Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Wed Apr 27, 2022 12:10 pm

Operation deindustrialization
April 27, 13:41

Image

Operation deindustrialization

The escalation of hostilities in Ukraine led to the fact that the Russian Armed Forces began to strike at railway infrastructure facilities. According to the Russian Defense Ministry, for the first time, a strike was struck on railway facilities in the west of the country and other rear infrastructure facilities in order to prevent the supply of Western weapons, ammunition and fuel and lubricants for the group in Donbass.

Representative of the Russian Defense Ministry, Major General Igor Konashenkov, said that long-range high-precision weapons were used to destroy traction substations on the territory of Ukraine.

Image

Ukrzheldorog (UZ) said that on the morning of April 25, attacks were carried out on 5 railway stations in the western and central parts of Ukraine. The head of the company Alexander Kamyshin announced the delay of at least 16 passenger trains.

UZ also claims the destruction of three traction substations. It is reported about the decommissioning of two facilities in the Vinnytsia region (TPS "Kazatin-2" and TPS "Podolskaya-tupikovaya") and one in the Kyiv region (TPS "Fastov"). The voltage in the contact network disappeared at the sections Shepetovka (Khmelnitsky region) - Kozyatyn (Vinnitsa region), Zhmerynka (Vinnitsa region) - Kazatin, Kazatin - Fastov (Kyiv region). In the Lviv region, the Krasnoe railway station was destroyed, reports the Operation Z Telegram channel.

If this trend continues, the electric locomotives that are operated on the UZ network will turn into useless scrap metal.

If you look at the map of the railways of Ukraine, then you can conclude that the most, if I may say so, "careful" solution in relation to the infrastructure of Ukraine. The fact is that the Ukrainian railway network has been most widely developed since tsarist times. The high level of industrialization of the once second largest Soviet republic has led to the fact that the main highways of the country are electrified.

The number of diesel locomotives in UZ is extremely limited. Especially powerful diesel locomotives capable of hauling heavy trains. For the last 30 years, the railway industry has degraded. At the end of 2021, the government of Ukraine announced a deep modernization of UZ. Western funding was found and local producers were already looking forward to, if not participation in the division of the pie, then the selection of rich crumbs from the lordly table of foreign companies.

But it didn't come to fruition. The main transport arteries from west to east are the Kovel-Kyiv-Poltava and Lvov-Bila Tserkva-Dnepropetrovsk highways. This is the main cargo "move". The railway from Uzhgorod also flows into the Lviv transport hub. Accordingly, the railway communications of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are extremely vulnerable. Detours are mostly single-track, not designed for heavy trains and have also been electrified for a long time. It turns out that the defeat of the energy infrastructure of UZ paralyzes the supply of the eastern groups.

An alternative is to use diesel locomotives. But there are two problems. First, there are few diesel locomotives, and they are old. Secondly, diesel locomotives use valuable fuel that is required for military equipment.

A blow to traction substations, if not paralyzing, will significantly slow down the movement on Ukrainian railways. Morally and technically obsolete diesel locomotives of UZ will not be able to make up for the resulting shortage of traction rolling stock. The 30 GE diesel locomotives delivered to Ukraine in 2019 are unlikely to significantly improve the situation. Depreciation of the Ukrainian TPS park is more than 90%. Until 2033, UZ planned to purchase 315 units of TPS.

Further, we should expect the defeat of the depot, car repair plants and individual diesel locomotives.

Until recently, the transportation of weapons and ammunition in passenger trains, including electric trains, has been repeatedly reported. However, in the dilemma of attacks on infrastructure and heavy human casualties or the grinding of equipment in clashes, the Russian Armed Forces chose the second option. Gradual bitterness and attacks on Russian territory, on the one hand, and the moment when the flow of refugees from east to west subsided, on the other hand, led to the fact that it became possible for the RF Armed Forces to begin destroying the transport infrastructure of Ukraine.

What's next? Further, we should expect the defeat of the depot, car repair plants and individual diesel locomotives. Lack of traction will lead to paralysis of movement. If the foreign sponsors of the conflict urgently supply diesel locomotives to Kyiv, then the railway bridges in Kyiv and the Dnieper will become the target of the RF Armed Forces, which, of course, is a critical moment. If bridge crossings over the Dnieper become unusable, the Ukrainian rail network will be cut in two. Thus, the supply of units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the east of the country by rail will become impossible.

Image
Merefo-Kherson railway bridge in Dnepropetrovsk

The southern route through Chisinau and Odessa will not be able to greatly affect supplies to the Donbass, however, it seriously complicates the military isolation of Odessa. There were videos from Croatian Osijek with platforms with British military equipment. This means that through Chisinau, Odessa can be “pumped up” with anti-aircraft, anti-tank and anti-ship missiles, which, with NATO satellite support, can turn it into a special fortified area. In this regard, provocations in Transnistria may play into the hands of Russia, which can cut this transport corridor through diplomatic and other methods.

On April 26, the Odessa City Council reported that in the Odessa region, a bridge across the Dniester estuary in the urban settlement of Zatoka was under attack. Put into operation in 1955, the drawbridge in Zatoka connects two parts of the Budatskaya Spit. This is one of two bridge crossings that connect the southern part of the Odessa region with the territory of the rest of Ukraine.

Over the past few weeks, the Western allies of Kyiv have been announcing the supply of military equipment, ammunition and fuel for the needs of the Armed Forces of Ukraine almost on a daily basis. Only the heads of the US Department of State and Defense, Anthony Blinken and Lloyd Austin, who visited Kyiv on a visit, promised Zelensky another $300 million for armaments. Since the beginning of the special operation of the Russian Armed Forces in Ukraine, American assistance to the Kyiv government has amounted to $3.7 billion.

Probably, there is not a single European country left that has not made its own, albeit small, but symbolic contribution to the fight against Russia. Trains with bulk tanks were seen on the approaches to the Ukrainian border in Moldova and Romania. Moreover, these trains are formed, most likely, at broad gauge marshalling yards in Romania. American "Hercules" regularly land in Polish Rzeszow.

Obviously, such volumes of weapons and ammunition cannot be transported except by rail.

Especially when it comes to heavy weapons. It will not be superfluous to recall the quote of the American general during the First World War, John Pershing: "Infantry wins battles, but logistics wins the war."

At the moment, Ukrzheldoroga continues the process of evacuating the civilian population from the settlements of the Kharkiv, Nikolaev and Dnepropetrovsk regions, as well as from the territory of the DPR and LPR controlled by Ukraine. Combining the removal of civilians in one direction and the transfer of military equipment to the other is a rather difficult task.

With a shortage of traction, both of these tasks may become impossible. Solely due to the fact that the railway infrastructure will become unusable. The victims will be refugees fleeing the battle zone.

Image

Gazprom cut off gas supplies to Poland and Bulgaria

1. Gazprom officially announced that gas supplies to Poland and Bulgaria had been cut off due to their refusal to pay for gas in rubles.
2. Previously, Poland and Bulgaria stated that they were ready to pay only in euros, and they would not use the scheme proposed by Russia.
3. Yesterday, notification letters were sent to them from Gazprom, where it was said that in connection with this, deliveries were stopped from April 27.
4. At the same time, Hungary expressed its readiness to pay for gas through an account with Gazprombank with conversion into rubles.
5. Hungary will receive gas in transit through Bulgaria, so it will not be left without gas.
6. If they start stealing transit gas, then Gazprom promises to reduce the volume of transit by the amount of stolen gas.
7. After the announcement of the shutdown of Poland and Bulgaria, gas in Europe began to rise sharply in price.
8. The resumption of supplies to Poland and Bulgaria is possible if they agree to pay for gas in rubles.

We look forward to developments in Germany, where big German business howls that the rejection of Russian gas will lead Germany to an economic disaster and a long recession.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/7581499.html

Google Translator

************************************************

Politico: "Germany approves tank sales to Ukraine, bowing to pressure"

Did Germany really decide to deliver tanks to the Ukraine?

The German government said Tuesday it will deliver anti-aircraft tanks to Ukraine after facing strong pressure at home and abroad to abandon its reluctance to supply heavy weapons to Kyiv.
The decision to provide the “Gepard” tanks, which come from German defense industry stocks, was made at a closed-door government meeting on Monday, Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht told reporters at a Ukraine security conference at a U.S. airbase in Ramstein, Germany. There was no immediate information on how many tanks Germany would deliver.

The announcement marks a notable shift for Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who as recently as last week was still ruling out sending German tanks to Ukraine, insisting it would make more sense for Eastern NATO countries to give Kyiv old Soviet-era tanks already familiar to the Ukrainian military. Scholz promised Germany would then send those countries replacement German tanks.


I find it amusing how many misunderstand this move. First off - the Gepard (Cheetah) is not a tank as the turret has very little protective armor.

Image

It is a short range (5 km / 3 miles) anti-air system on a tank chassis useful against helicopters, drones and low flying planes.

That Scholz decided to offer these, instead of real tanks or armored infantry carriers as the U.S. and the camouflage-Green party demanded, is a nice way out. It guarantees that the Ukrainians will not be able to use them before the war is over.

The Gepard system with its two 35mm cannons is more than 50 years old but has been upgraded two or three times. The Germany army retired their last one of these in 2010. They have since been held in storage.

I remember them well from my time in the Bundeswehr. While my primary training was as a gunner on a real tank, the Leopard 1A3, two people I knew were trained as gunners for the Gepard. There was a huge difference though. It took 6 months of training to become a reasonably good tank gunner. It took 12 month, including hundreds of hours in a simulator, to become a gunner on a Gepard. The commander role required even more training.

The system was excellent for its time but also really complicate. The two radars have various modes for different purposes. One would better use the right one or risk to attract explosive countermeasures. The startup of the turret systems and the handling of their various error modes that could occur were not easy to handle. The tank chassis is also more complicate than the original one. It has an additional motor which powers five electric generators, two Metadyne rotary transformers and a flywheel to handle the extraordinary fast movements of the turret (2.5 sec for a 360°turn).

There are probably less than ten people in the current Bundeswehr who still know how to operate and maintain a Gepard. There is thus little chance to find German crews for them.

If the Ukrainians really want to use these outdated systems they will have to train fresh crews for at least a year. Otherwise those guns will be ineffective and of little use.

My hunch though is that none of these will ever be delivered. The Swiss, who manufactured the cannons and their ammunition, have seen to that:

Neutral Switzerland has vetoed the re-export of Swiss-made ammunition used in Gepard anti-aircraft tanks that Germany is sending to Ukraine, the government said on Tuesday.
Germany earlier announced its first delivery of heavy weapons to Ukraine to help it fend off Russian attacks following weeks of pressure at home and abroad to do so.

The Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) confirmed a report by broadcaster SRF that it had blocked Germany from sending munitions for the Gepard tank to Ukraine.


Chancellor Scholz likely knew all that. The offer of Gepards is a safe way to relieve the pressure put onto him to send arms to Ukraine. It is an offer of a system that can not be used within the timeframe of the war and for which he can not deliver the necessary specialized ammunition.

Are there still some Lockheed F-104 Starfighter in German storage? If so those flying coffins should be offered next.

Posted by b on April 27, 2022 at 10:24 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/04/p ... .html#more

******************************************

Image

The Nazis of Ukraine
April 26, 2022
By C.B. Forde – Apr 21, 2022

There is an inconvenient truth that those beating the war-drum against Russia love to ignore—namely, the Nazis of Ukraine. We are told that this is all somehow “Russian disinformation/misinformation,” or that Putin loves to call people whom he doesn’t like, “Nazis” (notice, this is what actually is done in the West against opponents of the elite). Of course, no real evidence is ever given to back up these claims, as has now become a sad habit, any self-righteous assertion is considered “truth.”

Here are the facts about Nazis in Ukraine. The drumbeaters have yet to disprove any of them.

Origins

When Hitler invaded Ukraine, for many it was a liberation from communism and openly celebrated, and soon led to the creation of the 14th SS-Volunteer Division “Galician” (later, the 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS, 1st Galician). It was nearly annihilated in the Lvov–Sandomierz Offensive (1944). What remained was regrouped as the Ukrainian National Army (UNA), under the German High Command (OKH) and led by General Pavlo Shandruk (1889-1979). The UNA numbered some 220,000 volunteers and fought in various theatres throughout Europe with the Wehrmacht, including Austria. What marked all these volunteers was a strong antipathy to the Soviet Union. With the defeat of the Nazis, the UNA surrendered to the British and the US. All the volunteers did not want to be sent back to the Ukraine and sought asylum elsewhere (a large number coming to Canada and the US).

General Shandruk struck a special deal with Poland (with the help of General Władysław Anders), which accepted members of the UNA as “pre-war Polish citizens.” Shandruk was given the Polish Virtuti Militari order, and he settled in Germany, before eventually moving to the US, where he died in 1979.

In effect, in Ukraine, Nazi Germany was not regarded as the enemy; rather, it was an ally in the fight against the Soviet Union, or the “Russians.” And therefore the negativity associated with Nazis and Nazism is weak, if not absent, in the Ukrainian context, where “uncle Hitler” was seen as a liberator from the Soviets.

This positive view of Germany goes back to that bloody period after the Russian Revolution, when Civil War broke out in all parts of what was once the Russian Empire, fueled by resistance to the Bolsheviks. As happened everywhere in the former Russian Empire, regions that did not want to become communist went into armed conflict with the Bolsheviks, including Ukraine, which declared itself independent of Moscow in 1918, with the establishment of the Ukrainian People’s Republic (UPR).

The Bolsheviks did not accept such independence and launched a series of highly successful campaigns in the region that saw the capture of key cities and put the UPR government in a position of total collapse. To prevent such collapse, the UPR turned for help to Germany, which quickly sent in troops and supplies, and bolstered the weak Ukrainian National Army (UNA), and beat back the Reds.

But it was 1918, and Germany itself was exhausted and before long signed the Armistice of November 11, 1918, thus ending the First World War. This left Ukraine to fight on, on its own, until gradually it lost and became part of the Soviet Union, in 1922, as the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.
Thus, in the post-1917 Ukrainian psyche, the enemy was always the Soviets, or the Russians, while Germany, whether in the figure of Kaiser Wilhelm or Hitler, was always the friend. Thus, also Nazism carried none of the negative connotations in Ukraine as it carries in the West.

Stepan Bandera

A Nazi-sympathizer, collaborator and murderer, Stepan Bandera is nevertheless a hero for many now fighting the Russians in Ukraine. His statues are proudly displayed and streets are named after him. Who was he? (What follows is summarized from Stepan Bandera: The Life and Afterlife of a Ukrainian Nationalist, by Grzegorz Rossoliński-Liebe.)

Born in Galicia (now Western Ukraine, but then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire), Bandera early showed signs of violence. As a university student in Lvov, he routinely tortured himself in order to toughen himself up for the time when authorities might question him. Such discipline included self-flagellation and slamming a door on his fingers. He was getting ready for his life ahead—as a national revolutionary.

By this time, the Russian Revolution had already happened and new countries came into existence. But in Eastern Europe, the struggle was not simply the winning of a national destiny but also the fight for or against communism; for the Russian Revolution had also unleashed a bloody civil war which would devour entire populations. What was once Galicia now became part of Poland. The eastern portions of Ukraine belonged to the Soviets. Both outcomes stuck in the craw of the nationalists who wanted to unite the western portion and the eastern portions into one unified whole (Ukraine). The eastern portions had already been engaged in a long, bloody war with the Soviets (from 1917 to 1921), a war which was lost.

At the age of 20, Bandera joined the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), in whose ranks he rose quickly, given his penchant for violence. Aside from robberies (to fund the movement), in 1933, he organized an attack on the Soviet embassy in Lvov, killing one of the staff. This was the first of his murders in the thousands. In 1934, he planned and carried out the assassination of Bronisław Pieracki, the Polish Minister of Internal Affairs, as well as other murders. Bandera was arrested by the Poles, tried and given a death sentence, which was commuted to life. But the killings continued. Things got so bad that the Polish government carried out mass arrests of OUN members, which led to further dislike of Poland. Just before the outbreak of the war, the general sentiment was to appeal to Hitler to come and rescue Ukraine.

And in 1939, it seemed Hitler granted the Ukrainians their dearest wish; he invaded Poland. In the fog of war, Bandera escaped from prison and made his way to his allies, the invading Germans. As Bandera declared the “German army as the army of allies.” Once safely among the Nazis, Bandera created a break-away “Bandera faction” of the OUN, known as “OUN-B[andera],” or Banderites, whose goal was to fashion a Nazi Ukraine, under the auspices of Hitler, because Bandera had stated that “German and Ukraine interests” were identical.

The Banderites set up various militias, such as the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) and Ukrainian People’s Militsiya, or the Ukrainian National Militsiya. The Banderites then undertook vicious reprisals and ethnic-cleaning actions, against Poles, communists, “ethnic Russians,” and against Jews. Or, in the words of Bandera: “Muscovites, Poles, and Jews” must be “destroyed.”

It was during this time that a distinct Ukrainian “identity” was also fashioned, one which stated that the “real” Ukrainians were supposed descendants of Vikings who set up Kievan Rus. There is no real historical or genetic basis for this designation, but it was a convenient merging with Nazi ideology. In other words, in the “true Ukraine,” there were the superior humans and the sub-humans. This “Germanic identity” of Ukraine would have tragic consequences down to today.

The inevitable result of all this was mass slaughter of those that were “undesirable,” the bloodiest of which occurred in June and July of 1941, all coordinated by Bandera, and in which some 9,000 people were murdered (Jews, Poles, and “Muscovites”).

Given the success of this violence and thinking that he had the upper hand, Bandera blundered and declared the Ukraine as independent, and so was promptly arrested by his friends, the Nazis, who sent him off to Sachsenhausen concentration camp, where he stayed until 1944, when he was released to coordinate resistance against the Red Army, a task he took up with renewed fervor.

After the war, the Banderites were reorganized by the British (MI6) and the CIA, as a way to fight the Soviets. During this time, Bandera moved about, often in disguise and in secret, and always protected by the many members of the former SS, who had found convenient shelter in Ukraine and who formed an extensive underground network.

During this time, Bandera and his organizations killed thousands; some say hundreds of thousands; and all the while he worked closely with the BND, the Federal Intelligence Service of what was then West Germany.

Finally, Bandera was assassinated by the Soviets in Munich, in 1959. But this did not end the deep influence of Hitler and the Nazis in the aspirations of Ukraine nationalists—so much so that it is now difficult to say where Nazism ends and Ukrainian nationalism begins.

In the new Ukraine, statues of Bandera are everywhere. He is the official, national hero.

Which Ukrainians?

In view of the above, it is important to note that theme of the “Ukrainian people” is again at the center of the current Ukraine-Russia conflict. In the West, this has come to mean an alliance with the “Ukrainians” in order to defeat the Russians who are regarded as aliens and who do not belong to “us.” Such is the legacy of Nazism in Ukraine, in that people repeat its core tenet of the inferior Other, in their “defense” of Ukraine. Russians are not “Western” and so must be fought and defeated. That is the gist of the hysterical Russophobia that now grips the West, where “innocent Ukraine” and the “bully Russia” has become “settled science.”

Few in the grip of this hysteria seem to want to understand the complexity involved, let alone the near-impossibility of separating Ukrainian nationalism from Nazism—for the Banderites never went away—meaning that the Ukraine was never de-Nazified. Rather, the Banderites became inseparable from the country’s power-structures and institutions. This relationship only intensified with the dissolution of the Soviet Union when Ukraine became independent in 1991, and when Ukrainian nationalism gained full legitimacy.

And the myth of a “superior, Germanic Ukrainian” was central to the “new Ukraine,” which in turn was central to Euromaidan and what came later—the relentless slaughter of the “sub-humans” in the Donbas regions, as many have meticulously catalogued from 2014 to today.

And according to current Ukrainian law, there are two kinds of “Ukrainians”—the “Germanic Ukrainians,” along with allied people, the Tatars and Karaites (neither of whom actually live in Ukraine).

Then, there are the undesirable people, who are not legally “Ukrainians.” These are the Slavs, and a few others like the Magyars and the Romani who are denied the use of their own language in public. They have to use the official “Ukrainian” language which officially has nothing to do with Russian (!!).

This is the “Law of the Indigenous Peoples of Ukraine” which states that only Germanic Ukrainians, Tatars and Karaites have “the right to fully enjoy all human rights and all fundamental freedoms.” It was signed into law by the current BFF of the West, President Volodymyr Zelensky, on July 21, 2021. In other words, racial segregation of society into the Uebermenschen and the Untermenschen.

This law is not an aberration; rather it reflects the widespread view of where Ukraine “belongs.” For example, in 2018, a book appeared (which became a bestseller and won the Stepan Bandera Prize) in which wide-ranging claims were made about ancient Aryan Ukrainians who invented all kinds of things, including civilization itself. The book was happily “reviewed” by three professors of history and philology at Lviv University (Iryna Kochan, Viktor Golubko and Iosif Los).

