of such force.  Biographical details are cited: born in Czechoslovakia as Marie Jana Korbelová; of Jewish roots rinsed in the blood wine of Roman Catholicism.  She fled with her family to Britain, eventually finding refuge in Notting Hill Gate.  She went to school, spent time in air raid shelters, sang A Hundred Green Bottles Hanging on the Wall.

The NATO intervention – and this point was never lost on Russian President Vladimir Putin, who reiterated it in his February address – took place without UN Security Council authorisation.  For the law abiders and totemic worshipers of the UN Charter keen to get at Russia’s latest misconduct in Ukraine, this served to illustrate the fickleness of international law’s supporters.  At a given moment, they are bound to turn tail, becoming might-is-right types.  The persecuted, in time, can become persecutors.

NATO, in fact, became an alliance Albright wished to see expanded and fed, not trimmed and diminished.  The historical role of Germany and Russia in central and eastern Europe became the rationale for expanding a neutralising alliance that would include previous “victim” countries.  A weakened Moscow could be ignored.  “We do not need Russia to agree to enlargement,” she told US Senators in 1997.

Paul Wilson, considering the Albright legacy, wrote in 2012 about the danger of following analogies in history to the letter.  “Historical analogies are seductive and often treacherous.  [Slobodan] Milošević was not Hitler and the Kosovar Liberation Army was not a champion of liberal democracy.”

In fact, the KLA was previously designated by the State Department to be a terrorist organisation.  “The Kosovar Albanians,” wrote the regretful former UN Commander in Bosnia Major General Lewis MacKenzie in April 2003, “played us like a Stradivarius violin.”  In his view, NATO and the international community had “subsidised and indirectly supported their violent campaign for an ethnically pure Kosovo.  We have never blamed them for being perpetrators of violence in the early 1990s, and we continue to portray them as the designated victim today, in spite of evidence to the contrary.”

Such is the treacherous nature of the sort of perverse humanitarianism embraced by Albright and her colleagues.  Such a policy, Alan J. Kuperman remarks with gloomy accuracy, “creates a moral hazard that encourages the excessively risky or fraudulent behaviour of rebellion by members of groups that are vulnerable to genocidal retaliation, but it cannot fully protect against the backlash.”

One such encouraged individual, Kosovo President Vjosa Osmani, was all gushing over Albright’s legacy.

“She gave us hope when we didn’t have it.  She became our voice and our arm and when we had neither voice nor an arm ourselves.  She felt our people’s pain because she had experienced herself persecution in childhood.”

The first female Secretary of State will also be linked with the Clinton Administration’s sanctions policy that killed numerous citizens and maimed the country of Iraq, only for it to then be invaded by the venal architects of regime toppling in the succeeding Bush Administration.  This sickening episode sank any heroic notions of law and justice, showing that Albright was content using a wretched calculus on life and death when necessary.

On May 12, 1996, Albright was asked by Lesley Stahl on the CBS program 60 Minutes about the impact of the sanctions that served to profitlessly kill hundreds of thousands.  “We have heard that half a million children have died.  I mean, that’s more children than have died in Hiroshima.  And, you know, is the price worth it?”  Then US Ambassador Albright did not flinch.  “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price – we think the price is worth it.”

In September 2000, she was still crazed by the sanctions formula against Iraq, telling the United Nations in an absurd address that Baghdad had to be stood up to, being “against the United Nations authority and international law.”  Meek acknowledgment was given to the fact that “the hardships faced by Iraq’s people” needed to be dealt with.  What came first was “the integrity of this institution, our security, and international law.”

Albright could be sketchy on sanctions.  In instances where Congress imposed automatic sanctions, Albright could express furious disagreement.  When this happened to both India and Pakistan in 1998 in the aftermath of nuclear weapons testing, she could barely conceal her irritation on CNN’s Late Edition.  “I think we must do something about it, because sanctions that have no flexibility, no waiver authority, are just blunt instruments.  And diplomacy requires us to have some finesse.”

The hagiographic salutations have been many.  One, from Caroline Kelly at CNN, is simply too much.  Albright “championed the expansion of NATO, pushed for the alliance to intervene in the Balkans to stop genocide and ethnic cleansing, sought to reduce the spread of nuclear weapons, and championed human rights democracy across the globe.”

As Secretary of State, she presided in an administration of the world’s only surviving superpower, uncontained, unrestrained, dangerously optimistic.  There was much hubris – all that strength, and lack of assuredness as to how to use it.  The Cold War narrative and rivals were absent, and the Clinton Administration became a soap opera of scandal and indiscretion.

In her later years, she worried about the onset of authoritarianism, of power going to people’s heads, the inner tyrant unleashed in the playpen of international relations.  She had much to complain about regarding Donald Trump, Putin and Brexit.  In encouraging the loud return of the US to front and centre of international politics, she ignored its previous abuses, including some perpetrated by her office.  When given such power, is it not axiomatic that corruption will follow?

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He currently lectures at RMIT University.  He is a regular contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]

Featured image is from Wikimedia Commons

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

Assuming that America can avoid a nuclear war with Russia, the American people would be well-served to ponder and reflect on some of the good founding principles of our country. One of those good founding principles was “no entangling alliances.”

It would be difficult to find a better example of an entangling alliance than NATO, which is really nothing more than a Cold War dinosaur. Having been called into existence as part of the U.S. national-security establishment’s Cold War racket, it should have gone out of existence at the ostensible end of the Cold War. 

Instead, not only was it kept in existence, it actually became the root cause of the current crisis in Ukraine. That’s because it continued moving eastward, absorbing former members of the Warsaw Pact and ultimately threatening to absorb Ukraine, knowing full well that Russia had made it very clear that it would never permit U.S. military bases, missiles, troops, tanks, and other weaponry to be established on its border, just as the Pentagon would never permit Russian military bases, missiles, tanks, troops, and weaponry to be established in Cuba or along the Mexico-U.S. border.

By now, every American should be aware of the dangers surrounding America’s involvement in NATO. If Russia attacks any of the Eastern European countries that are furnishing weapons to Ukraine, that means that the United States and Russia are now automatically at war with one another. That’s because the entangling alliance with NATO automatically commits the United States to go to war with any nation that attacks any other member of NATO.

Once the United States and Russia are in a state of war, the chances of the war going nuclear expand exponentially. That’s because it is in the interests of each nation to unleash its nuclear weapons first in the hope of disabling the other nation’s nuclear capability as much as possible.

As John Quincy Adams put it in his famous speech, “In Search of Monsters to Destroy,” Europe has always been besieged with wars. The United States, he said, is in a unique position given that the Atlantic Ocean stands between the U.S. and Europe. Therefore, he counseled, the United States should continue staying out of Europe’s incessant conflicts and instead devote ourselves to establishing a free, prosperous, peaceful and harmonious nation here at home. 

And yet, with NATO, it’s the exact opposite. In the event Russia or any other nation attacks Moldova, Poland, North Macedonia, or any other NATO member, the American people are now automatically at war. No national debate. No congressional declaration of war. No protests. Automatically at war, thanks to the Pentagon’s decision to entangle America in the old Cold War dinosaur NATO and, in the process, invite some 30 (yes, 30!) nations to join.

It’s time to get out. It’s time to make this Cold War dinosaur extinct. Our national well-being and perhaps even our very existence turn on returning to sound founding principles, especially “no entangling alliances.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He was born and raised in Laredo, Texas, and received his B.A. in economics from Virginia Military Institute and his law degree from the University of Texas. He was a trial attorney for twelve years in Texas. He also was an adjunct professor at the University of Dallas, where he taught law and economics. In 1987, Mr. Hornberger left the practice of law to become director of programs at the Foundation for Economic Education. He has advanced freedom and free markets on talk-radio stations all across the country as well as on Fox News’ Neil Cavuto and Greta van Susteren shows and he appeared as a regular commentator on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s show Freedom Watch. View these interviews at LewRockwell.com and from Full Context. Send him email.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

An article by Yahoo national security correspondent Zach Dorfman praising U.S. intelligence agencies for accurately predicting Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine inadvertently highlights the extent of Washington’s military provocations in Ukraine during the period before the outbreak of hostilities. Those measures went well beyond the ill-advised political decision on the part of George Bush’s administration and its successors to push for Ukraine’s admission to NATO.

Earlier warnings from realist scholars that NATO’s eastward expansion to Russia’s border was poisoning relations with Moscow are finally getting attention in the establishment news media and generating a vigorous debate. A few analysts outside the realism and restraint camp even have conceded that trying to gain NATO membership for Ukraine may have been imprudent. But the magnitude of the aggressive moves taken by the Pentagon and CIA are just now becoming apparent.

For years, the Kremlin made it emphatically clear that inviting Ukraine to join NATO would cross a red line that threatened Russia’s vital security interests. However, it was never merely an issue of Kiev’s formal accession to the alliance. Comments from Russian President Vladimir Putin and other officials signaled that the truly intolerable development was Ukraine becoming a NATO military asset and an arena for the deployment of U.S. and NATO forces. That danger could—and ultimately did—arise, even though France and Germany continued to block a formal membership invitation.

Evidence grew in recent years that the United States had begun to treat Ukraine as a NATO ally in all but name. Steps included pouring nearly $3 billion in “security assistance” (primarily weaponry) into the country since 2014. Such armaments included the deadly Javelin anti-tank missiles. Military collaboration also included joint military exercises between U.S. and Ukrainian troops—and between NATO and Ukrainian forces. A segment on National Public Radio in 2019 featured U.S. officials preening about how such measures had strengthened Ukraine’s deterrence capabilities.

In his article, Dorfman documented the extent of other provocative military measures Washington pursued with respect to Ukraine. The CIA “made a series of covert moves that have helped prepare the Ukrainian security services for the current crisis. Shortly after Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, the agency initiated secret paramilitary training programs for Ukrainian special operations personnel in the U.S. and on Ukraine’s former eastern front.” (The eastern front was the Donbas region where Ukrainian forces were attempting to suppress Russian-backed separatist fighters.) Current and former intelligence officials clearly thought that those programs were especially clever initiatives, insisting that they “helped teach forces loyal to Kyiv the skills that have enabled it to mount an unexpectedly fierce resistance to the Russian onslaught.”

An earlier article by Dorfman noted that coordination between the United States and Ukraine on intelligence matters also expanded greatly after 2014 (following U.S. support for the Maidan revolution that overthrew Ukraine’s elected, pro-Russia president and Moscow’s subsequent annexation of Crimea). “U.S. and Ukrainian intelligence have even participated in joint offensive cyber operations against Russian government targets, according to former officials. CIA officials have also regularly traveled to Ukraine on intelligence exchanges, and Ukrainian intelligence officials have made reciprocal visits to the U.S. to swap information.” Dorfman quoted another “former senior official” who asserted that “in many ways the U.S.-Ukraine intelligence relationship “is about as robust” as Washington’s intelligence collaboration with “just about anybody else in Europe.” That last comment implicitly referred to NATO members.

Once again, the United States was treating Ukraine as a full-fledged, albeit still informal, NATO strategic ally. One has to wonder whether U.S. leaders were so arrogant and obtuse that they believed such missions could be pursued without Russia learning about them. If so, it was a serious miscalculation, if not an epic blunder. Conversely, if policymakers in the Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations realized that Moscow would get wind of the intelligence and military collaboration, then they embraced an extraordinarily reckless set of provocations.

Engaging in a mental exercise based on role reversal illustrates the inherent danger of Washington’s policies. How would U.S. leaders (and the American people) react if China or some other major power engaged in ever-growing levels of intelligence and military cooperation with an anti-U.S. government in Canada or Mexico? The answer is rather obvious: Washington would be warning Beijing to back off, and it would be threatening Ottawa or Mexico City with dire consequences if such collaboration continued. It is difficult to explain why U.S. officials and members of the foreign policy elite were unable or unwilling to comprehend that Moscow would have a similar reaction to Washington’s provocations in Ukraine.

Predictably, such conduct ultimately produced a geopolitical explosion. U.S. and NATO officials used Ukraine as a strategic pawn against Russia and are now fuming with outrage at Moscow’s decision to go to war. Russia’s invasion was indeed a horrid overreaction, but it was far from being unprovoked. The Ukrainian people, unfortunately, are the ones paying a high price in blood for the gullibility of their country’s leaders and the shocking arrogance of U.S. leaders.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow in defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute and a contributing editor at The American Conservative, is the author of 12 books and more than 950 articles on international affairs.

Featured image is from The Unz Review

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Joe Biden spoke to troops with the 82nd Airborne in Poland Friday, telling them what to expect to see when they go to Ukraine. Biden also appears to have let slip that some troops have already been in Ukraine. The White House later clarified there has been no change in U.S. policy about not sending troops to Ukraine. Who to believe, Biden or his handlers?

Transcribed by Gateway Pundit.

The Ukrainian people, Ukrainian people have a lot of backbone, they have a lot of guts. And I’m sure you’re observing it. And I don’t mean just the military which is, we’ve been training since back when they uh, Russia moved into the southeast, southeast um, Ukraine. But also the average citizen. Look at how they’re stepping up. Look at how they’re stepping up. And you’re gonna see when you’re there, and some of you have been there, you’re gonna see, you’re gonna see women, young people standing, standing in the middle, in front of damn tank just, just saying, “I’m not leaving, I’m holding my ground.” They’re incredible. But they take a lot of inspiration from us. And you know, woman who just died, the secretary of State used to have an expression, she said, “we are the essential nation.” It sounds like a bit of uh, hyperbole but the truth of the matter is you are the organizational principle around which the rest of the world, the free world is moving.”

Note: In addition to not remembering her name, Biden misquoted the late Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. She said in 1998,

“Let me say that we are doing everything possible so that American men and women in uniform do not have to go out there again. It is the threat of the use of force and our line-up there that is going to put force behind the diplomacy. But if we have to use force, it is because we are America; we are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future, and we see the danger here to all of us. I know that the American men and women in uniform are always prepared to sacrifice for freedom, democracy and the American way of life.”

Joe Biden, perhaps accidentally, tells US troops they're going to Ukraine.

"You’re going to see when you’re there," he told 82nd Airborne Division in Poland.

You’re going to see women, young people standing in the middle, in the front of a damn tank saying I’m not leaving." pic.twitter.com/utCoYAnczI

— Ford Fischer (@FordFischer) March 25, 2022

Shorter version:

Biden tells the 82nd Airborne they're going to Ukraine:

"You’re going to see when you’re there, you’re going to see women, young people standing in the middle, in the front of a damn tank saying 'I’m not leaving.'" pic.twitter.com/M2nu77yUw7

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) March 25, 2022

The White House clarified: “UPDATE: A @WhiteHouse spokesperson tells me: “The President has been clear we are not sending U.S. troops to Ukraine and there is no change in that position.”

UPDATE: A @WhiteHouse spokesperson tells me: "The President has been clear we are not sending U.S. troops to Ukraine and there is no change in that position."

— Andrew Feinberg (@AndrewFeinberg) March 25, 2022

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Kristinn Taylor has contributed to The Gateway Pundit for over ten years. Mr. Taylor previously wrote for Breitbart, worked for Judicial Watch and was co-leader of the D.C. Chapter of FreeRepublic.com. Mr. Taylor studied journalism in high school, visited the Newseum and once met David Brinkley. Mr. Taylor is on Twitter.

Featured image is from Gateway Pundit

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Describing their findings as “particularly worrisome,” the authors of a study published Monday in Public Health Nutrition noted that in the U.S., the Dietary Guidelines for Americans form “the foundation for all national nutrition programs,” which amount to nearly $100 billion annually.

A study released Monday found 95% — 19 of the 20 members — of the U.S. government-run committee responsible for establishing dietary guidelines for Americans have one or more conflicts of interest (COIs) with industry actors in Big Food, Big Ag and Big Pharma.

The U.S. Dietary Guidelines for Americans Advisory Committee (DGAC) sets the guidelines used by U.S. policymakers, healthcare providers, nutrition educators and federal nutrition program operators, including those responsible for school lunch programs, on what foods and beverages “meet nutrient needs, promote health and prevent disease.”

According to the study, 129 industry actors had relationships with the 20 DGAC members, based on the COI disclosures submitted by the members of the committee.

Describing their findings as “particularly worrisome,” the authors of the study explained why this is a matter of public concern, noting that in the U.S., the Dietary Guidelines for Americans form “the foundation for all national nutrition programs,” which amount to nearly $100 billion annually.

The DGA also offers guidance to state and local governments, as well as healthcare professionals, hospitals, and community groups, among others, as “overarching dietary recommendations.”

The study’s authors added:

“Trustworthy dietary guidelines result from a transparent, objective, and science-based, process. Our analysis has shown that the significant and widespread COI on the committee prevent the DGA from achieving the recommended standard for transparency without mechanisms in place to make this information publicly available.

“Our findings here are particularly worrisome, as industry influence and COI can result in diverting the scientific process underpinning the U.S. national dietary guidelines, to one that is responsive to profit-driven interests rather than the public health.”

The study appeared in Public Health Nutrition, published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Nutrition Society, a UK-based nonprofit whose mission is to advance the scientific study of nutrition.

The DGAC, first convened in 1977, operates under the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The report, since its introduction in 1980, is revised and re-released every five years.

The DGAC’s latest report, issued in July 2020, led to the publication in December 2020 of the ninth version of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

Did committee members influence policy on breastmilk substitutes to promote product sales?

In an example of the depth and extent of the conflicts of interest identified, the authors of the study highlighted examples such as the following, involving food and nutritional products produced for infants and young children:

“[T]he Pregnancy and Lactation Subcommittee of the DGAC had six members, four of whom, or two thirds, had COI involving manufacturers of breastmilk substitutes: SD, RK, KD, JS [referring to DGAC committee members] all had instances of COI with Mead Johnson, and SD had COI with Wyeth and Abbot [sic].

“The Birth to Age 24 Months Subcommittee, which also addressed infant and young child nutrition, had four of its six members having COI involving manufacturers of breastmilk substitutes: SD, RK, KD also served on the Pregnancy and Lactation Subcommittee, with the same COI mentioned above; and TD had at least one COI with Abbott.

“There is evidence that those companies producing breastmilk substitutes regularly use science and try to influence policy in order to protect and promote the sales of their products, and their relationships with DGAC members may have had a direct impact on the work of those members.”

The study also highlighted the following findings:

“Our analysis found that 95% of the committee members had COI [conflicts of interest] with the food, and/or pharmaceutical industries and that particular actors, including Kellogg, Abbott, Kraft, Mead Johnson, General Mills, Dannon, and the International Life Sciences [Institute or ILSI] had connections with multiple members.

“Research funding and membership of an advisory/executive board jointly accounted for more than 60% of the total number of COI documented.

“We observed the existence of extensive, varied and long-standing relationships between some DGAC members and industry actors whose products are directly affected by the DGAC report ́s recommendations as well as the DGA themselves.

“[W]e can observe that Kellogg, Abbott, Kraft, Mead Johnson, ILSI, General Mills and Dannon are well-positioned to advance their interests within the DGAC given the existence of relationships (in some cases long-held) with several DGAC members.

“The most prevalent type of COI was research funding, followed by DGAC members being on a board/committee in a company, and consultant positions. Some industry actors, such as Mead Johnson, General Mills and Kellogg’s and the industry-funded organization, ILSI, have interacted with an extensive number of DGAC members.

“Conversely, other industry actors have prolonged relationships with only a handful of DGAC members. Amongst the top 15 industry actors by overall number of COI are ILSI and three trade associations or programs funded by them (California Walnut Commission, Almond Board of California and Beef Checkoff). Each of these actors has diverse means and ends to potentially influence scientific research and the DGA process.”

How ‘revolving door’ policies come into play

The apparent conflicts of interest also extend beyond the committee members themselves, as noted in the study:

“The use of what is called a ‘revolving door’ might also be problematic, with for example the Secretary of Agriculture, who spent much of his career in the agribusiness sector, having the ultimate say over the final content of the guidelines.

“In both cases, there seems to be an interplay between the strategic interests of industry actors, the professional interests of the researcher and, ultimately, the scientific work produced by the former.”

The study’s authors identified a possible “strategy by corporations to develop relationships that maximize their impact on science and policy,” and stated:

“DGAC members appear to disclose relationships each with a different group of industry actors, which are largely a reflection of how their own research speaks to a different industry sector, albeit most of them exhibit ties to corporations both in the food and pharmaceutical sectors.”

A fundamental lack of transparency?

Uncovering information about the 20 members of the DGAC, or even ascertaining who the members of the committee are, is challenging, in part, because the names of the members are buried in an appendix beginning on page 822 of the committee’s 835-page report.

While the report states that it provides “brief biographical information for each member of the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee as it relates to the Committee’s scope and charge,” none of the information provided appears to provide any indication of the conflicts of interest for any of the committee members.

This is of particular significance in light of the study’s finding that 95% of the committee members had at least one conflict of interest.

Indeed, according to the study, the top three committee members in terms of COIs identified were Sharon Donovan, Jamy Ard and Heather Leidy, with 152, 92 and 84 COIs identified, respectively, and identified connections to 31, 12 and 31 industry actors, respectively.

Another committee member, Richard Mattes, had 33 connections to industry actors, in addition to 65 COIs.

The authors of the study further noted the above figures may, in fact, understate the extent to which conflicts of interest actually exist, due to the criteria and time frame involved in the above determinations:

“Nonetheless, given that our method is also prone to underreporting, these percentages illustrate what are effectively the two main pillars underpinning long-term relationships between scientific experts and industry actors: (1) funding for research projects and (2) advisory roles in corporate boards.

“The current process for assessing COI, based on annually self-reported disclosures, does not capture the long-standing relationships between the DGAC and industry actors that we identified here.

“A ‘COI timespan’ of at least three-to-five years is normal, although our paper demonstrates that a longer timespan would be beneficial to understanding the breadth and depth of an expert’s long-term relationships with industry.

“Moreover, to be as thorough as possible, COI declarations should include past positions, revolving door situations, and COI involving third parties, such as industry front groups (e.g., ILSI).”

The study’s authors also questioned the transparency with which the members of the DGAC were selected in the first place, noting that the process was less than fully public:

“There is, in addition, a need for more transparency in the process for selecting DGAC members — a process where all pertinent information is made public (e.g., information contained in Form 450).

“The DGAC report states that Forms 450 were posted online, but we could not find them on the DGA website at the time of our data collection.

“It is this paper’s contention that the USDA-HHS should publicly post all COI of appointed DGAC members, as recommended by the 2017 NASEM [National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine] report permanently during and after completion of the DGA.”

According to the study, members of the DGAC are considered temporary federal workers, thereby requiring them to follow USDA ethics rules, and to “place loyalty to the United States Constitution, Federal laws, and ethical principles above private gain,” adding that they “may not ‘participate personally and substantially in a ‘particular matter’ in which [they] have a financial interest.”

Nevertheless, according to the study:

“In particular, the food industry has historically been observed to seek to influence the DGA process in its favor, for example by pushing for recommendations for particular foods or food groups, such as dairy products, grains or meat.

“For instance, of the comments submitted by organizations to the public consultation for selection of topics for the development of the 2020-25 DGA … nearly 70% were from industry actors, particularly those in the food industry.

“Moreover, trade associations such as the American Beverage Association, the Grocery Manufacturers Association (now the Consumer Brands Association), and the National Potato Council, as well as companies like Unilever, nominated experts to be appointed to the DGAC through an informal step.”

The study’s methodology

The study was conducted between January and February 2022, with the purpose of measuring the “incidence of conflicts of interest (COI) with food and pharmaceutical industry actors on the advisory committee for the 2020-2025 U.S. Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) and assess the adequacy of current mechanisms to disclose and manage COI among the committee’s members.”

Searches were conducted by the study’s authors during the two-month period, utilizing publicly available data.

The authors defined a conflict of interest as any relationship “between a DGAC member and an industry actor in a given year.”

Specifically, according to the authors:

“We documented the year in which the COI was disclosed as the year for which the COI existed, even if the relationship between the DGAC members and the organization might have been maintained for a longer period of time than that disclosed.

“Furthermore, lacking evidence to the contrary, we considered funding from industry to be a COI for any DGAC member who is a co-author on a study sponsored by industry.

“We argue that the time dimension is important in order to shed light on long-term relationships between industry and DGAC members. Therefore, we considered COI without date restrictions, allowing us to go as far back in time as information is publicly available.

“We focused on the COI of DGAC members with corporate actors from the food, drink and pharmaceutical industries, as well as third parties working with them such as trade associations or front groups.

“We included pharmaceutical companies, because some sell infant nutrition products and often offer devices or drugs that compete with food-based solutions to chronic diseases.

“We took a conservative approach using exclusively primary data to obtain evidence of a COI. We considered primary data sources as those platforms where information about COI is disclosed either directly by a DGAC member (e.g., scientific publication or a Curriculum Vitae), or by the institutions to which they were affiliated (e.g., bios on institutional websites).

“Primary data sources were excluded where a COI was discussed without a reference to the original information source.”

Further remarking on the possibility that there are even more COIs that were not identified by the study, Nina Teicholz of The Nutrition Coalition, one of the study’s authors, told The Defender in an email:

“It is true that some evidence of COI has disappeared from the Internet after various groups (including the Nutrition Coalition here and here) published articles on the committee’s COIs.

If these were not on the internet at the time of this paper’s search, then we did not include them.”

In summarizing the significance of their findings, and the importance of the DGA’s role in providing nutritional guidance to the American public, the authors did not mince words:

“It is critical to underscore the DGA’s impact on public health, especially for communities who are most impacted by diet-related diseases.

“For Americans to be able to trust the guidance from the DGA as sound, objective, and science-based, it is imperative to ensure that each step of the process, from the selection and appointment of the DGAC to the final release of the DGA, is publicly accessible, transparently administered, and largely free of COI and influence from actors whose profit-driven interests are often at odds with those in public health.

“Our analysis of COI of DGAC members has shown that this is far from true.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., is an independent journalist and researcher based in Athens, Greece.

Featured image is from CHD

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

 

“While the US succeeded in goading the Russian government to take the first shot, it is clear that the war in Ukraine is the first stage of a much broader conflict. Having provoked the Russian government into a desperate and disastrous invasion of Ukraine, the United States is using the war to reassert its global hegemony, building a war coalition for what the United States has termed “great power conflict” targeting not only Russia, but China as well.” Andre Damon, World Socialist Web Site

“What is important to our managerial and foreign policy elites, is, above all, the major effort and push for a globalist “Great Reset” using the Ukrainian conflict to finally accomplish their objective of bringing the entire world in accord with their plans for a New World Order. And to do that, Russia, which now stands athwart their designs, must be diminished and brought into line.” Boyd D. Cathey, The Unz Review

Why is NATO sending more lethal weaponry to Ukraine?

Didn’t Putin say that pouring arms into Ukraine would increase the likelihood of war?

Yes, he did, but the US and NATO continue sending more shipments anyway. Why?

And why does Ukraine need more weapons?

Could it be that Ukraine’s 600,000-strong military is collapsing like a trailer park in a hurricane? Is that it? Is that why NATO had an emergency confab in Brussels on Thursday to restate their support for a NATO-trained army that has not successfully launched even one major counteroffensive against the Russian military?

The media insists that the Russian offensive “has stalled”. Is that what you call it when your opponent captures an area the size of the UK in less than 3 weeks or when all your air and naval assets have been obliterated or when your Command-and-Control centers have gone up in smoke or when most of your combat troops are either encircled by Russian forces or fleeing to locations west of the Dnieper River? Is that what “stalled” looks like?

Do you get the impression that the media is not being entirely straightforward in their coverage of the war in Ukraine? Do you think that maybe their WEF-linked owners might have a dog in this fight? Here’s how Archbishop Vigano summed it up recently in an article linking “Covid tyranny” to the war in Ukraine:

“The ideological continuity between the pandemic farce and the Russian-Ukrainian crisis continues to emerge, beyond the evidence of the events and statements of the subjects involved, in the fact that the ultimate perpetrators of both are the same, all attributable to the globalist cabal of the World Economic Forum.” (“Exclusive: Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò”, Gateway Pundit)

Truer words were never spoken. It’s all manipulation by globalist “stakeholders” pursuing their own narrow interests. As for the war, check out this analysis from a post at Larry Johnson’s new blog A Son of the New American Revolution. I can’t vouch for the author, but he sounds a lot more credible than CNN:

“Official claims of a major Ukrainian counteroffensive near Kiev are completely fake; it’s totally made-up, it never happened—they simply don’t have a coherent military force in the Kiev area that’s capable of conducting an organized counteroffensive. All they have in and around Kiev is various bits and pieces including police and army special forces, civilian militia, regular police, some air defense, and a few artillery batteries. It’s not an offensive force—it’s a crazy quilt. …

What’s left of the Ukrainian army east of the Dniepr river is running out of diesel, and should be out of tube and rocket artillery munitions (and in fact, artillery) by the first week of April. Outside of the Donbass, it’s a war of attrition, with Russia wearing away the Ukraine’s ability to fight, using stand-off weapons (air and missiles) first and foremost. On Sunday, Russia hit a cache of munitions that was being hidden—Hamas-style—at a “vacant” retail and sports complex in downtown Kiev. Russia is finding tons and tons of Ukrainian army materiel, and methodically destroying them….

Russian and Donetsk/Lugansk forces have picked up so many U.S. and British antitank weapons, it’s visually documented they’re now using them on the battlefield. ..

And, the Stinger missile project has failed totally—Uncle Sam & Co. have moved and continue to move hundreds of Stingers into the Ukraine, but it’s only been documented to have brought down about seven manned aircraft since the invasion, and none in the last ten days or so. Some of those hundreds will get out and be sold and… perhaps you shouldn’t fly internationally anymore…

I’m not looking to sugarcoat it for Russia—those Ukrainian military units that did not simply melt away and disappear in the first days, are putting up a fight. But at some point, very likely in the first half of April, they will simply run out of everything, and they will crumble and then the Russian and Donetsk/Lugansk forces will take all or most of “Left Bank” (east of the Dnieper) Ukraine. (“Dreizin Report–Poland prepares to intervene, Ukraine slides into dictatorship”, Jacob Dreizin, The Son of a New American Revolution)

Yes, but can the author be trusted?

I don’t know but– let’s face it– when the media lies relentlessly for 4 years about “Russian collusion” followed by another 2 years of “Everyone’s going to die from the flu”; any critical thinking person is going to look for other sources of information, right? It’s a credibility issue, and, regrettably, “credibility” is a term that is never applied to the mainstream media.

So, where do we go from here?

Good question; and you can see from NATO’s statement that leaders in Washington and across Europe are determined to throw more gas on the fire. That’s the message they’re sending to the world; ‘We are united in our determination to defeat Russia whether we blow up the planet or not.’ Got it? Here’s a clip from their declaration on Thursday:

“Since 2014, we have provided extensive support to Ukraine’s ability to exercise that right. We have trained Ukraine’s armed forces, strengthening their military capabilities and capacities and enhancing their resilience. NATO Allies have stepped up their support and will continue to provide further political and practical support to Ukraine as it continues to defend itself. …..We remain determined to maintain coordinated international pressure on Russia. We will continue to coordinate closely with relevant stakeholders and other international organizations, including the European Union.

Russia’s unprovoked war against Ukraine represents a fundamental challenge to the values and norms that have brought security and prosperity to all on the European continent” (“Statement by NATO Heads of State and Government”, NATO)

Are you surprised that NATO would openly boast about arming and training thousands of Ukrainian combatants since 2014? What if an enemy of the United States did the same thing in Mexico or Canada. How would the US react? Here’s how Noam Chomsky put it:

“… for Ukraine to join NATO would be rather like Mexico joining a China-run military alliance, hosting joint maneuvers with the Chinese army and maintaining weapons aimed at Washington. To insist on Mexico’s sovereign right to do so would surpass idiocy. Washington’s insistence on Ukraine’s sovereign right to join NATO is even worse, since it sets up an insurmountable barrier to a peaceful resolution of a crisis that is already a shocking crime and will soon become much worse unless resolved — by the negotiations that Washington refuses to join.” (Truthout)

It looks to me like Chomsky thinks arming Ukraine was a deliberate provocation. Which it was. NATO stuffed the country full of weapons, trained its combat troops and paramilitaries, conducted military operations with NATO, ordered their army to the east so they could terrorize the ethnic Russian population, and then– to top it off– threatened to develop nuclear weapons. In short, they put a gun to Putin’s head and threatened to blow his brains out. If that’s not a provocation, then what is? Here’s more from an article at the WSWS:

(NATO chief) Stoltenberg’s historical reference point was not the Russian invasion of Ukraine last month but the 2014 fascist-led coup that turned Ukraine into a proxy for NATO. “Since 2014, [NATO] Allies have trained Ukraine’s armed forces and significantly strengthened their capabilities. They are putting that training into practice now, on the front lines, with great bravery.”

Stoltenberg made no effort to conceal NATO’s massive military buildup of Ukrainian forces over the past eight years. NATO, he said, has been “providing anti-tank and air defense systems, drones, fuel and ammunition. As well as financial aid.”

He went on, “I would like to commend the courage and the professionalism of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. I have met them in Ukraine, and we are all aware that compared to where they were back in 2014, this is a totally different force than eight years ago. The Ukrainian Armed Forces today is much bigger, much better equipped, much better trained, much better commanded. They have much better logistics than they had back in 2014.” (“NATO meets to plot next stage in Ukraine proxy war”, World Socialist Web Site)

Stoltenberg can hardly conceal his elation over the ‘courage and the professionalism” of his NWO army that is acting as cannon fodder in a US proxy-war with Russia. But do the brave Ukrainians that are fighting in this fiasco, know what they’re fighting for?

No, they don’t. They think they’re risking their lives for their country, but, actually, they’re fighting to preserve US global hegemony by annihilating Russia, encircling China and establishing America’s dominance over the world’s most populous and prosperous region of the next century. That’s what they’re fighting for, Washington’s “pivot to Asia”. As the author of the WSWS article admits:

“It is clear that what is involved is not only a war in Ukraine, but a campaign by the US and NATO imperialist powers for war against Russia and a redivision of the world.”

Yes, that’s right, and Biden doesn’t even try to hide it. Here’s what he said just two days ago:

“Now is a time when things are shifting. … There’s going to be a new world order out there, and we’ve got to lead it.” (Biden Talks NWO,You Tube)

“New World Order”? You mean, this isn’t about “Ukraine’s borders”, after all?

Nope. That’s all patriotic claptrap dolled-up for the serfs. Here’s how Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov summed it up on Tuesday:

“This is not about Ukraine, this is about a world order in which the United States wants to be the sole sovereign and dominate… This all is about removing the obstacle in the form of Russia on the way to building a unipolar world.”

Indeed, that is the objective, and the US is not going to be timid in pursuing its interests. China and Russia are under the illusion that the emergence of various “power centers” will inevitably bring about change in the global order. But the world doesn’t work that way. The world leader will not willingly concede defeat or graciously abdicate the throne. He must be knocked from his pedestal much like the schoolyard bully must be subdued through force. Regrettably, Ukraine is shaping up to be the battleground where these matters are going to be resolved through force of arms.

In any event, we should try to go beyond the media’s propaganda and see if we can identify the real causes of the current conflict. Why, for example, is the US targeting Russia? In what way is Russia an “obstacle” that is blocking Washington’s strategic ambitions?

The former Undersecretary of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz, answers that question in one short paragraph written more than two decades ago. It is as relevant today as it was then:

“Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.”

In short, Washington sees Russia as a “hostile power” because it sits atop an ocean of oil and gas reserves and because it “defiantly” conducts its own independent foreign policy. For these reasons, Russia is Uncle Sam’s mortal enemy.

Second, Russia’s has been gradually strengthening ties with Europe posing a serious challenge to US economic dominance. The building of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline– which would have greatly increased Europe’s dependency on Russian gas– meant that Washington’s influence would steadily erode while Europe and Asia would move closer to a common economic area in which neither the US Dollar nor NATO security would be necessary. This is why Washington went to such great lengths to provoke Russia to invade Ukraine. They needed to force the severing of economic ties to prevent further integration with EU markets.

The third reason why Russia has become Washington’s Enemy Number 1, is because the US is currently “rebalancing” assets and resources to the Asia-Pacific to take advantage of the anticipated growth-surge in the region. Hillary Clinton famously referred to this as “the pivot to Asia”, a term that was coined in a speech she delivered in 2011. Here’s what she said:

“Harnessing Asia’s growth and dynamism is central to American economic and strategic interests and a key priority for President Obama. Open markets in Asia provide the United States with unprecedented opportunities for investment, trade, and access to cutting-edge technology…..American firms (need) to tap into the vast and growing consumer base of Asia…The future of politics will be decided in Asia, not Afghanistan or Iraq, and the United States will be right at the center of the action…” (“America’s Pacific Century”,Secretary of State Hillary Clinton”, Foreign Policy Magazine, 2011)

Those are the geopolitical imperatives driving the conflict:

1. “To prevent the re-emergence of a new rival on the territory of the former Soviet Union that can dominate their own resources and, thus, challenge US power.
2. The threat of further economic integration that would unavoidably lead to a massive free trade zone spanning Europe and Asia.
3. The “pivot” plan to dominate the world’s most populous and prosperous region of the next century.

These are the three strategic policies that are fueling the war. They only relate to Ukraine inasmuch as Ukraine is the unfortunate staging-ground for the “Great Power Conflict” which is steadily gaining momentum. Tuesday’s recommendation, by Polish political leader, Jaroslaw Kaczynsk, that he would recommend that peacekeepers be sent to Ukraine shows that NATO is planning a major escalation of the conflict in the very near future. According to Reuters, Kaczynsk, will propose that:

“An international peacekeeping mission should be sent to Ukraine and be given the means to defend itself….

“I think that it is necessary to have a peace mission – NATO, possibly some wider international structure – but a mission that will be able to defend itself, which will operate on Ukrainian territory,” Kaczynski told a news conference.”

“It will be a mission that will strive for peace, to give humanitarian aid, but at the same time it will also be protected by appropriate forces, armed forces,” said Kaczynski, who is seen as the main decision-maker in Poland.” (“Top Polish politician calls for peacekeeping mission in Ukraine”, Reuters)

Think about that for a minute. Think about what it would mean. The peacekeeping mission:

1. “will operate on Ukrainian territory (where Russia is carrying out its military operation)
2. will be able to defend itself. (which means they will be armed.)
3. will be (protected by) “some wider international structure” (NATO)

Does anyone think this sounds like a good idea? Won’t this  force Russia to treat the NATO personnel as enemy belligerents that are interfering with their military operation?

Of course, it will. So, what are they trying to achieve; WW3? Is that the point? And what does this tell us about Washington’s strategy for Ukraine?

It also tells us that NATO is preparing to engage Russia militarily within Ukraine. That’s what it tells us. Until today, most people had assumed that NATO would not engage Russia militarily because they believed that would greatly increase the prospects of a nuclear exchange. But that is not how the foreign policy establishment sees things. After dealing with Putin for over 20 years, they see Putin as a rational actor who will not escalate unless Russia faces an imminent existence-threat. (A nuclear attack) In other words, the foreign policy mandarins have made the calculation that they can engage Putin in a bloody and protracted ground-war– that will drain Russia’s resources and destroy its economy– without Putin using his nuclear arsenal. It is a risky strategy but not entirely unreasonable given Putin’s behavior in the past. Putin has always been extremely cautious and never impulsive. The foreign policy wonks think they can use that against him. Like we said, it is a high-risk strategy.

Naturally, Russia is appalled by the ‘peacekeeper idea’ as it makes a clash between the two nuclear-armed superpowers almost unavoidable. Here’s what Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in response to the news:

“Our Polish colleagues have already stated that there will be a NATO summit now, and peacekeepers should be deployed. I hope they understand what is at stake. This will be a direct clash between the Russian and NATO armed forces, which everyone not only wanted to avoid but said that it should never take place in principle.”

Is Lavrov being overly courteous?

Yes, he is. If the United States had issued the warning, they would have said something much more ominous, like this:

“Any armed formations will be treated as legitimate enemy targets and destroyed. Full stop.”

That’s how you deliver a warning. You don’t try to ingratiate yourself with the person who wants to kill your soldiers and erase your country from the map. That doesn’t make any sense at all. If there was ever a time for straight talk, this is it. Lives are at stake.

The “peacekeeper” incident suggests something I’ve suspected for quite a while; that Washington is itching for a land-war in Ukraine, and to some extent, it makes sense. It further polarizes and weakens Russia, it unites the allies around a common cause, and it reinforces NATO’s role as guarantor of regional security. The downside, of course, is that the conflict could quickly escalate leading to a full-blown nuclear war. I believe the neocons at the State Department do not see that as a plausible scenario, so they are pushing as hard as they can to intensify the fighting. Here’s a short clip from the piece by veteran Jacob Dreizin who appears to see things the same way:

“I am confident that, out of impotent rage if nothing else, NATO forces will move into western Ukraine from Poland by mid-April at the latest, if the war is still on by then. The heavy equipment is already there near the border; bringing in the personnel to link up with it is the easy part. With the recent Russian bombing of the U.S./UK “Ho Chi Minh trail” hub at the Yavorov base near the Polish border, they will get in on the ground … to make a statement like, “Not again, because we’re here openly now.”

No, Brandon doesn’t want to do it, but the hawks in Congress and the MSM are running the show now. There will be escalation. It is baked into the cake. In fact, I predicted before the invasion that Poland would take advantage of the war to create a protectorate in western Ukraine, and I stand by my prediction…” (“Dreizin Report–Poland prepares to intervene, Ukraine slides into dictatorship”,Jacob Dreizin, The Son of a New American Revolution)

I think Dreizin is onto something here. Brandon is not on board with the planned escalation, but it might not matter, because the State Department is a hotbed of neocons that are doing whatever they can to grease the skids for a scorched earth, no-holds-barred cage-match with their most-reviled rival, Vladimir Putin.

It’s the State Department, the Intel agencies, the Congress and the media that are steering the ship of state now, not Biden. Perhaps, you wondered why the NY Times suddenly decided to ‘come clean’ on the Hunter Biden laptop story? You probably know that it’s not because the Times editors had a change-of-heart and wanted to inform the public or “speak truth to power”. Of course, not. The Times trotted out the laptop dossier to let Biden know that they “got him by the shorthairs” and if he doesn’t play ball, he’s toast.

Blackmail? Would the neocons really blackmail the President of the United States in order to escalate in Ukraine?

You bet, they would.

The neocons have their heart-set on a land-war war in Europe, and from the looks of things, they might just get one.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

This article was originally published on The Unz Review.

Mike Whitney, renowned geopolitical and social analyst based in Washington State. He initiated his career as an independent citizen-journalist in 2002 with a commitment to honest journalism, social justice and World peace.

He is Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

Featured image is from TUR

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

First published on March 24, 2022

*

“We must recommit ourselves to the work of strengthening our democracies, and demonstrate the principled leadership people are looking for,” said Trudeau at the European Parliament.

See what happened after Trudeau’s historic failed address to the European Parliament. (Scroll down)

No analysis by Canada’s mainstream media.

 

Video: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau addresses the European Parliament

 

Earlier statement by Romanian MEP Christian Terhes, followed by March 23 statement.

Romanian MEP @CristianTerhes absolutely mops the floor with PM @JustinTrudeau in Brussels this week over how he's handling the Ottawa #FreedomConvoy2022 protests.

"He's exactly like a tyrant, a dictator. He's like Ceaușescu in Romania," said Terhes. pic.twitter.com/Ox87jL3XJr

— Cosmin Dzsurdzsa 🇷🇴 (@cosminDZS) February 20, 2022

MEP @CristianTerhes has put out a statement after refusing to attend @JustinTrudeau's EU speech today

In the statement, Terheș blasts Trudeau for having horses trample protestors during the Freedom Convoy crackdown

I've translated it and will tweet relevant parts below

THREAD pic.twitter.com/KUR10j0s5b

— Cosmin Dzsurdzsa 🇷🇴 (@cosminDZS) March 23, 2022

Trudeau is going to come home from Europe VERY angry. He was just forced to sit and listen while he was labelled a "dictator," in front of the entire European Union, one who "trampled women with horses," and "blocks the bank accounts of single parents." https://t.co/GiPU69MboE pic.twitter.com/83662XKyrb

— Keean Bexte (@TheRealKeean) March 23, 2022

🇨🇦🇬🇧|Yesterday, Canada's Prime Minister @JustinTrudeau visited the #EU Parliament to give a speech. I took the opportunity to give him an appropriate "welcome" there. Short, concise and right hitting the bull's eye! #ID pic.twitter.com/qpcQyGTixQ

— Christine Anderson (@AndersonAfDMdEP) March 24, 2022

I tried to prevent the speech of 🇨🇦 PM #Trudeau in the #EU Parliament because he recently trampled on the core values of democracy. Unfortunately, the enemies of democracy are also on the rise in #Europe, as the reaction of my colleagues clearly shows.#TrudeauTyranny pic.twitter.com/Mji44OsnxU

— Bernhard Zimniok (@BernhardZimniok) March 24, 2022

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

First published on February 25, 2022

 

 

 

Sunlight is the best disinfectant.  A promotional video from the Canadian Bankers Association (CBA) helps to neatly connect all the dots about why the Canadian government made such a quick reversal in their bank asset seizures in the last 24 hours {Go Deep}.  And yes, as we suspected, it was almost certainly contact from the World Economic Forum to Canadian Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland that triggered the change in position.

When Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland announced they would use the Emergency Act declaration to target the financial support systems, banks and accounts of the people who were protesting against COVID mandates, they not only undermined the integrity of the Canadian banking system – but they also inadvertently stuck a wrench into the plans of the World Economic Forum and the collaborative use of the Canadian Bankers Association to create a digital id.

Against the backdrop of the Canadian government action, WATCH THIS VIDEO:

If the Canadian government can arbitrarily block citizen access to their banking institution without any due process, what does that say about the system the Canadian Banking Association (CBA) was putting into place as part of their Digital ID network?

If the CBA digital identity were in place, the same people targeted by Trudeau’s use of the Emergency Act would have their entire identity blocked by the same government measures.  The realization of the issue, reflected by a severe undermining of faith in the banking system, is a dramatic problem for those working to create and promote the Digital ID.

It is not coincidental the financial targeting mechanism deployed by Trudeau/Freeland, the Canadian banking system, is the same system being used to create the digital identity.  As a result of the government targeting bank accounts, Finance Minister Freeland just created a reference point for those who would argue against allowing the creation of a comprehensive digital identity.

The motive for the World Economic Forum and Canadian Bankers Association to immediately reach out to Trudeau and Freeland and tell them to back off their plan is crystal clear.  THAT is almost certainly why Freeland appeared so admonished, shocked and incapable of getting her footing yesterday {Go Deep}, and why the Canadian government simultaneously informed Parliament they were unfreezing the bank accounts.

Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland essentially broke the financial code of Omerta, by highlighting how easy it is for government to seize your bank accounts, credit cards, retirement accounts, insurance, mortgages, loan access and cut you off from money (without due process).

The unintended consequence was an immediate and clear reference point if government did the same action with a digital ID in place.

However, this undermined confidence and faith in the banking system cannot be restored quickly.  The toothpaste cannot be put back into the tube. The horse has left the barn.

Quickly this becomes a moment for immediate damage control by the Canadian government. This explains why Justin Trudeau dropped the declaration of the Emergency Act.

It all makes sense now.  All of it.

Indeed, the government leaders who take their instructions from the multinational corporations in charge of the World Economic Forum, which is to say almost all of them, are so entrenched in their need to use COVID-19 as the pry bar for the Build Back Better agenda, they simply cannot let it go.

Without COVID-19, they can’t keep the vaccination push.  Without the vaccination push, they can’t keep the vaccine passport process in place.  Without the vaccination passport registration process to track and monitor human behavior, the governing authorities cannot fulfill the mission of a comprehensive digital identity and social credit tracking system.  Indeed, everything they seek is contingent upon keeping the premise of COVID-19 alive.