As a further demonstration of this positive understanding of Nazis, recently the Ukrainian Parliament tweeted out a photo, comparing what the Russians were supposedly doing to what happened to Hamburg in 1943. The tweet was subsequently deleted. This could again be naivete. But in the context of Ukraine’s twentieth-century history, this should never be assumed.

Then, there is Hitler as the protector of Ukraine, a trope that appears often in children’s school textbooks. For example, one of the more popular textbooks is Andrei Kozitsky’s История Украины. 1914-2014 (History of Ukraine. 1914-2014), in which Ukrainian patriots often wear Nazi uniforms.

In another such textbook, Hitler is nearly teary-eyed with Ukrainian nationalism: “On April 1, 1939, he [Hitler] said: ‘My soul aches when we see the suffering of the noble Ukrainian people… The time has come to create a common Ukrainian state.’”

In other words, in Ukraine, uncle Hitler was never the bad guy; and Nazis equal real Ukrainian nationalism.

The West’s Grooming Of Nazis
Although the term “Nazi” is tossed about in the West to smear ideological opponents, the West also has a long and sordid history of grooming neo-Nazis in Ukraine.

In 2007, the CIA put together a “conference” of various anti-Russian factions in Ukraine whose purpose seems nothing other than to groom neo-Nazis and jihadists, both groups being solidly anti-Russian. Overseeing the conference was Dmytro Yarosh, who led the Trident and the Right Sector, both neo-Nazi organizations. Yarosh’s career is widely known.

These various neo-Nazi units were organized into anti-Russian fighters, trained by the West, and which were integrated into the Ukrainian army. Victoria Nuland, in 2021, told Zelensky to appoint Yarosh as adviser to the Commander-in-Chief of the Ukrainian army—because no one can fight Russians better than Nazis, right? After 2014, the West actively protected these neo-Nazi groups

Of course, it is usual to hear that all this is “Russian disinformation,” and that Putin just likes to call people he doesn’t like “neo-Nazis.” The facts, however, are straight-forward enough. Here are the larger units of neo-Nazis, or Banderites currently fighting Russians in Ukraine:

• Members of Svoboda (formerly the “Nation-Social Party of Ukraine,” which curiously rhymes with Hitler’s “National-Socialist German Workers Party”)
•The AZOV Battalion (likely now destroyed by the Russians)
• C14 of Kiev
• The Aidar Battalion (destroyed recently by the Russians)
• The Wotanjugend (who are actually Russian in origin)
• Ukraine Patriot (co-founded by Andriy Parubiy)
• The National Militia
• Karpatska Sich
• Freikorps

There are also many other smaller units (more than 30) that have merged with the larger ones, and all have been integrated into the Ukrainian army. And the various symbols of these organizations are common-place in Ukraine (i.e., the Sonnenrad, the Totenkopf, the Wolfsangel). After 2014, Ukraine also became the main “exporter” of Nazi ideology throughout the world (the mosque shooter in New Zealand was an ardent supporter, for example).

Fighting alongside the neo-Nazis and the Ukrainian army are a slew of jihadis and mercenaries, many of whom are from other Western neo-Nazi groups like the Misanthropic Division. These mercenaries are known as the International Legion of Territorial Defense of Ukraine.

There are some who say that none of this is true because Zelensky is Jewish. There is no need to go into the history of Jewish collusion with the Nazis. Suffice to say that the Azov Battalion, and various other neo-Nazi militias, are funded by the oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky who happens to be Jewish and who, it is said, hand-picked Zelensky. Both men also figure prominently in the Pandora Papers which further explains Zelensky the billionaire, complete with a mansion in Florida, lording it over the poorest nation in Europe.

Trudeau And The Nazis

In 2016, the government of Canada invited Andriy Parubiy to Ottawa, when he was the leader of the Social-National Party of Ukraine (now Svoboda), co-founder of Ukraine Patriot, and at that time Parliamentary Speaker of the Rada (the Ukrainian parliament). And Trudeau met him again in Ukraine later that same year.

In 2018, Parubiy opined about democracy: “I’m a major supporter of direct democracy… By the way, I tell you that the biggest man, who practiced a direct democracy, was Adolf Aloizovich [Hitler—and note the use of the honorific form of Adolf’s name, to show great respect].”

In his inimical way, Trudeau lined up with Ukrainian nationalism in a tweet (here translated from the French): “Five years ago, brave Euromaidan protesters were killed in Ukraine while demanding a better future for their country. Today, we honour the Hundred Heavenly Heroes and their sacrifices for democracy. Canada will always stand with the Ukrainian people.”

Irony aside, from the man who is now dictator of Canada, “the Hundred Heavenly Heroes” refers to protestors during Euromaidan who died, many of whom were neo-Nazis.

This may all be put down to naivete, but it is also clear that when Parubiy was invited to Ottawa, the government was fully briefed about his neo-Nazi credentials. But it seemed not to matter, in the greater game of besting Russia.

Perhaps, therefore, it is not surprising that Trudeau’s prominent role in backing Zelensky does have a precedent, and that neo-Nazis in Ukraine are perfectly acceptable, as long as they fight Russians. This is a very old story in Ukraine.

More recently, the current Canadian Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland happily posed with a neo-Nazi banner and posted the photo on Twitter, then removed it and posted another without the banner, while saying that anyone who said that she posed with a neo-Nazi banner was obviously spreading “Russian disinformation.”

The black-and-red banner read: “Slava Ukraini” (“Glory to Ukraine”), and it was the slogan of Banderites and the official slogan of the OUN-B. The colors, black and red, are the banner of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA).

Of course, one should never believe one’s lying eyes. It is better to believe the official narrative. It is also said that Freeland’s own family has connections to Banderites. The point being, not blood-guilt, but the deep-rooted problem of Nazism in Ukraine.

Such images might be seen as “innocent mistakes.” But in the blood-soaked history of Ukrainian nationalism, they carry a lot of weight and are used as valuable currency.

But the West helping Nazis is also nothing new.

More Atrocities

Ever since 2014, the sad litany of atrocities committed by the neo-Nazis, especially the Azov Battalion, are well-known and widely catalogued. And in the recent conflict, it these neo-Nazi units who are at the forefront of committing further atrocities against civilians. And there are also false-flag operations and yet more atrocities. Where will justice for these crimes come from? From the enablers of the Nazis?

But it would seem, few in the West care, as long as we can all collectively hate Putin and his Russians. Hatred is a great unifier, while the West keeps handing out cash and Wunderwaffen, in the hope that a great Volkssturm will sweep the Russians back where they came from. But notice too that the model of such efforts is always Nazi Germany.

And why does no one object to civilians being made into combatants? Is it a tactical Western move to get “bad press” about Russians “killing civilians?” Whatever the case, Zelensky is certainly guilty of a terrible crime against his own people whom he has pitted against a trained, professional army—and how are Russian soldiers to differentiate between combatants and civilians? Such is the face of a war led by Wokists.

Putin famously, at the beginning of Operation Z, said that Ukraine was ruled by a bunch of drug-addicts and Nazis. Others have looked at the wide-spread drug habits of the rulers, and in the Ukrainian army. The neo-Nazis we have outlined here.

Russia will succeed in its objectives, because it is not led by hysterical woke social justice warriors; and Russia will finally ne-Nazify Ukraine, a job long overdue. Here is Konstantin Pulikovsky, the Russian commander who sets the record straight. His is a voice of true sobriety. (You can watch with translation enabled):(Video wouldn't cc English for me. View at link.)

https://orinocotribune.com/the-nazis-of-ukraine/

**********************************************

Russia Destroys US-European Weapons Depot in Ukraine

Image
The spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry indicated that the weapons depot was in an aluminum factory in Zaporozhie. | Photo: @MarQs__
Published April 27, 2022 (1 hour 58 minutes ago)

The Russian Ministry of Defense indicated that it was possible to neutralize more than 120 Ukrainian nationalists and destroy 35 vehicles and armored vehicles.

The Russian Defense Ministry announced on Wednesday the destruction of a warehouse where weapons supplied by the United States and its European allies were stored in southeastern Ukraine.

The spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry, Igor Konashénkov, indicated that the military operation was directed against the hangars of an aluminum factory in the Ukrainian town of Zaporozhie.

Igor Konashenkov said that Russian aircraft hit 59 Ukrainian military facilities overnight on Wednesday, including 50 assembly areas for Ukrainian soldiers and military equipment, and four warehouses with weapons and ammunition.


Konashenkov noted that more than 120 Ukrainian nationalists had been neutralized and 35 vehicles and armor had been destroyed.

According to the Defense portfolio, in the last few hours, 432 concentration areas for soldiers and military equipment, 67 artillery positions, two batteries of multiple launch rocket systems and seven ammunition depots were attacked.

In another incident, the governor of Russia's Belgorod region, Viacheslav Gladkov, reported on Wednesday the burning of an arms depot near the border with Ukraine.


According to Governor Gladkov, the fire in the town of Staraya Nelidovka, about twenty kilometers from the border with Ukraine, is under control.

Viacheslav Gladkov pointed out that the fire did not leave any victims or damage to nearby buildings and added that the causes of the incident have not been made clear.

The governor of Belgorod has denounced several attacks on villages in the region bordering Ukraine in recent days.

https://www.telesurtv.net/news/rusia-de ... -0008.html

Google Translator

*************************************

Accused of Treason and Imprisoned Without Trial: Journalist Kirill Vyshinsky Recounts His Harrowing Time in a Ukrainian Prison

Eva Bartlett sat down with recently released Ukrainian journalist Kirill Vyshinsky. Vyshinsky endured 15 months of appalling conditions in a Ukrainian prison after being falsely accused of treason.

by Eva Bartlett

In November 2018, I became aware of the case of Kirill Vyshinsky, a Ukrainian-Russian journalist and editor imprisoned in Ukraine without trial since May 2018, accused of high treason.

Soon after, I interviewed Vyshinsky via email. He described his arrest and the accusations against him as politically-motivated, “an attempt by the Ukrainian authorities to bolster the declining popularity of [then] President [Petro] Poroshenko in this election year.”

Vyshinsky noted that his arrest was advancing the incessant anti-Russian hysteria now prevalent among Ukrainian authorities, as he holds dual Ukrainian and Russian citizenship. He noted that the charges against him, which pertain to a number of articles he published in 2014 (none of them authored by Vyshinsky), became of interest to Ukrainian authorities and intelligence services four years after they were published. To Vyshinsky, this supports the notion that neither the articles nor their editor were a security threat to Ukraine, instead, he says, they were a political card to be played.

In early 2019, I traveled to Kiev to interview Vyshinsky’s defense lawyer Andriy Domansky about the logistic obstacles of his client’s case. Domansky viewed the Vyshinsky case as politically motivated and expressed concern that he could himself become a target of Ukraine’s secret service for his role in defending his client, an innocent man.

Domansky told me at the time,

The Vyshinsky case is key in demonstrating the presence of political persecution of journalists in Ukraine. As a legal expert, I believe justice is still possible in Ukraine and I will do everything possible to prove Kirill Vyshinsky’s innocence.”

To the surprise of those following the case against Vyshinsky, in late August 2019 he was released with little fanfare after serving more than 400 days in a Ukrainian prison but still faces all of the charges brought against him by the Ukrainian government and is “obliged to appear in court or give testimony to investigators if they deemed it necessary.”

By early September, Kirill Vyshinsky was on a plane to Moscow. Despite never being tried or officially convicted, he found himself the subject of a prisoner exchange between the Russian and Ukrainian governments.

Image
A banner reading “Freedom to Kirill Vyshinsky” is held at a June 16, 2019 rally in Moscow. Maxim Shemetov | Reuters

I interviewed Vyshinsky in Moscow in late September. He told me about his harrowing ordeal, the Ukrainian detention system, other persecuted journalists, and what lies ahead for him.

He also touched on the inhumane conditions he experienced in Ukrainian prisons. He noted that a pretrial detention center as we know it in Western nations is a very different entity in Ukraine and that Ukrainian prisons were so over-crowded that it was common for inmates to sleep in three shifts in order to allow enough standing room for inmates crammed into a cell.



Ukrainian prisons like a “concentration camp”

Aleksey Zhuravko, a Ukrainian deputy of the Verkhovna Rada of V and VI convocations recently published photos taken inside of an Odessa pretrial detention center showing utterly unsanitary and appalling conditions. Zhuravko noted, “I am shocked at what was seen. It is a concentration camp. It is a hotbed of diseases.”

Another Ukrainian journalist, Pavel Volkov, was subjected to the same types of accusations lobbed against Vyshinsky. Volkov spent over a year in the same pretrial detention center as Vyshinsky. He was arrested on September 27, 2017, after Ukrainian authorities carried out searches of his wife and mother’s apartments without the presence of his lawyer and with what he says, was a false witness.

Volkov spent more than a year in a pretrial detention center on charges of “infringing on territorial integrity with a group of people” and “miscellaneous accessory to terrorism.” On March 27, 2019, he was fully acquitted by a Ukrainian court.

Volkov shared his thoughts on the persecution of journalists in Ukraine, saying:

The leaders of the 2014 Euromaidan movement, who subsequently occupied the largest positions in the country’s leadership, repeatedly stated that collaborators from World War II who participated in the mass extermination of Jews, Russians, and Poles are true heroes in Ukraine, and that the Russian and Russian-speaking population of Ukraine are inferior people who need to be either forcibly re-educated or destroyed.

They also believe that anyone who wants peace with the Russian Federation, and who believes that the Russian language (the native language for over sixty percent of Ukraine’s population) should be the second state language, is the enemy of Ukraine.

These notions formed the basis of the new criminal law, designed to persecute politicians, public figures, journalists, and ordinary citizens who disagree with the above.

Since 2014, security services have arrested hundreds of people on charges of state treason; infringing on the territorial integrity of Ukraine; and assisting terrorism for criticizing the current government in the streets or on the Internet.

People have been in prison for years without a conviction. And these are not only the journalists included in the ‘Vyshinsky list’.

Activists from Odessa, Sergey Dolzhenkov and Evgeny Mefedov, have spent more than five years in jail just for laying flowers at a memorial to the liberators of Nikolaev [Ukrainian city] from Nazi invaders.

Sergeyev and Gorban, taxi drivers, have spent two and a half years in a pretrial detention center because they transported pensioners from Donetsk to Ukraine-controlled territory so that they could receive their legal pension.

The entrepreneur Andrey Tatarintsev has spent two years in prison for providing humanitarian assistance to a children’s hospital in the territory of the Lugansk region not controlled by Ukraine.

Farmer Nikolay Butrimenko received eight years of imprisonment for paying tax to the Donetsk People’s Republic for his land located in that territory.

The 85-year-old scientist and engineer Mekhti Logunov was given twelve years because he agreed to build a waste recycling plant with Russian investors. The list is endless.

People often incriminate themselves while being tortured or under the threat of their relatives being punished, and such confessions are accepted by the courts, despite the fact that lawyers initiate criminal proceedings against the security services involved in the torture. These cases are not being investigated.

The only mitigation that has happened in this direction after the change of government was the abolition of the provision of the Criminal Procedure Code stating that no other measure of restraint other than detention can be applied to persons suspected of committing crimes against the state.

This allowed some defendants to leave prison on bail, but not a single politically-motivated case has yet been closed. Moreover, arrests are ongoing.

The only acquittal to date from the so-called journalistic cases on freedom of speech is mine. However, it is still being contested by the prosecutor’s office in the Supreme Court.

Ninety-nine percent of the media continue to call all these people ‘terrorists’, ‘separatists’, and ‘enemies of the people’, even though almost none of them have yet received a verdict in court.”


Volkov’s words lay bare the true nature of the allegations made against Kirill Vyshinsky as well as the countless other journalists and citizens of Ukraine that have fallen victim to the heavy hand of Ukrainian authorities.

https://www.mintpressnews.com/interview ... on/262498/

Video at link.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Wed Apr 27, 2022 3:39 pm

US Secretary of Defense Admits the Real Strategic Goal in Ukraine: Quagmire for Russia
27.04.22 - New York, United States - Pressenza London

Image
Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III speaks with the United Kingdom's Secretary of State for Defense Ben Wallace, the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., Jan. 23, 2021. (DoD photo by Lisa Ferdinando) (Image by Lisa Ferdinando for the US Department of Defence)

The strategic goal of “weakening Russia” is playing with fire—even nuclear fire—and to allow the war to go on indefinitely, or to escalate, at the expense of the Ukrainian people is cruel, dangerous, and unacceptable.

By John Burroughs*

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin provided a revealing and disturbing glimpse into a darker element of US policy at a press conference held April 25 at the Poland/Ukraine border. The press event followed a trip to Kyiv by Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Austin.

Austin was asked how he defines “America’s goals for success” in Ukraine. He first said that the US wants to see “Ukraine remain a sovereign country, a democratic country, able to protect its sovereign territory.” But then he added: “We want to see Russia weakened to the degree it cannot do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine.” I had feared that geopolitical strategizing is affecting the US approach, but this is the first public indication of that I have seen.

It cannot be said too strongly: The US government must not be guided by any notion that a quagmire in Ukraine would drain Russian resources, diminish Russian influence and power globally, and possibly lead to regime change. The United States instead should do all within its power to help bring the war to a close rapidly in order to limit suffering; to eliminate risks that the conflict will widen and escalate, possibly to nuclear war; and to limit the negative global economic and food security repercussions.

A broader reason for determined efforts to end the war is the need to work toward restoring a relationship with Russia enabling cooperation on nuclear arms control and disarmament, climate protection, public health, and other vital matters of global concern.

US energy in helping bring the war to a close is also appropriate in view of the political responsibility of the United States, together with NATO, since the late 1990s in helping to create the conditions for a crisis. Actions having this effect included precipitously withdrawing from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2003, subsequently establishing missile defense facilities in Romania and Poland, and opening the door to Ukraine’s membership in NATO in 2008.

In a recent paper, End the War, Stop the War Crimes, Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy outlines already widely discussed elements of an approach to ending the war. In brief, Russia and Ukraine should quickly agree to a cease-fire to enable negotiation of a settlement.

Negotiations should then aim to end the war immediately and to resolve the overarching disputes concerning governance of the Donbas region and the status of Crimea. A long-term consultative mechanism could be put in place to resolve time-intensive or recurring issues and to help maintain peace and human security. Ukraine appears ready to forswear any possibility of joining NATO, so long as some form of guaranteed neutrality can be established, but seeks to join the European Union. The overall aim should be the preservation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity in accordance with the UN Charter.

In addition to any role they can play, behind the scenes or not, in bringing about a cease-fire and negotiating a settlement, the United States and other states must be ready to lift war-related sanctions and to accept and support some form of neutrality for Ukraine should Ukraine choose that.

Russia’s war on Ukraine is already causing appalling suffering and devastation. It is playing with fire—even nuclear fire—to allow the war to go on indefinitely and potentially to widen and escalate, at least partly with the aim of weakening Russia. The right course is to make ending the war on acceptable, if not perfect, terms the highest priority.

https://www.pressenza.com/2022/04/us-se ... or-russia/

***********************************

Washington’s economic war on Russia (and Germany)
April 27, 2022 Gary Wilson

Image
The United States is the world’s largest exporter of LNG – liquified natural gas.

In February, President Joe Biden made it clear that the U.S./NATO military escalation in Europe was not about Ukraine. Since taking office in 2021, President Biden has been more focused on Germany and Russia, in particular the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.

The July 2021 meeting of Biden with then-German Chancellor Angela Merkel was icy. Politico reported July 15, 2021, that “Biden and Merkel still don’t see eye to eye on Nord Stream 2.”

Nord Stream 2 is a new pipeline designed to deliver natural gas from Russia to Germany at double the capacity of the existing pipeline. Construction of Nord Stream 2 was completed in September 2021, but it has not yet been opened for service.

The Trump administration had unsuccessfully tried to shut down Nord Stream 2. Now Merkel is out as German chancellor, replaced by Olaf Scholz. With a U.S. proxy war unleashed in Ukraine against Russia, Scholz announced a suspension of the opening of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.

No U.S. troops in Ukraine, yet

The Biden administration has not yet sent U.S. troops into Ukraine, but it has launched an economic war.

Natural gas is a primary energy source in the European Union and is the dominant source for home heating and cooking. The EU imports 40% of its natural gas from Russia. In the EU, Germany is the most dependent on gas piped directly from Russia. That is why Germany built the Nord Stream 2 pipeline with Russia.

The U.S. is now forcing the European Union, particularly Germany, to move away from purchasing natural gas from Russia. The U.S. says they should get natural gas from the U.S. or Qatar, a U.S. Big Oil subsidiary.

On Feb. 7, Biden said of the German-Russian project: “There will no longer be a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it.”

On Feb. 22, Germany announced the suspension of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. This was not a decision made in Berlin; the order to do this came from Washington.

Natural gas from Russia can be piped into Western Europe at a relatively low cost while natural gas from the U.S. and Qatar must be liquified – liquified natural gas or LNG – then shipped by sea to Europe. Germany does not have a port to receive LNG directly, adding to the transport costs.

On Feb. 27, Chancellor Scholz announced that Germany will construct two port terminals for LNG and also plans to lease floating LNG terminals as well.