It is not accidental the World Economic Forum is at the epicenter of this

As we previously noted, the architects of the Build Back Better society (WEF) are guiding various governments on ways to create efficient registration and compliance systems, i.e. ways that permit citizens to prove their vaccinated and compliant status.  As these discussions are taking place, it is prudent to pause and think very carefully, wisely.

We all know, as we are reading this, under the guise of enhancing our safety, the U.S. Federal Government is in discussions with the medical community, multinational corporations and employers of citizens to create a more efficient process for you to register your vaccine compliance.

We know their conversation under the terminology of a COVID Passport.  The current goal is to make a system for us to show and prove our authorized work status, which, as you know, is based on your obedience to a mandated vaccine.

Beta tests are being conducted in various nations, each with different perspectives and constitutional limitations, based on pesky archaic rules and laws that govern freedom.

For the western, or for lack of a better word ‘democratic‘ outlook, Australia, New Zealand, France and Europe are leading the way with their technological system of vaccination check points and registered state/national vaccination status tied to your registration identification.

New York City joined the vaccine checkpoint process, as their city now requires the vaccine to enter all private businesses.  Los Angeles soon followed.

The Australian electronic checkpoints are essentially gateways where QR codes are being scanned from the cell phones of the compliant vaccinated citizen. Yes comrades, there’s an app for that.

Currently, the vaccine status scans are registered by happy compliance workers, greeters at the entry to the business or venue. Indeed, the Walmart greeter has a new gadget to scan your phone prior to allowing you custody of a shopping cart.

In restaurants, the host or hostess has a similar compliance scanner to check you in prior to seating or a reservation confirmation.

It’s simple and fun. You pull up your QR code on your cell phone (aka portable transponder and registration device), using the registration app, and your phone is scanned delivering a green check response to confirm your correct vaccination status and authorized entry.

The Australian government, at both a federal and state level, is working closely with Big Tech companies (thirsting for the national contract) to evaluate the best universal process that can be deployed nationwide.

As noted by all six Premiers in the states down under, hardware (scanners) and software (registration) systems are all being tested to find the most comprehensive/convenient portable units to settle upon. Meanwhile in the U.S., cities like Los Angeles and New York await the beta test conclusion before deploying their own version of the same process.

In Europe, they are also testing their vaccine checkpoint and registration processes known as the EU “Green Pass.”

The “Green Pass” is a similar technological system that gives a vaccinated and registered citizen access to all the venues and locations previously locked down while the COVID-19 virus was being mitigated. What would have been called a “vast right-wing conspiracy theory” 24 months ago, is now a COVID passport process well underway.

As with all things in our rapid technological era, you do not have to squint to see the horizon and accept that eventually this process will automate, and there will be a gadget or scanning gateway automatically granting you access without a person needing to stand there and scan each cell phone QR code individually.

The automated process just makes sense. You are well aware your cell phone already transmits an electronic beacon enabling your Uber or Lyft driver access to your location at the push of a touchscreen button, another convenient app on your phone. So, why wouldn’t the gateways just accept this same recognizable transmission as registration of your vaccine compliant arrival at the coffee shop?

The automated version is far easier and way cooler than having to reach into your pocket or purse and pulling up that pesky QR code on the screen. Smiles everyone, the partnership between Big Tech and Big Government is always there to make your transit more streamline and seamless. Heck, you won’t even notice the electronic receiver mounted at the entry. Give it a few weeks and you won’t remember the reason you were laughing at Alex Jones any more than you remember why you are taking off your shoes at the airport.

However, as this process is created, it is worth considering that you are being quietly changed from an individual person to a product. Some are starting to worry in the beta test:

[…] “you must become an object with attributes sitting in a database. Instead of roaming around anonymously making all sorts of transactions without the government’s knowledge, Australians find themselves passing through ‘gates’. …

All product-based systems have these gates to control the flow of stock and weed out errors. It is how computers see things. The more gates, the more clarity.

You are updating the government like a parcel pings Australia Post on its way to a customer. If a fault is found, automatic alerts are issued, and you are stopped from proceeding. In New South Wales, this comes in the form of a big red ‘X’ on the myGov vaccine passport app (if you managed to link your Medicare account without smashing the phone to bits).

Gate-keeping systems have been adapted from retail and transformed into human-based crowd solutions to micromanage millions of lives with the same ruthless efficiency as barcodes tracking stock. There is no nuance or humanity in this soulless digital age. Barcodes are binary. Good – bad. Citizen or dissident.

Even if you have all the required government attributes to pass through the gates – two vaccines, six boosters, and a lifelong subscription to Microsoft – something could go wrong. If your data fails the scan, you’ll slip into digital purgatory and become an error message. (read more)

It could be problematic if your status fails to register correctly, or if the system identifies some form of alternate lifestyle non-compliance that will block you from entry. Then again, that’s what beta tests are for, working out all these techno bugs and stuff. Not to worry…. move along….

Then again… “For those in the privileged class allowed to shop, take note of Covid signs which encourage cashless transactions under the guise of ‘health’. Messaging around cards being ‘safer’ will increase until the Treasury tries to remove cash entirely, almost certainly with public approval.”

Wait, now we are squinting at that familiar image on the horizon because we know those who control things have been talking about a cashless society for quite a while.

We also know that data is considered a major commodity all by itself. Why do you think every system you encounter in the modern era requires your phone number even when you are not registering for anything. It, meaning you, us, are all getting linked into this modern registration system that is defining our status. We also know that system operators buy and sell our registered status amid various retail and technology systems.

Yeah, that opaque shadow is getting a little clearer now.

Perhaps you attempt to purchase dog food and get denied entry into Pet Smart because you didn’t renew the car registration.  Or perhaps you are blocked from entry because you forgot to change the oil on the leased vehicle you drive, and Toyota has this weird agreement with some retail consortium.   You head to the oil change place that conveniently pops up in the citizen compliance App –it’s only two blocks away– they clear the alert after they do the oil change, and you are gateway compliant again.

Missed your booster shot? We’re sorry citizen, your bank account is frozen until your compliance is restored… please proceed to the nearest vaccination office as displayed conveniently on your cell phone screen to open access to all further gates (checkpoints)…. tap to continue!

Vote for the wrong candidate?  Attend, or donate to, a trucker protest?

Yes, it seemed transparently obvious where this was heading, and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau just awakened the masses:

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

All images in this article are from The Last Refuge

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Over the past month, both the mainstream and alternative media worldwide have focused on the Russian military intervention in Ukraine. It was launched in response to almost nine years of Western provocations since the Euromaidan colour revolution saw the democratically elected Moscow-friendly President Viktor Yanukovych overthrown and replaced with the successive pro-Western governments of Petro Poroshenko and Volodymyr Zelenskyy, whose eight year long war on the breakaway Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk, involving the use of neo-Nazi paramilitaries such as the Azov Battalion and the ethnic cleansing of both Republics’ predominantly ethic Russian populations, would act as a catalyst for the Russian Federation to intervene militarily in its Western neighbour – with attempts to resolve the situation peacefully by Moscow over the past several months having ultimately amounted to nothing following Kiev’s refusal to implement its’ side of the Minsk Agreements, which would have granted Donetsk and Luhansk a degree of autonomy while still remaining under Ukrainian rule.

In the past week however, the corporate media, has noticeably, in lockstep, switched its focus back to COVID-19, specifically the new ‘BA.2 variant’, and the positive tests of high-profile figures such as Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Jen Psaki and Doug Emhoff, husband of US Vice President Kamala Harris  – media attention which has not been seen since multiple countries worldwide simultaneously dropped all restrictions at the end of January, during the highly coincidental timing of the World Economic Forum’s Davos Agenda virtual event.

This sudden coordinated pivot back to the Covid mainstream media narrative, one that was  suddenly dropped in a similar lockstep fashion two months ago, raises many questions. And with the recent confirmation by current Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland – herself instrumental in the original Euromaidan regime change operation – that US-funded labs in Ukraine were developing bioweapons, as well as allegations by the White House that Russia is planning to use chemical weapons as part of the current military operation, there is indication that the sudden media switch to Covid may be used as a means to clear the stage for a deadly escalation in Ukraine – a false flag chemical attack or lab leak, blamed on Russia by the West, and used as means for NATO to launch a ‘No Fly Zone’ over Ukraine, clamoured for by current Ukrainian President Zelenskyy.

Indeed, the staging of a false flag chemical attack as a means to encourage a US-led military intervention is a tactic with very recent usage by Washington’s Neocons.

In 2017, the Syrian Arab Republic had been in the grip of a six-year long regime change operation launched in response to President Bashar al-Assad’s refusal to allow Western-allied Qatar to build a pipeline through his country. Unlike Libya however, subjected to a similar regime change operation at the same time and overrun and destroyed in the space of eight months by Western-backed terrorists, Syria had been successfully able to withstand the similar Western-backed onslaught launched against its territory, thanks in part to interventions by its’ allies Iran and Russia, which would lead to the regime-change lobby taking reckless measures.

On the 4^th of April 2017, a false flag chemical attack would be launched in the Syrian town of Khan Shaykhun, resulting in the then-US administration of Donald Trump launching a cruise missile strike against the Syrian government-controlled Shayrat airbase three days later, the first direct military engagement between the West and Damascus since the regime change operation began, though one that just stopped short of the full-scale military intervention that the Neocons had hoped for.

Undeterred, a similar false flag attack would be launched almost a year to the day later in the city of Douma, this time resulting in the US, Britain and France launching air strikes against Syrian government targets, though again stopping short of a Libya-style ‘No Fly Zone’.

Now with the near inevitability that the stage is being set for the same script to be played out in Ukraine – possibly around the end of May when the World Economic Forum is due to hold its’ first in-person summit in two years – the world must prepare itself for preventing the possible consequences, of a ‘limited’ strike against Russian military infrastructure, similar to what happened in Syria, which could potentially result in the gravest consequence of all – World War III.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Gavin O’Reilly is an activist from Dublin, Ireland, with a strong interest in the effects of British and US Imperialism. Secretary of the Dublin Anti-Internment Committee, a campaign group set up to raise awareness of Irish Republican political prisoners in British and 26 County jails. His work has previously appeared on American Herald Tribune, The Duran, Al-Masdar and MintPress News.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

---

“Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War” 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-5-3
Year: 2012
Pages: 102

PDF Edition:  $6.50 (sent directly to your email account!)

Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which hosts the critically acclaimed website www.globalresearch.ca . He is a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.

Reviews

“This book is a ‘must’ resource – a richly documented and systematic diagnosis of the supremely pathological geo-strategic planning of US wars since ‘9-11’ against non-nuclear countries to seize their oil fields and resources under cover of ‘freedom and democracy’.”
–John McMurtry, Professor of Philosophy, Guelph University

“In a world where engineered, pre-emptive, or more fashionably “humanitarian” wars of aggression have become the norm, this challenging book may be our final wake-up call.”
-Denis Halliday, Former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations

Michel Chossudovsky exposes the insanity of our privatized war machine. Iran is being targeted with nuclear weapons as part of a war agenda built on distortions and lies for the purpose of private profit. The real aims are oil, financial hegemony and global control. The price could be nuclear holocaust. When weapons become the hottest export of the world’s only superpower, and diplomats work as salesmen for the defense industry, the whole world is recklessly endangered. If we must have a military, it belongs entirely in the public sector. No one should profit from mass death and destruction.
–Ellen Brown, author of ‘Web of Debt’ and president of the Public Banking Institute  

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

On Monday, President Joe Biden said “evolving intelligence” indicates Russia is preparing a massive cyberattack against the United States in response to its support for Ukraine. “The magnitude of Russia’s cyber capacity is fairly consequential and it’s coming,” Biden said.

Days prior to Biden’s remarks, an FBI advisory issued to US businesses warned “Kremlin-linked hackers could target US organizations as the Russian military continues to suffer heavy losses in Ukraine and as Western sanctions on the Kremlin begin to bite,” reports CNN.

Anne Neuberger, Biden’s national security adviser, said during a White House press briefing on Monday Russia is preparing “preparatory activity” for a cyber attack on the United States and its allies. She declared the coming attacks are “not about espionage, it’s probably very likely about disruptive or destructive [cyber] activity” in response to US assistance to Ukraine. The following day, US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Director Jen Easterly made similar remarks to business executives, according to CNN.

(It should be noted Neuberger is a Zionist and thus an ardent defender of Israel; the Yehuda and Anne Neuberger Foundation has “donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the pro-Israel lobby known as AIPAC, for its efforts to influence the US government and public opinion,” David Corn reported for Mother Jones in 2021.)

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said in February a Russian cyberattack “on one will be regarded as an attack on all,” a statement that invokes NATO’s Article 5 of the Washington Treaty. “Article 5 provides that if a NATO Ally is the victim of an armed attack, each and every other member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the Ally attacked,” explains the NATO web page.

The United States, and especially Joe Biden and his  son, Hunter Biden, have a vested interest in making certain Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the color revolution installed government of Ukraine remain in power.

The fact is the US, under the State Department and Obama’s Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, Victoria Nuland, and the US Ambassador to Kyiv Geoffrey Pyatt, were responsible for orchestrating the overthrow of the democratically elected government of President Viktor Yanukovych.

This is a taboo subject for the corporate media as it reports a one-sided blow-by-blow account of the war in Ukraine. Never mentioned is the fact the US orchestrated  color revolution in Ukraine (and those in Georgia and Kyrgyzstan) violate the United Nations Charter and international law.

Prior to leaving office, President Obama looked into “an unprecedented cyber covert action against Russia in retaliation for alleged Russian interference in the American presidential election, U.S. intelligence officials told NBC News.” As we now know—and some of us claimed at the time—the supposed effort by Russia to get Donald Trump elected was pure fantasy and rank political expediency. It took almost two years for ex-FBI Director Robert Mueller to discover the obvious—there had been no collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia. Despite this, many Americans, in particular Democrats, believe the conspiracy theory is true.

The effort to destabilize Russia continued under the outlier president Trump. He gave the CIA carte blanc to launch cyber attacks on Russia. “The secret authorization, known as a presidential finding, gives the spy agency more freedom in both the kinds of operations it conducts and who it targets, undoing many restrictions that had been in place under prior administrations. The finding allows the CIA to more easily authorize its own covert cyber operations, rather than requiring the agency to get approval from the White House,” reported Yahoo News in 2020.

The “very aggressive” finding “gave the agency very specific authorities to really take the fight offensively to a handful of adversarial countries,” said a former U.S. government official. These countries include Russia, China, Iran and North Korea — which are mentioned directly in the document — but the finding potentially applies to others as well, according to another former official. “The White House wanted a vehicle to strike back,” said the second former official. “And this was the way to do it.” (emphasis added.)

Those of us who study history and geopolitics know the CIA has had a free hand to conduct subversion and surveillance activities around the world and at home despite its charter. “When the CIA was created in 1947, members of Congress who feared the establishment here of the type of domestic surveillance apparatus that the Allies had just defeated in Germany insisted that the new CIA have no role in American law enforcement and no legal ability to spy within the U.S. The legislation creating the CIA contains those limitations,” writes Andrew Napolitano.

“Populations from at least 25 countries were denied the right to choose their own leaders,” writes Thomas Swan. “This is perhaps the main reason why America is hated so much around the world. The excuse given by CIA supporters is that Soviet influence over certain governments had to be curtailed. However, in many cases, no proof of Russian activity was ever found. The CIA had taken to dismantling any leftist or anti-US government, regardless of the regime’s domestic or foreign support.”

The CIA, following Trump’s “presidential finding,” engaged in a new round of computer and network subversion against Russia and Iran. The 2018 finding gave a green light to the CIA to wipe or dump hacked banking data and target foreign intelligence services, media organizations, charities, religious institutions, or other non-state entities for disruptive or destructive cyber actions, according to a report posted at Axios.

In fact, Trump’s finding was little more than a formality. In addition to overthrowing elected governments, the CIA has engaged in assassination, the distribution of heroin and cocaine, and making certain local officials, most notably state governors, are onboard with the establishment’s program (see “Former Governor Jesse Ventura Explains That CIA Embedded In Many State Governments”).

“Recently we have noted a significant increase in attempts to inflict harm on Russia’s informational systems from external forces,” Nikolai Patrushev, secretary of Russia’s Security Council, told the Rossiiskaya Gazeta daily in January of 2017, prior to the US election.  Patrushev said the Obama administration had “deliberately ignor(ed) the fact that the main Internet servers” complicit in the attacks “are based on the territory of the United States and are used by Washington for intelligence and other purposes aimed at retaining its global domination.”

In short, the intelligence apparatus of the US was engaged in subverting Russia’s computer networks (and those in China, Iran, and North Korea) years before the current crisis in Ukraine and the contested US election. This was accomplished under the bogus assertion that Putin and Russia colluded with the Trump team to get him elected, thus painting the real estate magnate as a Russian tool.

“The U.S. CIA’s hacking unit has been conducting attacks over the last 11 years on Chinese aviation firms, technology companies, oil sector companies and other critical industries,” Emily Fang, a correspondent in Beijing, told NPR in 2021.

China, Russia, North Korea, Israel, and other nations have probed the networks of adversaries for years, and may have indeed engaged in cyberattacks. However, as Wikileaks discovered in 2017, the CIA is at the forefront of this activity. Its sophisticated arsenal of cyberattack tools include “malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized ‘zero day’ exploits, malware remote control systems,” according to WikiLeaks “Vault 7” archive of documents purloined from the CIA.

The “Year Zero” documents introduce “the scope and direction of the CIA’s global covert hacking program, its malware arsenal and dozens of ‘zero day’ weaponized exploits against a wide range of U.S. and European company products, include Apple’s iPhone, Google’s Android and Microsoft’s Windows and even Samsung TVs, which are turned into covert microphones.”

The events of 9/11 gave the agency the emphasis it needed to expand its cyberattack efforts.

Since 2001 the CIA has gained political and budgetary preeminence over the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). The CIA found itself building not just its now infamous drone fleet, but a very different type of covert, globe-spanning force — its own substantial fleet of hackers. The agency’s hacking division freed it from having to disclose its often controversial operations to the NSA (its primary bureaucratic rival) in order to draw on the NSA’s hacking capacities.

All of the above represents factual information, not a conspiracy theory. I believe—and this is my opinion based on years of dedicated research—that the majority of cyberattacks launched against US corporations and the government originated with CIA hackers who leave behind traces implicating the above roster of official enemies.

In the days to come, as the war in Ukraine continues, we may face cyberattacks on critical infrastructure here in the US. The warfare state is dedicated to confronting Russia and China, even if it results in a nuclear conflagration. There is no better way to get Americans onboard with criminal behavior than to let them sit in the dark for a week or more without access to streaming television and their precious smart phones that are in effect surveillance devices.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Kurt Nimmo is a regular contributor to Global Research.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

 

---

Today, the dangers of military escalation are beyond description.

What is now happening in Ukraine has serious geopolitical implications. It could lead us into a World War III Scenario.

It is important that a peace process be initiated with a view to preventing escalation. 

Global Research does not support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The history of this war must be understood.

The bombing and shelling led by Ukraine’s Armed Forces directed against the people of Donbass started eight years ago, resulting in the destruction of residential areas and more than 10,000 civilian casualties.

A  bilateral Peace Agreement is required.

---

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has been widely condemned for its unjustified aggression. There are legitimate fears of a revived Russian empire and even a new world war. Less discussed is the almost half-trillion dollar defense industry supplying the weapons to both sides, and the substantial profits it will make as a result.

The conflict has already seen massive growth in defense spending. The EU announced it would buy and deliver 450 million euros of arms to Ukraine, while the US has pledged US$350 million in military aid in addition to the over 90 tons of military supplies and $650 million in the past year alone.

Put together, this has seen the US and NATO sending 17,000 anti-tank weapons and 2,000 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, for instance. An international coalition of nations is also willingly arming the Ukrainian resistance, including the UK, Australia, Turkey and Canada.

This is a major boon for the world’s largest defence contractors. To give just a couple of examples, Raytheon makes the Stinger missiles, and jointly with Lockheed Martin makes the Javelin anti-tank missiles being supplied by the likes of the US and Estonia.

Both US groups, Lockheed and Raytheon shares are up by around 16% and 3% respectively since the invasion, against a 1% drop in the S&P 500, as you can see in the chart below.

BAE Systems, the largest player in the UK and Europe, is up 26%. Of the world’s top five contractors by revenue, only Boeing has dropped, due to its exposure to airlines among other reasons.

Defence company share prices vs S&P 500

Orange = Lockheed Martin; cyan = Boeing; yellow = Raytheon; indigo = BAe Systems; purple = Northrop Grumman; blue = S&P 500. Trading View

Opportunity knocks

Ahead of the conflict, top western arms companies were briefing investors about a likely boost to their profits. Gregory J Hayes, the chief executive of US defense giant Raytheon, stated on a January 25 earnings call:

We just have to look to last week where we saw the drone attack in the UAE … And of course, the tensions in eastern Europe, the tensions in the South China Sea, all of those things are putting pressure on some of the defence spending over there. So I fully expect we’re going to see some benefit from it.

Even at that time, the global defense industry had been forecast to rise 7% in 2022. The biggest risk to investors, as explained by Richard Aboulafia, managing director of US defense consultancy AeroDynamic Advisory, is that “the whole thing is revealed to be a Russian house of cards and the threat dissipates.”

With no signs of that happening, defense companies are benefiting in several ways. As well as directly selling arms to the warring sides and supplying other countries that are donating arms to Ukraine, they are going to see extra demand from nations such as Germany and Denmark who have said they will raise their defense spending.

The overall industry is global in scope. The US is easily the world leader, with 37% of all arms sales from 2016-20. Next comes Russia with 20%, followed by France (8%), Germany (6%) and China (5%).

Beyond the top five exporters are also many other potential beneficiaries in this war. Turkey defied Russian warnings and insisted on supplying Ukraine with weapons including hi-tech drones – a major boon to its own defence industry, which supplies nearly 1% of the world market.

And with Israel enjoying around 3% of global sales, one of its newspapers recently ranan article that proclaimed: “An Early Winner of Russia’s Invasion: Israel’s Defense Industry.”

As for Russia, it has been building up its own industry as a response to Western sanctions dating back to 2014. The government instituted a massive import substitution programme to reduce its reliance on foreign weaponry and expertise, as well as to increase foreign sales. There have been some instances of continued licensing of arms, such as from the UK to Russia worth an estimated £3.7 million, but this ended in 2021.

As the second biggest arms exporter, Russia has targeted a range of international clients. Its arms exports did fall 22% between 2016-2020, but this was mainly due to a 53% reduction in sales to India. At the same time, it dramatically enhanced its sales to countries such as China, Algeria and Egypt.

According to a US congressional budget report: “Russian weaponry may be less expensive and easier to operate and maintain relative to western systems.” The largestRussian defence firms are the missile manufacturer Almaz-Antey (sales volume $6.6 billion), United Aircraft Corp (US$4.6 billion) and United Shipbuilding Corp ($4.5 billion).

In the face of Putin’s imperialism, there are limits to what can be achieved. There appears little credible possibility for Ukraine to demilitarize in the face of Russia’s continued threat.

There have nevertheless been some efforts to de-escalate the situation, with NATO, for example, very publicly rejecting the request of Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky to establish a no-fly zone. But these efforts are undermined by the huge financial incentives on both sides for increasing the level of weaponry.

What the west and Russia share is a profound military industrial complex. They both rely on, enable and are influenced by their massive weapons industries. This has been reinforced by newer hi-tech offensive capabilities from drones to sophisticated AI-guided autonomous weapons systems.

If the ultimate goal is de-escalation and sustainable peace, there is a need for a serious process of attacking the economic root causes of this military aggression. President Joe Biden has said that the US will directly sanction the Russian defense industry, making it harder for them to obtain raw materials and sell their wares internationally to reinvest in more military equipment.

Having said that, this may create a commercial opportunity for Western contractors. It could leave a temporary vacuum for US and European companies to gain a further competitive advantage, resulting in an expansion of the global arms race and creating an even greater business incentive for new conflicts.

Ukrainian soldiers use a launcher with US-made Javelin missiles during military exercises in the Donetsk region, Ukraine, on December 23, 2021. Photo: Ukrainian Defense Ministry Press Service

In the aftermath of this war, we should explore ways of limiting the power and influence of this industry. This could include international agreements to limit the sale of specific weapons, multilateral support for countries that commit to reducing their defense industry, and sanctioning arms companies that appear to be lobbying for increased military spending.

More fundamentally, it would involve supporting movements that challenge the further development of military capabilities.

Clearly, there is no easy answer and it will not happen overnight, but it is imperative for us to recognize as an international community that long-lasting peace is impossible without eliminating as much as possible the making and selling of weapons as a lucrative economic industry.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Peter Bloom is Professor of Management, University of Essex.

Featured image: F-15 Eagles from the 493rd Fighter Squadron at Royal Air Force Lakenheath, England, taxi to the runway during the final day of Anatolian Eagle June 18, 2015, at 3rd Main Jet Base, Turkey. The 493rd FS received the 2014 Raytheon Trophy as the U.S. Air Force’s top fighter squadron. (U.S. Air Force photo/Tech. Sgt. Eric Burks)

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

First published on March 13, 2022

***

“The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes.”—Thomas Paine  

As a former officer in the Canadian Armed Forces, I am appalled at the direction this great nation has taken. If someone had told me twenty-five years ago that one day citizens of Canada would be arrested for peacefully demonstrating in the streets of our nation’s capital, I would not have believed it possible. And yet here we are today, watching the government shred our Charter of Rights and Freedoms by threatening and trampling—sometimes literally with police horses—Canadians who wish to send a message of love and a plea for freedom.

@benswann___ Police in Ottawa Trample Peaceful Protestors With Horses #Protesters #Trampling #Ottawa ♬ original sound – Ben Swann

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has subjected 38 million people to the first and only invocation of the sweeping Emergencies Act we have ever seen in this country. Shockingly, he has done so without any justification. Even more egregiously, he has asserted these powers in order to solve a problem that he himself created and deliberately exacerbated. 

Both before and after he made this unprecedented motion—which the House of Commons approved on February 21, 2022, but which was rejected by the Senate two days later—Trudeau has been acting equal parts coward and tyrant. He has refused to engage in negotiations—or, for that matter, in any dialogue whatsoever—with representatives for hundreds of thousands of working-class protesters, deeming them a “small fringe minority” who hold “unacceptable views.” What he means is that they do not share the vision of his puppet-masters at Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum (WEF).

Throughout the thus-far-month-long standoff, the Prime Minister has uttered a string of pejoratives, painting anyone who dares dissent from his (read: the WEF’s) technocratic agenda and totalitarian tactics as a “racist,” a “misogynist,” a “terrorist.” He has even resorted to the vile term “Nazism” as an excuse to dodge face-to-face meetings with his Canadian brothers and sisters from all walks of life. Rather than listening to what they have to say, as a true leader would, he has treated citizens with callous, arrogant disregard for their human rights, their legitimate demands, and their state-imposed suffering.

Klaus Schwab on Trudeau’s loyalty to the World Economic Forum & not to the Canadian people. pic.twitter.com/8VaTKMAnb6

— TheNo1Waffler (@TheNo1Waffler) February 15, 2022

All of this is to say that, from everything I have seen or studied, the current regime in Ottawa has become the most dangerous, lawless government in Canada’s 155-year history as an independent nation. Over the past two years, it has displayed a wanton disregard for the rule of law and the legislative process, putting in place mandates that have not been voted upon by Parliament. In so doing, Trudeau and his cabinet have illegally and incrementally restricted the rights and freedoms of all Canadian citizens.

To wit: In the last two years, the Prime Minister, his administration, and his Liberal Party have been relentlessly coercing Canadians into being violated with an experimental injection that is neither safe nor effective. 

To wit: In the same two years, rates of small business failures, depression, suicide, domestic violence, and deaths-by-overdose have skyrocketed across the nation.

To wit: In the past month alone, peaceful protestors—including sympathetic military and police veterans—have been beaten, harshly shoved to the ground, psychologically intimidated, and verbally threatened for exercising their constitutional right to assemble and speak freely. 

To wit: In the past week, the Trudeau government has invoked the Emergencies Act and has used it to prepare and execute—even before waiting for ratification by Parliament—a ruthless, privacy-invading plan to track down and disclose the personal information of citizens who financially contributed to Freedom Convoy 2022 or who attended the Ottawa protest—and freeze the bank accounts of some of them.

Thus, even though the Emergencies Act was defeated in the Senate, I believe a new era of authoritarian control is sweeping through our nation’s halls of power. This control grid has been designed to work in concert with the equally authoritarian technocratic agenda of the WEF.

Like most governments in the West, the ruling party in Canada has been heavily infiltrated by members who subscribe to the WEF’s “Great Reset.” Klaus Schwab, the WEF founder and executive chairman, admitted as much in a 2017 interview, when he boasted:

“Yesterday, I was at the reception for Prime Minister Trudeau and I would know that half of his cabinet, or even more than half of his cabinet, are for or are actually Young Leaders of the WEF.”

Sure enough, a list of names on a WEF sister website reveals that both Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland are graduates of the influential Forum of Young Global Leaders. (Freeland is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and four years ago gave a talk to that globalist body.) Yet, despite such easily verified evidence, “fact checkers” and Ottawa officials call the existence of this group of globalist technocrats-in-training a “conspiracy theory.” 

Given that the Liberal Party has fallen under the WEF’s spell, it should come as no surprise to see the government now fast-tracking brand-new vaccination regulations to be added to the Canada Labour Code. Once implemented, these regulations will require all federal employers and federally regulated industries to mandate and enforce the COVID-19 “vaccination” of employees as a condition of employment. (I put “vaccination” in quote marks because the mRNA doses are actually a gene-altering therapy, not a traditional vaccine that is said to immunize against a disease.) Never before have Canada’s federal workers been required to undergo vaccination to keep their jobs. 

Of even more concern is that the soon-to-be-adopted federal vaccination regulations will supersede the provincial governments’ longstanding authority over and administration of healthcare.

Why would such a change in the administrative structure be taking place?

I believe it’s because passing the buck to the federal government provides a great excuse for provincial premiers to relax their unpopular vaccine passport requirements for all Canadians who want to travel and enter public spaces.

The impeccable timing of this change in policy will take the pressure off their political fortunes—a kind of sure-win strategy for the upcoming provincial elections set to take place between June and December of 2022. The unsuspecting voters will be deceived into believing they are free from the shackles of the vaccine passport, when in fact only the goalposts have been moved. 

But that is not the worst of it. No, the federal workers’ vaccine mandate and the expected post-elections imposition of a vaccine passport at the provincial and/or federal level are just the beginning of a far more sinister plan.

What Lies Ahead

These envisioned edicts in Canada are simply the initial steps Trudeau and fellow globalist technocrats are taking in their attempt to enslave all the planet’s inhabitants—except, of course, their own kind.

But even if the vaccine passport plan is dropped in Canada and elsewhere, what will definitely come to pass, as sure as night follows day, is a worldwide digital ID system. My confidence in making that claim stems from the constantly articulated aim of the WEF—and of all the central banks—to implement a global system in which everyone’s personal data will be incorporated into the Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) network. 

Once that goal is accomplished, every aspect of our lives will be controlled, from womb to crematorium, by the so-called 1% who run the world’s most influential institutions and comprise its bluest bloodlines.

(Yes, bloodlines. As in the Rockefellers, Morgans, du Ponts, Rothschilds, British royals, and Dutch royals, to name a few of the supposedly superior families whose wealth and power have been dominating the global population for centuries.) 

What do I mean by “every aspect of our lives”?

For starters, what we can purchase with our CBDC money.

And from there . . . whom we may—or may not—associate with. How much electricity we can use in our (rental) dwellings. What we are allowed to read, see, hear, say—and even eat.

Whether and where we can travel. The list of “forbiddens” will keep growing. And so will the social demerits we pile up for bad behavior. That is, for disobeying our slave masters. A similar version of this scheme already exists in China. 

I don’t mean to sound hopeless. Despite this bleak peek at an economy being purposely destroyed by the “Build Back Better” architects and engineers at the WEF (and, not to be forgotten, at its parent, the United Nations), I do not think we should despair. For, believe it or not, we are beginning to win the battle for freedom in Canada and in other countries. 

It helps that more of us than ever before are “awake” to the globalists’ intentions. Our ranks will only expand in coming months as more and more of the wrongdoing at the top is exposed. (Thankfully, the sunlight of truth is the best disinfectant.) 

Moreover, Canadian politicians’ wild misuse of state authority is a sure sign of their desperation—a desperation born of their futile attempt to stop the sudden crumbling of the pseudo-pandemic narrative. The COVID-19 story has been a ruse from its inception, planned over many decades and constructed on a bed of lies. In the end, the current Canadian government, like so many rotten regimes in the past, will be relegated to the dustbin of history. 

I implore all active members of Canada’s military and police forces to uphold the highest law of our land.

Promise you will never forget your solemnly sworn oath to defend the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Your country is depending upon you to guard it well.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

David Skripac has a Bachelor of Technology degree in Aerospace Engineering. He served as a Captain in the Canadian Forces for nine years. During his two tours of duty in the Air Force, he flew extensively in the former Yugoslavia as well as in Somalia, Rwanda, Ethiopia, and Djibouti.

He is author of a recently published e-book, “Our Species Is Being Genetically Modified” and a regular contributor to Global Research.

---

Our Species Is Being Genetically Modified. Are We Witnessing Humanity’s March Toward Extinction? Viruses Are Our Friends, Not Our Foes

Author: David Skripac

Click here to read the e-Book.

.

.

.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

A sometimes overlooked factor which influenced the Nazi-Soviet War is the effects of the weather, chiefly the rain, ice and snow, the type of conditions for which the Russian or Soviet climate was famous for.

It must be mentioned, however, that the adverse climatic situation had started to impact on the Nazi-led invasion in October 1941, four months into the attack, when Adolf Hitler‘s forces had by then expected to be victorious, but instead were pressed for time. The weather only became an issue because the invasion had not gone as planned.

Why were the Germans pressed for time? In the main because of the strategic blunders, committed by the German high command and Hitler; between the dates of 22 June 1941 when the invasion was launched across an enormously broad front, which ultimately weakened the force of the blow; and on 21 August 1941, when Hitler postponed the advance on the all important Moscow for a month and a half, sending his divisions to the north (Leningrad) and south (the Ukraine) in what proved a critical mistake.

 

Taking these causes into account, the suggestion is inaccurate that either heavy rainfall, or freezing cold, were primarily responsible for Operation Barbarossa‘s failure. Before analysing German misfortune regarding the weather, it can be noted that Hitler initially got lucky with what he believed, to the end, was the late start of his invasion.

Barbarossa had been scheduled to commence on 15 May 1941, but this was too early for an attack on Russia to proceed (Goodspeed, The German Wars, p. 390). Having not been informed of the relevant weather reports, Hitler was unaware that the spring of 1941 was exceptionally wet in the western USSR, including the eastern half of Poland, which the USSR occupied as part of the 1939 Nazi-Soviet Pact.

Many of the Polish-Russian river valleys were still flooded in late May and early June 1941, such as the strategically placed Bug river, which flows for almost 500 miles across Poland, western Ukraine and south-western Belarus. Barbarossa, therefore, could not have been successfully executed until weeks after 1 June 1941.

Due to the April 1941 Wehrmacht offensives in Yugoslavia and Greece, the attack on the Soviet Union was delayed for 5 and a half weeks (38 days). It has been claimed down the years that this hold up was fatal to German plans, an attractive idea, but something quite different is the case. Military historian Donald J. Goodspeed observed “since the initial thrust had to go rapidly to yield the best results, Hitler probably gained more than he lost by the postponement”.

This was because the ground in the western Soviet Union had dried out by 22 June 1941. There were no overflowing rivers or flooded fields in sight. The hard, flat surfaces were suitable for the panzer formations to advance relatively unhindered, at 30 miles per hour, inflicting terrible damage on the Soviet military. German Army Group Centre reached the Belarusian capital of Minsk, on just day 6 of the invasion. In the weeks to come the strategic errors and, to a lesser extent, growing Soviet resistance, the vast terrain and poor weather would lead to the slowing of the German advance.

Overall, the Red Army’s performance in 1941 and into 1942 was decidedly inept, many of its divisions suffering from poor morale and training. This was not the typical Soviet soldier’s fault. The culpability lay mainly with Joseph Stalin, for decimating the Red Army high command of experienced officers with his purges. British scholar Evan Mawdsley noted, “Many Soviet soldiers fought badly in 1941 or surrendered without a fight, demoralized troops in a demoralized society”.

There was some fierce Red Army resistance on display from June 1941, but this was not a widespread occurrence along the front, and should be put into perspective. The statistics on casualties demonstrate that the Nazi-Soviet War was one-sided in its opening months. By the end of September 1941, according to Mawdsley the Germans had inflicted 2,050,000 personnel losses on the Red Army, while the invaders by then had suffered 185,000 losses (a ratio of 11:1 in favour of the Germans). The casualty figures for the remainder of 1941, and for the first 6 months of 1942, continued to heavily favour the Wehrmacht, hovering at a ratio of between 7:1 and 8:1.

In the closing weeks of 1941, the Russian rains and debilitating winter can be regarded as secondary factors in Barbarossa’s demise. Yet, as stated, the inclement weather still contributed to the Wehrmacht’s failure in toppling the USSR. Marshal Georgy Zhukov, Stalin’s top wartime commander, wrote in his memoirs,

“For the benefit of those who are inclined to hide behind the mud, as the real reason for the Germans’ defeat near Moscow, I would like to add that the period of slush in October 1941 was comparatively short. Cold weather set in and snow fell in early November, making the terrain and roads passable everywhere”.

Zhukov’s viewpoint is accurate relating to the mud; though he does not mention quite how severe the winter of 1941-42 was, a subject which will be discussed further on here. The winter that was to come shortened what the Russians call the Rasputitsa, when the rains turn poor quality roads, pathways and fields into rivers of mud. Zhukov reminisced how the mud stuck to everything, from human feet “to the wheels of the barrows” and “the blades of the spades”.

Meanwhile, on the opposing side to Zhukov was the Austrian-born SS lieutenant Otto Skorzeny. Like Zhukov, Skorzeny was located on the frontline in 1941. Skorzeny wrote in his memoirs that rainfall did not arrive near Moscow until “October 19” when “torrential rain fell on the area of Army Group Center, which in three days literally sank into the morass”. Hitler had already said in August 1941 that the “autumn rain season of the Moscow region begins about mid-October”.

The autumn Rasputitsa lasted for 3 weeks, until 10 November 1941. Even before 10 November the mud was solidifying, with the temperature dropping considerably in the first days of November. The colder conditions were at first welcomed by German soldiers, who had no idea of the winter that lay in store. Skorzeny wrote, “We thought: long live the cold! It froze during the night of November 6 and 7. Slowly the supplies began to flow again. We received ammunition, fuel, some food and cigarettes. Finally the wounded could be evacuated, and preparations were made for the final offensive”.

With the Rasputitsa at its worst during the second half of October 1941, there is no doubt it had a very serious impact on the German invasion. The following August of 1942, on the 9th of that month, Hitler insisted, “Had it not been for the rain and mud last October, we should have been in Moscow in no time. We have now learnt that the moment the rain comes, we must stop everything”.

Eminent climatologists Hermann Flohn and Jehuda Neumann, in a co-authored study on how the weather impacted the Nazi-Soviet War, recognised that “At the time of WWII, there were very few paved roads in the USSR. Rains and low evaporation rates of the fall season would turn unhardened roads and fields into quagmires, in which many of the tanks, pieces of heavy artillery, and other mechanized transports would dig their own graves by trying to move on”.

The respite gave the Soviets time to strengthen their rearguard. In the first fortnight of November 1941, the Kremlin dispatched 21 fresh divisions from Siberia and Central Asia to the Moscow front, the sort of reserves which the Germans did not have.

The Rasputitsa also impinged on Soviet divisions but, altogether, the inhospitable surfaces had a more negative outcome for the attackers which was inevitable. Fighting a war based largely on defence in the early 1940s, the Red Army was less reliant on mobility than the Germans. Russian tanks, like the T-34, had wider tracks than the panzers and they moved more efficiently across the soggy soil. Supplies and logistics were not as great an issue for the Russians, who had a working railway system directly behind them, while the German lines were increasingly stretched.

In the first half of October 1941, the Germans had almost annihilated the defences in front of Moscow, destroying 86 Soviet divisions around the Russian towns of Vyazma and Briansk, both about 130 miles from the capital. When the rain clouds arrived on 19 October, Army Group Centre on that day captured Mozhaisk, just 65 miles west of Moscow. It is little wonder that Zhukov considered the dates, from the 10th to the 20th of October 1941, as the most dangerous time for the Red Army in the war.

The Red Army’s resistance was at a low ebb by mid-October. With the town of Mozhaisk under German control, the road to Moscow lay open. Skorzeny believed at this period, “We were convinced that we would be in Moscow at the beginning of November”.

The earlier strategic errors, committed by the Nazi hierarchy, now caught up with them. Frontline commanders were aware that rainfall was coming. One Wehrmacht general recalled how “the reality far exceeded our worst expectations”; but he remembered too that the rains began “slowly enough in mid-October” and “became steadily more intense”. The rainfall’s slow start partially enabled the German 6th Army to take the Ukrainian metropolis of Kharkov, the USSR’s 4th largest city, on 24 October 1941. Forty-five miles north of Kharkov, the Germans also captured on 24 October Belgorod, a medieval Russian city.

The Wehrmacht victories then began to dry up, with the German approach halted by the mud as the climatologists, Flohn and Neumann, have highlighted. In early November with the mud hardening, the Germans were able to sort out their transportation lines. The advance on Moscow did not resume in full flow until 15 November 1941. By then it was too late. Hindsight is always useful but with the biting cold and snow emerging, the German offensive should not have recommenced at all in 1941. On the night of 11 November, the temperature dropped suddenly to minus 20 degrees Celsius.

Flohn and Neumann have outlined in their paper that the Russian winter of 1941-42 “turned out to be one of the most severe winters on record” and “there is no comparison between German and Russian winters; even a ‘normal’ Russian winter would be considered a very cold winter in Germany”.

A table produced in the Flohn-Neumann study provides the figures regarding winter temperatures in Moscow, for example, compared to other winters in the capital. Temperature recordings in Moscow, for November 1941, show that month was on average 6.8 degrees Celsius colder when compared to November 1940. December 1941 in Moscow was, on average, 5.2 degrees Celsius colder in comparison to December 1940. January 1942 was 6 degrees colder than January 1941, February 1942 was 1.2 degrees colder than February 1941, and March 1942 was 3.4 degrees colder than March 1941.

It is also worth comparing the winters of 1941-42 to 1939-40, in order to provide a broader picture. November 1941 in Moscow was on average 4.7 degrees Celsius colder than November 1939. December 1941 was 5.4 degrees colder than December 1939. January 1942 was 0.8 degrees colder than January 1940. February 1942 had the exact same average temperature as February 1940, and March 1942 was 4.5 degrees colder than March 1940.

The winter of 1939-40 was somewhat colder than 1940-41, but still nowhere as severe as 1941-42, when the war was raging beside Moscow. The average temperature in Moscow for November 1941, which takes into account both day time and night time recordings, was minus 5.3 degrees Celsius. December 1941 showed an average temperature of minus 12.8 degrees.

In January 1942, it dropped again to minus 20.2 degrees Celsius in Moscow. February 1942 showed a recording of minus 11.8 degrees. Even March 1942 had a well below zero reading, with an average temperature of minus 9.7 degrees. This winter was extraordinarily brutal and nor were the above temperatures limited to the Moscow region. Similar figures were posted at Leningrad, over 400 miles from Moscow. By 20 February 1942 the Germans had suffered 112,627 cases of frostbite.

Hitler, who at length was examining meteorological studies and forecasts at the Wolf’s Lair, continually declared the winter of 1941-42 to be  “the worst in 150 years, and had come on four weeks earlier than expected”. This was perhaps only a slight exaggeration, and the Flohn-Neumann paper would add weight to Hitler’s argument. Nevertheless, Hitler, like Napoleon before him, was exploiting the weather as the chief reason for the inability to conquer Russia. The weather conditions, as mentioned earlier, were a secondary factor in Barbarossa’s derailing.

A significant part of the Ukrainian population, in the centre and west of the country, greeted the Wehrmacht and SS soldiers as “liberators” in the summer of 1941. This was particularly so in western Ukrainian cities like Lvov (Lviv) – where many of its citizens warmly welcomed the fascist forces from 30 June 1941, as the gold and blue Ukrainian flag flew beside the Nazi Swastika. Lvov’s Jewish community, aware of the racist roots of Nazism, remained fearfully at home.

For the German soldiers, when night came the pain was really felt. Late on 4 December 1941, the thermometer near Moscow sank to minus 31 degrees Celsius. The following night, it dropped again to minus 36 degrees. Flohn and Neumann wrote that these temperatures “gravely hit the German armies that were not appropriately clothed, and which were not equipped with armaments, tanks and motorized vehicles that could properly function even in a ‘normal’ winter in the northern parts of the USSR, let alone a winter as rigorous as that of 1941-42”.

Similar to the Rasputitsa, the Soviets did not suffer as much as the invaders during the cold. They had much greater quantities of warm clothing, anti-freeze for their tanks and lubricants for their guns, etc. They were closer to home and used to fighting in the winter, having experienced such a conflict in Finland just 2 years before (the Winter War). Night time temperatures would sink lower still in the coldest month of all, January 1942.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

 

Shane Quinn is a Journalist and renowned Historian, focussing on geopolitics and the history of World War II, based in Ireland. 

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

Sources

J. Neumann and H. Flohn, Great Historical Events That Were Significantly Affected by the Weather: Part 8, Germany’s War on the Soviet Union, 1941–45. Long-range Weather Forecasts for 1941–42 and Climatological Studies, American Meteorological Society, June 1987, Jstor

Evan Mawdsley, Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War, 1941-1945 (Hodder Arnold, 23 Feb. 2007)

Donald J. Goodspeed, The German Wars (Random House Value Publishing, 3 April 1985)

Georgy Zhukov, Marshal of Victory: The Autobiography of General Georgy Zhukov (Pen & Sword Military, 3 Feb. 2020)

Adolf Hitler, Hitler’s Table Talk, New Foreword by Gerhard L. Weinberg (Enigma Books, 30 April 2008)

Otto Skorzeny, My Commando Operations: The Memoirs of Hitler’s Most Daring Commando (Schiffer Publishing Ltd., 1 Jan. 1995)

Alexander Hill, “’General Mud’ has Usually Been on Russia’s Side in War. Not This Time”, Slate Magazine, 11 March 2022

Christoph Mick, Lemberg, Lwow, and Lviv 1914-1947: Violence and Ethnicity in a Contested City (Purdue University Press, 30 Nov. 2015)

John Toland, Adolf Hitler: The Definitive Biography (Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, 3 Feb. 2007)

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The following article documents the failure on the part of  Russia’s Central Bank to secure control over its gold and  foreign currency assets.

Only 21.7% of Russia’s Central Bank reserves are deposited in Russia. Our thanks to Statista for bring this article to our attention.

With the sanctions regime, a large share of the Russian Central Bank’s gold and forex deposits will be affected. See  the analysis by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts.

***

According to a now unavailable report by Russia’s Central Bank saved by internet archive Wayback Machine, China was the single-biggest foreign holder of Russian central bank reserves as of June 30, 2021. 13.8 percent of the total of Russia’s reserves, held in gold and foreign currency, was located in China, roughly the same share of assets held in Chinese currency Yuan Renminbi.

The biggest share of reserves was that held in Russia itself – in the form of gold, making up 21.7 percent of reserves. With the sanctions against its central bank progressing, this means Russia would likely remain in charge of around one third of its currently $630 billion strong reserves through domestic gold and Chinese Yuan. The location of another 10 percent of reserves are not specified by the report, while 5 percent are held by international financial institutions.

EU countries, along with the UK, U.S. and Canada, on Saturday moved to freeze assets under their jurisdiction associated with Russia’s central bank. According to the latest report, around 25 percent of Russia’s reserve assets were held in France, Germany and Austria. The total reserves held in Euro stood at around 32 percent.