Cutting off natural gas from Russia is a big bonus for the U.S. oil oligarchy. The United States is the world’s largest exporter of LNG. Liquified natural gas has a higher price than piped-in gas and prices for U.S. LNG are now expected to double.

OilPrice reported April 24: “Right now, U.S. LNG exports are booming, and most are going to Europe, where the prices are the highest and demand is the strongest. … After the war started, demand went off the charts as the European Union vowed to reduce EU demand for Russian gas by two-thirds before the end of the year.”

Another bonus for U.S. capitalists

There’s another bonus for U.S. capitalists. The increase in the price of natural gas across Europe will raise the prices of commodities produced by European industries, particularly German products.

German commodities dominate the markets in Europe and have been rising in the global marketplace. In 2015, Ben Bernanke — former chair of the Federal Reserve System — publicly complained of the strong rise in German exports taking markets away from the capitalists of other countries.

The U.S. economy has been in a long-term decline. Increasingly, the “U.S. consumer” buys and consumes commodities that are produced outside of the United States. The great bulk of both material production and surplus value — unpaid labor contained in commodities — is being produced outside of U.S. capitalist ownership.

Forcing the European Union to pay higher energy prices will increase the cost of commodity production in the EU, which opens the possibility that U.S.-owned industry might be able to take markets away from German and other European capitalists.

The proxy war in Ukraine has been a gift to the U.S. military-industrial complex, with over $3 billion in armaments already poured into Kiev. This may line the pockets of a few billionaires, but it won’t reverse the U.S. economic decline.

Military spending produces the means of destruction, that is, the money does not go to expanding commodity production. Military spending actually contracts the capitalist market. Factories that normally produce commodities for profit are instead producing the means of destruction, so there’s no profit, in Marxist terms.

Military spending rots the economy by destroying the productive forces. Also, the expanded military spending in the U.S. is a cause of inflation, though that’s hidden in most economic reports.

U.S. expanding military in Europe

While the U.S. is not yet sending troops into Ukraine, it is expanding U.S. military operations in Europe. In March, the New York Times reported: “NATO doubles its battlegroups in Eastern Europe.” NATO already had 175,000 troops lined up on Russia’s border and in February launched an additional 40,000-strong rapid response force.

The U.S. now has more than 100,000 soldiers deployed in Europe, the most since the overturn of the Soviet Union. About 40% of the U.S. armed forces in Europe are stationed in Germany.

Germany remains very much an occupied country. The Federal Republic of Germany, built on the ruins of the defeated Third Reich by the U.S. occupation forces and later incorporating the (East) German Democratic Republic, is a sort of protectorate of the United States. The U.S. rebuilt Germany in order to fortify the dominant position of the U.S. over Western Europe following World War II.

European trade and investment prior to the U.S./NATO proxy war in Ukraine against Russia had seen a rise in commerce between Germany, France and other Western European countries with Russia and China. One of the goals of the U.S. is to hold Germany and Western Europe firmly within the U.S. economic orbit.

According to Washington’s policy, Europe is supposed to impose sanctions on Russia and give priority to imports from the United States at the cost of raising energy and agricultural prices, particularly in Germany.

Up to now the interests of West European capitalists, including German ones, have coincided with those of the U.S. But Washington’s need to reverse the long-term decline of U.S. industry’s position in the world market has begun to change that. First came Trump’s trade war and now Biden’s economic war on Russia.

https://www.struggle-la-lucha.org/2022/ ... d-germany/

**********************************

Surprise: Ex-general pushing for NATO troops in Ukraine has weapons industry ties
Ret. US Gen. Philip Breedlove wants to escalate the military conflict with Russia but media outlets don’t disclose he works for defense firms.

APRIL 26, 2022
Written by
Eli Clifton

Weapons companies and military contractors stand to book new orders and enjoy heightened demand for new weapons systems, as the United States and NATO countries scale up spending in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Coincidentally or not, one of the most high-profile advocates for dramatically escalating NATO’s involvement in the war — literally calling for putting troops and arms inside Ukraine — quietly moonlights as a consultant for weapons firms and defense contractors, interests that presumably stand to benefit from a direct conflict between NATO and Russia.

More importantly, that conflict of interest hasn’t been disclosed in any of his media appearances or interviews.

On Sunday, retired U.S. general and former top NATO commander Gen. Philip Breedlove told The Times of London:

So what could the West do? Well, right now there are no Russian troops west of the Dnieper River. So why don’t we put Nato troops into western Ukraine to carry out humanitarian missions and to set up a forward arms supply base?

The escalation of NATO boots on the ground inside Ukraine would make NATO a direct participant in the war, dramatically increase the likelihood of Russian attacks on NATO personnel and facilities, and raise the risk of a nuclear conflict.

Breedlove, whom The Times notes is “advising the Biden administration on Ukraine,” also works as a consultant for the weapons industry, a fact which The Times did not disclose.

According to Breedlove’s LinkedIn profile, he works as a “Senior Advisor to Culpeper National Security Solutions,” a firm that the Washington Post’s David Ignatius wrote about in 2019 in the wake of Jamal Khashoggi’s murder in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. Ignatius wrote:

A U.S. plan to train and modernize the Saudi intelligence service is also on hold, pending State Department approval of a license. This project was developed by Culpeper National Security Solutions, a unit of DynCorp, with help from some prominent former CIA officials. No work on the project has been done.

DynCorp was a scandal-plagued military contractor with an expertise in military flight operations support, whose primary client was the U.S. government until its acquisition last year by Amentum, a company that boasts of its “deep relationships with customers in the U.S. Department of Defense and Department of Energy.”

Breedlove is also promoted as an “advisor” at Stellar Solutions, a consultancy that markets itself to clients needing expertise in “coalition operations” and “expert solutions for Department of Defense customers related to space and missile systems of national protection and security.”

In other words, since retiring from the Air Force, Breedlove associated himself with firms that either directly profit from military contracts, like DynCorp, or market themselves as effective consultants for defense contractors seeking to manage their relationships with the U.S. government.

Breedlove may genuinely believe that a direct military confrontation with Russia, and the heightened risk of nuclear war, is necessary, but his downplaying the risks of boots on the ground dovetails nicely with his consulting work for industry interests that stand to benefit from increased U.S and European defense spending.

Speaking on Thursday at The Wesley Foundation at Georgia Tech, a campus ministry of the United Methodist Church, Breedlove batted away concerns about a direct military conflict between NATO and Russian forces, telling the audience:

“So Mr. Obama took 500 Russians off the battlefield in northern Syria. He faced the same Putin and the same nukes. Robert [sic] F. Kennedy faced nukes in Cuba aimed at our country and he did it. There are a series of presidents in history who have taken on Russia and their nukes and it went OK so my thought is do not take counsel of your fears and take all options off the table. We need to examine all options.”

Those events are quite different from a potential showdown between NATO and Russian forces in Ukraine.

Both U.S. and Russian forces in Syria deliberately avoided direct engagement, and the Cuban Missile Crisis is widely seen as a sobering historical event that brought the United States and the Soviet Union to the precipice of nuclear war, an event that both sides have actively tried to avoid repeating. Indeed, one immediate consequence of the crisis was the installation of a “hotline” between Moscow and Washington precisely to facilitate communication at the highest levels in crisis situations.

But for Breedlove, these events “went OK” and, as a slide behind him read, “The ‘West must respond’ and the United States must lead!”

That course of action might be bad news for avoiding a NATO military engagement with Russia, a country with the world’s largest nuclear arsenal. But it’s good news for the weapons and defense contractors who hire consultants like Breedlove.

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2022/ ... ustry-ties

***************************************.

Image

War it is – and escalation is coming
Originally published: Al Mayadeen on April 24, 2022 by Alastair Crooke (more by Al Mayadeen) (Posted Apr 26, 2022)

It is indeed war. NATO is at war with Russia. German legalists may say not, but when the West arms Ukraine; when NATO Special Forces are in Kiev (i.e. the British SAS), and are training their militia protégés to use their weapons to kill Russians, is it really relevant (or known) from whose shoulder the (UK made) Starstreak missile, which downs a Russian helicopter, is fired?

In any case, this ‘war’ (proxy war, if you prefer) was effectively launched in 2014, and ratcheted up substantially in 2017, when NATO switched from relying on Ukrainian national forces (that had proved somewhat prone to defects, with their arms, to Russian speaking militia), to the use of internationalists and mercenaries, with the aggressive intent of weakening and miring Russia in a quagmire.

‘War is war’, and this war is set to escalate.

Nobody knows exactly the number of these extreme Right militias mounted by the West, but Reuters has put the figure at one hundred thousand, former senior NATO adviser Jacques Baud notes and concurs. These paramilitaries, however, take no role in normal field warfare, but rather focus on maintaining ‘order’ [i.e. strict compliance] within cities. And that’s exactly what you have had in Mariupol and elsewhere. These Azov-type militia are not equipped for field operations. They are equipped for urban warfare. Just to be clear, this mode of Idlib-style ruthless urban warfare is not about defeating the Russian army, it is about pulling them into cloying, all-enveloping mud.

Up until February this year, this set-up essentially was intended to unfold as a campaign of attrition; an incipient quagmire. But then suddenly, on 16 February, there was a massive increase in shelling from the Ukrainian side (about 30 times more than on past occasions per OSCE) and coinciding with Biden’s predictions of an imminent Russian invasion. This for the Russians, and for President Putin in particular, was the sign of the start of the expected war of attrition. And so on 24 February, Russia’s Special Military Operation was launched.

Why attrition? Why not ordinary war? Well, because NATO did not want to put its’ boots on the ground. It wanted low-intensity insurgency.

Why? Because it had been decided that the collapse of Russia (the ultimate aim) was primordially to be achieved by all-out financial war (thus avoiding U.S. casualties): Thousands of sanctions; the seizing of Russian foreign exchange reserves; and a concerted effort to sink the rouble. In March, Biden was already boasting in his State of the Union speech that the rouble had collapsed by 30% and the Russian stock market by 40%. The fighting in Ukraine, therefore, was treated as giving the pain from financial war more time to bite in Russia.

But now, we see the calculus is changing. Indeed it must change, because the dynamics and timelines are inverting:

First, Russia’s economy did not collapse. The rouble is back to where it was before 24 February. Then subsequently, the West unfurled its unprecedented anti-Putin PSYOPS amid almost daily claims of atrocities and war-crimes attributed to Russia.

The PSYOPS war has completely infused the European public with a passionate animosity and hatred for Putin and Russian persons. There is no doubt about ‘its success’ in this respect.

But there seems to have been a less noticed Anglo-American sub-plot too: This sub-plot is the weakening of Germany, and the blocking of Germany from allying with Russia — for at least a generation. This latter aspiration is well-established and has existed since before WW1.

As Ambrose Evans-Pritchard wrote in the Telegraph this week, “Olaf Scholz must choose between an energy embargo on Russia, or a moral embargo on Germany”:

… [W]estern Europe’s refusal to cut off funding for Vladimir Putin’s war machine is untenable. The moral and political damage to the EU itself is becoming prohibitive.

But note the corollary: To push for this EU energy embargo, Britain is turbo-firing the stakes by demanding a western “response that rises to the existential threat now facing Europe’s liberal order”.

So, here is the revised grand agenda: Russia is surviving the financial war because the EU still buys gas and energy from Russia. ‘The EU–and Germany more specifically–is financing Putin’s ‘grotesque unprovoked war’, the meme goes. ‘Not a Euro must reach Putin!’.

Is this not simply an evolution of the West’s February aims? No. For, a ‘boycott-Russian-energy’ strategy is not about giving the ‘Treasury War’ time to bear fruit, but rather, it means ‘curtains for Europe’ of course, and for Germany very obviously. And soon.

There is no way for Europe to replace Russian energy from other sources in the coming years. But Europe’s leadership, consumed by a frenzy of outrage at a flood of atrocity images from Ukraine–and a sense that the ‘liberal world’ at any cost must prevent a loss in the Ukraine conflict–seems ready to go this ‘whole hog’. The energy ban may happen quite soon.

But, here is the rub: The U.S. can see that its attrition ‘war’ is failing. Ukraine’s army is surrounded, and will soon come to an end (one way or another).

Thus, it is no longer a question of whether the war of attrition can give sanctions more time to bite with the Russian populace. The Treasury War is failing, too (for complex reasons to do with the Bank of Russia linking the rouble to gold; and the rouble to energy).

Here again, it is the economic/financial consequences that are the game-changer. Inflation is soaring in Europe, and will go higher. And the public sentiment is shifting:

Public support for Russian sanctions is falling as the cost of living crisis starts to bite, a poll has found. The proportion of the public that would accept higher fuel prices as a consequence of tough Western sanctions on Russia fell 14 points in a month, from 50 percent in March to 36 percent this week.

The timelines no longer gel: Euro-sanctions (theoretically) need more time to bite. However, the West does not have time. It is inflation that is biting ‘now’ (and turning European sentiment against the Ukraine project). The last thing wanted by the European establishment is a ‘European Spring’ (as a counterpoint to the Arab Spring).

The West faces a tough choice: Public support for the Ukraine project may be fading, just as the realities on the ground become apparent that the ‘European Liberal Order’ is not going to be saved from disintegration–through Ukraine.

Yet, public opinion has been hyped to believe that without a European Ukraine victory; without the utter defeat and humiliation of Russia, the liberal world cannot survive. Thus, we hear slipping from the lips of EU High Representative Borrell that Ukraine can only be resolved by military means. What he may be saying is that the West must go maximalist, before inflation ruins the plan. Escalation, or else existential failure.

https://mronline.org/2022/04/26/war-it- ... is-coming/

************************************************************************

"The West created an empire of lies"
April 27, 14:56

Image

Selections from a long interview with Patrushev.

"The West has created an empire of lies."

Our country not only dared, but publicly declared that it would not play by the imposed rules. They tried to force Russia to give up its sovereignty, self-consciousness, culture, independent foreign and domestic policy. We have no right to agree with such an approach.

* * *

In an attempt to suppress Russia, the Americans, using their henchmen in Kiev, decided to create an antipode for our country, cynically choosing Ukraine for this, trying to divide what is essentially a single people. Finding no positive basis to win Ukrainians over to its side, Washington, long before the 2014 coup d'état, instilled in Ukrainians the exclusivity of their nation and hatred for everything Russian.

* * *

I'm not sure that Europe will survive the crisis. Political institutions, supranational associations, economy, culture, and traditions may become a thing of the past. Europe will still bite its elbows, and America will free itself from its main geopolitical fear - the political and economic union of Russia and Europe.

* * *

The American and European military-industrial complex rejoices, because thanks to the crisis in Ukraine, it has no end to orders. It is not surprising that, unlike Russia, which is interested in the speedy completion of a special military operation and minimizing losses from all sides, the West is determined to drag it out even to the last Ukrainian. For some reason, the world still thinks that militarists and aggressors must wear uniforms. But don't be deceived by Anglo-Saxon respectability. No brand-new costume can disguise hatred, anger and inhumanity.

* * *

Speaking of denazification, our goal is to destroy the foothold of neo-Nazism created by the efforts of the West at our borders. The need for demilitarization is due to the fact that Ukraine, saturated with weapons, poses a threat to Russia, including from the point of view of the development and use of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.

* * *

American elites remember how the US managed to become a superpower after two world wars, and now they do not want to accept the fact that the American global empire is in its death throes.

* * *

If all the instructions of the head of state in the field of import substitution were fulfilled in time, we would be able to avoid many of the problems that the Russian economy is facing today.

* * *

Washington and Brussels make no secret of the fact that their sanctions are aimed at both material and spiritual impoverishment of Russians. To destroy our education by imposing on us the so-called progressive models of education is for Westerners just as strategic a task as, for example, bringing NATO closer to our borders.
<...>
I am still convinced that the Soviet school of education has historically been the most advanced and progressive in the world, and forward movement should be carried out with this in mind.

Completely here
https://rg.ru/2022/04/26/patrushev-zapa ... ossii.html - zinc

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/7582704.html

Google Translator

Man, that image is the bomb! Must re-post in the 'Sympathy' thread...
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Wed Apr 27, 2022 11:21 pm

LIVE: Putin Warns With Lightning Attack In Case Of Interference

Image
Russian S-500 55R6M Triumfator-M long range air defense complex. | Photo: Twitter/ @OluwafemiMaduka

Published 27 April 2022

"We are not going to brag. We will use them if necessary. And I want everyone to know it. All decisions on this have already been made," the Russian president stressed.

Russia warns with 'lightning attack' in case of Western interference in Ukraine. President Vladimir Putin warned on Wdenesday that Russia will perform a "lightning-speed" attack to any strategic interference in what is happening in Ukraine.

"If someone sets out to interfere in ongoing events and creates unacceptable strategic threats to Russia, they should know that our retaliatory strikes will be swift," he said during an address to the Council of Parliamentarians in St. Petersburg.

Implicitly alluding to hypersonic weapons, Putin recalled his country has "all the instruments" for an extremely rapid response, adding that "we are not going to brag. We will use them if necessary. And I want everyone to know it. All decisions on this have already been made."

He also accused Western countries of turning Ukraine into an "anti-Russia." The US-NATO strategy has pushed the Ukrainians to clash with Russia, attack the Crimean peninsula and Donbas, and open bioweapons laboratories.

Russia destroyed warehouses storing foreign weapons at Zaporozhye aluminum plant. Defense Ministry spokesperson Igor Konashenkov announced that his armed forces used high-precision sea-based Kalibr missiles to destroy hangars, with a large batch of foreign weapons and ammunition supplied by the United States and European countries.

Ukraine seeks to receive US$5 billion from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) per month. "We are talking about US$5 billion a month -- the need for this amount has been confirmed by both the IMF and the World Bank. These are the funds that the budget of Ukraine needs in order to fulfill all our social and humanitarian obligations," Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal said.

Russia sanctions 287 members of the British House of Commons. This is a response to the decision of the British government to impose sanctions against 386 members of the Russia's State Duma on March 11.

Russia declared three Norwegian diplomats "personae non gratae" in a tit-for-tat move. On Wednesday, Norwegian Ambassador Rune Resaland was summoned to the Foreign Affairs Ministry on in protest over the unjustified decision to expel employees at the Russian Embassy in Norway, as well as Norway's provision of military assistance to Ukraine and Oslo's cover-up of the crimes of Ukrainian nationalists.

Russia announced the expulsion of eight Japanese diplomats. They must leave the country before May 10. A representative of the Japanese Embassy in Moscow was summoned to the Foreign Affairs Ministry, where he was informed about the expulsion of the diplomats.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/LIV ... -0008.html

*******************************

Image

Zelenskymania and Switzerland’s ruined image
Originally published: Verein Schweizer Standpunkt on April 10, 2022 by Guy Mettan (more by Verein Schweizer Standpunkt) (Posted Apr 26, 2022)

While negotiations seem to be progressing and the first contours of a possible solution in Ukraine are emerging (neutrality and partial demilitarisation of the country, handover of the Donbass and Crimea), the background to the conflict is beginning to be better understood. However, a quick ceasefire is not to be expected: the Americans and the Ukrainians have not yet lost enough and the Russians have not yet won enough to cease hostilities.

Before I continue with my reflections, however, I would like to ask those who do not share my realistic view of international relations to put this text aside. They will not like what is about to come, and it will save them heartburn and the time they would waste denigrating me.

I am of the opinion that morality is a very poor advisor in geopolitics, but in human affairs it is appropriate: the most uncompromising realism does not prevent us from investing time and money, as I am doing, to alleviate the fate of the population affected by the fighting.

The analyses of the most qualified experts (I am thinking especially of the Americans John Mearsheimer and Noam Chomsky), the investigations of investigative journalists like Glenn Greenwald and Max Blumenthal, and the documents seized by the Russians–for example, the intercepted communications traffic of the Ukrainian army from 22 January and the attack plans seized on a computer left behind by a British officer–show that this war was both inevitable and highly improvised.

An inevitable and improvised war
Inevitable because since Zelensky’s declaration of his intention to retake Crimea by force in April 2021, Ukrainians and Americans had decided to trigger the war no later than early this year.

The concentration of Ukrainian troops in the Donbass since last summer, the massive arms deliveries by NATO in recent months, the accelerated combat training of Azov regiments and the army, the intensive shelling of Donetsk and Lugansk by the Ukrainians from 16 February onwards (all this was ignored by the Western media, of course), prove that Kiev had planned a large-scale military operation for the end of this winter.

The aim was to repeat the “Operation Storm” launched by Croatia against the Serbian Krajina in August 1995 and to take the Donbass in a lightning offensive, without giving the Russians time to react, in order to gain control over the entire Ukrainian territory and enable the country to join NATO and the EU quickly. Incidentally, this also explains why the USA has repeatedly announced a Russian attack since the autumn: they knew that, one way or another, it would come to war.Improvised because the Russian response was made under time pressure. When the Russians realised that NATO’s diplomatic moves–no U.S. response to their proposals, Blinken-Lavrov meetings in Geneva in January, Zelensky’s call for calm and Macron-Scholz mediation in February–did not clarify the situation and amounted to a classic stalling tactic, the Russians reacted in a masterful and at the same time very risky way. Within ten days (recognition of the republics, cooperation agreement and start of the military operation), they decided to attack first in order to pre-empt the Ukrainians.
And instead of attacking the well-equipped and heavily fortified Ukrainian army forces head-on, it was decided to bypass them with a large-scale encirclement/diversion manoeuvre. The invasion opened three fronts simultaneously–north, centre and south–in order to destroy the Ukrainian air force and as much equipment as possible in the first few hours and disorganise the Ukrainian counter-attack.