Following the de-dollarization of Russia’s reserves over the past years, dollar assets made up only around 16 percent of Russia’s stockpile. The U.S. was holding only 6.6 percent of Russia’s reserves as of last year, with other dollar reserves held elsewhere. In Japan, it is the other way around as the country holds more Russian reserves (10 percent) than are in its currency. Japan said on Monday it was also coordinating with the G7 on releasing sanctions against Russia’s central bank.

More than three quarters of Russia’s central bank reserves are foreign currency assets. Around half are foreign currency securities, like government bonds, which never leave their country of issuance. Around 25 percent are tied to foreign national banks, private foreign banks, the Bank of International Settlements and the IMF. On top of the approximately 20 percent held in gold, additional small amounts exist in IMF SDR reserve assets, reserves held for Russia by the IMF and reverse repo securities, which Russia has sold but is contracted to buy back.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Katharina Buchholz is a Data Journalist. [email protected]

Featured image is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The spike protein present in Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines is one of the most bioactive and potentially damaging substances known to mankind. It penetrates the blood-brain barrier, cell nucleus and even affects DNA replication.

The spike protein appears to reprogram the immune system in a strange way. The BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against the COVID-19 virus has been shown to reprogram both adaptive and innate immune responses. When it penetrates the cell nuclei, the free-floating spike protein inhibits DNA repair. (Related: Pfizer vaccine data shows far more damaging side effects than initially expected.)

There had been immune system problems in the vaccinated, and it is becoming apparent that they do not actually develop broad natural immunity. Instead, they produce more S antibodies against the spike protein that they were originally vaccinated with.

A recent surveillance report from the U.K. Health Security Agency showed that N antibody levels appear to be lower in individuals who acquire infection following two doses of the vaccine.

This means that the vaccines interfere with the immune system’s ability to produce antibodies against the virus following infection. In the case of the N antibody, this is shown to be against the nucleocapsid protein, which serves as the shell of the virus and is an important part of the immune system response of the unvaccinated population. (Related: After you are vaccine damaged, if you complain about symptoms you will be REQUIRED to take psychiatric medications until your “disorder” is cured.)

If any mutations to the spike protein of the COVID virus occur in the future, the vaccinated will be more vulnerable and may possibly be unprotected due to their inability to produce the N antibody.

Meanwhile, the unvaccinated would have much better immunity to any mutations due to their ability to produce both S and N antibodies after infection.

America’s Front Line Doctors also warned that vaccines are turning people’s bodies into walking spike protein factories, which causes the body to create antibodies to them.

“First, these vaccines ‘mis-train’ the immune system to recognize only a small part of the virus [the spike protein]. Variants that differ, even slightly, in this protein are able to escape the narrow spectrum of antibodies created by the vaccines,” AFLDS explained. “Second, the vaccines create ‘vaccine addicts,’ meaning persons become dependent upon regular booster shots because they have been ‘vaccinated’ only against a tiny portion of a mutating virus.”

The group also cited Australian Health Minister Dr. Kerry Chant, who said that COVID will become endemic and people will have to get used to taking endless vaccines.

Finally, there is the simple fact that the vaccines do not, in any way, prevent infection in the nose and upper airways, which is where fully vaccinated people tend to show the highest viral loads.

Immune problems and other vaccine infections

Vaccinated individuals have also encountered immune problems and reinfections. These conditions, dubbed VAIDS (or Vaccine Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome), have been very concerning as they could be damaging to individuals.

While not an official scientific term, it is important to bring attention to VAIDS, especially for those who are concerned about the immune health of their vaccinated loved ones.

In late January, an anti-mandate rally in Italy reiterated the claim that COVID-19 vaccines were toxic and that they could cause a variety of medical catastrophes down the line.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Featured image is from TrialSiteNews

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Two leaked stories from the Pentagon have exposed the lies of mainstream media about how Russia is conducting the Ukraine war in a bid to counter propaganda intended to get NATO into the conflict, writes Joe Lauria.

The Pentagon is engaged in a consequential battle with the U.S. State Department and the Congress to prevent a direct military confrontation with Russia, which could unleash the most unimaginable horror of war.

President Joe Biden is caught in the middle of the fray. So far he is siding with the Defense Department, saying there cannot be a NATO no-fly zone over Ukraine fighting Russian aircraft because “that’s called World War III, okay? Let’s get it straight here, guys. We will not fight the third world war in Ukraine.”

“President Biden’s been clear that U.S. troops won’t fight Russia in Ukraine, and if you establish a no-fly zone, certainly in order to enforce that no-fly zone, you’ll have to engage Russian aircraft. And again, that would put us at war with Russia,” said U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin earlier this month. (The administration plan is to bring down the Russian government through a ground insurgency and economic war, not a direct military one.)

But pressure on the White House from some members of Congress and especially the press corps is unrelenting to recklessly bring NATO directly into the war. (Secretary of State Antony Blinken who initially backed a plan to send NATO planes from Poland to Ukraine has backed down and now opposes the no-fly zone.) Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, hailed as a virtual superhero in Western media, has vacillated between openness to negotiating a peace settlement with Russia and calling for NATO to “close the skies” above Ukraine. To save his country he appears willing to risk endangering the entire world.

(The Pentagon’s mettle will be tested if there is a chemical weapons attack in Ukraine. Biden has said Russia would be a “severe price” but who the perpetrator would be might be murky.)

Meanwhile, Western corporate media, depending almost exclusively on Ukrainian sources, report that Russia is losing the war, with its military offensive “stalled,” and in frustration has deliberately targeted civilians and flattened cities.

Biden has bought into this part of the story, calling Russian President Vladimir Putin a “war criminal.” He has also said that Russia is planning a “false flag” chemical attack to pin on Ukraine.

But on Tuesday, the Pentagon took the bold step of leaking two stories to reporters that contradict those tales. “Russia’s conduct in the brutal war tells a different story than the widely accepted view that Vladimir Putin is intent on demolishing Ukraine and inflicting maximum civilian damage—and it reveals the Russian leader’s strategic balancing act,” reported Newsweek in an article entitled, “Putin’s Bombers Could Devastate Ukraine But He’s Holding Back. Here’s Why.”

The piece quotes an unnamed analyst at the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) saying,

“The heart of Kyiv has barely been touched. And almost all of the long-range strikes have been aimed at military targets.”

A retired U.S. Air Force officer now working as an analyst for a Pentagon contractor, added:

“We need to understand Russia’s actual conduct. If we merely convince ourselves that Russia is bombing indiscriminately, or [that] it is failing to inflict more harm because its personnel are not up to the task or because it is technically inept, then we are not seeing the real conflict.”

The article says:

“As of the past weekend, in 24 days of conflict, Russia has flown some 1,400 strike sorties and delivered almost 1,000 missiles (by contrast, the United States flew more sorties and delivered more weapons in the first day of the 2003 Iraq war). …

A proportion of those strikes have damaged and destroyed civilian structures and killed and injured innocent civilians, but the level of death and destruction is low compared to Russia’s capacity.

‘I know it’s hard … to swallow that the carnage and destruction could be much worse than it is,’ says the DIA analyst. ‘But that’s what the facts show. This suggests to me, at least, that Putin is not intentionally attacking civilians, that perhaps he is mindful that he needs to limit damage in order to leave an out for negotiations.’”

A second retired U.S. Air Force officer says:

“I’m frustrated by the current narrative—that Russia is intentionally targeting civilians, that it is demolishing cities, and that Putin doesn’t care. Such a distorted view stands in the way of finding an end before true disaster hits or the war spreads to the rest of Europe. I know that the news keeps repeating that Putin is targeting civilians, but there is no evidence that Russia is intentionally doing so. In fact, I’d say that Russia could be killing thousands more civilians if it wanted to.”

These Pentagon sources confirm what Putin and the Russian Ministry of Defense have been saying all along: that instead of being “stalled,” Russia is executing a methodical war plan to encircle cities, opening humanitarian corridors for civilians, leaving civilian infrastructure like water, electricity, telephony and internet intact, and trying to avoid as many civilian casualties as possible.

Until these Pentagon leaks it was difficult to confirm that Russia was entirely telling the truth and that corporate media were publishing fables cooked up by Ukraine’s publicity machine.

No Evidence of Chemicals

The second article directly undermines Biden’s dramatic warning about a false flag chemical attack. Reuters reported:

“The United States has not yet seen any concrete indications of an imminent Russian chemical or biological weapons attack in Ukraine but is closely monitoring streams of intelligence for them, a senior U.S. defense official said.”

It quoted the Pentagon official as saying,

“There’s no indication that there’s something imminent in that regard right now.” Neither The New York Times nor The Washington Post published the Reuters article, which appeared in the more obscure U.S. News and World Report. 

Never let the facts get in the way of a good story — even if it could lead to the most devastating consequences in history.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former U.N. correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe, and numerous other newspapers, including The Montreal Gazette and The Star of Johannesburg. He was an investigative reporter for the Sunday Times of London, a financial reporter for Bloomberg News and began his professional work as a 19-year old stringer for The New York Times.  He can be reached at [email protected] and followed on Twitter @unjoe  

Featured image: The Pentagon. (Source: Joe Lauria)

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Russian President Vladimir Putin announced on March 23 that natural gas payments from so-called unfriendly countries will be made in rubles from now on. He stressed however that Russia will continue to supply gas to other countries according to the volume and price specified in previously signed contracts. With Western countries making it difficult for Russia to trade in dollars, euros and pounds, there was no choice left but for gas trade to be conducted in rubles – which will not only ultimately benefit Russia in the long run, but also China.

By selling gas, oil and other products in rubles, it limits, or perhaps even entirely rules out the freezing of Gazprom’s accounts, thus protecting this money from Western sanctions. But to attain rubles to make payments to begin with, so-called unfriendly countries will need to sell foreign currency on the stock exchange. In this way, Russia’s revenue will not only be directly from Gazprom, but also from the Russian foreign exchange market. It is hoped that such a measure will lead to a demand in rubles, thus supporting the Russian monetary system.

The biggest issue Russia faces is whether Europe will instead buy energy from elsewhere, even at a higher price. None-the-less, it does express Moscow’s intentions to reciprocate and respond to economic provocations made by the West, especially as it is very likely that this payment policy will lead to an increase in the price of gas in the European market.

In response to Russia’s military campaign in Ukraine, Western countries have announced large-scale sanctions against the country, mainly in the banking sector and the supply of high-tech products. Moscow calls these measures an economic war and listed 48 countries including the US, Canada, EU member states, the UK, Ukraine, Japan, South Korea, Australia and Singapore as “unfriendly countries.”

In 2021, these hostile countries paid roughly $69 billion for gas from Gazprom, the Russian state-owned company. To make a similar scale of payments this year, countries will have to procure around 6-7 trillion rubles. As Quartz explained, as yet,

“most of these ‘hostile nations’ buying Russian energy have few options but to continue their purchases. If the demand for rubles steadily increases as a result, the drastic fall in the currency’s value will halt and even reverse. After Putin made his announcement, the ruble gained 7% against the dollar.”

The outlet also explained that

“if Western governments pursue these avenues, the Central Bank of Russia doesn’t have to spend its own dollars and euro reserves to prop up the ruble—which is just as well, since more than half of Russia’s foreign reserves have been frozen by sanctions.”

German experts have already said that technically, paying in rubles is possible but takes time to create some additional mechanisms to facilitate the attainment and payment of rubles. However, the decision of EU countries will not only depend on the technical aspects.

US President Joe Biden will most likely continue to persuade the EU to give up Russian energy sources, even though this is practically impossible despite the American assurances. However, with Europe unable to realistically cut itself from Russian energy in the short and medium term, the American suggestion will only lead to a weakened European economy as they will inevitably pay exorbitant prices for alternative energy sources.

Goldman Sachs chief economist Jan Hatzius has warned, according to FT, that a European ban on Russian energy imports would cause a 2.2% hit to production and trigger a eurozone recession. In addition, UK chancellor Rishi Sunak has been telling colleagues that the hit would be larger and would quickly cause a downturn worth £70 billion, or 3%, of gross domestic product in the UK, given its still-close ties to the continental European economy.

This comes as Russia announced that it will diversify its oil and gas supplies if Western countries completely refuse to import. In preparation for this, Russian companies have been developing new logistics plans. Although Russia will undoubtedly earn less, it will be able to rebuild the oil industry and the wider economy to not be so heavily hinged on the West.

In this way, it will not only be the ruble that benefits, but also the Chinese yuan. After the West froze Russia’s gold and foreign exchange reserves, many experts saw the Chinese yuan as an alternative to the dollar. China’s currency correlates with the dollar exchange rate at 97%, meaning that if the dollar rises against the ruble, then the yuan will also rise. Effectively this means that the yuan is currently almost a full replacement for the dollar.

As Quartz explained, the US and the EU may then have to run ruble exchange payments through a third, intermediary currency such as the yuan. Effectively, the Russian demand for rubles for oil and gas will stabilize the Russian currency whilst also propping up the yuan, thus weakening sanctions.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Paul Antonopoulos is an independent geopolitical analyst.

Featured image is from asia.nikkei.com

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The director of the Institute of Oncology and Radiology of Serbia explained that chemical plants and various dangerous industries were bombed, which, as she says, created an ecological catastrophe and poisoned Europe.

According to Grujičić, the use of NATO bombs with depleted uranium and the destruction of environmentally dangerous facilities during air strikes have led to Serbia being now the leader in the number of cancer deaths in Europe, with almost 60.000 new cancer patients a year.

“The North Atlantic Alliance did not pay attention to civilian casualties. Everyone knows the famous conversation between former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic and Finnish diplomat Martti Ahtisaari, who said that Belgrade would be levelled to the ground (if it does not accept the ultimatum),” Grujičić added.

“If we had a nuclear power plant, they would definitely hit it, because they attacked everything on the list of facilities dangerous for the environment. They knew that a local environmental catastrophe would be created in every oil refinery, chemical company. They did it on purpose”, she said.

Grujičić recalled that about 15 tons of depleted uranium were officially dumped on Serbia, but emphasized that “no one knows how much it really was, and it will never be known.”

“We have taken the initiative to determine with mathematical precision, not only medical, but also environmental consequences. The data we received show that the whole of Europe was polluted. Europeans who were looking forward to the bombs over Belgrade and Serbia are also endangered and do not know what they were breathing, eating, drinking,” she added.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Featured image is a screenshot from TV Prva via B92.net

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The U.S. justifies wars of aggression in the name of human rights. The term has no meaning domestically either, as the people’s needs are subordinated to those of the ruling class.

Images of burnt flesh from napalm bombs, wounded and dead soldiers, scenes of U.S. soldiers burning the simple huts of Vietnamese villages, eventually turned the public against the war in Vietnam and produced the dreaded affliction, from the ruling class point of view, known as the “Vietnam syndrome.” This collective Post Traumatic Stress Disorder made it impossible for the public to support any foreign military involvement for years.

It took the rulers almost three decades to finally cure the public of this affliction. But the rulers were careful.

The brutal reality of what the U.S. was doing in Afghanistan and Iraq was whitewashed. That is why the images now being brought to the public by the corporate media are so shocking. It has been more than two generations since the U.S. public was exposed to the horrific images of war.

In the 1960s the rulers inadvertently allowed themselves to be undermined by the new television technology that brought the awful reality of imperialist war into the homes of the public. Now, the ruling class operating through its corporate media propaganda arms has been effectively using Ukraine war propaganda, not to increase Anti-war sentiment but to stimulate support for more war!

Incredibly also, the propagandists are pushing a line that essentially says that in the name of “freedom” and supporting Ukraine, the U.S. public should shoulder the sacrifice of higher fuel and food prices. This is on top of the inflation that workers and consumers were already being subjected to coming out of the capitalist covid scandal that devastated millions of workers and the lower stratums of the petit bourgeoisie.

But the war, and now the unfair shouldering of all of the costs of the capitalist crisis of 2008 – 2009, and the impact of covid by the working classes in the U.S., amounts to a capitalist tax. It is levied by the oligarchy on workers to subsidize the defense of the interests of big capital and the conditions that have produced obscene profits, even in the midst of the covid crisis and now, the Ukraine war.

These policies are criminal. While the U.S. continues to pretend that it champions human rights around the world, the failure of the state to protect the fundamental human rights of the citizens and residents in the U.S. is obvious to all, but spoken about by the few, except the Chinese government.

For those who might think that the Chinese criticism of the U.S. is only being driven by politics, and it might be,  just a cursory, objective examination of the U.S. state policies over just the last few years reveals a shocking record of systematic human rights abuses that promise to become even more acute as a consequence of the manufactured U.S./NATO war in Ukraine.

The Ongoing Human Rights Crisis

The U.S. working class, and Black working class in particular, never recovered from the economic crisis of 2008 before it was once again ravaged in 2020 with the global capitalist crisis exacerbated by covid. On the heels of those two shocks, today millions of workers are experiencing a permanent state of precarity with evictions, the continued loss of medical coverage, unaffordable housing and food costs, and a capitalist-initiated inflation. The rulers are operating under the belief that with the daily bombardment of war images, U.S. workers and the poor will embrace rising costs of gas and even more increases in the cost of food.

Doesn’t the state have any responsibility to ensure that the economic human rights of the people are fulfilled? No, because liberal human rights practice separates fundamental human rights – such as the right to health, food, housing, education, a means to subsist at an acceptable level of material culture, leisure, and life-long social security – from democratic discourse on what constitutes the human rights responsibility of the state and the interests it must uphold in order to be legitimate.

The non-recognition of the indivisibility of human rights that values economic human rights to an equal level as civil and political rights, exposed the moral and political contradictions of the liberal human rights framework. The massive economic displacements with hunger, unemployment, and unnecessary deaths among the population in the United States, with a disproportionate rate of sickness and hospitalization among non-white workers and the poor in the U.S., were never condemned as violations of human rights.

War and Economic Deprivation the Systemic Contradictions of the Western colonial/capitalist Project.

The war being waged against global humanity by the U.S./EU/NATO Axis of Domination is a hybrid war that utilizes all the tools it has at its disposal – sanctions, mass incarceration, coups, drugs, disinformation, culture, subversion, murder, and direct military engagement to further white power. The Eurocentrism and “White Lives Matters More Movement” represented by the coverage of the war in Ukraine stripped away any pretense to the supposed liberal commitment to global humanity. The white-washing of the danger of the ultra-right and neo-Nazi elements in the Ukrainian military and state and the white ethno-nationalism that the conflict generated across the Western world demonstrated, once again, how “racialism” and the commitment to the fiction of white supremacy continues to trump class and class struggle and the ability to build a multi-national, class based anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist opposition in the North.

It is primarily workers from Russia, the Donbas and Ukraine who are dying. But as in the run-up to the first imperialist war in Europe, known as World War One, workers with the encouragement of their national bourgeoisies, are lining up behind their rulers to support the capitalist redivision taking place, a redivision that can only be completed by war as long as capitalism and capitalist competition continues. Yet, instead of “progressives and radicals” joining forces to resist the mobilization to war, they are finding creative ways to align themselves with the interests of their ruling classes in support of the colonial/capitalist project.

In the meantime, the people of Afghanistan are starving, with thousands of babies now dying of malnutrition because the U.S. stole their nation’s assets. Estimates suggest that unless reversed, more people there will die from U.S./EU imposed sanctions than died during the twenty year long war. And the impact of the war in Ukraine with the loss of wheat exports from Ukraine and Russia resulting not only in rising food prices globally but in some places like East Africa, resulting in death from famine.

In the U.S. where we witness the most abysmal record of covid failure on the planet, the virus will continue to ravage the population, with a disproportionate number who get sick and die being the poorest and those furthest from whiteness.

The lackeys of capital playing the role of democratic representatives claim that there is no money to bring a modicum of relief to workers represented in the mildly reformist package known as Build Back Better. Yet, the Brown University Costs of War Project estimates that the wars waged by the United States in this century have cost $8 trillion and counting, with another $8 trillion that will be spent over the next ten years on the military budget if costs remain constant from the $778 billion just allocated.

No rational human being desires war and conflict. The horrors of war that the public are finally being exposed to because it was brought to Europe again, the most violent continent on the planet, should call into question all of the brutal and unjustified wars that the U.S. and its flunkey allies waged throughout the global South over the last seventy years. Unfortunately, because of the hierarchy of the value of human beings, the images of war in Ukraine are not translating into a rejection of war, but instead a rejection of war in Europe and on white Europeans.

This means that the wars will continue and we must fight, often alone, because as Bob Marley said in his song “War ”:

Until the philosophy

Which hold one race superior and another

Inferior

Is finally

And permanently

Discredited

And abandoned

Everywhere is war

Me say war

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Ajamu Baraka is the national organizer of the Black Alliance for Peace and an editor and contributing columnist for the Black Agenda Report. Baraka serves on the Executive Committee of the U.S. Peace Council and leadership body of the U.S. based United National Anti-War Coalition (UNAC) and the steering committee of the Black is Back Coalition.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

By a queer coincidence, former US Secretary of State Madeline Albright passed away while President Joe Biden was travelling in Air Force 1 en route to Europe on what is probably the most crucial diplomatic mission of his presidency. 

The general expectation is that 80-year old Biden is personally undertaking a mission to persuade the US’ European allies that the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) should intervene in the Ukraine crisis in some way. And, ironically, Albright was the choreographer of the idea that in the post-cold war era, the NATO should reinvent itself and transform as a global security organisation. 

Albright, like most American diplomats of East European descent, was passionately devoted to the NATO. She supported the alliance’s brutal military intervention in Yugoslavia in 1999 and would have supported an intervention in Ukraine. 

The White House spin is that Biden will discuss additional sanctions against Russia. But the possibility of new restrictions has waned following the EU foreign and defence ministers’ meeting on Monday where a decision was taken to put off further sanctions. 

The EU meeting instead assessed that the ongoing Ukraine-Russian talks should proceed further and even if upbeat predictions may not be entirely correct, since the talks are challenging, the good part is that neither party has complained of any deadlock in the negotiations so far. 

Conceivably, Biden is travelling to Europe not to discuss tougher sanctions  (something which he could as well have handled in a videoconference) but to explore NATO’s potential engagement in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict for which his participation becomes absolutely essential. 

As things stand, there is every possibility of a prolonged conflict in Ukraine and Russia eventually prevailing. Such a scenario is extremely damaging for Biden politically in the US. Biden is facing domestic criticism both for his failure to prevent the conflict as well as for being ineffectual in blocking the Russian advance.

While the US rhetoric pillories Russia for “war crimes” and the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine, et al, the world capitals view this as a geopolitical confrontation between America and Russia. Outside of the western camp, the world community refuses to impose sanctions against Russia or even to demonise that country. 

The world community steers clear of taking sides between the US and Russia. The Islamabad Declaration issued on Wednesday after the 45th meeting of the foreign ministers of the fifty-seven member Organisation of Islamic Conference refused to endorse sanctions against Russia and instead counselled cessation of hostilities in Ukraine, avoidance of loss of lives, enhancement of humanitarian assistance and a “surge in diplomacy” — almost ditto China and India’s stance.

Not a single country in the African continent and West Asian, Central Asia, South and Southeast Asian region has imposed sanctions against Russia. Following a visit to Hanoi, Malaysian PM Ismail Sabri Yaakob said, “We discussed the Russian-Ukrainian conflict and agreed that Malaysia and Vietnam will remain neutral on this issue. As for sanctions against Russia, we do not support them. The sides do not support unilateral sanctions; we recognise only restrictions that could be imposed by the UN Security Council.” This is the consensus within ASEAN too. 

Interestingly, Chinese Councillor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi was the chief guest at the OIC meeting in Islamabad. In his remarks, Wang Yi said,

“China supports Russia and Ukraine in continuing their peace talks, and hopes that the talks will lead to ceasefire, end the fighting, and bring about peace. Humanitarian disasters should be avoided, and spillover of the Ukrainian crisis should be prevented so as not to affect and harm the legitimate rights and interests of other regions and countries.” 

The Chinese foreign ministry press release on Wang Yi’s meeting with the Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud said, “As to the Ukraine issue, the two sides agreed that all countries’ sovereignty and territorial integrity should be respected and their reasonable security concerns should be taken seriously. It is imperative to prevent any humanitarian crisis, maintain the peace talk process and resolve conflicts through dialogue and negotiation. Both sides emphasised that all countries have the right to make independent judgements, withstand external pressure, and disagree with the simple logic of “black or white” and “friend or foe”.

Again, the Chinese press release on Wang Yi’s meeting with his Egyptian counterpart Sameh Shoukry said, inter alia,

“The two sides exchanged views on the Ukraine issue, and agreed to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries and stay committed to a comprehensive solution to the current crisis. Shoukry said, Egypt opposes some countries exerting pressure on China and stands for strengthening cooperation rather than escalating confrontation.” 

Curiously, four foreign ministers from West Asia travelled to Moscow last week to discuss the bilateral cooperation — from Qatar, Iran, Turkey and the UAE. 

Nonetheless, the outcome of Biden’s visit to Europe will have significant bearing on the conflict in Ukraine. If Biden succeeds in getting European backing for his proposal for a NATO intervention in Ukraine, the conflict may escalate dramatically into a world war involving nuclear weapons.   

Will Biden push the envelope? It seems he’s unwilling to risk. Biden seems to have a Plan B as well. He has scheduled a separate visit to Warsaw. Poland indeed has its fair share of Russophbes and has been straining at the leash for some form of involvement in Ukraine. 

The heart of the matter is that Poland also has an axe to grind. Parts of Poland comprise today’s ethnically mixed western borderlands of Ukraine — oblasts of Zhytomyr, Khmelnytskyi and Lviv. If Ukraine fragments or collapses in defeat, Poland will most certainly seize the opportunity to reclaim its lost territories. Poland’s hyper-activism over Ukraine is self-evident. 

Incidentally, in recent days, former Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski and Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister Iryna Vereshchuk have both accused Budapest of trying to lay its hands on Ukraine’s largely Hungarian-populated Transcarpathian region. On Tuesday, Sikorski alleged in a tweet that Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán and President Vladimir Putin reached a secret agreement on the partition of Ukraine! 

On the same day, Iryna Vereshchuk complained in a Facebook post:

“The way the Hungarian leadership has been treating Ukraine lately is even worse than some of the Russian satellite states of the former Soviet Union. Hungary does not support the sanctions. They don’t provide weapons. They don’t allow transit of weapon supplies from other countries. They say ‘no’ to virtually everything.”   

Biden cannot but be exploring with the Polish leadership possibilities that fall short of an outright NATO intervention in Ukraine. The spectre that haunts the Biden administration, despite the swagger of its media bluster, is that the Russian special operation may after all be inching toward successful conclusion, creating a large buffer of regions on the eastern side of the Dnieper river, and gaining control of Black Sea coastline that denies access to NATO ships. 

Poland becomes a key stakeholder in such an outcome and Washington surely regards Warsaw as its number one interlocutor in the developing situation, as the fate of Ukraine hangs in the balance. 

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Featured image: US President Biden (L) and Polish President Andrzej Duda (R) (Source: Indian Punchline)

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Officials from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, (OPEC) have issued a stark warning to the EU, saying that if the European alliance follows through with a proposed ban of oil imports from Russia, the markets will see massive price spikes beyond the surge already seen.

Since the start of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine last month, oil prices surged to their highest levels since 2008, a situation that was exacerbated by harsh economic sanctions imposed on Moscow.

The warning reportedly came during a meeting on 16 March between OPEC officials, including Secretary General Mohammad Barkindo and EU Energy Commissioner Kadri Simson.

These are extraordinary times for the energy market & the unprecedented oil prices are a serious risk to the world economy.

Today, I met with Mohammad Sanusi Barkindo, the Secretary General of #OPEC to discuss the situation & hear more about their next steps. pic.twitter.com/DwHUSs7oCR

— Kadri Simson (@KadriSimson) March 16, 2022

According to an OPEC source who spoke with Reuters, the group’s concerns were made abundantly clear to the EU. “They are very well informed,” the source said.

“OPEC presented their analysis of the oil market situation and informed us of their plans in terms of oil production,” an EU official said in response to the news.

Earlier this month, both Washington and London made attempts to pressure Saudi Arabia and the UAE into increasing their oil production levels in order to mitigate skyrocketing fuel prices.

However, both attempts failed with Riyadh and Abu Dhabi making it clear to the west that they intend to maintain the production quota agreed upon by OPEC+.

Russia is an ally of OPEC and co-chairs the OPEC+ group, which has cooperated on oil supplies to support oil markets since 2017.

In an additional show of defiance against the demands from the west, on 17 March Emirati Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed al Nahyan travelled to Moscow to cement Abu Dhabi’s energy cooperation ties with Moscow.

The trip came just one day after the British prime minister failed to convince OPEC members to increase production.

As for Saudi Arabia, the kingdom has previously expressed its willingness to decrease investments in the US and has even floated the idea of selling oil to China, using the Chinese yuan instead of the US dollar.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Featured image: Fuel prices in EUR at a Shell petrol station in Berlin, Germany, 09 March 2022. (Photo credit: EPA-EFE/FILIP SINGER)

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) updated its death tally last week and slashed over 70 thousand deaths from the provisional COVID-19 death count.

The Daily Wire reported the information through an updated analysis of what is available on the CDC website.

“The Centers for Disease and Control updated its COVID-19 death statistics last week, revealing that the agency had included an additional 72, 277 deaths that should not have been counted as COVID-19 deaths,” wrote the Daily Wire.

A total of 26 state death records were affected, and statistics from all age groups were part of the update. The CDC called it a “coding logic error.”

Almost 970 thousand deaths have been attributed to COVID-19 in the US, and the update would mean that the numbers were inflated by almost 8%.

One notable revision was the removal of  416 child deaths from the tally; this is significant because children represent such a small portion of overall COVID-attributed deaths.

Mairead Elordi told the Daily Wire, “The huge change in the pediatric death count drops the estimate of COVID deaths in children down to 1,341 nationwide.”

The update was part of an initiative to clean up how data is reported to the CDC. It is called the Data Modernization Initiative.

Other regions around the world have also started adjusting their COVID-related death statistics by significant margins.

The Canadian province of Ontario admitted in March that deaths attributed to COVID had been inflated by 30%, and the prevalence of false-positives associated with PCR testing could reduce the numbers further.

In October 2020 Scientific American published an article calling Donald Trump a “conspiracy fanatic” for suggesting that deaths related to COVID had been inflated due to dubious statistical records.

The idea that deaths attributed to COVID could be lower than the official record was called a “debunked conspiracy fantasy [from] QAnon.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Featured image is from Shutterstock

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The Canadian industrial engineer at Moderna, Dr. Daniel Nagase, reported that a Moderna COVID jab production engineer leaked crucial information about Moderna adding manually “small quantities of additions” (described by Moderna as “highly sensitive trade secret adjuvants”) to the vaxx-vails. These “adjuvants” when analyzed, revealed that they were to sterilize women, or cause miscarriages. The impact of such injections could last over one or more generations.

*

On 20 March 2022, Dr. Daniel Nagase gave this speech to a Canadian crowd:

This is the summarizing transcript of the video, as published on 22 March 2022, by For Life on Earth:

“Dr Nagase amplifies the message that I have been reiterating for three years: the Creator gave you your abilities and you have a duty to do everything that you are capable of to stand up for justice, truth and love.  We have all been conditioned to believe that we are not good enough, we don’t know enough, and someone else who is more expert should do something instead of us.  Dr. Nagase illustrates that he was fooled by believing in an “expert”.  The system wants you to be cowed by experts, and to my mind, this is exactly the mistake that we all make.  We listen over and over to the same pundits, while sitting and doing nothing ourselves.  We are living through unprecedented times and we are assailed by a conspiracy such as we have never seen in human history, deploying technologies that we know nothing of.  There are no experts under these circumstances.  All those people with their impressive qualifications are as adrift as you are.  And many – if not most – of them are complete idiots and/or slaves to the system that is killing us, actively participating in our and their own demise.

Listen to your heart, listen to your intuition, be confident that you always know right from wrong and that you CAN act, you CAN speak out, you CAN succeed.  Millions of people are now in action to defend humanity against this assault.  Be one of them and do everything in your power, at whatever level, to stop this monstrous crime and instead create and be part of the world we want to see.  By creating the world we want to live in, we stop the crime.  Think about energy: it flows around obstacles.  By bypassing the egregious plans of the perpetrators, by refusing to participate in them in any way, shape or form, whether that be in our everyday lives, at the post office or at the supermarket, at work or in your interactions with others, by ending our participation and refusing to compromise ourselves, and by focusing on the world we want to see, we leave them in the dust.  That means abandoning the prime tool of control: that “smart” phone that you are constantly clutching.  Get rid of that and get rid of wireless technology and you have crushed the conspiracy in a single act.  For without wireless technology, there can be no technocracy, no inventorying of the entire world down to every last blade of grass, no manipulation of the thoughts and emotions of whole regions of people, no digital currencies, no cyborgs, and no “smart” city prisons.  YOU are constructing your own prison around you and the whole human race by your refusal to give up your “smart” phone.  You can still communicate – just use a cabled computer.  You will be amazed at the change in yourself once that satanic scrying screen is gone from your life.  You will be freeer and happier than you have been for years.

Dr Nagase explains that over a billion women of childbearing age have been deliberately targeted for sterilization by these poison injections, which change DNA for eternity, and what is worse, even if an injected woman manages to bear children, the effects may skip a generation and appear in grandchildren or great-grandchildren.  He says that the human race has been changed forever by these injections.  He asks if we should ban such children from being able to have children of their own.”

This is the full post anonymously published on 9 December 2020 as a 4chan post; see this. And this is the original post:

“I’m an industrial engineer at Moderna and the other one of us is a process development engineer. I’m sure the same thing is happening with Pfizer-BioNTech. It was hard to put things together based on the small quantities of additions happening in manual step (highly unorthodox for a continuous process production). The explanation we got was highly sensitive trade secret adjuvants being added. Digging in deeper showed how sensitive it actually was.

Most people’s understanding of this novel vaccine type is that it works as follows:
1. Make mRNA coding for S protein
2. Make lipid nanoparticle delivery system
3. Profit

How it actually works from what we’ve uncovered:
1. Make mRNA coding for S protein
2. Make mRNA coding for mutant versions of CYP19A1 and CDKN1B in smaller amounts
3. Make sure that while delivery system for (1) mostly ends up in liver, most of (2) ends up in the gonads
4. Make sure form and quantity of additive upregulating LINE-1 reverse transcription activity makes it hard to detect among legit adjuvants
5. Effects from (2) integrated by (4) are recessive; mildly oncogenic effects in vaccine recipients unlikely to be noticed for many years
6. (5) recessive but since most of population vaccinated, in next generation female offspring have premature ovarian failure

(6) coincides with poor people being obsoleted by AI and robotics, so we didn’t have to dig for motivation.
We’ve taken precautions but fear for our safety. So far, I don’t think we’ve raised suspicion, but can’t be sure. Not sure what to do. Avoiding taking the vaccine makes us prime suspects for this leak.”

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation have been supportive of Moderna. Bill Gates is known for his eugenist narrative. He doesn’t make a secret of it.

See also his Ted speech of February 2010, “Innovating to Zero” – video 27 min.

In addition, and until recently he propagated and pledged openly or indirectly for a reduced world population. He is in alliance with the Rockefellers and the Rockefeller Foundation – and other of the financial elites – who fall into the same category.

Depopulation is part of the Great Reset, alias UN Agenda 2030.

We should be aware of it, and do whatever we can to resist any moves towards the Great Reset, the goals of which are numerous – all very-very human unfriendly.

Please orient ourself and stand up against any potentially coming tyranny.

Beware of Moderna jabs – and of Pfizer jabs. They almost certainly follow the same pattern.

Beware of all mRNA vaxxes – for your own safety and that of future generations.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he has worked for over 30 years on water and environment around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and  co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

On Wednesday night, Dr. Scott Atlas, former member of White House Coronavirus Task Force, appeared at Michigan State University where he addressed hundreds of students about the disastrous consequences of failed COVID-19 policy.

During the presentation, Dr. Atlas went through dozens of studies showing how COVID-19 lockdowns caused cascading problems that society may never recover from. These include excess deaths, severe mental health issues, economic damage to the poor and lower class, and a permanent divide among the brainwashed and those who have maintained the ability of independent, rational thought.

Before his presentation, Dr. Atlas met privately with patriotic leaders throughout the state – including journalists, gubernatorial candidates, state representatives, student activists, civil liberties attorneys, front-line doctors and others – where he talked candidly about the dire situation facing America.

Dr. Atlas addressed top activists in the state before speaking with students at Michigan State University.

Dr. Atlas, whose book A Plague Upon Our House: My Fight at the Trump White House to Stop COVID from Destroying America is now for sale, described how his naivety led him into the role of lead skeptic against megalomaniacal government scientists at war with free humanity.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories has submitted a report to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), concluding that the situation in Israel and the occupied territories amounts to apartheid.

In a 19-page report submitted to the body on Tuesday, Michael Lynk said Israeli Jews and Palestinians lived “under a single regime which differentiates its distribution of rights and benefits on the basis of national and ethnic identity, and which ensures the supremacy of one group over, and to the detriment of, the other”.

“The political system of entrenched rule in the occupied Palestinian territory which endows one racial-national-ethnic group with substantial rights, benefits and privileges while intentionally subjecting another group to live behind walls, checkpoints and under a permanent military rule… satisfies the prevailing evidentiary standard for the existence of apartheid,” he added.

Lynk said that while the situation in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories differed from that experienced in South Africa, it still amounted to apartheid.

Apartheid is a legal term defined by international law that refers to systematic oppression by one racial group over another.

“There are pitiless features of Israel’s ‘apartness’ rule in the occupied Palestinian territory that were not practiced in southern Africa, such as segregated highways, high walls and extensive checkpoints, a barricaded population, missile strikes and tank shelling of a civilian population, and the abandonment of the Palestinians’ social welfare to the international community.

“With the eyes of the international community wide open, Israel has imposed upon Palestine an apartheid reality in a post-apartheid world.”

Lynk is slated to formally release his report on Thursday ahead of a debate on Agenda Item Seven, the permanent UNHRC item reserved for Israeli human rights abuses against Palestinians and other Arabs.

In the report, the Canadian academic argued that Israel was pursuing a strategy of “strategic fragmentation of the Palestinian territory into separate areas of population control, with Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem physically divided from one another”.

Israel uses Gaza, Lynk said, for the “indefinite warehousing of an unwanted population of two million Palestinians”.

The issuing of thousands of work permits for Palestinian labourers in the West Bank and Gaza to work in Israel amounts to the “exploitation of labor of a racial group”, the report said.

‘We need action and accountability’

Last month, Amnesty International labelled Israel an apartheid state, becoming the latest organisation to join a cadre of human rights groups that have used the term to describe Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.

“The special rapporteur’s findings are an important and timely addition to the growing international consensus that Israeli authorities are committing apartheid against the Palestinian people,” said Saleh Higazi, deputy director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty.

“Palestinian human rights organisations have been calling the situation apartheid for years, and this report is a landmark moment of recognition of the lived reality of millions of Palestinians.

Despite the increasing number of rights groups labelling Israeli policies as amounting to apartheid, the United States and Israel’s other western allies have refrained from making any such declarations.

Beth Miller, the senior governance affairs manager at Jewish Voice for Peace-Action, said the report echoed what international human rights groups had been saying for years, that “Israel is committing the crime of apartheid”.

“For [US President Joe] Biden and Congress, the task is clear: end all US military funding to this violent apartheid regime.”

NYC Solidarity with Palestine, a group that works to open expansive spaces of resistance, told MEE: “We welcome these various international organisations finally saying and confirming publicly what the Palestinian people have been crying out with blood for years.

“And, that said, apartheid is only one mechanism and instrument of settler colonisation and illegal occupation. Palestinian’s right to self-determination dictates responsibilities that include ending the occupation by and all any means. Double standards must end.”

Ahmad Abuznaid, the executive director of the US Campaign for Palestinian Rights, told MEE that “as more and more international institutions affirm what Palestinians have been saying for years, we hope to finally see what the international community is going to do about Israeli apartheid.

“We need action and accountability now.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Featured image: The Palestinian flag being waved at a rally in New York City on 18 September, 2021, during the anniversary of the Sabra and Shatila massacres (MEE/Zainab Iqbal)

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

On March 23, PM Justin Trudeau was called a dictator in front of the entire European Union over his response to the Freedom Convoy.

Click here to watch the video.

Addressing both the European Parliament and Trudeau specifically, Member of the European Parliament Mislav Kolakusic proceeded to deliver Trudeau perhaps the most humiliating international thrashing of his political career.

Trudeau is going to come home from Europe VERY angry. He was just forced to sit and listen while he was labelled a "dictator," in front of the entire European Union, one who "trampled women with horses," and "blocks the bank accounts of single parents." https://t.co/GiPU69MboE pic.twitter.com/83662XKyrb

— Keean Bexte (@TheRealKeean) March 23, 2022

“Freedom, the right to choose, the right to life, the right to health, the right to work for many of us are fundamental human rights for which millions of citizens of Europe and the world have laid down their lives,” Kolakusic began.

“…. Canada, once a symbol of the modern world, has become a symbol of civil rights violations under your quasi-liberal boot in recent months. We watched how you trample women with horses, how you block the bank accounts of single parents so that they can’t even pay their children’s education and medicine, that they can’t pay utilities, mortgages for their homes.”

“To you,” he continues, speaking to Trudeau, “these may be liberal methods; for many citizens of the world, it is a dictatorship of the worst kind. Rest assured that the citizens of the world, united, can stop any regime that wants to destroy the freedom of citizens, either by bombs or harmful pharmaceutical products.”

The entire civilized world should condemn this unacceptable violence by the police and authorities in Canada 🇨🇦. This is not what democracy looks like, this is completely unacceptable and shocking. pic.twitter.com/1BISRvQJXF

— Mislav Kolakusic MEP 🇭🇷🇪🇺 (@mislavkolakusic) February 20, 2022

Kolakusic, having once lived under a Communist regime in Croatia, is more than likely only too familiar with authoritarian regimes, their consequences, and the grievances of everyday citizens. And like many who have survived Communist dictatorships, it is apparent that he shares the disdain over Trudeau’s use of Emergency Powers to target peaceful protesters who only wanted their rights back.

And indeed, Kolakusic isn’t the only MEP to suggest Trudeau is acting like a dictator.

“[Trudeau’s] exactly like a tyrant, like a dictator. He’s like Ceaușescu in Romania,” said Romanian MEP Cristian Terhes last month.

Romanian MEP @CristianTerhes absolutely mops the floor with PM @JustinTrudeau in Brussels this week over how he's handling the Ottawa #FreedomConvoy2022 protests.

"He's exactly like a tyrant, a dictator. He's like Ceaușescu in Romania," said Terhes. pic.twitter.com/Ox87jL3XJr

— Cosmin Dzsurdzsa 🇷🇴 (@cosminDZS) February 20, 2022

Terhes subsequently decided not to attend Trudeau’s speech today.

MEP @CristianTerhes has put out a statement after refusing to attend @JustinTrudeau's EU speech today

In the statement, Terheș blasts Trudeau for having horses trample protestors during the Freedom Convoy crackdown

I've translated it and will tweet relevant parts below

THREAD pic.twitter.com/KUR10j0s5b

— Cosmin Dzsurdzsa 🇷🇴 (@cosminDZS) March 23, 2022

In England, too, the response has been no better. During his first trip to the UK following the Freedom Convoy, Trudeau was greeted by protesters brandishing “F*** Trudeau” flags in front of PM Boris Johnson’s office, forcing him to sneak in through the back.

Protesters in London are protesting the arrival of Justin Trudeau.

Trudeau had to use the back entrance of 10 Downing St due to the protesters. pic.twitter.com/fBX0PWdGZY

— Marie Oakes (@TheMarieOakes) March 7, 2022

While it appeared that Trudeau was headed back to the EU for more PR after his first successful glam tour, the global community is done with his façade. Trudeau is a joke on the international stage.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Featured image: On Wednesday, Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau addressed the European Parliament in Brussels © European Union, 2022 – Source: EP

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Peace talks between Ukraine and Russia are well underway and there are signs of a potential breakthrough. Europe has every interest in a speedy end to this conflict, but that does not seem to be the case for the US or the UK. Will peace logic succeed?

Possible breakthrough

Amid the horrific violence of war, there are signs of a potential breakthrough in Ukraine-Russia peace negotiations. According to the Financial Times, significant progress has been made in the talks and a 15-point peace plan has been drawn up by both sides.

In exchange for a ceasefire and the withdrawal of Russian troops, Ukraine would assume neutral status, renounce its ambitions to join NATO and promise not to host foreign military bases on its territory. Kyiv could keep its army, but would ban certain groups (read neo-Nazi militias). Also, the names of streets referring to Ukrainian collaborators who fought with the Nazis against the Soviet Union during WWII would have to be changed.

Russia, for its part, would water down its demand that Ukraine upgrades Russian to the country’s second official language on the condition that Kyiv rolls back laws restricting the use of the language.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky made it clear that he is after peace. In a public message he indicated that he does not expect his country to join NATO soon, which is one of Moscow’s most important demands:

“For years we have been hearing about how the door is supposedly open [to NATO membership] but now we hear that we cannot enter. And it is true, and it must be acknowledged”.

There are still important bottlenecks. For example, the ongoing discussion about the status of neutrality. Ukraine rejects Sweden or Austria models and wants solid security guarantees against future threats.

Another point of contention is the recognition of the 2014 annexation of Crimea and the independence of two separatist republics in the eastern border region of Donbas. Ukraine refuses to accept this, but is willing to deal with the issues separately.

Troublemakers

“The parties are close to an agreement on fundamental issues,” said Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu. All in all, these are hopeful messages, but unfortunately not everyone is in favour of this state of affairs.

Many observers say that behind the scenes the US is playing a crucial role in these talks. And it is highly questionable whether Washington will pursue a swift negotiated solution. The same goes for the British government.

“US pours cold water on hopes of diplomatic solution in Ukraine,” The Financial Times headlined this weekend. And US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken says about the peace talks:

“Diplomacy requires both sides to be in good faith to de-escalate, and I see no signs at this point that Putin is willing to stop.”

Blinken’s declaration came days after President Biden announced a new package of military aid to Ukraine, including anti-aircraft defence systems, anti-tank weapons and armed drones.

Hillary Clinton, the former Secretary of State, opts for a prolonged war and toys with the idea of turning Ukraine into Russia’s new Afghanistan.

British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss thinks in the same direction. According to her, the conflict in Ukraine could last “a number of years” and we should be “prepared for a very long haul”.

War logic

Two logics are diametrically opposed here. You have the logic that fully prioritizes war. The enemy must be dealt with as hard as possible and weakened as much as possible. That means sending more and more powerful weapons, stationing troops and missiles in neighbouring countries, imposing tougher sanctions and razor-sharp rhetoric (“Putin is a war criminal”).

It was also following that logic that since the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and despite clear promises, NATO has systematically expanded eastward, leaving Russia feeling cornered.

The implications of this logic are threefold. A prolonged and fierce conflict will be felt first and foremost in economic terms. Energy and food prices will soar. High inflation will cause interest rates to rise. This is not only detrimental to economic growth, but given the high mountain of debt as a result of the corona crisis, this could lead to a serious debt crisis.

In addition, trade flows with Russia will cease and arms expenditures will increase. A protracted war also causes uncertainty in the markets, which is detrimental to the investment climate. In any case, Europe is expected to experience a serious slowdown of growth due to the war in Ukraine.

Second, a fierce and protracted conflict will cause a large and long-lasting influx of refugees. This will put pressure on housing markets, education, social security, etc. The far right has managed to take political advantage of the refugee wave that came from Syria in 2015. If the current conflict drags on for a long time and Western Europe has to take in millions of refugees for a long time, then right-wing extremists will be able to reap even more profits this time.