Had they let Ukraine attack first, their situation would have become critical and they would have either been defeated or condemned to an endless war of attrition in the Donbass. It should be remembered that Russian troop strength is ridiculously low: 150,000 men against 300,000 Ukrainians, including the National Guard.

Considering the circumstances and despite the initial mishaps and losses, the Russian operation was a success and will go down in military history, though of course not as a human example.

With this first phase completed, the Russians can now concentrate on their main objective, which is to liquidate the “pockets” of Kharkiv and Mariupol held by the neo-Nazi Azov regiments and to reduce the Kramatorsk cauldron where the bulk of the Ukrainian army is entrenched.

So much for the military component.

Winners and losers

Let us now look at the political situation. Who are the real winners and losers of this war? I see one main winner, smaller winners and many losers.

The biggest winner is undoubtedly the USA. One has to recognise that the Biden team has manoeuvred masterfully despite the senility of its president. By withdrawing from Afghanistan last August, it has cleared itself in the eyes of the public and avoided being blamed for the disastrous invasion and occupation of that poor country.

By drafting a script in which the born actor Zelensky can shine, they appear to the Western public as brave white knights, although they are the big masterminds in the background. The USA has closed ranks in NATO and turned the Europeans into useful idiots who willingly defend “the democracies threatened by the despicable butcher-dictator Putin”. In the process, they are forced by the USA to buy its shale gas, while the German left and the Greens rush to mobilise 100 billion euros in military loans to buy American F-35 fighter-bombers. Bingo! The only fly in the ointment is that the plan did not go according to plan. The Russians did not fall into the trap. Ukraine will be carved up, neutralised and will not be able to join NATO as hoped.

Other winners are China, India and the countries of the South, which are watching with glee as the West, especially the Europeans, tear each other apart and weaken themselves for a long time. In an unexpected way, they find themselves in the comfortable position of neutrality or non-alignment. The Chinese would have preferred an amicable settlement, but they had no choice: they know that if they drop Russia, they will be next on the list, as shown by the torrent of Sinophobia that the West is pouring out under the pretext of defending the rights of the Uighurs (while the West is completely indifferent to the rights of the Yemenis, who have been bombed mercilessly for six years).

The big loser will of course be Ukraine, which is being needlessly maimed, dismembered, devastated and massacred, as it now loses much more than what it would have lost if the Minsk agreement had been implemented. President Zelensky will have to bear the heavy responsibility for this in history, as he preferred the ruin of his country to a timely compromise.

The other big losers are the Europeans. In the immediate future, it is true, they can brag about their rediscovered unity, their accelerated rearmament, their strong will to defend democracy and freedom to the last Ukrainian, their generosity towards refugees, their future independence from Russia in the field of energy, and so on.

All this is indeed correct and true. But in the future the price they will pay for it will be extremely high. Their behaviour shows that they have absolutely no say vis-à-vis the Americans–they are mere vassals. Ursula von der Leyen’s decision last week to hand over the personal data of EU citizens to the Americans shows the extent of European subjugation.

The same applies to the economy: what sense does it make to free oneself from Russian energy dependence to fall into that of the Americans with gas prices four or five times higher? What will the German industry say when it has to foot the bill? Especially since there are neither LNG tankers, nor ports, gas de-liquefaction plants or pipelines in sufficient numbers in Europe. How is American shale gas to be delivered to the Slovaks, Romanians and Hungarians? On the backs of donkeys?

What will the German Greens say if they have to accept the construction of new nuclear power plants to meet the demand for electricity? What will the youth and the European environmentalists say when they realise that they have been ripped off and the fight against global warming has been sacrificed in the name of dirty geopolitical interests? Or the French when they see their country being declassified not only globally but also at the European level after having witnessed the rearmament of Germany and the massive purchase of American weapons by Poles, Balts, Scandinavians, Italians and Germans? How about the European public opinion when it has to entertain millions of Ukrainian refugees after offering them free train subscriptions?

And what will Europe gain if it finds itself split in two by deep hatred and a new Iron Curtain that has shifted just a little further east than that of the Cold War? And what will it do when it finds that it has not isolated Russia but is itself cut off from the rest of the world? If one looks closely at the vote on the UN resolutions, one finds that the 40 or so countries that abstained or did not participate in the vote, represent a majority of the world’s population and 40% of the world’s economy.

Far from melting, support for Russia has actually improved between the 2 March vote and the 25 March vote. As for the countries that refused to impose sanctions on Russia, it should be noted that an overwhelming majority abstained and only the Western countries accepted them…

Switzerland’s ruined image
Another big loser is Switzerland. Official Switzerland boasts that it has followed the sanctions demanded by the USA and the European Union with historic speed. Those in a hurry are already calling for swift accession to the EU and NATO. Well done.

But after the Federal Council gave in in the cases of Jewish funds and bank client confidentiality, this is the third time in twenty years that our government has submitted to American dictates: what is left of our law and sovereignty?

Worse still, we have capitulated by surrendering our neutrality in the open field because no one asked us to do so. After standing firm for two centuries, we are now submitting without a fight in less than five days!

This renunciation is serious not only for the country’s identity but also for its credibility. The fact that federal councillors bow to Zelensky on the Bundesplatz and wear scarves in the Ukrainian colours still gets a pass. That is political folklore. But the sacrifice of neutrality is seriously damaging the country, because by aligning ourselves with the West we have gambled away our credit with the rest of the world.

What are we to think of the reliability of our banks when they block accounts on mere American orders? What will become of international Geneva and our foreign policy, which is now boycotted by Russia and probably many other countries, if we are no longer able to articulate it ourselves without appealing to Brussels and Washington? How can Geneva claim to remain the capital of multilateralism when CERN and the ILO [International Labour Organisation] suspend Russia’s participation and Switzerland boycotts Lavrov’s speeches at the Human Rights Council in the slipstream of EU countries?

This departure signals the shipwreck of the inclusive multilateralism that Switzerland and Geneva claimed to defend, and is proving serious for our humanitarian policy and the Geneva Conventions, as evidenced by the alarming ICRC communication of Tuesday 29 March.

By unconditionally backing Ukraine and Europe, we are putting the ICRC’s neutrality and impartiality at risk. The two are inseparable in the eyes of the world. And that is why the ICRC had to respond forcefully to Ukrainian attempts to sabotage its work when it was accused of doing business with the Russians, even though neutrality is at the heart of its mission.

How can one trust an institution whose host country has betrayed the spirit and even the letter of neutrality, which is after all enshrined in its constitution, in order to please Western political leaders and a public opinion inflamed by anti-Russian propaganda?

The silence of the Geneva authorities and political parties will cost dearly, especially since Switzerland is making a fool of itself by leaving the Good Offices initiative to countries like Israel, Turkey or Belarus!

Finally, there is Russia. Winner or loser? Both, actually. On the one hand, Russia will probably win militarily and strategically. At the end of the fighting, Russia could achieve the neutralisation of Ukraine, its partial demilitarisation (no foreign military bases and nuclear weapons) and a possible partition of the country.

Russia will leave the fanatics of American hegemony haunting the offices in Washington and Brussels utterly shocked. It will have shown that there will be no compromise on its security and that of its allies. And Russia will have shown the world that it does what it says and says what it does, having made its red lines clear three months before the conflict. And it will have done so without rocking its economy and currency, as the West had hoped.

Contrary to the opinions of Western countries, economic sanctions, however harsh, will only strengthen Putin, as recent polls by the neutral Levada Institute show, confirming the support of a large majority of the population for the “special operation”. Never before has a sanction succeeded in toppling a government, neither in Cuba, nor in Iran, nor in North Korea.

But Moscow will have to bear the stigma of the warmonger, the aggressor, even if legally its concerns are no less bad than the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the NATO aggression against Serbia in 1999 with the subsequent secession of Kosovo a few years later. The human, cultural, economic and political price to be paid will be high. The tensions created by the conflict will not magically disappear and the Russians will have to deal with the consequences of this war for a long time to come.

Cyber war and Stratcom

We conclude this overview with a word about the incredible success of the Ukrainian propaganda campaign in the West. This war offers the opportunity to witness live the first full cyberwar operation.

If press freedom is suffering in Russia, it is not much better here: we have banned Russian media and forbid dissenting viewpoints, even though we pretend to defend press freedom! Within a few days, there was a zelenscisation of minds, with everyone competing in subservience to listen to the Great Hero and fulfil his wishes. President Macron even wore a three-day beard and an olive-coloured T-shirt to underline his support for the cause, while the media renounced all journalistic ethics in order to give full support to Ukraine. Such a breakdown of sanity in such a short time is unheard of.

Outrageous, but not inexplicable. Dan Cohen, correspondent for “Behind the News”, has closely analysed the sophisticated mechanisms of Ukrainian propaganda and the reasons for its colossal success in our countries.

A NATO commander described the campaign in the Washington Post as “a massive stratcom (strategic communications) operation mobilising media, info ops and psy ops”. In essence, it was about mobilising the media and hypnotising the public with a constant stream of real news, fake news, images and narratives that were likely to stun people in order to keep emotional levels high and shut down the public’s ability to judge.

This resulted in a flood of spectacular images and often false information: the alleged death of the soldiers on Snake Island, the ghost of Kiev who is said to have shot down six Russian planes alone, the threats against the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, the fake bombing of the Zaporozhye power plant, or the cases of the maternity ward and the theatre in Mariupol whose victims were never seen, apart from two women, at least one of whom was recognised as alive.

Add to this the accelerated whitewashing of the Azov battalions, who were transformed into patriotic soldiers after their neo-Nazi patches were removed, and the denial of the existence of American bacteriological laboratories in Ukraine, although their existence was explicitly admitted by Victoria Nuland at a Senate hearing on 8 March. It is true that “wording” was immediately disseminated to deny their existence. The very next day, people started talking about “biological research structures” and warning the public about alleged Russian chemical attacks in order to stifle the issue of secret bacteriological laboratories (Cf. BFM TV).

It turns out that Ukrainian communications, under the aegis of the PR Network Group, uses no less than 150 PR firms, thousands of experts, dozens of news agencies, renowned media, Telegram channels and Russian opposition media to spread its messages and format Western public opinion.

People make fun of the Russians, who have banned the use of the word war in favour of the word “special operation”. But the Western media do no better, constantly feeding them key messages and language elements, banning, for example, the use of phrases like “Crimean referendum” or “civil war in the Donbass”. For more details, see Dan Cohen, Ukraine’s Propaganda War: international PR firms, DC lobbyists and CIA cutouts, MintPressNews.com.

However, this brilliant success in Western countries masks an obvious failure in Latin America, Africa and Asia, the remaining 75 per cent of the inhabited world. The countries of the South are no longer falling for our lies and interests, and Zelensky’s star is beginning to fade.

His pathetic performance in the Knesset, where he made the mistake of comparing the Russian offensive to the “Final Solution”, even though it was the Russians who liberated Auschwitz and pushed back Hitler, and it was the ancestors of his allies from the Ukrainian nationalist far right who participated in the Holocaust with firearms, will have been the last straw.

At the risk of repeating myself, I will close this long article by saying: one can, indeed one must, condemn this war. But please let us stop blinding ourselves. Let us regain our critical spirit and our sense of reality. Only in this way can we rebuild a lasting peace on the shambles that Ukraine has become.

(Translation “Swiss Standpoint”)

https://mronline.org/2022/04/26/zelensk ... ned-image/

**************************************

From Cassad's Telegram account:

***

forwarded from
ONT NEWS
0:14
"The fate of a banderlog activist is hard and unsightly!"

☝️In Kyiv, they found another "health care", however, very far away - you can't tie the "health care workers" to a pole. A volunteer from Denmark posted a video of Ukrainian refugees from Kharkiv who had a party to Russian pop music.

Now the Ukrainian media, so to speak, are calling to deal with them as a matter of urgency. But how? The Danish police don't give a damn what music they dance to in a private courtyard, as long as it's at a set time and doesn't disturb the neighbors. And the SBU cannot reach the newly discovered "Kremlin agents" until they return to their homeland.

🤷‍♂️Let them turn to the government of Denmark so that it also becomes obvious to them that refugees from Ukraine are not fleeing from a special operation at all, but from the wild policy of the Kyiv authorities with their conscious informers, who for 8 years have been imposing on people what language to speak and what music to dance to .

***

forwarded from
yellow plums
🇬🇧The Russian media got to the bottom of an interesting thing: Zelensky's wife and children have already received British citizenship. Come on, he himself received it, although this should be contrary to the constitution of Ukraine.

But the bloody clown's parents refused allegiance. Well, at least someone in this family has a conscience.

Also, by the decision of the British government, citizenship was granted to the head of the office of the President of Ukraine Andriy Yermak and his family members, as well as Zelensky's adviser Mikhail Podolyak and his family members. A number of employees of the General Staff of Ukraine and the SBU are in the process of receiving.

The Ukrainian elites have prepared an alternate airfield for themselves, but the majority of Ukrainians will be left with a nose.

***

forwarded from
WAR[Z]ONE
The 63rd day of the special operation of the RF Armed Forces was marked by a sharp increase in the activity of the Russian army on the northern and southern faces of the Donbass ledge, which the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine also recognizes. In the Kramatorsk-Slavic and Severodonetsk-Lysichansk directions, there are signs of an impending local breakdown of the Ukrainian defense.
@riafan_everywhere | subscribe |

***

forwarded from
Rybar
0:10
🇬🇧🇺🇸🇺🇦💀 Two American mercenaries were seriously injured in Orekhovo

Manus McCaffrey and Paul Gray - former US Army soldiers - fought as part of the Javelin ATGM crew on the side of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

And today at about 14.35 in the Orekhovo area they were in position, waiting for Russian tanks that were approaching the city from Novotishkovsky .

It was at that moment that the allied forces began an artillery bombardment, and one of the shells landed near the position of the American mercenaries.

Both received shrapnel wounds to the face, head and body, and a concrete wall behind which he was hiding also fell on a mercenary with the surname Gray.

Currently, both Americans are in the hospital and apparently they will not be able to return to Orekhovo - the allied forces are already fighting inside the city.
#mercenaries #Russia #USA #Ukraine @rybar *Support us: 4377 7278 0407 7977

***

Сolonelcassad
Gauleiter of the Sumy region reports that in the evening the RF Armed Forces are heavily shelling the positions of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the north of the region. According to him, "losses are being specified."
Of course. the fire damage of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the north of the Sumy region will not stop the shelling of border villages, but at least will make the Armed Forces of Ukraine pay significantly for it. A real minimization of shelling is possible only when the northern regions of the Chernihiv and Sumy regions are occupied, which will leave the Armed Forces of Ukraine not so many options for shelling the border regions of the Russian Federation. But one can hardly expect a new offensive operation in this area until the completion of the 2nd phase of the operation in Donbass.

***

forwarded from
Rybar

Image

❗️🇬🇧🇺🇦Attack on Donbass from the north. The situation at the end of April 27, 2022

North-West

▪️The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation occupied the Plants , reaching the village of Velikaya Kamyshevakha .

North

▪️The allied troops reached the Liman from the northeast side, occupying Maslyakovka .
▪️In the vicinity of Drobyshevo , fighting is underway to establish control over the Liman-Svyatogorsk road.
▪️According to unconfirmed information, the allied troops occupied the settlement. Yampol , a sweep is underway.

Northeast

▪️After the allied forces have occupied the Kremennaya supply route for the Severodonetsk enemy grouping, they are under fire control.
▪️In Severodonetsk , Lisichansk , Seversk and Privolye , enemy targets are systematically destroyed.
▪️the assault on Orekhovo began : tank battles in the village
▪️In Popasnaya , allied forces led by Wagner PMCs are fighting for the western districts of the city along the street. Bakhmutskaya .

Large resolution

map #Map #Donetsk #Izyum #Lugansk #Liman #Severodonetsk #Russia #Ukraine @rybar *Support us: 4377 7278 0407 7977

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Thu Apr 28, 2022 1:39 pm

Attack on Slavyansk. 04/28/2022
April 28, 12:38

Image

Attack on Slavyansk. April 28, 2022.
Yampol has not yet been completely taken. Fighting is already going on near the outskirts of Krasny Liman.
The most actively promoted in the Izyum direction. Fights are going on between Kurulka and Pashkovo, a few kilometers from the Barvenkovo-Slavyansk highway.
Also, after the capture of Andreevka and the village of Plants, the troops are fighting to capture Bolshaya Kamyshevakha.

Image

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/7584174.html

Gazprom rejects German gas payment
April 28, 11:07

Image

Gazprom rejects German payment for gas
Formerly Gazprom Marketing & Trading Ltd. was under the control of the German subsidiary PJSC "Gazprom". However, in early April, Germany took this unit under trusteeship to ensure gas supplies to the country.
Gazprombank declined payment for several April and May deliveries, despite the fact that the company tried to complete the transaction using a ruble account. The rejected payment is part of a medium-term contract for the supply of 7 terawatt-hours of gas until the end of 2023.
Now Gazprom Marketing & Trading Ltd. is trying to secure a deal and is negotiating with Gazprombank and Gazprom's export division.
If the company cannot get gas from Russia, it will have to buy it from other suppliers at a higher price.

https://inosmi.ru/20220428/gaz-253995251.html - zinc

The return of the Kherson region to Ukraine is excluded
April 28, 9:13 am

ImageImage
According to Defense Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov, Russian air defense systems shot down two Tochka missiles and 12 MLRS shells. | Photo: Ria Novosti
Published 28 April 2022

Russian aircraft destroyed 67 Ukrainian military targets on the last day.

The Russian Defense Ministry reported on Thursday that Russian anti-aircraft defense units repelled the attack launched by the Ukrainian Armed Forces on Wednesday with tactical missiles and high-power rocket launcher projectiles aimed at residential neighborhoods in the central part of the city of Kherson. , south of Ukraine.

About 12 rocket launcher projectiles and two Tochka-U tactical missiles were launched by the Ukrainian forces, according to the spokesman for the military entity, Igor Konashénkov.

Part of the targets not reached were multiple objects of civil infrastructure, including kindergartens, schools of institutions of social importance, added the spokesman, who described the attack as an indiscriminate war crime and a violation of international humanitarian law.



In another point of the country, specifically in the eastern region of Kharkov, Russian anti-aircraft defenses intercepted a Tochka-U missile in the city of Izium that was aimed at a hospital where a Russian medical team treats the local population.

During the night, the Russian Aerospace Forces attacked with missiles two areas of concentration of personnel and military equipment and two weapons and ammunition depots in the Kharkov region.

Similarly, the aircraft of this military branch destroyed 67 Ukrainian military objectives on the last day, including six command posts, two fortifications, two weapons and fuel depots and 55 concentration points for troops and equipment, neutralizing more than 300 troops and up to 40 vehicles.

https://www.telesurtv.net/news/rusia-in ... -0005.html

Google Translator

*****************************

Image

The Betrayal of Bucha
April 27, 2022
By Fra Hughes – Apr 16, 2022

With Bucha we have an example of why Russia should not abandon areas it liberates.

In my opinion, the coup in Kiev in 2014 and the murders of men, women and children in the Odessa massacre on May 2, 2014, by fascists was the catalyst that drove the people of Crimea and the Donbas region to refuse to live under an American-EU-NATO-installed, rogue regime in Ukraine.

Crimeans voted to join the Russian Federation.

The people of Lugansk and Donetsk oblast’s denounced the undemocratic coup in Kiev, the death threats against their democratically elected President before taking to the streets.

While the President fled, the people of Donbas were subjected to a repressive military occupation by their fellow countrymen.

Peaceful protests were brutally repressed by the Ukrainian army, many of whom were openly fascist and Russophobic.

A local militia was formed to defend the people which then went on to liberate areas of Donbas from the undemocratic, unwanted, brutal, unelected fascist leadership in Kiev.

Having visited both Lugansk and Donetsk, I am reliably informed that the militia had the military advantage during the conflict and could have freed most of Eastern Ukraine.

Much like today, large sections of the Ukraine forces were surrounded.

In 2014, they were allowed to evacuate unhindered.

A pyrrhic victory.

I say this because having spared the lives of the mainly conscripted Ukraine army, some of whom wanted no part in the Kiev coup’s vicious attack on their fellow citizens, the people of the liberated areas, the independent Republics of Lugansk and Donetsk have suffered eight years of continuous attacks along the line of contact, the de facto ceasefire positions of 2014.

Thousands were murdered and many more injured. The Ukraine army is once again committing heinous war crimes against Russian-speaking, Russian Orthodox, Catholic Ukrainians and in some cases killing torturing, maiming, raping and castrating those they deem to be sub-human.

From Russian-speaking Ukrainians to gypsies, Roma, and all those countering the Zelensky, NATO, American, British and EU narrative, many have suffered appallingly under these fascist monsters, who are roaming Ukraine with western media support seeking out the enemies of the state.

The ‘Untermensch’, was a German word used by the Nazis to describe inferior people such as Jews, Roma and Slavs including Poles, Serbs, Ukrainians and Russians.

If the people’s militia had continued its advance in 2014, Ukraine might not be where it is today.

If Russia had recognized the Donbas Republics in 2014 the current war may never have become necessary.

Allowing the failed Minsk Agreements of 2014 and 2015 to form the basis of the ceasefires, with hindsight, only encouraged the US, the EU and NATO to rearm the fascists in Kiev and encourage the reoccupation of the Donbas, thus forcing Russia to intercede in order to defend Russian speaking ethnic Ukrainians and Russian passport holding citizens against a possible massacre.

With Bucha we have an example of why Russia should not abandon areas it liberates.

The Ukrainian Mayor of Bucha claimed his town was liberated; but in reality it was only after the Russian withdrawal that the Ukraine army entered.

The Russians having freed Bucha, who were welcomed by sections of the population then abandoned them to potential fascist reprisals.

Having spoken to people on the ground in Lugansk I have been informed that up to 30 people were murdered.

The victims in Bucha were undoubtedly killed by Ukrainian forces, and their corpses then were used for propaganda.

There is a video of dead bodies being dragged into position on the road for the Ukraine army propaganda videos.

I will let others forensically detect the video evidence offered by the fascists, supported by Western and governments in their continuing false flag propaganda and reinvention of the facts on the ground.

If Russia allows the bulk of the Ukrainian forces to freely enroll mercenaries and “jihadists”, we may simply have a new extended line of contact that I believe NATO and Biden will continue to exploit.

Putin and the Russian government may believe guarantees given by Zelensky and the Ukrainian Parliament that Ukraine will remain a neutral country and recognize Lugansk and Donetsk as independent Republics, with Crimea as part of the Russian Federation.

Any assurances given much like the agreed Minsk Agreements which were guaranteed and underpinned by France and Germany and signed by the Kiev regime may simply be ignored if it is politically convenient to do so.

A new de facto border will now exist.

Russia has effectively expanded into Ukraine.

A buffer zone is now in play.

The US for its own domestic and foreign capitalist interests wants an extended prolonged exhausting and financially debiting war for Russia in Ukraine, in conjunction with multiple sanctions that are designed to undermine the Russian economy.

Russia has the largest land mass in Europe but its economy is comparable to Spain or Italy.

Americans want to destroy Russia and install a pro-western Imperialist puppet regime much like it had under Yeltsin office, so American companies can steal the wealth and natural resources which belong to the Russian people in a prelude to a similar attack on China for the same material gain.

Remember the massacre in Bucha.

Remember the massacre in Odessa.

Remember the sacrifice of 27 million Russians who died defeating fascism in WW2.

Remember the victims of fascism, the Jews, the socialists, the Roma and the disabled.

What Russia takes Russia must hold.

To abandon people to fascist oppression and reprisals is unconscionable.

I am not a general. I do not know the forces at work on the ground in Ukraine.

I am not tactically aware of frontal military attacks, feints and distractive assaults.

I do know it’s wrong to liberate people and then abandon them to forces who have no regard for human life and glorify in the death of the other.

I am not a religious person.

If I was I would pray for all those who are not Ukrainian nationalists now living in fear, under threat and in constant dread of coming to the attention of the Ukrainian fascist troops, their intelligence torturers, and superhuman overlords.

It is time we to stand all against fascism.

Zelensky has been quoted as saying the new Ukraine will resemble “Israel” much more than it will resemble any European country.

Does he mean, armed soldiers will be on every street corner?

Does he mean an apartheid regime?

Does he mean Russian-speaking ethnic indigenous Ukrainians will be subject to arrest interrogation and treated as enemies of the state?

Will prisons be filled with those who oppose the new regime?

If yes, then I guess he is right.

Ukraine will mirror Israeli society much more than it will mirror European society.

Both “Israel” and the new Ukraine will resemble Nazi Germany of the 1930s much more than either will care to admit.

https://orinocotribune.com/the-betrayal-of-bucha/

I defy the pacifists, false equivalency crowd and those exhibiting reading comprehension issues concerning 'Imperialism' to refute this. Did the USSR not strive mightily to bring the West into an anti-Nazi alliance until the betrayal at 'Munich'? Or was the USSR imperialists too?

It might be relevant to recall that there were no Nazis when Lenin wrote 'Imperialism'. Do we believe that he would have ignored or dismissed their 'theory' and actual atrocities in adherence to theory? Or would theory have adjusted to reality, as is recommended?

******************************************************

Political West Considers Reshaping UN and What’s Left of International Law
Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on APRIL 27, 2022

Drago Bosnic

In order to understand the prelude to World War 2, one cannot ignore the failures of the long-defunct League of Nations, which was a UN-like structure aimed at being a forum of countries resolving disputes through dialogue rather than war. Although just another noble idea before World War 1, in the immediate aftermath of the sheer death and destruction resulting from that conflict, it became an urgent necessity. The League of Nations was supposed to make sure nothing of sorts ever happened again.

Sadly, as we all know, it failed miserably, with an even worse conflict erupting less than 20 years after the Paris Peace Conference was completed. Now, nearly 80 years since the horrors of WW2, we have reached a hauntingly similar point as we realize the UN didn’t just inherit the League of Nations flag, but also many of the same faults which ultimately led the world into yet another disaster of global proportions, one which resonates to this very day.

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is the pillar of the UN and its veto power mechanism serves as a balancing tool which takes into account the interests of world powers and thus provides the UN with relevance which no other international organization or forum of sovereign nations in known history ever had. Currently, the five permanent members of UNSC (China, France, Russia, the UK and the US) can veto any resolution put forth by the body. The council’s other 10 rotating members do not have such powers.

This veto power has especially been a source of frustration for the United States, NATO and the EU. Due to their dominance in the UN General Assembly (UNGA), where there is a swarm of Western client states and statelets, many of which were created through deliberate and oftentimes forceful disintegration of larger and more sovereign nations (for instance, Yugoslavia was split into 6 states and one illegal state-like entity), the political West wants this UN body to be more prominent than the UN Security Council.

By pushing the UN General Assembly to the forefront of decision making, the West could then simply force these countless vassal states and statelets to vote in a way which would be beneficial to the US, EU or NATO and give these decisions a sort of “international community” touch which the political West needs in order to build what they see as a much-needed facade of “international legitimacy”.

Because of this, Western political elites and the mainstream media often try to portray the UNGA as a “more democratic” body than the UNSC. How truly democratic is up for debate, given the sheer amount of US pressure and arm-twisting used to coerce countries into voting not just in line with Western interests, but oftentimes at the expense of their own. And in terms of population distribution, we see that these states and statelets, despite oftentimes being the majority or close to a majority in the UNGA, actually represent less than 20 or even 15 percent of the world’s population. This also explains the Western obsession with forceful fragmentation of larger nations into smaller ones, echoing the ancient Roman policy of divide et impera.

To meet this goal, the UNGA is now considering introducing a provision that would require permanent members of the UN Security Council to justify their use of veto powers. It was tabled by Liechtenstein in mid-April and presented at a closed-door discussion panel last Tuesday. The discussion supposedly “turned out to be quite positive” and the initiative “received additional co-sponsors”, the mission of the microstate to the UN said after the meeting.

“We had a strong turnout and positive engagement on the Veto Initiative in open format this afternoon. We will continue our work to get the strongest possible political support for our text which now has 57 cosponsors,” it stated.

If adopted, the initiative would mandate convening the UNGA within 10 days after a permanent member of the UNSC uses their veto power. At the meeting, the state would have to justify its decision to use the veto. According to Liechtenstein, adopting the provision would “empower the General Assembly and strengthen multilateralism.”

Quite unsurprisingly, so far, the initiative has been openly supported only by one permanent member of the UNSC – the United States. Washington co-sponsored the provision, openly acknowledging the drive is aimed at Moscow and its use of the veto power to block a resolution on the ongoing Russian special military operation in Ukraine. Announcing the co-sponsorship, the US envoy to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield accused Moscow of “misusing” its veto powers.

“We are particularly concerned by Russia’s shameful pattern of abusing its veto privilege over the past two decades,” she stated, adding that, in the latest alleged abuse, Moscow had used the veto power to “protect President Putin from condemnation over his unprovoked and unjust war of choice against Ukraine.”

Of course, it would require an entirely separate analysis to dissect US envoy’s statements, which are filled with “liberal interpretation” of facts. But the statement does confirm the assertion that the political West, and the US in particular, are trying to reshape the UN to their liking, which would result in sidelining US competitors. In doing so, the US might be successful in turning the UN into another footnote of its belligerent foreign policy and even use it to justify sanctions and wars of aggression anywhere in the world.

However, even though this may seem like a victory to the aggressive planners in Washington DC, it may spell a disaster for world peace. By sidelining countries like Russia, China or even India, Brazil, South Africa and many others in the foreseeable future, the US is incentivizing these countries to ignore or even leave the UN, which would bring about the de facto end of international law.

At best, it would result in the creation of another UN-style organization led by those same sidelined countries, bringing about a deeply divided world where there would be at least two blocks – the political West (plus its vassals) and the rest of the world composed of sovereign nations. The last time such a division happened, the world suffered up to 80,000,000 dead in just 6 years.

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2022/04/ ... ional-law/

The Little-Known International Charter At The Center of Ukraine War and China’s Future Defense
Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on APRIL 27, 2022
Jacqueline Luqman

The U.S. talks about “rule based order” because international law is not on its side. The 1999 OSCE Charter explains why the Biden administration would rather make up a new phrase out of whole cloth than live up to agreements it signed.

In 1999, the United States and the 56 other participating states of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) signed a charter in Instanbul that is another intentionally ignored key to understanding the war in Ukraine.

The OSCE is the world’s largest regional security organization . It claims to engage in political dialogue – that is, a forum for political dialogue on a wide range of security issues. There are 57 OSCE member states that cover three continents – North America, Europe and Asia. The policies the OSCE deliberates over include security issues such as arms control, terrorism, good governance, energy security, human trafficking, democratization, media freedom, and the rights of national minorities that affect more than a billion people. This is what they say they do, anyway.

But the 1999 Instanbul Charter signed by all the member states says that countries should be free to choose their own security arrangements and alliances but specifies that, in doing so, countries “will not strengthen their security at the expense of the security of other states.”

This charter was raised as the rationale for Russia mobilizing troops inside its border in response to US and it western allies expanding NATO eastward since the Cold War and refusing to rule out granting membership to Ukraine. NATO says it is a defensive alliance that is open to new members, but can we be honest – because we always are – and point out that Russia was not doing anything in Ukraine or anywhere else to put NATO on the defensive. This issue of the charter being violated was raised by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in February 2022 when he had a phone conversation with US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken.

“Our western colleagues are simply trying not even to ignore but to consign to oblivion this key principle of international law agreed in the Euro-Atlantic space,” Lavrov said at the time.

“We will insist on an honest conversation and an honest explanation of why the West doesn’t want to fulfill its obligations or wants to meet them only selectively to its own advantage.”


Lavrov had written to the United States, Canada, and a number of governments on January 28, 2022, to ask them urgently to explain how they intended to fulfill this commitment to the principle of “indivisible security” that they all agreed to in the 1999 OSCE Istanbul Charter. What Russia received, instead of answers to its questions or discussions about the West holding up its end of the charter agreement, were US and NATO demands that Russia pull back troops from inside its own borders.

This happened in February 2022, right around the same time that Biden started claiming that Russia was going to invade Ukraine “ANY DAY NOW!!!” The whole time, however, Russia was trying to get the US to adhere to the OSCE charter. But it seems that the US was really just pushing for this war.

So when Chinese President Xi Jinping announced a “global security initiative” that upholds the principle of “indivisible security,” it’s odd that Reuters – the same outlet that reported on Russia’s Lavrov trying to get the US to adhere to the OSCE charter in February – characterized the idea of indivisible security as some mysterious thing that Xi just came up with. In fact, it is literally what the 1999 OSCE charter is based on!

Reuters goes on to inexplicably say that Xi’s proposal is one also endorsed by Russia but said that Xi gave no details of how it would be implemented. Well, not only is the concept of “indivisible security” endorsed by Russia, it was an agreement signed by 57 member countries of the OSCE in 1999.

And Xi doesn’t have to give details on how the proposal would be implemented because those details already exist in the 1999 OSCE Istanbul Charter. China is not a member state of the OSCE, but is raising the issue of the organization’s violation of its own charter to not only point out the hypocrisy of the US/EU/NATO in this horror they created in Ukraine, but also to make its case for defending itself against further US imperialist aggression in Taiwan.

Li Mingjiang, associate professor at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore, is quoted by Reuters saying, “If China deems actions by U.S. and its allies on Taiwan or the South China Sea as disregarding its security concerns, it could evoke the concept of ‘indivisible security’ to claim the moral high ground in retaliation.” And Wang Jiangyu, a law professor at the City University of Hong Kong, said that by evoking the concept of “indivisible security,” which had originated from Europe, China could hope to make its actions in defense of its core interests appear more legitimate to other countries.

Security for Europe but not for Russia or China? Xi Jingping is saying that this is not how it should work. And it should not. As Lavrov tried to point out but was completely dismissed by Antony Blinken, no country should have its security concerns violated by another country claiming defense while actually building up its own security. The 1999 OSCE Istanbul Charter says that.

But the way the Reuters article reads, China has concocted some strange thing no one has ever heard of, that they’re being tight-lipped and secretive about, even though Xi is literally using language and concepts already established by the OSCE and agreed to by the US and its Western allies. But the US will ignore China’s invocation of the indivisible security model of the OSCE, and claim it’s a sneaky Chinese provocation.

Just like they did with Russia regarding Ukraine.

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2022/04/ ... e-defense/

***************************************

Image
Ukrainian government photo of soldiers during battle in Mariupol on March 15. (Photo: CC BY 4.0, Wikimedia Commons)

The U.S. bubble of pretend
Originally published: Consortium News on April 5, 2022 by Patrick Lawrence (more by Consortium News) (Posted Apr 28, 2022)

This is the first of an occasional series, to appear in four parts, considering various aspects of our “bubble of pretend,” that protective membrane within which most Americans prefer to reside, safely removed from the realities of our circumstances, the disorders of our time, and, of course, the responsibilities we share for these circumstances and disorders. My concern as I began these pieces, sometimes tipping into morbid fascination, was that our collective psychology, as I understand the term, has deteriorated these past few years to such an extent it calls into question the survival of our polity, if not our republic.

— P.L.

It is perfectly obvious by now, to anyone who cares to look, that mainstream media in America and the other Western powers are not reporting the Ukraine crisis accurately.

Let me try that another way: The government-supervised New York Times and the rest of the corporate-owned media on both sides of the Atlantic lie routinely to their readers and viewers as to why Russia intervened in Ukraine, the progress of its military operation, the conduct of Ukrainian forces, and America’s role in purposely provoking and prolonging this crisis.

So far as I know, this is the first war in modern history with no objective, principled coverage in mainstream media of day-to-day events and their context. None. It is morn-to-night propaganda, disinformation and lies of omission—most of it fashioned by the Nazi-infested Zelensky regime in Kiev and repeated uncritically as fact.

There is one thing worse than this degenerate state of affairs. It is the extent to which the media’s malpractice is perfectly fine to most Americans. Tell us what to think and believe no matter if it is true, they say, and we will think and believe it.
Show us some pictures, for images are all.

There are larger implications to consider here. Critical as it is that we understand this conflict, Ukraine is a mirror in which we see ourselves as we have become. For more Americans than I wish were so, reality forms only in images. These Americans are no longer occupants of their own lives. Risking a paradox, what they take to be reality is detached from reality.

This majority–and it is almost certainly a majority–has no thoughts or views except those first verified through the machinery of manufactured images and “facts.” Television screens, the pages of purportedly authoritative newspapers, the air waves of government-funded radio stations—NPR, the BBC—serve to certify realities that do not have to be real, truths that do not have to be true.

This leaves us in a sad and very parlous place.

Sad: Is there some state more pitiful than having no genuine connection to one’s own thoughts, perceptions, experience—altogether to one’s life? If Americans are not a profoundly sad people behind all the smiles we see in advertising, idiotic comedy shows, and on Facebook, then I must be missing something.

Parlous: Over the course of some decades—from the mid–Cold War years, I would say—Americans have been rendered highly vulnerable to the manipulations of those who control the images through which most people have come to live. Anyone who has read a history of the 20th century knows where this can lead.

The two months that have passed since the Russian intervention on 24 February have been shocking on both these counts. The derelictions of the press and broadcasters are without precedent in my lifetime, and with Vietnam, the Iraq War, and the covert operation in Syria among the wreckage in the rearview mirror, this is saying something.

I will let the American public’s enthusiasm for the sinkhole that is Ukraine, the Azov Battalion, and the ridiculous posturing of President Volodymyr Zelensky, the comedian who is no longer funny, speak for itself.

‘Questionable Veracity’

Image
Fan art of the “Ghost of Kyiv” by Andriy Dankovych. (CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimeda Commons)

Ten days into the Russian intervention, the propaganda coming out of Kiev was already so preposterous The New York Times felt compelled to publish a piece headlined, “In Ukraine’s Information War, a Blend of Fact and Fiction.” This was a baldly rendered apologia for the many “stories of questionable veracity,” as The Times put it, then in circulation. I do love The Times for its delicate phrasing when describing indelicate matters.

There was the “Ghost of Kiev” story, featuring an heroic fighter pilot who turned out to derive from a video game. There were the Snake Island heroes, 13 Ukrainian soldiers who held out to the death on some small speck in the Black Sea, except that it turned out they surrendered, though not before Zelensky awarded them posthumous medals of honor that were not posthumous.

After railing against disinformation for years, The Times wants us to know, disinformation is O.K. in Ukraine because the Ukrainians are our side and they are simply “boosting morale.”

We cannot say we weren’t warned. The Ghost of Kiev and Snake Island turn out now to be mere prelude, opening acts in the most extensive propaganda operation of the many I can recall.

There was the maternity ward the Russians supposedly bombed in Mariupol. And then the theater, and then the art school. All filled with huddling citizens the Russian air force cynically targeted because “this is genocide,” as the ever-intemperate Zelensky does not hesitate to assert.

All of this has been reported as fact in the Times and other major dailies and, of course, by the major broadcasters. There have been pictures. There have been videos, all very persuasive to the eye.

And then, as evidence mounts that these incidents were staged as propaganda to frame the Russians and draw NATO forces directly into the war, a silence worthy of a Catholic chapel descends. We read no more of the maternity ward that turned out to be an improvised Azov base, or the theater, where citizens were herded, photographed in raggedy blankets, and sent away. Ditto the art school: Nothing more on this since the initial reports began to collapse. No body counts, no mention of the fact that Russian jets did not fly over Mariupol on the days in question.

Image
Snake Island in Ukraine. (Photo: CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons)

Before proceeding to Bucha, the greatest of the outrages to date, I must reproduce a quotation from that propaganda-is-O.K. piece The Times published in its 3 March editions. It is from a Twitter user who was distressed that it became public that the Ghost of Kiev turned out to be a ghost and the Snake Island heroes didn’t do much by way of holding the fort.

“Why can’t we just let people believe some things?” this thoughtful man or woman wanted to know. What is wrong, in other words, if thinking and believing nice things that aren’t true makes people feel better?

America the beautiful, or something like that.

Bucha is a suburb of 35,000 souls a few miles north of Kiev and one of the cities Russian forces began to evacuate on 29 March as peace talks in Istanbul progressed. Two days later the mayor, Anatoly Fedoruk, celebrated the city’s liberation in a selfie-speech to his citizenry. He made no mention of anything untoward in Bucha’s streets, backyards, or public spaces.

Four days later, 2 April, a special unit of the Ukrainian national police deployed to Bucha. And suddenly the place turns out to be a hellhole: bodies in the streets–410, according to the Prosecutor General’s office in Kiev–evidence of atrocities galore, people bound and shot point blank. The whole nine, in short.

Instant Outrage

The outrage from Washington, London and Paris—“worldwide outrage,” this would be–was instant. No demand for an impartial inquiry, forensic inspections, or any such thing. No one asked why corpses left in the street for five days appeared to be fresh, or why the relatives of the dead left them there until Kiev’s commando unit arrived.

António Guterres, the U.N. secretary-general, was level-headed enough to state, “It is essential that an independent investigation leads to effective accountability.” This is the only sound position at this point. But we know from a long history how far SGs at the U.N. get with this sort of talk.

In my read this is yet another of the false flags the Kiev regime flies almost by the day now. Paying-attention people will not miss the striking similarity between these incidents and the numerous put-up jobs that featured in Washington’s covert operation in Syria and the campaign of those famous “moderate rebels” who desperately wanted to draw the U.S. into the conflict.