The real winner

These two effects will particularly be felt in Europe and much less so in the US. The US economy has recovered faster than Europe after the corona crisis. Because of the stimuli, US economy is even struggling with overheating, which makes it welcome rising interest rates.

US economy even benefits from this war. It will be able to supply its expensive shale gas to Europe in future, in order to replace cheaper Russian gas. The tens of billions that Germany and other European countries will spend on armaments will be a boon for US war industry.

A third consequence of the war logic is that the US will get an even greater grip on Europe through NATO. After WWII, Europe was crammed into a (military) straitjacket through a NATO that is completely controlled by the US. “To remain the dominant global power, the US must use the European Union and NATO to establish its hegemony in Europe,” Christian Saint-Etienne commented.

Since the fall of the Soviet Union and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, there have been frequent voices in Europe for a more autonomous course in geopolitical and military terms, without any results.

Through its warmongering, NATO is now more than ever setting the geopolitical course in Europe. There is no longer any question of a separate, autonomous strategy.(1) Germany, which has traditionally been a cool NATO lover, with a pacifist tradition, and which will be the biggest loser in this conflict, has now completely changed its tack.

This conflict primarily affects Europe and weakens the continent. In this war, the United States is the real winner. Biden’s presence at the European summit on March 24 should also be seen in this light. The question is whether he is after peace or whether he is going to stir up war.

Give peace a chance

Be that as it may, a different logic is necessary, a logic that puts a stop to militarist escalation, a logic that focuses on dialogue and strives for a sustainable security structure.

In the short term, active peace diplomacy is needed. The sooner the war ends, the better. To give the peace talks between Ukraine and Russia every chance, one must refrain from further inflaming the war by sending weapons or troops, by extending sanctions, or by using unnecessary war rhetoric.

Offering Putin a so-called “golden bridge” from Ukraine should also be considered. Ending the war must be made as attractive as possible. At present there are only threats of even more war violence and sanctions. The reverse is also possible and is more desirable now. For example, a ceasefire and a withdrawal from Ukraine could be linked to easing economic sanctions.

This conflict has not come out of the blue. The security structure on the European continent is unbalanced and unstable. The US still sees Eurasia as the chessboard on which the battle for world domination is waged.

Therefore, in the long run, Europe needs a new security architecture. This means taking security into its own hands and not accepting it to be dictated or imposed from outside. This must be a security architecture that focuses on the countries concerned and that is not developed for the sake of geopolitics.

Stability can only be achieved if all countries involved feel safe. If weapons agreements are made and conclusive security guarantees are given that all parties can live with.

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) is best placed to set up such a security architecture. The OSCE has more than proved its worth in the past.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Translation by Dirk Nimmegeers

Marc Vandepitte is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Notes

(1) The announced new European intervention force, the so-called rapid deployment capacity, is a good illustration of this. It involves barely 5,000 soldiers and will not be fully operational until 2030.

Featured image is from epthinktank.eu

Biggest Lie in World History: The Data Base is Flawed. There Never Was A Pandemic. The Covid Mandates including the Vaccine are Invalid

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, March 23, 2022

Was the Azov Battalion Behind the Mariupol Theater Bombing? Or was it Russia?

Eric Zuesse, March 23, 2022

Why Ukraine is Important to Powerful People in Washington: Lara Logan Sets the Record Straight on Ukraine-Russia

Alexandra Bruce, March 22, 2022

The U.S. Has Killed More Than 20 Million People in 37 “Victim Nations” Since World War II

James A. Lucas, March 24, 2022

“Preemptive Nuclear War”: The Historic Battle for Peace and Democracy. A Third World War Threatens the Future of Humanity

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, March 21, 2022

The Ukraine-Russia Negotiations Are Effectively Dead: Ukraine’s Refusal to “Denazify”

Eric Zuesse, March 21, 2022

Video: Covid-19: Engineered Destruction of Civil Society: Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, March 20, 2022

Newly Released Pfizer Documents Reveal COVID Jab Dangers

Dr. Joseph Mercola, March 23, 2022

Fires Rage within Canada’s Ukrainian Community as Professor Attacks the Myth of Holodomor

Matthew Ehret-Kump, March 21, 2022

Sudden Death of Corona Crisis” Versus “Sudden War with Ukraine”

Peter Koenig, March 20, 2022

A Letter to the Vaccinated

Dr. Angela Durante, March 23, 2022

Ukraine-Russia: A Proxy-War, Advancing the Agenda of the Great Reset?

Peter Koenig, March 23, 2022

Graphene COVID Kill Shots: Let the Evidence Speak for Itself

Dr. Ariyana Love, March 23, 2022

This Is the End of Free Speech Online

Fraser Myers, March 20, 2022

“COVID-19 shots’ effects on fertility, targeting children with social pressure and coercion to get jabbed”: Robert Malone and Candace Owens Interview

Dr. Joseph Mercola, March 20, 2022

Video: Ukraine. A Bombshell of Truth. Lara Laugan

Peter Koenig, March 18, 2022

Video: Mariupol: “Nicolay Knows”. Civilians Denounce the Crimes of the Neo-Nazi Azov Regiment

Christelle Néant, March 23, 2022

Ukraine: A Complex War and “The Neo-Nazi Element”: Holes in the Mainstream Account of “Justice in Ukraine”

Michael Welch, March 19, 2022

Eleven Years Ago: Hillary Clinton’s Emails Confirm The “Real Agenda” Behind the US-NATO War on Libya

Timothy Alexander Guzman, March 22, 2022

Ukraine Adopts the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset”

Martin Armstrong, March 18, 2022

America’s Insidious Plan to Invade Canada and Bomb Vancouver, Halifax and Quebec City (1930-39)

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, March 25, 2022

Most Canadians are unaware of the fact that the United States of America had formulated in 1924 a carefully designed plan to invade Canada and bomb Montreal, Quebec City, Halifax and Vancouver. What has been deliberately omitted from our history books is that our American neighbour had formulated a detailed plan to invade Canada. The use “poison gas” was part of that project.

Video: One Month into War — Now What? Former CIA Officer Phil Giraldi

By Philip Giraldi and Judge Andrew P. Napolitano, March 25, 2022

The latest on the Russian invasion of Ukraine with former CIA officer Phil Giraldi.

The Incidence of Cancer, Triggered by the Covid 19 “Vaccine”

By Dr. Nicole Delépine, March 24, 2022

We are in a world gone mad and yet these stories are multiplying, such as this young man of 22 years who had a chronic cough leading to an X-ray discovering a mediastinal mass. The two big Paris hospitals that received him refused to start the treatment (without it being explained in detail) if the patient refused the experimental injection, of absolutely unknown effects on the development of cancers.

A Letter to the Unvaccinated

By Dr. Angela Durante, Prof Denis Rancourt, and et al., March 24, 2022

It is entirely reasonable and legitimate to say ‘no’ to insufficiently tested vaccines for which there is no reliable science. You have a right to assert guardianship of your body and to refuse medical treatments if you see fit. You are right to say ‘no’ to a violation of your dignity, your integrity and your bodily autonomy. It is your body, and you have the right to choose.

Trudeau Very Angry. Labelled a “Dictator” at the European Parliament. “Trampling on democratic rights”, “You are a disgrace to democracy”

By Global Research News, March 24, 2022

No analysis by Canada’s mainstream media. See what happened after his historic failed address to the European Parliament.

”Trojan Horse” in Russia’s Central Bank: Will Putin Wake Up to the Threat of Russia’s Atlanticist Integrationists? Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, March 24, 2022

Yesterday I reported that Anatoly Chubais, who created the Russian oligarch system during the Yeltsin years, the system in which wealth and capital flowed out of Russia, has fled Russia. He was a member of the Gang of Three with Latvian Alexei Kudrin and central bank chief Nabiullina. They convinced Putin of an economic policy that has severely damaged Russia economically and left her unprepared for Washington’s sanctions. 

Ukraine’s Propaganda War: International PR Firms, DC Lobbyists and CIA Cutouts

By Dan Cohen, March 24, 2022

Since the Russian offensive inside Ukraine commenced on February 24, the Ukrainian military has cultivated the image of a plucky little army standing up to the Russian Goliath. To bolster the perception of Ukrainian military mettle, Kiev has churned out a steady stream of sophisticated propaganda aimed at stirring public and official support from Western countries.

West Grieves for Ukraine While Afghanistan Starves

By Black Alliance for Peace, March 24, 2022

Afghanistan has joined the ever growing ranks of countries forcibly thrown into desperate humanitarian crises following U.S./NATO wars now relegated to the sidelines as the latest crisis instigated by the West’s imperial aggression takes the spotlight.

Reflecting on Canada’s Freedom Convoy: “The Frozen Ashes” of Our Democracy and the “Frozen Assets” of Those Who Defended It

By Julie Fleischauer, March 24, 2022

Derek Brouwer owns a small fleet of trucks for his business, transporting hay from Southern Ontario, down into the United States. He was interviewed on Fox news recently for the blow back that he received for having a truck in Ottawa during the Emergency Measures Act.

As Outrage Grows Over Civilian Casualties in Ukraine, Media Ignores Suffering of Yemeni People

By Andi Olluri, March 24, 2022

The media have failed to report on large-scale war crimes committed by the Ukrainian Army in Eastern Ukraine. The plight of Yemenis subjected to years of international terror by some of the most powerful nations on Earth has also been ignored.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Spain has announced that it has endorsed a proposal by the Kingdom of Morocco to designate the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) as an “autonomous” region within the North African state.

Former United States President Donald Trump in 2020, recognized Moroccan control over the Western Sahara in an attempt to strengthen relations between the Kingdom and the State of Israel.

Formerly known as the “Spanish Sahara”, the people of the territory have been demanding national independence for decades.

All of the former colonies of Europe within the African continent have sought independence from the former imperialist masters. Although there are 55 African countries which are members of the African Union (AU) and the United Nations, the phenomenon of neo-colonialism has hampered genuine liberation and continental unification.

This recent proclamation by Spain is clearly a manifestation of the legacy of neo-colonialism, where even independent governments are subjected to the economic domination of the imperialist states. The most progressive states within the AU have supported the SADR in their struggle to win independence from Morocco.

The territory was ceded to Morocco and Mauritania after the exit of Spain as a colonial power in 1975. Mauritania relinquished its falsely designated authority over the Western Sahara, while the Kingdom of Morocco, one of the few remaining monarchies on the continent, has refused to allow the people of the territory to even conduct an internationally supervised and monitored election on the status of their own country.

Both the United Nations and the African Union (AU) has recognized the SADR as a government in waiting with a legitimate claim to represent the people of the de facto colony. The Western Sahara is the only country which has not been declared independent within the AU, whose predecessor, the Organization of African Unity (OAU) after contentious debate, has advocated for the total liberation of the Western Sahara for nearly four decades.

Nonetheless, in response to the seating of the SADR by the OAU/AU, Morocco withdrew its membership from the continental organization. However, several years ago, the Kingdom petitioned for readmission which was granted despite objections from several states including Algeria and the member-states of the Southern African Development Community (SADC).

The Polisario Front, the armed liberation movement which has been fighting for independence since 1973, rejected the recent shift in the position of Spain. The UN has been unable to ensure that Morocco holds a national referendum within the Western Sahara over the future of the territory.

This consistent failure on the part of the UN and the intransigence on the part of the U.S., the European Union (EU) and its collaborators within the AU and West Asia, has stifled the independence and sovereignty of the continent’s last remaining colony. Obviously, the economic interests of Europe and the U.S. has guided its position towards the right of oppressed nations to self-determination.

In fact, the European Council on Foreign Relation (ECFR) in a recent report noted:

“The surprise move came to light when King Mohammed VI (Morocco) revealed some of the contents of a private letter from Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez. The letter endorses Rabat’s position on Western Sahara, describing Morocco’s 2007 proposal for Sahrawi autonomy – which would integrate the territory into Morocco – as ‘the most serious, realistic, and credible’ basis for resolving the conflict. This follows a similar move by Berlin. In a bid to mend its own relations with Rabat, the German government described Morocco’s plan as an ‘important contribution’. Spain is now the strongest European supporter of Morocco’s autonomy plan – even in comparison to France, a close ally of Morocco. So far, Paris has refrained from using superlatives when endorsing the ‘serious and credible’ nature of the plan.”

These unscrupulous diplomatic maneuvers are part and parcel of the aggressive posture being displayed by the imperialist states. It must be viewed within the context of the efforts to expand the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) further into Eastern Europe. The Russian Federation intervention in Ukraine, which has gained significant support among the masses within the AU member-states, is taking place alongside the proliferation of Pentagon and EU troops on the African continent. The U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) and the French-coordinated Operation Barkhane have established permanent and temporary makeshift bases on AU soil.

Although France has threatened to downsize its presence in West Africa and is undergoing a diplomatic row with Algeria over the legacy of its colonial domination from 1830 to 1962, Paris does not want to relinquish its capacity to respond militarily when it believes that their economic interests in Africa are compromised. The presence of the Wagner Group, a Russian Federation military services company assisting the Central African Republic, Mali and other states on the continent, indicates the discontent with Washington and Paris. These military operations in Africa by the Pentagon and other NATO countries coincides with the worsening security situation where so-called “jihadists” are utilizing sophisticated armaments to undermine the stability of AU member-states.

The Polisario Front Has a Legitimate Struggle to Liberate the Sahrawi Nation

There has been a swift and terse response by the independence movement to the provocations of Spain related to its effort to bring political freedom to the Western Sahara. For many years the Polisario Front abided by a ceasefire in order to facilitate the long-promised UN-sponsored referendum on its status within the international community.

Polisario Front women fighters in formation

Algeria, which has been a longtime advocate for liberation movements on the continent, has continued to demand that the UN abide by its legal obligations with respect to the SADR. Algiers routinely challenges on a diplomatic level those entities which support the continued colonization of the Western Sahara.

In a recent report by Al Jazeera on the declaration by Spain the press agency emphasizes that:

“Algeria has recalled its ambassador from Madrid in protest at Spain’s decision to back a Moroccan autonomy plan for the disputed former Spanish colony of Western Sahara. Morocco sees Western Sahara, with rich phosphate resources and access to lucrative Atlantic fishing waters, as an integral part of its territory. A statement carried by Algeria’s official media on Saturday (March 19) condemned the ‘abrupt about-turn’ by Madrid, which had previously maintained neutrality in the decades-old conflict for the territory between Morocco and the Polisario Front independence movement.”

As far as the SADR and the Polisario Front are concerned, Spain continues to be the colonial power in the Western Sahara since they do not recognize the continued occupation by the Moroccan monarchy over their territory. Numerous international legal decisions and the authority of the UN and the AU are being violated by Rabat and its supporters among the imperialist governments of Europe and North America.

Image on the right: SADR Ambassador to United Nations Dr. Sidi Omar

SADR Ambassador to the United Nations, Dr. Sidi Omar, issued a public letter to Secretary General Antonio Guterres on the present situation saying:

“Regarding the status of Morocco in relation to Western Sahara, the General Assembly has deeply deplored ‘the continued occupation of Western Sahara by Morocco’ in its Resolutions 34/37 of 1979 and 35/19 of 1980, among others. It is worth noting that the condition of Western Sahara being both a Non-Self-Governing Territory on the UN agenda since 1963 and an Occupied Territory is compatible with international law and practice. In view of the above, Spain therefore still has legal, historical, and moral responsibilities towards the people of Western Sahara. As such, it is still accountable to the UN and to the Sahrawi people for the fulfilment of its responsibilities and ‘sacred trust’ obligations concerning the decolonization of the Territory in line with the provisions of Chapter XI of the UN Charter and relevant General Assembly resolutions. The Frente POLISARIO and the Government of the Sahrawi Republic (SADR) call upon Spain, as the de jure Administering Power of Western Sahara, to assume fully its legal and historical responsibility regarding the Territory and the destiny of its people.”

Therefore, according to the liberation movement and the provisional government, which is recognized by the UN and the AU, the question of the Western Sahara remains one of European domination over an oppressed people. The recent decision by Spain has no moral or legal weight and must be seen as yet another attempt to deny the right to self-determination, independence and sovereignty of the African continent.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Western Sahara solidarity demonstration in 2007; All images in this article are from the author unless otherwise stated

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The latest on the Russian invasion of Ukraine with former CIA officer Phil Giraldi.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected].

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version). 

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch

First posted by Global Research on August 7, 2021

 

 

***

OCLA researcher Dr. Denis Rancourt and several fellow Canadian academics penned an open letter to support those who have decided not to accept the COVID-19 vaccine.

The group emphasizes the voluntary nature of this medical treatment as well as the need for informed consent and individual risk-benefit assessment. They reject the pressure exerted by public health officials, the news and social media, and fellow citizens.

Control over our bodily integrity may well be the ultimate frontier of the fight to protect civil liberties. Read the letter below or as a PDF here.

Open Letter to the Unvaccinated

You are not alone! As of 28 July 2021, 29% of Canadians have not received a COVID-19 vaccine, and an additional 14% have received one shot. In the US and in the European Union, less than half the population is fully vaccinated, and even in Israel, the “world’s lab” according to Pfizer, one third of people remain completely unvaccinated. Politicians and the media have taken a uniform view, scapegoating the unvaccinated for the troubles that have ensued after eighteen months of fearmongering and lockdowns. It’s time to set the record straight.

It is entirely reasonable and legitimate to say ‘no’ to insufficiently tested vaccines for which there is no reliable science. You have a right to assert guardianship of your body and to refuse medical treatments if you see fit. You are right to say ‘no’ to a violation of your dignity, your integrity and your bodily autonomy. It is your body, and you have the right to choose. You are right to fight for your children against their mass vaccination in school.

You are right to question whether free and informed consent is at all possible under present circumstances. Long-term effects are unknown. Transgenerational effects are unknown. Vaccine-induced deregulation of natural immunity is unknown. Potential harm is unknown as the adverse event reporting is delayed, incomplete and inconsistent between jurisdictions.

You are being targeted by mainstream media, government social engineering campaigns, unjust rules and policies, collaborating employers, and the social-media mob.

You are being told that you are now the problem and that the world cannot get back to normal unless you get vaccinated.

You are being viciously scapegoated by propaganda and pressured by others around you. Remember; there is nothing wrong with you.

You are inaccurately accused of being a factory for new SARS-CoV-2 variants, when in fact, according to leading scientists, your natural immune system generates immunity to multiple components of the virus. This will promote your protection against a vast range of viral variants and abrogates further spread to anyone else.

You are justified in demanding independent peer-reviewed studies, not funded by multinational pharmaceutical companies. All the peer-reviewed studies of short-term safety and short-term efficacy have been funded, organized, coordinated, and supported by these for-profit corporations; and none of the study data have been made public or available to researchers who don’t work for these companies.

You are right to question the preliminary vaccine trial results. The claimed high values of relative efficacy rely on small numbers of tenuously determined “infections.”  The studies were also not blind, where people giving the injections admittedly knew or could deduce whether they were injecting the experimental vaccine or the placebo. This is not acceptable scientific methodology for vaccine trials.

You are correct in your calls for a diversity of scientific opinions. Like in nature, we need a polyculture of information and its interpretations. And we don’t have that right now. Choosing not to take the vaccine is holding space for reason, transparency and accountability to emerge. You are right to ask, ‘What comes next when we give away authority over our own bodies?’

Do not be intimidated. You are showing resilience, integrity and grit. You are coming together in your communities, making plans to help one another and standing for scientific accountability and free speech, which are required for society to thrive. We are among many who stand with you.

Angela Durante, PhD
Denis Rancourt, PhD
Claus Rinner, PhD
Laurent Leduc, PhD
Donald Welsh, PhD
John Zwaagstra, PhD
Jan Vrbik, PhD
Valentina Capurri, PhD

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is from Health Impact News

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Yesterday I reported that Anatoly Chubais, who created the Russian oligarch system during the Yeltsin years, the system in which wealth and capital flowed out of Russia, has fled Russia. He was a member of the Gang of Three with Latvian Alexei Kudrin and central bank chief Nabiullina. They convinced Putin of an economic policy that has severely damaged Russia economically and left her unprepared for Washington’s sanctions. 

The Chubais-Kudrin-Nabiullina policy had Russia borrowing from the West for no reason other than to have her vulnerable to sanctions.

The policy had Russia supporting the currencies of the US and EU to the detriment of the ruble, thus making the Russian currency another vulnerable point of Western attack and gave away Russian income to foreigners by privatizing Russian assets.  The policy held back Russian economic development.  For reasons I don’t know, Putin trusted these leaders of the pro-Western Atlanticist Integrationists who built dams against Russian economic development.

Putin’s recent announcement that henceforth “unfriendly countries” (why only unfriendly countries) will have to pay for Russian energy in rubles indicates that finally economist Sergei Glazyev, who has Russia’s interest at heart rather than Washington’s interest, is being heard in the Kremlin. 

That the Russian traitors and Washington agents Kudrin and Nabiullina are still in office indicates that Putin still has much to learn.

Chubais, Kudrin, and Nabiullina are Washington’s candidates to be installed as president of Russia once Putin can be overthrown.  Although Chubais has fled, Putin has taken no action against Kudrin and Nabiullina.

Nabiulina bears sole responsibility for Russia’s loss of her foreign exchange reserves. The central bank chief had most of Russia’s reserves in foreign banks where they were easily seized by the sanctions.  As Glazyev has said, this is open undisguised treason, and Putin just nominated Nabiulina for reappointment!

 

 

It is the presence of Atlanticist Integrationists, who are willing to sacrifice Russian sovereignty to be part of the West, in the Russian government, and their representation in the intellectual and upper classes and billionaire oligarchs, that encourages Washington’s efforts to shame Russia with a psyops campaign and punish her with economic sanctions. The same campaign of demonization that was used against Donald Trump is being used against Putin. Washington hopes that the Atlanticist Integrationists will overthrow Putin or cause his overthrow by their economic policies that weaken the Russian economy and turn the people against Putin.

The increase in the pension age is one of their policies that they sold to Putin that weakened his support among the Russian people.

Perhaps one day Putin will wake up and have Kudrin and Nabiulina arrested for high treason.  If not, their presence will continue to encourage more Washington provocations until they bring nuclear war.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts writes on his blog site, PCR Institute for Political Economy. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Anatoly Chubais (Licensed under CC BY 4.0)

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Since the Russian offensive inside Ukraine commenced on February 24, the Ukrainian military has cultivated the image of a plucky little army standing up to the Russian Goliath. To bolster the perception of Ukrainian military mettle, Kiev has churned out a steady stream of sophisticated propaganda aimed at stirring public and official support from Western countries.

The campaign includes language guides, key messages, and hundreds of propaganda posters, some of which contain fascist imagery and even praise Neo-Nazi leaders.

Behind Ukraine’s public relations effort is an army of foreign political strategists, Washington DC lobbyists, and a network of intelligence-linked media outlets.

Ukraine’s propaganda strategy earned it praise from a NATO commander who told the Washington Post,

“They are really excellent in stratcom — media, info ops, and also psy-ops.”

The Post ultimately conceded that

“Western officials say that while they cannot independently verify much of the information that Kyiv puts out about the evolving battlefield situation, including casualty figures for both sides, it nonetheless represents highly effective stratcom.”

Key to the propaganda effort is an international legion of public relations firms working directly with Ukraine’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs to wage information warfare.

According to the industry news site PRWeek, the initiative was launched by an anonymous figure who allegedly founded a Ukraine-based public relations firm.

“From the first hour of war, we decided to join the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to help them distribute the official sources to show the truth,” the nameless figure told PR Week. “This is a hybrid war: the mix of bloodily struggling fight with a huge disinformation and fake campaign lead by Russia [sic].”

According to the anonymous figure, more than 150 public relations firms have joined the propaganda blitz.

The international effort is spearheaded by public relations firm PR Network co-founder Nicky Regazzoni and Francis Ingham, a top public relations consultant with close ties to the UK’s government. Ingraham previously worked for Britain’s Conservative Party, sits on the UK Government Communication Service Strategy and Evaluation Council, is Chief Executive of the International Communications Consultancy Organisation, and leads the membership body for UK local government communicators, LG Comms.