As a matter of principle we must await evidence of what happened in Bucha, even as we know we are likely to see as much about events there as we have in Mariupol. We also know that to most people neither evidence nor its absence matters.

We have been told once again what to think and believe, and most of us will think and believe it.

Image
Media engineer. (Photo: State Department/Ron Przysucha)

We are to add this to various other “truths” now almost universally accepted: The Russian intervention had nothing to do with NATO expansion and was “unprovoked”—that favored term in the Biden regime. Ukrainian forces have pushed the Russians into retreat: not that the pressure on Kiev was a Russian diversionary tactic to keep Ukrainian forces away from Donbass where the fighting is.

After the Pentagon Papers came out in 1971, Hannah Arendt published an essay in The New York Review of Books called “Lying in Politics.” In it she wrote of America’s slide into a sort of collective psychosis she termed “defactualization.” Facts are fragile, Arendt wrote, in that they tell no story in themselves. They can be assembled to mean whatever one wants them to mean. This leaves them vulnerable to the manipulations of storytellers.

“The deliberate falsehood deals with contingent facts,” Arendt explained in this remarkable piece of work,

that is, with matters which carry no inherent truth within themselves, no necessity to be as they are; factual truths are never compellingly true.

A dead body in a Ukrainian street, in other words, can be assigned a meaning that, once it is established, evidence to the contrary cannot be used to erase.

It is a half-century since Arendt published “Lying in Politics.” And it is to that time, the 1960s and 1970s, that we must trace the formation of what now amounts to America’s great bubble of pretend. The world as it is has mattered less and less since Arendt’s time, the world as we have wished it to be has mattered more and more.

Image

Nine years before Arendt published her NYRB piece, Daniel Boorstin brought out The Image: Or, What happened to the American Dream, an unjustly neglected work. “I describe the world of our making,” he wrote,

how we have used our wealth, our literacy, our technology, and our progress to create the thicket of unreality which stands between us and the facts of life.

The press, as you can imagine, did not escape Boorstin’s scrutiny. “The reporter’s task,” he wrote memorably,

is to find a way to weave these threads of unreality into a fabric the reader will not recognize as entirely unreal.

This is our condition. The Ukraine crisis is the mirror that reflects us as we are.

Now I will relate a peculiar coincidence, pertinent to our case.

A few weeks ago I took it upon myself to watch Marcel Ophuls’ The Sorrow and the Pity, all four hours of it. This is the famously explosive documentary that forced the French to come to terms with the extent to which they had collaborated with the Nazis during the three years and some they occupied France.

This film has a special meaning for me. It came out in 1969, just as I arrived in Paris for university studies. France was in an uproar over Ophuls’ film. It was banned from broadcast on French television until 1981. I did not understand much of this at the time.

Image
Movie poster of an eye with a single teardrop and a tiny swastika near the pupil. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

The Sorrow and the Pity shredded to pieces, relentlessly, unblinkingly, the national myth that the French had all been heroes of the resistance, or had aided it, or had in some way stood against the collaborationist Vichy regime of Marshal Pétain, hero of Verdun in World War I, capitulationist in World War II. This was nothing like the case.

Now I understand what the young student long ago could not quite grasp. The French simply could not face Ophuls’ unyielding exposure of who they had been. Ophuls had punctured the enduring bubble of pretend within which they had lived for 25 years after the 1945 victory in Europe.

People can live in these bubbles a very long time. The unreality within them can be very persuasive. The French finally emerged from their bubble. It was painful, a passage full of angst, but they were fortunate to have escaped.

Will we have our interim of sorrow, of pity, and emerge from our bubble the better for it? May we someday be so blest.

https://mronline.org/2022/04/28/the-u-s ... f-pretend/

Two 'home runs' in one thread, nice.

I didn't know Ardent wrote anything of value, but not bad.

I might recommend 'Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television' in this vein. The first three arguments are valid, I think, though the fourth is mired in metaphysics and thus useless.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Thu Apr 28, 2022 10:53 pm

The horrible dangers of pushing a US proxy war in Ukraine
If there is indeed a shift in strategy to another level of confrontation with Russia, we need to know what we’re getting into.

APRIL 27, 2022
Written by Anatol Lieven

To judge by its latest statements, the Biden administration is increasingly committed to using the conflict in Ukraine to wage a proxy war against Russia, with as its goal the weakening or even destruction of the Russian state.

This would mean America adopting a strategy that every U.S. president during the Cold War took great pains to avoid: the sponsorship of war in Europe, bringing with it the acute risk of escalation towards direct military confrontation between Russia and NATO, possibly ending in nuclear catastrophe. The U.S. and NATO refusal to support armed rebellions against Soviet rule in eastern Europe was obviously not based on any kind of recognition of the legitimacy of Communist rule and Soviet domination, but simply on a hard-headed calculation of the appalling risks involved to America, Europe and humanity in general.

A note of caution, however, while there is considerable unease in sections of Russian society about an aggressive war against Ukrainians —whom Moscow after all claims to be a “brotherly people” — a war against American attempts to harm and subjugate Russia has much stronger public appeal.

During his visit to Kiev this week, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin stated that the U.S. wants to see “Russia weakened to the degree that it can’t do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine.” On the same day, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov declared on Russian television that by supplying Ukraine with heavy weaponry, NATO is now “in essence” involved in a proxy war with Russia.

Lavrov compared the situation in terms of nuclear danger to the Cuban missile crisis. We might do well to remember in this context how very close humanity came to nuclear annihilation in the fall of 1962. At one point, the fate of the world depended on the wisdom and caution of just one Soviet naval officer on board a nuclear attack submarine: Commander (later Admiral) Vassily Arkhipov (the character played by Liam Neeson in the film about the nuclear accident the previous year on the submarine K-19, of which Arkhipov had been the executive officer).

Two of Lloyd Austin’s remarks are especially worth examining in some detail. The first is that weakening Russia is necessary in order to prevent it repeating its invasion of Ukraine elsewhere. This statement is either meaningless, hypocritical, or both. There is no sign that Russia wants to or indeed could invade any other countries. As far as an attack on NATO is concerned, the miserable performance of the Russian military in Ukraine should have made absolutely clear that this is a fatuous chimera. If Russia cannot capture cities less than 20 miles from Russia’s own border, the idea of an attack on NATO is ludicrous.

As far as Georgia, Moldova and Belarus are concerned, it already holds the positions it needs in these countries. Russia’s military presence in Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh is at the request of the Armenians themselves, and is indeed essential to protect them against Turkey and Azerbaijan. When it comes to combating Islamist extremism in Central Asia and elsewhere, Russia’s interests and those of the West are in fact aligned.

Lloyd Austin also stated that U.S. officials believe that Ukraine can “win” the war with Russia given the right equipment and support from the West. The question is what “winning” means. If it means preserving Ukrainian independence, freedom to join the European Union, and sovereignty over the great majority of Ukrainian territory, then this is a legitimate and necessary goal. Indeed, thanks to Ukrainian courage and Western weaponry, it has already to a great extent been achieved.

Moscow’s original goal of overthrowing the Ukrainian government and subjugating the whole of Ukraine failed utterly. Given the losses that the Russian military has suffered, it seems highly unlikely that Russia can capture any more large Ukrainian cities, let alone conquer the whole of Ukraine.

If however what is meant by victory is Ukrainian reconquest — with Western help — of all the areas lost to Russia and Russian-backed separatists since 2014, then this is a recipe for perpetual war, and monstrous losses and suffering for Ukrainians. The Ukrainian army has fought magnificently in defense of its urban areas, but attacking entrenched Russian defensive positions across open country would be a very different matter.

Moreover, since Russia has annexed Crimea and the vast majority of the Russian people believe that this is Russian national territory, no future Russian government could possibly agree to give it up. A goal of complete Ukrainian victory therefore does indeed imply the destruction of the Russian state — something that Russia’s nuclear arsenal exists to prevent.

There is however a fatal ambiguity involved in such statements. For if what they suggest is a U.S. commitment to help Ukraine to go on fighting until Ukraine has reconquered all of the territory taken by Russia since 2014, including Crimea, then this implies a permanent war with the destruction of the Russian state as its goal; for short of the collapse of the Russian state, no Russian government will surrender Crimea, and for geographical reasons, no Ukrainian victory on the ground can bring this about. Furthermore, while China has so far been very restrained in its support for Russia over Ukraine, Beijing could not possibly tolerate a U.S. strategy aimed at the destruction of the Russian state and the consequent complete isolation of China.

A U.S. strategy of using the war in Ukraine to weaken Russia is also of course completely incompatible with the search for a ceasefire and even a provisional peace settlement. It would require Washington to oppose any such settlement and to keep the war going. And indeed, when in late March the Ukrainian government put forward a very reasonable set of peace proposals, the lack of public U.S. support for them was extremely striking.

Apart from anything else, a Ukrainian treaty of neutrality (as proposed by President Zelensky) is an absolutely inescapable part of any settlement — but weakening Russia involves maintaining Ukraine as a de facto U.S. ally. U.S. strategy as indicated by Lloyd Austin would risk Washington becoming involved in backing Ukrainian nationalist hardliners against President Zelensky himself.

Due to the losses the Russian military has suffered, it seems possible that once Russia has conquered the whole of the Donbas (assuming that it can even do that), Moscow will go over to the defensive militarily and offer a ceasefire as the initial basis for peace negotiations. The West will then face a stark choice: between accepting this and using economic means to pressure Russia into offering acceptable terms; or on the other hand encouraging and arming Ukraine to launch a massive counter-offensive.

How long would Russia accept such a Western strategy before it decided to escalate, in an effort to terrify the Europeans in particular into splitting from America and seeking a peace settlement? Even if direct war between Russia and the West could be avoided, how long would Western unity survive in these circumstances? So far, Russian attacks aimed at interdicting Western weapons supplies have been confined to Ukrainian territory. What would be the consequences if they are extended to Polish territory? What if Ukraine uses Western weaponry to launch attacks on Russia itself — as the British deputy defense minister has (with almost insane irresponsibility) suggested?

During the Cold War, no U.S. president ever forgot that Washington and Moscow between them have the ability to destroy human civilization and even put an end to the human race. For this reason, first the Truman and then the Eisenhower administration adopted the strategy of “containing” the Soviet Union in Europe, and not trying to “roll back” Soviet power through armed support for anti-Soviet insurgencies in eastern Europe.

Our leaders of today should remember this. They should also remember that where both sides engaged in proxy warfare outside Europe, the consequences were disastrous for themselves and still more disastrous for the wretched people on the ground who became the pawns of these great power agendas. Have we really learned nothing from history?

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2022/ ... n-ukraine/

***********************************

Four Buyers In Europe Have Paid In Rubles For Russia’s Gas
By Tsvetana Paraskova - Apr 27, 2022, 7:53 AM CDT

Bloomberg: four EU customers have already bought Russian gas with rubles.

Ten companies in Europe have already opened accounts at Gazprombank.

Gazprom confirmed on Wednesday that it had cut off gas supply to Poland and Bulgaria.

Four buyers from Europe have already paid for Russian gas in rubles, Bloomberg reported on Wednesday, citing a source close to Gazprom, as the Russian gas giant halted supply to Poland and Bulgaria.

Vladimir Putin has threatened to cut off the gas supply to Europe if the “hostile” nations—including all of the EU—do not start paying in rubles for gas. The EU has rejected Putin’s demands for payments in rubles, while Russia did not immediately cut off the gas supply to Europe after April 1, partly because it is dependent on revenues from gas and partly because payments for gas delivered after April 1 are not due until later this month or early May.

Some of Russia’s natural gas customers have agreed to pay in rubles for Russian gas, Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak said earlier this month, without disclosing which buyers had agreed to pay in rubles for gas.

According to Bloomberg’s source on Wednesday, ten companies in Europe have already opened accounts at Gazprombank, which Putin has designated as the bank that will be handling the payments in rubles for Russian gas.

The EU’s refusal to pay directly in rubles tests Putin’s threat to cut off the gas supply, and buyers in Europe “would be running a very real risk of their supplies being cut,” Katja Yafimava, a Senior Research Fellow at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, told Bloomberg last week.

Late on Tuesday, Poland and Bulgaria said they had been notified by Gazprom that Russian gas supply to the two countries would be cut off as of Wednesday. Gazprom says supply was stopped “due to absence of payments in rubles.”

Gazprom confirmed on Wednesday that the gas had been shut off to the two countries.

In the contract with Gazprom, Bulgaria has to pay in U.S. dollars for Russian gas and Russia’s demand for payment in rubles is a breach of contract, Bulgarian Energy Minister Alexander Nikolov said on Wednesday.

“It is clear that in the current war in Ukraine, Russia uses natural gas as a political and economic weapon,” Nikolov added, noting that Bulgaria will not negotiate under pressure.

By Tsvetana Paraskova for Oilprice.com

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Natural-Gas ... s-Gas.html

***********************************

Image

Synthetic Left Joins Corporate Right in Getting Ukraine War Wrong – Historical Analysis
April 27, 2022
By Max Parry – Apr 24, 2022

Since the Russian military operation to de-Nazify and de-militarize Ukraine began in late February, there is a common misperception that the Western left is “split” over the conflict in its response.

Indeed, it is true there has been infighting within organizations such as the US-based Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) between its “International Committee”—whose official statement rightly faulted NATO enlargement for “setting the stage” for Russia’s actions in Ukraine—and local branches of the group which released their own takes distancing themselves from the former.

Similar sectarian splinters have occurred among the US Green Party over the issue with the Howie Hawkins-led wing on one side endorsing sending lethal aid to Ukraine and its peace action committee on the other.

However, all of them fell in line behind the corporate media in characterizing the Russo-Ukrainian conflict as an “invasion” by Moscow to be condemned. For what the late Edward S. Herman called the “cruise missile Left,” the 14,000 ethnic Russians killed in Donbass by the Ukrainian army since 2014 are “unworthy victims,” as Herman and Noam Chomsky defined the notion in Manufacturing Consent. With a few notable exceptions, the vast majority of the so-called left wing in the United States and Western Europe have gotten Ukraine totally wrong.

Image
Edward S. Herman, co-author of Manufacturing Consent. Photo from Rolling Stone

International relations scholar John Mearsheimer warned for years that NATO expansion threatened Moscow’s legitimate security interests and would likely lead to a hot war in Ukraine. Then again, Joe Biden himself acknowledged as much as a senator back in 1997.

Now that the US president has openly called for regime change in Moscow, one wonders what new excuses NATO apologists will invent to maintain that the eastward encroachment on Russia’s borders is benevolent. Still, the source of the widespread misunderstanding today can be traced much further back in history—long before the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the reunification of Germany.

In the lead-up to the escalation of hostilities, many on the Left made reference to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s speech formally recognizing the Novorussian republics. They pointed to Putin’s blaming the Soviet policy on the Ukrainian national question for the current crisis as evidence that the Russian head of state is a reactionary and, therefore, Moscow’s actions unjust.

A recent article in Jacobin magazine, the unofficial flagship publication of the Harringtonite reformist tendency in the US [Michael Harrington was a social democrat who was anti-communist], continued this line of thought by distorting early Soviet history. In particular, the modestly self-professed “leading voice of the American left” sought to historically sever the ancestral relations between Russified communists in Donbass over a century ago from the latter-day militants in the Eastern Ukrainian republics.

Never mind that it was the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, the largest political opposition to Putin, which first proposed to the State Duma back in January that the Kremlin should recognize the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics.

Image
Russian Parliament in process of voting to approve recognition of Luhansk and Donetsk Republics—something first proposed by the Russian communists. Photo: Euronews

It is impossible to understand the struggle between the two countries and the Left’s misapprehension without putting it in the context of the former Soviet Union and its demise. Leaving aside his own politics, Putin’s assertion that the Bolsheviks carved up territory of the former Russian Empire to form a Ukrainian state is a historical fact.

That this controversial decision determined the course of the next century of events from the Second World War through Ukraine’s independence to the current flare-up is also valid.

To its credit, one of the legacies of the USSR and its ethnic federalism was that it greatly reduced the frequently violent conflicts between the more than 120 different oppressed nationalities of the old Tsarist autocracy. With that being said, it would be a disservice to the socialist movement in failing to recognize that mistakes were made by the Soviet leadership over the national question. More importantly, what many self-described leftists would like us to forget is that there were other prominent Marxists at the time who were at odds with Lenin over Ukraine’s right to statehood, chiefly among them Polish-German revolutionary Rosa Luxemburg.

Image
Lenin Square in Donetsk People’s Republic. Photo: The Atlantic

As the Slovene provocateur Slavoj Žižek once noted, it is a “historical irony” that Ukrainian nationalists have been tearing down statues of Lenin, considering that not only did the USSR redraw Ukraine’s borders and extend its territory several times—including the mostly Russian-speaking Crimea which was transferred by Nikita Khrushchev in 1954 after nearly 200 years as Russian land—it was during the first decade of the Soviet era when Ukrainian culture, identity and language was revitalized and promoted by the state. Putin also called attention to this paradox when he mocked Kiev’s “decommunization” laws, pointing out that, if it were not for communism, there would be no modern Ukraine.

Despite the fact that the mother tongue of most Ukrainians was Russian, the local dialect only began to be taught in schools when the Soviet education system was introduced. Having said that, the choice to establish a Ukrainian state did not come without considerable debate among the Marxist school beforehand.

Prior to the overthrow of the Romanov dynasty, there were many concerns among the Russian revolutionaries as to whether the calls for self-determination by the heterogenous demographics which composed the Tsarist Empire would make an eventual Soviet entity impossible to govern.

The Bolsheviks hoped to appease minority ethnic groups by formulating a policy which in principle offered autonomy and sovereignty but a form of national rights that did not take precedence over socialist internationalism—or as Lenin called it, a “voluntary union of nations.”

In The Socialist Revolution and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination, the Marxist revolutionary leader explained the policy of indigenization (korenizatsiya) or nativization which sought to integrate the many non-Russian nationalities into the Soviet system:

The proletariat of the oppressing nations cannot confine itself to the general hackneyed phrases against annexations and for the equal rights of nations in general, that may be repeated by any pacifist bourgeois. The proletariat cannot evade the question that is particularly ‘unpleasant’ for the imperialist bourgeoisie, namely, the question of the frontiers of a state that is based on national oppression. The proletariat cannot but fight against the forcible retention of the oppressed nations within the boundaries of a given state, and this is exactly what the struggle for the right of self-determination means. The proletariat must demand the right of political secession for the colonies and for the nations that ‘its own’ nation oppresses. Unless it does this, proletarian internationalism will remain a meaningless phrase; mutual confidence and class solidarity between the workers of the oppressing and oppressed nations will be impossible.

Image
Vladiimir Lenin and Rosa Luxemburg. Photo: links. org.au

Meanwhile, Luxemburg’s native Poland declared its autonomous status despite opposition from her own SDKPiL (Social Democracy of the Kingdom of Poland and Lithuania) faction on the basis of a commitment to proletarian internationalism. Part of her pragmatic reasoning was that the ex-Tsarist colonies were instantly pulled into imperialist orbit once they seceded, culminating in the Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War.

Her 1918 essay on The Russian Revolution is more well-known for its criticism of the one-party rule of the Bolsheviks, but its third chapter examines the nationalities question:

The Bolsheviks are in part responsible for the fact that the military defeat was transformed into the collapse and breakdown of Russia. Moreover, the Bolsheviks themselves have, to a great extent, sharpened the objective difficulties of this situation by a slogan which they placed in the foreground of their policies: the so-called right of self-determination of peoples, or—something which was really implicit in this slogan—the disintegration of Russia… One is immediately struck with the obstinacy and rigid consistency with which Lenin and his comrades stuck to this slogan, a slogan which is in sharp contradiction to their otherwise outspoken centralism in politics as well as to the attitude they have assumed towards other democratic principles. While they showed a quite cool contempt for the Constituent Assembly, universal suffrage, freedom of press and assemblage, in short, for the whole apparatus of the basic democratic liberties of the people which, taken all together, constituted the “right of self-determination” inside Russia, they treated the right of self-determination of peoples as a jewel of democratic policy for the sake of which all practical considerations of real criticism had to be stilled.

In retrospect, whether or not Lenin’s stance was correct and Luxemburg’s wrong is a matter of debate, though the consensus seems to be the former on the left, particularly when applied to the many anti-colonial and national liberation struggles in the global south. So too is the matter of whether Ukraine had the right to become a separate country from Russia, albeit both Eastern Slavic nations along with Belarus evolved from the medieval Kievan Rus state and they are essentially the same ethnic group. Nevertheless, what is more pertinent is that Luxemburg was ominously accurate in her assessment of the particularly dangerous character of Ukrainian nationalism. After all, Lenin died in 1924 and did not live to witness the Great Patriotic War and Ukrainian collaboration with the Axis powers.

Image
Ukrainians greet German soldiers in western Ukraine in 1941. Source: Wikipedia

Then again, the early warning signs were all there in the many pogroms against tens of thousands of Jews, Poles and Russians by Ukrainian ultra-rightists under the leadership of Symon Petliura who tried to create a racially homogenous state during the Soviet-Ukrainian War (1917-1921).

Image
Symon Petliura. Source: Wikipedia

Historically, Ukraine’s independence movement began as part of the broader extremist coalition which became European fascism and its defeat only further radicalized its exiled right-wing émigrés during the interwar period, eventually leading to the founding in Vienna of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) in 1929. A decade earlier, Luxemburg had forewarned that placation of Ukrainian ultranationalism would serve as a counterrevolutionary call to arms and fragment Ukraine:

Ukrainian nationalism in Russia was something quite different from, let us say, Czechish, Polish or Finnish nationalism in that the former was a mere whim, a folly of a few dozen petty-bourgeois intellectuals without the slightest roots in the economic, political or psychological relationships of the country; it was without any historical tradition, since the Ukraine never formed a nation or government, was without any national culture, except for the reactionary-romantic poems of Shevschenko. It is exactly as if, one fine day, the people living in the Wasserkante should want to found a new Low-German (Plattdeutsche) nation and government! And this ridiculous pose of a few university professors and students was inflated into a political force by Lenin and his comrades through their doctrinaire agitation concerning the “right of self-determination.”

Lenin remained unconvinced and proceeded with the policy. In hindsight, Luxemburg appears clairvoyant. Two decades later when Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union, many Ukrainians did not view the Wehrmacht as conquerors but liberators and more than a quarter of a million local quislings were recruited from ultranationalist organizations by the Third Reich to participate in the mass murder of Poles, Jews, Roma and other so-called undesirables.

Those same far-right terrorist forces under Stepan Bandera’s command in the OUN continued a violent insurgency against the Soviets during the Cold War with the covert support of Western intelligence agencies in Project AERODYNAMIC. Central Intelligence Agency documents verify that the CIA sponsored Ukrainian Nazi collaborators like Bandera and Mykola Lebed in order to “exploit nationalist cultural and other dissident tendencies in Ukraine” and “exploit the minority nationality question in the Soviet Union.” A declassified CIA document from 1953 states:

The purpose of Project AERODYNAMIC is to provide for the exploitation and expansion of the anti-Soviet Ukrainian resistance for cold war and hot war purposes. Such groups as the Ukrainian Supreme Council of Liberation (UHVR) and its Ukrainian Insurgent Army (OUN), the Foreign Representation of the Ukrainian Supreme Council of Liberation (ZPUHVR) in Western Europe and the United States, and other organizations such as theOUN/B will be utilized.

The Banderovtsi were ultimately defeated in the late 1950s but Ukraine was never truly de-Nazified, as Khrushchev made yet another disastrous blunder in allowing many Ukrainians deported during the Stalin years to repatriate while releasing others from imprisonment.

Image
Anti-Soviet partisans supported by the CIA under Project Aerodynamic. Photo: rbth.com

Right-wing nationalism and anti-Russian sentiment remained underground for several decades until its reappearance when the USSR dissolved and would later become one of the biggest factors in the 2004 Orange Revolution and the Maidan ten years later. [CIA agitation was also of course a factor].

Image
A Ukrainian nationalist carries a portrait of Stepan Bandera, founder of a Ukrainian rebel army that fought the Soviet Union in the 1930s and ’40s. The rally was held on Jan. 1, 2013. While many Ukrainians see Bandera as a hero, many Russians view him as an ally of Hitler and a mass murderer. Photo: art-for-a-change.com

Modern Ukraine itself had grown out of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Habsburg Empire, and Imperial Russia to become a multinational state with a significant minority population of Russian speakers.

When Ukraine was incorporated into the USSR, the nationality question was kept under control by the fact that Soviet citizenship was not restricted by ethnic identity and all Ukrainians were citizens of the Soviet Union.

Immediately after Kyiv declared its independence in 1991, ethno-nationalism resurfaced just as it did in nearly every ex-communist country in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, from the breakup of the former Yugoslavia to more than three decades of frozen conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh.

Once the Warsaw Pact disbanded, the West began to absorb all of its former signatories into NATO, reneging on the agreement made between Mikhail Gorbachev and then-U.S. Secretary of State James Baker who promised that it would not move “one-inch to the east.”

Once Eastern European countries started to pursue integration into NATO and the European Union, Boris Yeltsin signaled that the Russian Federation’s long-term aspiration was to eventually join the alliance and superstate as well. Even in the first term of Putin’s incumbency, Moscow naively continued to hope that it could one day be accepted into the Atlanticist and European projects.

By 2004, NATO had acceded eleven additional countries since the end of the Cold War, but it was not until three years later, at the Munich Security Conference, when Putin finally challenged NATO’s continuous extension eastward and from that point on became a pariah in the West.

Image
Putin speaks at the Munich National Security Conference in 2007. Photo: NYT

Even though Ukraine’s induction into the transatlantic alliance was opposed by France and Germany in 2008, the possibility of Kyiv’s eventual membership in the NATO bloc took center stage in souring relations with its neighbor. Former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski summed up the rationale behind using Ukraine as a beachhead to attack Russia in his influential 1997 book The Grand Chessboard: “Ukraine is a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country (means) Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire.”

It all came to a head in 2014 when Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych was thrust in the middle of the two competing spheres of influence. Faced with a choice between an EU Association Agreement which offered bilateral support in return for draconian austerity measures or a more favorable bailout loan from Russia, Yanukovych eventually accepted Putin’s offer.

Image
Viktor Yanukovych. Photo: unian.info

Immediately, Western-backed mass protests in the so-called “Revolution of Dignity” began and within months he was removed in a parliamentary coup with Washington strategists handpicking his replacement. When it turned out that Brussels [EU} preferred the former professional boxer and current Mayor of Kyiv Vitali Klitschko to be his successor—instead of the US’s choice—it was revealed in a controversial leaked phone call that Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, told US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt, “Fuck the EU.”

Image
Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt: “Fuck the EU.” Photo: eleventimezones.com

This was not the only occasion when the former foreign policy adviser to Dick Cheney would divulge Washington’s dirty secrets. Speaking to the National Press Club inside the Beltway, Nuland bragged that the supposedly spontaneous pro-EU demonstrations in which she notoriously handed out cookies had actually been funded in part by the US State Department. Or as then-President Obama put it, “we brokered a deal to a transition in power in Ukraine.”

Image
Victoria Nuland with Pyatt behind her handing out cookies to Maidan Square demonstrators. Photo: csmonitor.com

Yanukovych’s NATO-installed substitutes—former investment banker Arseniy Yatsenyuk and oligarchic chocolatier Petro Poroshenko—both advocated a nationalist agenda which included enacting legislation making Ukrainian the country’s sole official language and pressuring the Ukrainian Orthodox Church into severing ties with the Patriarch of Moscow. Current Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has only deepened the stratification with the signing of indigenous people’s laws recognizing Crimean Tatars and other minorities at the exclusion of ethnic Russians.

Image
Arseniy Yatsenyuk (left), and Petro Poroshenko. Photo: WSJ

Image
Zelensky in ceremony with Ukrainian Tatars, where he said Crimea would be returned to Ukraine. Photo: ukrinform.net

These steps, along with the emboldening of neo-Nazism, divided the country on ethnic lines and set off the bloody conflict in Donbass which is native to a significant Russian ethnolinguistic community. Threatened by the Banderite regime’s discriminatory policies and genocidal neo-fascist militias, the people of Novorussia sought protection from the Motherland. Since then, Kyiv and the separatists both agreed to a ceasefire in the 2015 Minsk Agreements to which the post-Maidan regime has consistently failed to adhere.

With the peace process undermined by the far right—including the Azov battalion—and Western military aid, the likelihood of a resolution to the conflict dwindled. If there was ever to be an end to the ongoing ethnic cleansing and war crimes in the Donbass region, a Russian intervention became almost inevitable.

For eight years, the people of Donetsk and Luhansk lived through a perpetual state of war as the NATO powers refused to provide Moscow with any security guarantee that Ukraine would not re-nuclearize or become a member state.

Image
Inside a school in ruins in the village of Nikishyne near Debaltseve in the Donetsk People’s Republic. Photo: Valentin Sprinchak/TASS via Getty Images

In the meantime, the Western yellow press has portrayed a war driven by complex historical developments as a Manichean dichotomy of a Russian bear picking on its little brother. Without much distinction, many on the so-called Left has drawn a false equivalence between the two sides.

While Putin is certainly a conservative, there is a magnitude of difference between Moscow and Kiev where in the former the Communist Party is the second-largest political organization which urged the Kremlin to recognize the pro-Russian breakaway oblasts, and the latter in which the Communist Party is banned and fascists openly serve in parliament.

It should be acknowledged that there are many parts of Putin’s historical analysis which are incorrect, starting with his sweeping statements concerning the formation of Ukraine and incognizance of the connection between revived ultranationalism and the reinstitution of free enterprise. However, rebuke of those errors means nothing coming from the Western Left which only lends tacit support to NATO when it turns reality on its head to portray the alliance’s confrontation with Moscow as an “inter-imperial rivalry.”

In order to understand why this is false, we should turn to Lenin who in 1920 reformulated the pre-industrial, traditional definition of imperialism into categories of “oppressor” and “oppressed” nations:

That is why the focal point in the Social-Democratic programme must be that division of nations into oppressor and oppressed which forms the essence of imperialism, and is deceitfully evaded by the social-chauvinists and Kautsky. This division is not significant from the angle of bourgeois pacifism or the philistine Utopia of peaceful competition among independent nations under capitalism, but it is most significant from the angle of the revolutionary struggle against imperialism.

In the context of US global hegemony, the Russian Federation would definitely fall into the oppressed nation distinction and still occupies the geopolitical space once filled by the former Eastern Bloc when it supported the movements of Third World national liberation. Although post-Soviet Russia has undeniably returned to the international stage, it remains a relatively weak capitalist country since the neoliberal “shock therapy” of the 1990s.

Those suffering from Putin derangement syndrome selectively omit that the Russian statesman acknowledges that the fall of the Soviet Union was a tragedy and that Ukraine has only become the poorest country in Europe since the restoration of capitalism, during which, on the advice and encouragement of U.S. advisors, Russia’s most valuable assets and natural resources (which belonged to the Russian people) were privatized, plundered, and “sold” for virtually nothing to Yeltsin’s cronies, who became today’s oligarchs.

Oddly enough, modern Ukraine itself would never have been established if not for Lenin’s rethinking of imperialism and the Russian Empire as a “prison house of nationalities” which colonized and subjugated oppressed nations.

Motivated by colonial guilt over actions taken by the Tsars, the Bolsheviks partitioned new boundaries within the communist state so that marginalized groups could exercise self-rule. Putin takes issue with the Soviets because, when these lines were created, they permitted a large geographical distribution of Russian speakers who found themselves suddenly stateless as soon as the USSR crumbled. Yet the faux-Left which misrepresents his words fails to mention this part of the address and instead zeroes in on the Russian President’s criticism of Lenin and his claim that modern Ukraine was founded by the Bolsheviks arbitrarily without the permission of its inhabitants.

Admittedly, Putin does leave out many historical details in which multiple quasi-governments were declared during the Ukrainian War of Independence. These included the nationalist Ukrainian People’s Republic set up in Kyiv after the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, its follow-up the Second Hetmanate or “Ukrainian State,” and the Kharkiv-based Ukrainian Soviet Republic government in the east which appealed to Moscow for military support against its rivals.

However, the Ukrainian Soviet Republic was not the only communist state-like formation at the time—there was also an Odessa Soviet Republic pseudo-state as well as a Donetsk Soviet Republic. This oversight makes Putin’s conclusion that the mostly Russian-populated Donetsk Basin was dictatorially added to Soviet Ukraine incomplete. In fact, historical records show that Lenin was at one point in favor of the Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Soviet Republic remaining independent from the Ukrainian SSR and respected its territorial integrity.

The option to incorporate the Donbass was only taken because the province did not wish to remain secluded and vulnerable after its previous occupation by Ukrainian nationalists in collaboration with the Central Powers.

The region was also an industrial hub and, without it, Soviet Ukraine would have been an agrarian-based society, so it was an economic as well as a political decision, not simply an autocratic decree by Lenin. As it happens, the present-day self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic considers itself the descendant to the short-lived proto-state of 1918.

Image
Soviet poster from 1921 reads: ‘Donbass Is the Heart of Russia.’ Photo: istorya.ru

While there was no referendum to include Donbass in Ukraine, the Bolsheviks introduced the most democratic structures the one-time Tsarist territory had ever experienced in its history. Where Putin’s point would be more applicable as an instance when the Soviets did actually transfer Russophone territory without the consent of its people was when Khrushchev gifted the Crimean peninsula to his native Ukraine. Even so, it was not the abolition of the Crimean Autonomous Republic in 1954 that led to the current schism but the fall of the USSR which Putin fails to identify as the real cause of ethnic tensions between Galicia, or western Ukraine, and Donbass.

Above all, it was the removal of the Soviet policy of the “Friendship of Peoples” and the Soviet of Nationalities chamber which eliminated the guarantee of equal representation of minorities.

The reinstatement of the free market did not just make Ukraine impoverished as Putin concedes but was also what opened up political space for the Ukrainian ultranationalism of the Orange Revolution and Euromaidan which had been kept in check under communism. After all, few remember that, in March 1991, more than 70% of the Ukrainian population voted to preserve the Soviet confederation and to remain in one country with Russia before capitalism was forced upon them, an inconvenient truth to the narratives of both the West and Putin alike.

Image
People’s Friendship Arch in Kiev, Ukraine. Photo: waymarking.com

Putin’s nationalism often overlaps in interests with his communist political opponents in terms of geopolitics but just as frequently diverges. For example, he regards the 1918 Treaty of Brest-Litovsk as a national humiliation. While the peace agreement between the Bolsheviks and Central Powers did cede a large amount of Russian imperial land, the negotiations were supported by the majority of Russians as the communists rose to power on the slogan of “peace, bread and land” and had to deliver on their promise to the Russian people which the provisional government betrayed after the February Revolution. Moreover, much of the area that was surrendered was later regained following World War II, including the Baltic states which rejoined the USSR despite having previously been colonized by Tsardom.

Image
Borders drawn up in 1918 Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. Source: Wikipedia

And what is the tragedy of the execution of the Romanov family compared to the millions of Russian peasants who Nicholas II sent to their deaths in World War I? Putin seems to forget that the needless imperial bloodbath was what propelled the success of the Russian Revolution to begin with. The reigning Russian leader is also just as seemingly unaware that Lenin did not reject Russian nationalism outright as the mainstream Left critics of his speech. To distinguish Soviet patriotism from the reactionary monarchist Black Hundreds, Lenin wrote in On the National Pride of the Great Russians:

Let us, Great-Russian Social-Democrats, also try to define our attitude to this ideological trend. It would be unseemly for us, representatives of a dominant nation in the far east of Europe and a goodly part of Asia, to forget the immense significance of the national question—especially in a country which has been rightly called the “prison of the peoples,” and particularly at a time when, in the far east of Europe and in Asia, capitalism is awakening to life and self-consciousness a number of “new” nations, large and small; at a moment when the tsarist monarchy has called up millions of Great Russians and non-Russians, so as to “solve” a number of national problems in accordance with the interests of the Council of the United Nobility and of the Guchkovs, Krestovnikovs, Dolgorukovs, Kutlers and Rodichevs.

Is a sense of national pride alien to us, Great-Russian class-conscious proletarians? Certainly not! We love our language and our country, and we are doing our very utmost to raise her toiling masses (i.e., nine-tenths of her population) to the level of a democratic and socialist consciousness. To us it is most painful to see and feel the outrages, the oppression and the humiliation our fair country suffers at the hands of the tsar’s butchers, the nobles and the capitalists. We take pride in the resistance to these outrages put up from our midst, from the Great Russians; in that midst having produced Radishchev, the Decembrists and the revolutionary commoners of the seventies; in the Great-Russian working class having created, in 1905, a mighty revolutionary party of the masses; and in the Great-Russian peasantry having begun to turn towards democracy and set about overthrowing the clergy and the landed proprietors.

Lenin distinguished what he considered socialist patriotism from bourgeois nationalism and its promotion by the Soviet state was not confined to the time after his death as it is widely portrayed. Constantly likening Putin to Stalin, the contemporary pseudo-left considers the post-Lenin period a revision of original Soviet federalism, when they fail to remember that Lenin supervised his Georgian-born Commissar of Nationalities in the writing of Marxism and the National Question where Stalin provided the Marxist-Leninist definition of ‘nation’ itself in unambiguous terms: “A nation is a historically originated stable community of people, originated on the basis of a common language, common territory, joint economic life and common mental characteristics revealing themselves in a common culture.”

Regardless of whether, if Ukraine constitutes a real nation per se distinct from Russia, Putin deserves credit for delivering a thoughtful speech providing historical context, however imperfect, on its formation in order to communicate to the Russian people the reasons for the special operation, something Western leaders seldom if ever do to their constituents when they go to war.

It is little wonder why no corporate outlet would dare broadcast the speech in full, for it might remind Americans how incompetent their own politicians are. His remarks expanded upon a lengthy op-ed “On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians” authored last year which is worth examining as a companion piece.


While he may not fall on the left of the political spectrum, Putin’s Bonapartism arguably saved the Russian state from complete collapse by re-nationalizing the energy sector after the economic genocide of the Yeltsin era. This is the main reason the former KGB officer consistently polls at more than 70% approval in Russia, a figure that has only risen since the start of the intervention in Ukraine. It is true that Putin has many faults, but the misrepresentation of his words by the pro-NATO Left is more worthy of condemnation.

Rosa Luxemburg’s and Putin’s critiques of Lenin may be a century apart but they converge in one crucial respect. They both assert that the Russian revolutionary declaration that all nations have the right to self-determination was excessive. By endorsing self-determination, the Bolsheviks ensured the outcome seen now in the numerous ethno-territorial conflicts in post-Soviet states.

It is worth noting that Lenin broke from Karl Marx in his emphasis on nationality, though the latter’s position evolved during his final years regarding the Irish question where, even though the Irish nationalist movement was not necessarily socialist, Marx came to regard it as progressive, prompting attacks from the Russian anarchist thinker Mikhail Bakunin.

Image
Karl Marx (left), Mikhail Bakunin (right). Photo: ceasefiremagazine.co.uk

That Bakunin’s teachings influenced the Ukrainian anarchist Nestor Makhno, whose forces were accused of anti-semitic pogroms during the Russian Civil War, perhaps might explain why contemporary anarchists often take the de facto side of Ukrainian nationalism in the current conflict whose brand is anything but progressive.

Image
Nestor Makhno. Photo: thefamouspeople.com

Some on the US left today are infected with such amateurishness.

Like their maturation on Irish republicanism, so too did Marx and Friedrich Engels later convert on the Polish question. On the other hand, Rosa Luxemburg adamantly opposed Polish independence until her death and deviated from Marx and Engels on nationalism as much as Lenin, advocating socialist revolution and self-government for her country of origin but within the boundaries of the former Russian Empire.

More than a century after Luxemburg’s death, the German-naturalized revolutionary left behind a complicated legacy, one whose theoretical shortcomings in a denial of the need for revolutionary vanguardism in Western Europe may have contributed to her own murder by social fascists in the Spartacist uprising of the failed German Revolution. Nonetheless, Rosa’s unheeded premonition regarding the Ukrainian question still resonates today and revisiting her dialogue with Lenin can help the Western Left better grasp the difficult processes driving the bloodshed between peoples of a foreign land.

https://orinocotribune.com/synthetic-le ... -analysis/

******************************

From Cassad's Telegram account:

***

forwarded from
Readovka
The map of hostilities and the situation on the fronts on the evening of April 28

Today we will immediately start with “arrivals”. Moreover, right at the time of writing the report, news came from the capital of the Russian Land. Eyewitnesses report that three rocket attacks were carried out on the Artem defense plant and Zhuliany airport in Kiev. In confirmation of this message, we see video of epic fires. Also went to Fastov (Kyiv region). In addition to the Kiev region, our VKS accurately "pushed" in Nikolaev, Odessa, Kharkov, Zaporozhye, Khmelnitsky.

But the Armed Forces of Ukraine are not left in debt today. The bastards again fired at civilians in the DPR. In Donetsk, Yasinovataya, Makeevka, at least 6 civilians were killed by ukrofascists during the day, and another 24 were injured.The shelling of Donetsk and Yasinovataya does not stop. But that's not all, in Akimovka, Melitopol region (this is our deep rear), Ukrainian missiles hit the railway bridge. Air defense is working tirelessly in Kherson today. At night there were explosions over the city, this afternoon everyone watched an epic fire, reeds were burning. In Belgorod, also throughout the day, air defense again destroyed air targets.

On the fronts. In the north of Kharkov, having recently suffered a bloody failure in an attempt to advance on Cossack Lopan, the enemy is making active attempts to attack Russkaya Lozovaya, a village in the suburbs of Kharkov. Serious battles and the active work of cannon artillery and MLRS are reported.