“We’ve been privileged to help coordinate efforts to support the Ukrainian Government in the last few days, “ Ingham told PRovoke Media. “Agencies have offered up entire teams to support Kyiv in the communications war. Our support for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine is unwavering and will continue for as long as needed.”

With an anonymous Ukrainian figure joining two of the top public relations figures in the Kiev government’s propaganda blitz, Ukraine’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs distributed a dossier folder(archived)  with materials instructing public relations agencies on “key messages,” approved language, content for debunked propaganda constructs, far-right and Neo-Nazi propaganda.

The folder is run by Yaroslav Turbil, described on his LinkedIn page as “Head of Ukraine.ua — Ukraine’s digital ecosystem for global communications. Strategic Communications & Country Brand Promotion.” Turbil has worked at multiple “civil society” organizations closely linked to the U.S. government and interned at Internews, a U.S. intelligence-linked organization that operates under the guise of promoting press freedom.

Among the propaganda constructs distributed in the dossier, is a video of the Snake Island incident, which was quickly proven false, in which Ukrainian border guards stationed on a small island were reported to have been killed after they told an approaching Russian warship that had urged them to surrender to “Go f*** yourself.” President Zelensky held a press conference announcing he would award the men the Hero of Ukraine medal as mainstream media spread the story widely. However, the supposedly-dead soldiers quickly turned up alive and well, proving their heroic stand to be a farce.

Despite the story being proven as fake, the dossier contains a propaganda video promoting it.

Another folder in the dossier is run by Ukrainian MFA graphic artist Dasha Podoltseva and contains hundreds of propaganda graphics submitted by artists in Europe and the United States.

Some feature generic “no war” messages, while dozens of other images celebrate “The Ghost of Kiev” – a heroic Ukrainian pilot who turns out to be non-existent – and the phony “Snake Island 13” incident.

Many use xenophobic and racist language, and some are explicit in their praise of prominent Ukrainian Neo-Nazis, including C14 leader Yevhen Karas, the Right Sector fascist paramilitary, and the Neo-Nazi Azov Battalion.

Multiple images call for “Banderite smoothies” – a reference to Molotov cocktails named for the late OUN-B commander Stephan Bandera, who collaborated with Nazi Germany in the mass murder of Jews and ethnic Poles during World War II. Another image depicts a book titled the: ”Encyclopedia of Incurable Diseases,” listing Russia, Belorussia, North Korea, Syria, and Eritrea.

“I love NLAW” – Next Generation Light Anti-tank Weapon, provided by western governments to the Ukrainian military

Graphic implying fertilizing the fields with bodies reads, “Grandma advice to Moskovites: Hide in the fields, When you die in hands of our army, Sunflowers will grow better”’

“Thank You Ukrainian Army” with an Azov Battalion Wolfsengel patch emblazoned on the sleeve”

“The Encyclopedia of Incurable Disease: Russia, Belorussia, North Korea, Syria, Eritrea”

“Against Moscovian Occupation.” Moscovian is a xenophobic term used to describe Russians

Graphic calling Czar Nicholas, Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, and Vladimir Putin incarnations of the same “Mental Moskovian Dragon”

“Bandera Smoothie”

Click here for more photos.

Foreign extremists flock to Ukraine

The dossier also contains a link to a Ministry of Foreign Affairs page called “Fight for Ukraine,” which provides instructions for foreigners who wish to join Ukraine’s Neo-Nazi-infested armed forces – termed the “International Defense Legion of Ukraine.”

Following Zelensky’s call for foreign fighters to form a brigade, fighters from all over the world, including the U.S., UK, Canada, Australia, Spain, Colombia, Brazil, Chile, and more have traveled to face Russian forces. Others with no combat training or experience have arrived for “war tourism” – what one British soldier called “bullet-catchers.”

Official Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs recruitment graphics from the dossier

Official Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs recruitment graphics from the dossier

While the Ukrainian government says tens of thousands have answered their call, some commentators expressed doubt at those figures, calling it a “PR exercise.”

However, the foreigners who have traveled to Ukraine have encountered a much more severe reality than they anticipated.

Russia’s air force bombed military installations adjacent to where the foreign fighters were sleeping. Having fled to neighboring Poland, a Spanish fighter described the bombing as a “message” that could have killed thousands.

Similarly, an American fighter who hid in an ambulance to escape the frontlines warned that Ukrainian authorities were killing foreigners who decided not to fight, calling it a “trap.”

Correct wording

One document inside the dossier delineates acceptable language on the conflict with Russia as determined by the Ukrainian government.

“Such Russian clichés like ‘referendum in Crimea’ or ‘will of the people of Crimea’ are absolutely unacceptable,” the document states, in reference to the 2014 overwhelmingly successful referendum to separate from Ukraine.

The document deems unacceptable the terms “Civil war in Donbass,” “Internal conflict,” “Conflict in Ukraine” and “Ukrainian crisis” to describe the Ukrainian military’s war with the breakaway republics of the Donbass region. This, despite the fact that the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights estimates that 14,200 people, including 3,404 civilians, have been killed in internal fighting in Ukraine since 2014.

In place of these phrases, the document calls for the use of the terms “Armed aggression by the Russian Federation in Donbass, international armed conflict, Russian war against Ukraine, Russian-Ukrainian conflict armed conflict.”

Key Messages

Another document titled “Key Messages” contains specific propaganda claims that were widely disseminated in mainstream western media, but which have since been discredited. One section claims the “entire Europe was put on the brink of nuclear disaster, when the Russian troops began shelling the largest in Europe Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant.”

However, International Atomic Energy Agency’s director-general, Rafael Mariano Grossi, said that the building hit by a Russian “projectile” at the Zaporizhzhia plant was “not part of the reactor” but instead a training center. Russian troops also left Ukrainian workers to continue operating the plant.

“If I were a Russian worried about the potential of Nazi extremists coming up with a dirty bomb, I’d need to take control of this very facility” – @realscottritter deconstructs the Ukrainian nuclear plant takeover

With @dancohen3000

Full Interview: https://t.co/KOMDd6018Y pic.twitter.com/lpANwW2rt4

— MintPress News (@MintPressNews) March 8, 2022

Another section thanks Turkey for the decision “to block the access of Russian warships to the Black Sea.”

However, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan closed the Bosphorus and Dardanelles straits to all military vessels, preventing both NATO and Russian vessels from accessing the Black Sea.

Among the document’s key messages is a statement of gratitude to the “Anti-war demonstrations held by citizens of many nations throughout the world demonstrate strong support to Ukraine in defending against Russia.”

This refers to large pro-Ukraine demonstrations in Europe which have featured calls for the U.S. and NATO to establish a no-fly zone over Ukraine and shoot down Russian military aircraft, potentially transforming the conflict into a world war between nuclear-armed powers.

The NED published video of its CEO, Damon Wilson, at a rally outside the White House, declaring "Glory to Ukraine" – the salute used by Nazi collaborator Stephan Bandera's OUN-B, which carried out mass murder of Jews and Poles during World War 2. pic.twitter.com/a5hWSn9txo

— Dan Cohen (@dancohen3000) March 7, 2022

“Despite Russia’s propaganda, there is no discrimination based on the race or nationality, including when it comes to the crossing of the state border by foreign citizens,” claims the Ukrainian document.

However, numerous videos and reports have documented Ukrainian authorities preventing Africans from fleeing the fighting. Even the New York Times – hardly a bastion of Kremlin propaganda – published a report documenting these racist practices.

One message says that “On 16 March, the Russian forces dropped a bomb on a drama theatre where up to 1300 civilians were being sheltered. The number of casualties is still unknown.”

However, as Max Blumenthal reported the explosion appears to be the result of a false flag operation designed by the Neo-Nazi Azov Battalion and aimed at triggering a NATO intervention.

NATO-backed troll farms

Another anonymously-penned investigation shows how Ukrainian public relations firms have used targeted advertisements to astroturf Russian internet and social media networks with messaging calling to economically isolate Moscow and “stop the war.” This effort is led by Bezlepkin Evgeny Vitalievich, who uses the alias Evgeny Korolev, along with Pavel Antonov of the Targetorium organization. From behind his Korolev pseudonym, the Ukrainian information warrior composed a post on his Facebook page (now private) boasting that his firm’s Facebook ads achieved 30 million hits in three days.

At the same time, Facebook has blocked Russian state-owned media outlets from running ads and monetizing content. Several fake accounts for media outlets like Russia 24 have sprung up, burying the authentic account under a series of impostors. Facebook has also marked statements from Russian officials, including the Ministry of Defense, as “false.”

This campaign has reportedly been carried out upon recommendation from StopFake, a self-described “fact checking” outlet that is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy, Atlantic Council, Czech and UK foreign ministries, and the International Renaissance Foundation, which is funded by billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Foundation.

StopFake was hired by Facebook in March 2020 to “curb the flow of Russian propaganda” but was found to be employing multiple figures closely tied to violent Neo-Nazis. The journalist who co-authored the exposé received death threats and ultimately fled Ukraine.

Those revelations have apparently not prevented Facebook from relying on the organization for censorship guidance.

Meanwhile, Russian hackers located a public Google document (since made private, uploaded here) detailing the propaganda operation, which has been distributed in Telegram channels of “creative farms.”

“Here you can find links to Ukrainian media that need promotion, bot accounts with logins and passwords from which anti-war messages and messages with fakes about the Ministry of Defense were sent to users, theses and specific instructions on which posts and which audiences to embroider,” the investigation reads.

Another campaign is run by Nataliya Popovych, the founder of the public relations agency, One Philosophy, in Kiev. Popovych’s LinkedIn profile shows she has worked with the U.S. State Department and advised former President Petro Poroshenko. She is also co-founder and board member of Ukraine Crisis Media Center, a propaganda arm funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development, the National Endowment for Democracy, the U.S. Embassy, and NATO, among many others.

A Campaign Asia article profiles several public relations firms involved in the effort. Among them is Richard Edelman, CEO of Edelman PR. Edelman is also a member of the Atlantic Council’s Board of Directors and the World Economic Forum.

“Geopolitics has become the new test for trust. We saw this with the allegations of human rights abuses in Xinjiang and the war between Ukraine and Russia has only reinforced it,” he said, linking the U.S. propaganda campaign surrounding China’s deradicalization campaign for Uyghur Muslims.

PR approved media outlets

An article in PRWeek profiles several figures partaking in what they describe as a “PR army” that is “fighting on the informational frontline” against Russia’s “barbaric genocide of Ukrainians.”

“Propaganda is the same as real lethal weapons,” declares Marta Dzhumaha, PR manager at healthcare company BetterMe.

Julia Petryk, head of public relations at MacPaw, offers a list of approved media outlets, authored by her colleague Tetiana Bronistka, a former employee of Ukraine’s Prosecutor General’s Office. The list includes Russian and English language sources, as well as Telegram channels. However, these “verified sources that objectively cover what is happening in Ukraine” are anything but independent. Most of them are tied to the U.S. and European governments and billionaire foundations.

She also lists several Russian-language websites:

• Novaya Gazeta – Tied to and reportedly funded by the National Endowment for Democracy
• Meduza – Funded by the government of Latvia, OAK Foundation, Open Society Foundation ​​oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorovsky, and Sweden
• Dozhd – SREDA foundation, European Commission
• Holod Media – Offshoot of Meduza – praised in PBS and CNN as “independent media”
• Proposed that Leningrad should have been surrendered to the Nazis in World War 2 and has complained that they are called a “fifth column” for being funded by western powers
• BBC Russia – British government media
• Current Time TV – Created by CIA-founded propaganda outlet Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty in collaboration with Voice of America
• Censor – funded by, editor in chief Yuri Butusov, former advisor to the Minister of Defense of Ukraine
• 200RF – A Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs website that claims to publish publishes photos and documents of the Russian soldiers captured and killed in action

Among the Telegram channels listed are:

• Radio Svoboda – CIA-founded propaganda organ Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
• Espresso TV, largely owned by the wife of former Ukrainian member of parliament Mykola Knyazhytsky
• Censor.net, formerly the largest media site in Ukraine, whose motto is “To bring down Russia”, and whose owner operates a “parade of international trolls.”

Intelligence operations

While the public relations firms distribute content, CIA cutouts and billionaire foundations run the media outlets they derive it from. At the core of this operation is a project called the Russian Language News Exchange that was the product of a network of opposition media outlets founded in 2016 that operate in post-Soviet countries, as revealed by an investigation by the Russian media agency, RIA FAN.

In July 2021, a group of journalists flew to Warsaw for media training after being exempted from coronavirus-related restrictions and quarantine orders by Poland’s top medical authorities.

Among the six journalists were Andrey Lipsky, deputy editor-in-chief of Novaya Gazeta, and Yuliia Fediv, CEO of Hromadske TV media, one of the most-watched networks in Ukraine.

Hromadske’s financial reports show it is funded by numerous governments and foundations, including the U.S. embassy in Ukraine, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, the European Endowment for Democracy, and Free Press Unlimited. Silicon Valley billionaire Pierre Omidary was also involved in creating the outlet.

Hromadske recently hosted a commentator demanding genocide of ethnic Russians in the Donbass, saying it is populated with 1.5 “superfluous” people that “must be exterminated.”

The training, held behind closed doors from July 19 to July 21, was titled “Media Network 2021+” and closely tied to Mediaset, also known as the Russian Language News Exchange, a network founded in 2015. Russian Language News Exchange’s website is sparse, with little available information on its activities – apparently made private since the publication of RIA FAN’s investigation.

While it claims to be independent, Russian Language News Exchange is a project of Free Press Unlimited, funded by the Dutch government and the European Commission.

Today, it includes 14 media outlets that act as “nodes,” cross-publishing each other’s articles in various countries.

The website’s introductory video is hosted by Maxim Eristavi, a former Radio Free Europe reporter and founder of Hromadske. Today, he heads the Millennium Leadership Program at the NATO and arms industry-backed think tank, the Atlantic Council.

Since its inception, Mediaset has coordinated between outlets in Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Moldova, Russia, and Ukraine. In March 2021, Mediaset expanded with the Colab Medios Project, created through the Free Press Unlimited Viable Media for Empowered Societies (VIMES) program. This program created training for journalists and saw articles from the El Salvadoran outlet El Faro published in Euroradio (Belarus), Coda (Georgia), and Ziarul de Garda (Moldova).

On March 4, several days after Russia launched its military offensive, a new project called the Media Lifeline Ukraine was created.

The next day, Free Press Unlimited held an emergency conference for Ukraine featuring Hromadske co-founders Maxim Eristavi and Nataliya Gumenyuk. The meeting called to raise 2 million euros for the project. “Only with ongoing external support, will local media entities be able to continue to do their work,” its introductory page asks.

Days later, Free Press Unlimited announced a partnership to support a new joint project of  Reporters Without Borders and its Ukrainian partner, the Institute for Mass Information, called The Lviv Press Freedom Center. The Institute for Mass Information is headed by USAID communications officer Oksana Romaniuk and funded by USAID and the UK government.

Washington DC lobbyists wag the dog

While public relations firms and intelligence-linked propaganda operations target the public, Washington DC lobbyists are agitating in Congress to extend the war in Ukraine

Daniel Vajdich, a registered foreign agent and lobbyist for the Ukrainian Federation of Employers of the Oil and Gas Industry, the largest in Ukraine, is working on behalf of Volodymyr Zelensky to lobby members of Congress to approve more weapons shipments to Ukraine. Now the head of Yorktown Solutions, he previously advised Ted Cruz and Scott Walker’s campaigns and is a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council.

“Stingers, Javelins, and let’s figure out the fighter aircraft issue,” he told Politico, claiming Russia is attempting to carry out a “genocide” and “depopulate certain areas of Ukraine.”

Vajdich also wrote Zelenskyy’s March 16 speech to U.S. Congress, in which he quoted Martin Luther King Jr. ‘s ‘I Have a Dream’ speech to call for a no-fly zone over Ukraine.

Ukrainian Permanent Representative at the United Nations Sergiy Kyslytsya’s February 23 speech to the United Nations General Assembly was written by DC lobbying firm SKDKnickerbocker Managing Director Stephen Krupin, a former senior speechwriter to President Barack Obama who worked extensively on Biden’s 2020 campaign.

Most prominent among the registered lobbyists promoting Ukrainian government and business interests is Andrew Mac, who also contributed to writing Zeleneksyy’s speech to Congress. Mac registered as a lobbyist for Zelensky in 2019 and runs the Washington DC office of Ukrainian law firm Asters Law.

The lobbying firm Your Global Strategy, founded by Shai Franklin, who has been affiliated with numerous Zionist organizations including the World Jewish Congress and Anti-Defamation League, is also using its influence with local officials in the U.S. Franklin has set up meetings between Kharkiv Mayor Ihor Terekhov and U.S. mayors, including Eric Adams in New York City, Michelle Wu in Boston and Lori Lightfoot in Chicago. He is also attempting to set up a meeting between U.S. officials and the mayors of Odessa and Kiev. A media outlet owned by the mayor of Kiev’s wife recently featured a presenter calling for genocide against Russians, beginning with children.

Franklin said he’s working with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s administration to help set up virtual meetings between mayors of Odessa and Kiev and U.S. counterparts.

Maryland-based lawyer Lukas Jan Kaczmarek is also working on behalf of the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense to increase U.S. weapons shipments, specifically seeking to arrange shipments of guns from Kel-Tec CNC Industries based in Cocoa, Florida, to the city of Odessa, Ukraine.

Former U.S. ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul described the network of public relations professionals and lobbyists surrounding Zelenskyy.

“These are people around Mr. Zelenskyy who are like the intermediaries and interlocutors. They’ve been interacting with the American elites and American media for a long time,” he said.

McFaul and John E. Herbst, former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine and senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center, act as informal advisors to Zelenskyy. McFaul told Politico that he speaks to Ukrainian government officials “probably everyday,” and “has helped them make connections with NBC or MSNBC producers.”

McFaul recently told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow that “Hitler did not kill German-speaking people, facing accusations of Holocaust denial.

Zelenskyy also held a “strategic video call” with McFaul before he spoke to House democrats.

With a powerful Russian military fighting alongside DPR and LPR forces, the Ukrainian military’s defeat seems to be imminent unless the United States and NATO directly confront Russian forces, a scenario President Biden has already ruled out. Lobbyists nevertheless persist in their campaign to portray the Ukrainian military as underdogs scoring blow after blow against Russian hordes. In doing so, they help extend the war and continue the carnage.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Dan Cohen is the Washington DC correspondent for Behind The Headlines. He has produced widely distributed video reports and print dispatches from across Israel-Palestine. He tweets at @DanCohen3000.

All images in this article are from MPN/Dan Cohen unless otherwise stated

To our readers,

We’d like to extend our gratitude for your continued support in these challenging times.

As you may all know, Global Research has been unduly censored by the search engines, et al, not to mention the recurrent smears by the “fact checkers” and mainstream media platforms. Nonetheless, we still manage to engage a sizeable Worldwide readership on a daily basis.

As it is our shared interest to pursue the truth for peace and justice, we would like to appeal to you to employ every creative and effective means to sustain our online presence.

• Crossposting Global Research articles on your blog sites,
• Forwarding articles to emails lists,
• Posting on social media,
• Bringing the Globalresearch.ca Newsletter to the attention of friends and colleagues,
• And more

We need every help we can get so take the liberty to cascade our daily publications in your own ways.

Moreover, we have just recently built new accounts on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Please feel free to follow and share.

We see all your efforts and we appreciate every bit of them! 

---

 

Click to view our membership plans

Click to make a one-time or a recurring donation

---

Thank you for supporting independent media!

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Despite pressure from the Biden administration, the Palestinian Authority has firmly refused to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and adopted a passive neutral stand on the conflict. While the Authority is West-leaning, Palestinians have experienced nothing but abuse from all the US administrations succeeding president Dwight Eisenhower (1953-1961).

He adopted a principled stand against aggression and occupation and commanded Israel to withdraw from Gaza and Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula after seizing these territories during the 1956 Anglo-French-Israeli war waged to topple Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser after he nationalised the Suez Canal. Israel reluctantly obliged by withdrawing in 1957.

The US has refused to exert pressure on Israel to evacuate Gaza, East Jerusalem and the West Bank since Israel conquered them in 1967 and has not sanctioned Israel for colonising them in flagrant violation of international law and the Fourth Geneva Convention. Instead, successive administrations have subsidised Israel’s occupation by providing military and economic aid and permitting the unhindered flow of tax free funds from US donors to the illegal colonies. The US has protected Israel from UN Security Council votes condemning its constant crack-down on Palestinians living under occupation, repeated wars against Gaza and Lebanon, and, during the last decade, all too frequent attacks on Syria.

Even after the Oslo accord was signed in ceremonies on the White House lawn, the US did not press Israel to abide by the deal’s terms by pulling its troops out of the West Bank and Gaza and negotiating a land-for-peace deal with the Palestinians. Determined to hang onto the land it occupies, Israel demands peace-for-peace. As a result, Israel has established an elaborate apartheid regime in occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank and, since 2006-07 besieged and blockaded Gaza. Donald Trump recognised Israeli sovereignty over occupied East Jerusalem, moved the US embassy from Tel Aviv to the holy city, closed down the US consulate in occupied East Jerusalem and the Palestinian mission in Washington, and cancelled US contributions to UNRWA, the UN agency caring for 5 million Palestinian refugees. President Joe Biden has partially restored UNRWA’s funding but has not reversed Trump’s other anti-Palestinian actions.

Little wonder that the Palestinian Authority has refused to accept Biden’s diktat. If the Authority had, there would be furious protests in the occupied Palestinian territories against US hypocrisy in condemning Russia’s invasion of portions of Ukraine while giving full support to Israel’s occupation of all Palestine. Palestinians are branded “terrorists” if they resist Israel’s military regime, Ukraine’s national guard and citizens are deemed heroes if they fight Russia.

In contrast with the US and its European partners which have not yet recognised Palestine, Moscow recognised the virtual state three days after the Palestine National Council’s November 1988 declaration of independence in Algiers and established diplomatic relations witn Palestine in 1989.  Although lacking the muscle to seriously aid the Palestinians in their struggle for liberation from Israeli domination, Russia has repeatedly proven to be an ally in UN Security Council and General Assembly votes and in international fora.

Deeply indebted to the US for decades of support, Israel has tried to sit on the fence over Russia’s war in Ukraine. While Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid condemned Russia’s military campaign, Prime Minister Naftali Bennett did not and offered to mediate between Ukraine and Russia although Israel is in illegal occupation of Palestine.

Despite US pressure, Israel has not imposed sanctions on Russia and will not prevent Israeli companies from doing business with Russia or Israeli commercial aircraft from continuing flights to and from Russia. Israel has not provided Ukraine with drones or its Iron Dome anti-missile system which was funded by billions of US dollars. Israel has sent humanitarian aid to Ukraine and prepared to admit 13,500 Ukrainian refugees, but 1,000 either were rejected or, upon arrival, refused to stay in Israel.

Treatment is different for Jews and non-Jews. Jews are airlifted to Israel and their immigration procedures are expedited. Among the Ukrainians are 3,500 Jews who are eligible for healthcare, services, long-term residence, and Israeli citizenship under the “Law of Return”, prompting critics to accuse the authorities of racism towards non-Jews. Non-Jews have to leave when the war ends. They either stay with relatives or are to be accommodated in caravans in three medium sized Israeli towns rather than Tel Aviv or Jerusalem.

Ukraine’s Ambassador to Israel Yevgen Korniychuk expressed disappointment in Israel’s attitude by saying Ukrainian refugees, including Jews, who receive shelter, food, heath care and schooling for children in Europe, are not eager to travel to distant, expensive Israel.

The massive Western condemnation of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine might, just might, compel the US and Europe to recognise that all other countries waging war on their populations or neighbours must also be held to account for committing aggression, violating international law and perpetrating war crimes.  Russia should not be the only country to be ostracised and comprehensively sanctioned if international law is to be respected and a global rule of law is to be enforced everywhere. No one should continue to enjoy impunity. Not even Israel.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Featured image: A sign stating ‘Danger, demolition. Entry is prohibited’ was placed by Israeli authorities on top of the rubble of the Khalialehs’ houses (MEE\Sondus Ewies)