On the Izyum part of the East front.Enemy artillery is working closely in Izyum itself, points flew in, out of three air defense systems, two were shot down, one exploded in the city. Suffer as always peaceful. The battles in the Slavic direction are moving forward most actively. Fights are going on between Kurulka and Pashkovo, a few kilometers from the Barvenkovo-Slavyansk highway. Also, after the capture of Andreevka and the village of Plants, the troops are fighting to capture Bolshaya Kamyshevakha. Yampol has not yet been completely taken. A video surfaced today showing a large group of soldiers from the 79th Airmobile Brigade laying down their arms. The cleansing of the city continues. In the neighborhood, the fighting advanced close to the outskirts of Krasny Liman. It is reported that enemy artillery sat down in Svyatogorsk, the enemy positions were located right in the middle of the monastery.Here, places on the mountain are very convenient for artillery, allowing you to effectively shell the area.

Fighting continues in the industrial area of ​​Rubizhne. There are heavy battles in Popasna, there is progress, but very weak. Ours are also fighting for Orekhovo. In the Gulyai-Polye area is still active. Our art works very closely on the enemy. But there are no details from these places.

At the South front , in addition to arrivals in Odessa and Nikolaev, today comes info about active battles near the settlement. Aleksandrovka, Tavriysky, Ivanovka and Zagradovka in the Kherson region.

The situation in Transnistria continues to be tense. Terror attacks, sabotage, posters of Ukrainian nationalists and the "red level" of the terrorist threat throughout the territory.And suddenly, from April 28 to April 30, the command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine decided to conduct exercises in Podolsk, which is located in close proximity to a military warehouse in the village of Kolbasna.

From important. The head of the foreign intelligence service, Naryshkin, said that Poland is working on a plan with Washington to send troops to the western regions of Ukraine. Such a mission would be without a NATO mandate. According to foreign intelligence, the Polish military will gradually have to seize control of the strategic facilities located there from the National Guard of Ukraine.

The United States voted for Lend-Lease for Ukraine. We are talking about the supply of weapons on the model of deliveries to the allies during the Second World War.

From interesting. According to Basurin, onlyThere are more than 3,000 Ukrainian prisoners of war on the territory of the DPR. Earlier it was reported that more than 100 captured soldiers and officers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the DPR will stand trial in various cases related to the commission of war crimes.

From funny. American intelligence claims that trained dolphins of the Russian Navy are guarding the Black Sea naval base. Hohlophobes fighting dolphins, this is strong!))

Image

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Fri Apr 29, 2022 1:24 pm

Russia destroys military factory facility in kyiv, Ukraine

Image
According to the Ukrainian emergency services, the attack also hit a residential building that was damaged. | Photo: EFE
Published April 29, 2022 (1 hour 20 minutes ago)

Air defenses shot down 13 unmanned vehicles and one shell from the Smerch multiple rocket launcher system.

The Russian Defense Ministry reported this Friday that the Russian Aerospace Forces used precision weapons to destroy the production facilities of the Artiom missile and space technology factory, located in kyiv, the Ukrainian capital.

Overnight on Thursday, Ukrainian emergency services confirmed the attack on an unspecified facility and that a residential building was hit and its lower floors were damaged.

Local authorities later specified that at least ten people were injured inside the 25-story building, while the media shared photos of the rescue work by firefighters.


Initial reports indicated that the unidentified facility could be the Artiom missile development and production plant. Other media assured that the factory was evacuated and that it had been empty since February.

For his part, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that at least five cruise missiles hit kyiv on Thursday night and accused Moscow of carrying out the attack with the aim of deliberately humiliating the United Nations while his secretary General António Guterres was visiting the Ukrainian capital.

"This says a lot about the true attitude of Russia towards world institutions, about the efforts of Russian leaders to humiliate the UN and everything that the organization stands for," he said.

Meanwhile, the spokesman for the Russian military entity, Igor Konashénkov, detailed in his daily report of the special military operation that three railway traction substations in Fastov, Krasnossiolka and Polonnoye were destroyed with Kalibr missiles, launched from the sea.


Another group of high-precision missiles hit ten Ukrainian military targets, including nine assembly points for troops and military equipment and an ammunition depot.

The Russian aircraft neutralized 112 military targets, while the missiles destroyed 13 targets, including a crew of the Tochka-U tactical missile system in Nikolayev.

Instead, the artillerymen eliminated 763 concentration points of military personnel and equipment, 21 command posts, 69 fortifications and 107 artillery positions.

https://www.telesurtv.net/news/rusia-de ... -0006.html

Google Translator

************************************

Russian Foreign Ministry Denies Alleged Nuclear War Threat

Image
Russian FM spokeswoman Maria Zakharova: "Statements by Western countries about the alleged nuclear threat emanating from Moscow are fake". She stressed that Russia is against nuclear war. | Photo: Twitter @viktoriyarus34

Published 29 April 2022

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that "the West is openly calling on Kiev to attack Russia".

The Russian Foreign Ministry on Thursday denied the alleged threat of nuclear war emanating from Russia, which has been raised as part of a media campaign built by Western countries. As part of the campaign, they allege that the presence of Russian troops in Ukrainian nuclear facilities harmed the security of these enclaves.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova remarked that "in the West, at the highest, cross-border and transformational level, mechanisms have been set in motion to launch a new thesis into the public space."

"It is extremely primitive and at the same time terrible: the Russians threaten nuclear war, the Russians wave a nuclear baton. Is it necessary to say that this thesis is extremely false and untrue? Apparently it is necessary," she said.

On the other hand, she emphasized that "our country is against nuclear war, this is exactly what the Russian Foreign Minister claims, and this is what guides our diplomacy in its activities."

Zakharova indicated that they should not have switched off their alternative sources of information, then they would have listened to Russia's statements. "And not in the interpretation of their own media, which they do according to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's (NATO) own methodology," she said.


The spokeswoman also alluded to the statements of Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who in an interview declared that at the Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council signed the declaration of inadmissibility of nuclear war.

Similarly, the spokeswoman warned that "the West is openly calling on Kiev to attack Russia, including the use of weapons received from NATO countries (...) instead of forcing the Kiev regime to comply with the Minsk Agreements. Over the last eight years, the United States and its allies have been sending Ukraine advanced armaments and ammunition in violation of their international commitments".


On the other hand, she argued "that Kiev and Western capitals should take seriously the statements of our country's Defense Ministry that further Ukrainian provocations to attack Russian targets will definitely lead to a harsh response from Russia".

The Russian Foreign Ministry has stated that the Russian military took control of the nuclear power plants "solely to ensure their safety, when these facilities were in the zone of a special military operation, and protected them from the actions of Ukrainian saboteurs".

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Rus ... -0001.html

US to Send More Funding to Ukraine

Image
The White House requested more funds in support of Ukraine. Apr. 28, 2022. | Photo: Twitter/@sentdefender

Published 28 April 2022 (10 hours 25 minutes ago)

Biden requests that Congress approve an additional 33 billion dollars in funds for Ukraine.

Joe Biden has called on Congress to boost Ukrainian-related funds with 33 billion dollars supporting that country's current military conflict. A significant part of the funds are destined for additional military armament and security aid, and the rest will be employed for humanitarian and economic assistance.

“The Administration is requesting $20.4 billion in additional security and military assistance for Ukraine and for U.S. efforts to strengthen European security in cooperation with our NATO allies and other partners in the region,” said a statement released by The White House.

During his speech at the White House, President Biden said that the approval of the package was “critical.” He continued to say: “We need this bill to support Ukraine and its fight for freedom,” while admitting that the price was not “cheap.” “But caving to aggression is going to be more costly if we allow it to happen.”

It is expected that the aid package is designated as an emergency spending, making it possible in that way that it does not have to be offset by spending cuts elsewhere. Moreover, the U.S. administration is eliciting new powers to target wealthy Russians that the country considers to be ‘oligarchs.’


“I’m also sending to Congress a comprehensive package that will enhance our underlined effort to accommodate (sic) the Russian oligarchs and make sure we take their ill-be-gotten gains. We’re going to accommodate them; we’re going to seize their yachts, their luxury homes, their ill-begotten gains,” said Biden describing wealthy Russians as “kleptocracy.” “These are bad guys,” he added.

Russian officials have continuously warned Western countries about boosting aid for Ukraine, claiming that it would only exacerbate and prolong the current military conflict, representing more significant damage to Ukraine and the suffering of the Ukrainian citizens.

Last February 24, Russian forces started a special military operation in Ukrainian territory, given the country's failure to accomplish with Minsk Agreements. During the peace talks celebrated, Moscow demanded Ukraine designate itself as a neutral state and to quite the idea of joining the US-led NATO military bloc.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/US- ... -0025.html

*************************************

Ukraine seeks to seize Russia's assets for post-conflict recovery: PM
Xinhua | Updated: 2022-04-29 15:57

Image
Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal speaks on the Chernobyl exclusion zone at a news briefing in Kyiv, on February 24, 2022, in this screen grab taken from a video. [Photo/Agencies]

KYIV -- Kyiv is willing to seize Russian assets to finance Ukraine's post-conflict recovery, Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal said on Thursday.

"The funds of the Russian government and oligarchs will be one of the main sources for filling the Fund for the Reconstruction of our country," Shmyhal wrote on Telegram.

Ukraine is in talks with the countries of the Group of Seven over the seizure of Russia's assets, Shmyhal said, adding that Canada has already prepared legislation for such actions.

Earlier, Shmyhal said that his cabinet has set up a recovery fund for Ukraine's long-term reconstruction and estimated that the country's full-scale recovery will cost around $600 billion.

Russia has over $600 billion worth of foreign currency reserves held in dollars, gold and other currencies, with about half of them believed to be frozen by the restrictions imposed by Western governments on its central bank.

The head of Russia's central bank has said it was preparing to take legal action to challenge the freeze.

https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202204/ ... 5a327.html

****************************************

Here’s what I found at the reported ‘mass grave’ near Mariupol
April 29, 2022 Eva Bartlett

Image
Photo: Eva Bartlett

According to recent Western media, Russian forces have buried up to 9,000 Mariupol civilians in “mass graves” in a town just west of the Ukrainian city. These reports use satellite imagery as supposed evidence and repeat the claims of officials loyal to Kiev that “the bodies may have been buried in layers” and “the Russians dug trenches and filled them with corpses every day throughout April.”

I went to the site in question and found no mass graves.


On April 23, I joined RT journalist Roman Kosarev on a visit to the location, in the town of Mangush. What I saw were new, orderly grave plots including some still empty ones – an extension of a cemetery that already exists at the spot. No mass pit. Many of the graves have placards with the names and dates of birth of the deceased when available, and the remaining plots were numbered according to burial.

Since the media is essentially copy-pasting from the same source – the former mayor of Mariupol, Vadym Boichenko (who seems to be far from the city now) – I’ll cite from the Washington Post’s article.

Boichenko, the article notes, “called the site the ‘new Babyn Yar,’ referring to one the largest mass graves in Europe located in the outskirts of Kyiv, where 33,000 Jews where killed by Nazis in 1941 during World War II.”

This is ironic on several levels. A mayor who is whitewashing the neo-Nazis who have run amuck in hso city – notably those from the Azov Battalion, who have used civilians as human shields, occupied and militarized civilian infrastructure, point-blank executed civilians – is comparing an alleged (non-existent) mass grave to a Nazi massacre of WW2.

Meanwhile, the Kiev regime has re-written history, making WW2 Nazis and their collaborators heroes of the nation. The most notorious example being the World War Two figure Stepan Bandera.

Boichenko’s other alarming claim was that the alleged “mass grave” was “the biggest war crime of the 21st century.” We are only 22 years into it, but we’ve already seen the US-led invasion and destruction of Iraq, the levelling of Syria’s Raqqa, Saudi Arabia’s ongoing war in Yemen – all of which are much stronger contenders than the nowhere-to-be-found “mass graves” of Mangush.

In reality, the site has around 400 individual plots, including nearly 100 empty ones. The 9,000 bodies and “biggest war crime of the 21st century” were unverified claims made by a mayor who fled his city, promoted by media which down the page admitted they could independently verify the claims – but by then, the damage had been done.

Gravediggers disprove mass grave claims

While walking around the site, two men responsible for burials arrived, and when presented with the former mayor’s accusations of mass graves they vehemently rejected the claims.

“This is not a mass grave and no one is throwing bodies into a pit,” one told me.



According to them, they bury each person in a coffin and separate grave, details are logged in the morgue, and when any documents regarding name and age are given, the plot is marked with a placard containing those details. Otherwise a number is used.

Interestingly, they also noted that a section of the new graves included buried Ukrainian soldiers. “They’re human, too” one of the men said.

For those in doubt as to the location, see Roman’s report: his drone footage shows that it’s precisely the same location as shown in the satellite images used by Western media.

Image
Photo: Eva Bartlett

Meanwhile, as Roman noted while walking, mass graves is something Ukraine has previously been accused of. He cited DPR leader Denis Pushilin as having stated that at least 300 such sites have been discovered since 2014.

He also spoke of what he witnessed. “In 2014 or 2015, mass graves were discovered as Azov or Aidar fighters retreated from the Donetsk region. I even saw a woman, she was dug up, she had her arms tied behind her back, she was in the late stages of pregnancy and she had a hole in her head, so that means she was executed.”

American journalist George Eliason, who has lived in Lugansk for many years, has written about these alleged atrocities. In a documentary on the issue, he said: “I’m here for five minutes and then I’m told the first five people they found, it was five decapitated heads. They were all civilians. Who does this to people?”

This story of a mass grave in Mangush is another fake from the Western corporate media, which previously pushed incubator babies being thrown on the floor by Iraqi soldiers, pushed lies about WMDs in Iraq, and carried reports of a chemical attack in Douma that never happened, to name but a few of their litany of hoaxes.


Meanwhile, when I was in Mariupol on April 21 and 22, yes there was destruction – thanks to those Neo-Nazi & regular Ukrainian forces occupying upper floors of residential buildings and using them as military positions, thus drawing return fire on the buildings – but I also saw people in the streets, and the beginning of the cleaning up process before rebuilding can occur.


I’ll repeat what I’ve said on Western media reporting on Syria (which in my experience, from on the ground in that country, is largely dishonest): those who promote these hoaxes and war propaganda have blood on their hands.

After the countless lies emanating from Western corporate media, I would hope people would exercise critical thinking whenever a new claim is pushed, particularly when it is repeated in chorus by the usual suspects.

https://www.struggle-la-lucha.org/2022/ ... -mariupol/

********************************************************

The Guardian inadvertently shakes up Bucha narrative
Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst

When the events in Bucha were first reported, Ukrainian and Western mainstream media were unanimous - Russian Armed Forces were the alleged "perpetrators of the Bucha massacre", while some even called it a "genocide". The Ukrainian side claims Russian troops killed at least 412 people, while so-called "independent" sources state there were 50 victims. The peculiar claims were completely unsupported by any actual official investigation by any neutral side. The Kiev regime and their Western sponsors flatly refused to allow an international investigation, while any claims contrary to the official narrative were immediately suppressed. If anyone dared to question the narrative, they would be labeled "conspiracy theorists", "genocide deniers" and "Putin's propagandists".

It is more than clear that such a blunt approach to the events in Bucha is designed to silence not just those opposing the official narrative, but even those who are not invested with either side and simply want answers to legitimate questions regarding the veracity of mainstream media reports. This completely removes any sort of public debate, limiting it to one-sided talkshows where so-called "pundits" are called to brainwash the public into thinking that the Russian military is entirely composed of alleged rapists, murderers, alcoholics, drug addicts, etc. By pushing this narrative, the mainstream media are "normalizing" Russophobia and anyone trying to denounce it is promptly silenced.

However, lies are still lies. And they are significantly harder to sustain than the truth. The truth is just truth, it stands by itself. Lies require the liar to circumvent and twist facts. In other words, more lies are necessary to sustain just one. It's a neverending rabbit hole which inevitably spirals out of control. And precisely this happened on 24 April, when The Guardian published an article about new findings regarding the events in Bucha. According to the UK-based daily, "independent" investigators found evidence of fléchettes used by artillery (supposedly Russian) in Bucha.

"Independent" pathologists and coroners who are carrying out postmortems on bodies found in mass graves in the region north of Kyiv, where "occupying" Russian forces have been accused of alleged atrocities, said they had found small metal darts, called fléchettes, embedded in people’s heads and chests, the report stated.

“We found several really thin, nail-like objects in the bodies of men and women and so did others of my colleagues in the region,” Vladyslav Pirovskyi, a Ukrainian forensic doctor, told The Guardian. “It is very hard to find those in the body, they are too thin. The majority of these bodies come from the Bucha-Irpin region.”

"Independent" weapons experts who reviewed pictures of the metal arrows found in the bodies, seen by The Guardian, confirmed that they were fléchettes, an anti-personnel weapon widely used during the First World War.

These small metal darts are contained in tank or field gun shells. Each shell can contain up to 8,000 fléchettes. Once fired, shells burst when a timed fuse detonates and explodes above the ground. Fléchettes, typically between 3cm and 4cm in length, release from the shell and disperse in a conical arch about 300m wide and 100m long. On impact with a victim’s body, the dart can lose rigidity, bending into a hook, while the arrow’s rear, made of four fins, often breaks away causing a second wound.

"According to a number of witnesses in Bucha, fléchette rounds were fired by Russian artillery a few days before forces withdrew from the area at the end of March," the report added.

As with all cases of Western-reported alleged crimes, there are always numerous witnesses, independent international experts, anonymous whistleblowers, etc. We just never get to see them. Which means we should simply take the claims of these people, whose very existence we cannot verify, at face value. And any sort of view opposing this narrative is immediately shut down.

According to Neil Gibson, another "Independent" weapons expert at the UK-based Fenix Insight group, who has reviewed the photos of the projectiles seen, they include the 122mm 3Sh1 artillery round, in use by Russian artillery and which are filled with fléchettes. What Mr. Gibson conveniently "forgot" to mention is that these same shells are used in all post-Soviet countries, including Ukraine. More specifically, the shells fit the D-30 howitzers, which are in service with both Russia and Ukraine, as well as dozens of other countries.

A spokesperson for the Ukrainian Ground Forces was quick to state that Ukraine's military "does not use shells with fléchettes". However, facts beg to differ, as surgeons in eastern Ukraine have reported the use of fléchettes by Ukrainian artillery in Donbass warzone since at least 2014. It's obvious the Ukrainian and Western media find it convenient to use Soviet-era weapons as "proof" of alleged Russian war crimes, while ignoring the fact that these same weapons are used by Ukraine. What's more, Ukraine is more likely to use them, since they have produced little to no new weapons and munitions since the collapse of the USSR.

Russian forces left Bucha on March 30. It took only a few days for the "independent" pathologists and coroners to file the reports from Bucha. At first, the reports claimed Russian forces allegedly shot civilians at point-blank range. Satellite image company Maxar Technologies claimed its photos provided "critical evidence that mass killings of civilians in the Ukrainian city of Bucha must have occurred when Russian forces were occupying the territory in mid to late March". Combined with the report about fléchettes, this would mean the Russian artillery fired at the city while Russian troops were there, which defies any military logic.

If the reports about the usage of fléchettes are true, the only logical conclusion is that the Ukrainian military shelled Russian positions after the decision to withdraw from the Kiev and Chernigov regions. Russian forces deployed in Bucha certainly didn't shell their own positions. Since we now know that the Ukrainian forces have and use fléchettes in their artillery shells, what conclusion can we draw except that the civilians were killed by the side which shelled the city while Russian troops were there?

Source: InfoBrics

http://infobrics.org/post/35646/

**********************************

NATO’s Fascist History
Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on APRIL 28, 2022
Tim Anderson

Image
NATO’s Nazi paramilitaries in Ukraine

In recent years NATO – essentially the USA and Western Europe – has bared its fascist roots through multiple interventions across four continents. The NATO states backed fascist coups in Venezuela, Honduras and Bolivia, imposed blockades on dozens of nations, fomented Al-Qaeda/ISIS/Boko Haram sectarian terrorism to destabilize Libya, Iraq, Syria, and Nigeria, and are now arming open Neo-Nazis in Ukraine.

All this seems at odds with the NATO states’ heavily promoted self-image: as models of liberalism and democratic values, even lecturing other countries on that theme. They claim to have fought both fascism and communism. Yet, it was European and North American imperialism and colonialism that laid the foundation for 20th-century fascism.

Since the Second World War – a massive conflict that took more than 70 million lives – both Washington and the western Europeans made great efforts to hide the contributions and sacrifices of both the Soviet Union (principally Russia) and China, nations that lost more lives in WW2 than any other.

Indeed, in 2019 the European Parliament went so far as to blame both the USSR under Joseph Stalin, alongside Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitler, as being jointly responsible for WW2. That resolution claimed that “the Second World War … was started as an immediate result of the notorious Nazi-Soviet Treaty on Non-Aggression of 23 August 1939.”

If not entirely cynical, this was an extraordinary self-deception, and the culmination of a long campaign where socialist leaders Stalin and Mao Zedong were presented, over decades, as moral equivalents of the western European fascist Adolf Hitler.

That deceit made use of false claims that Stalin and Mao had instigated famines that killed many millions. In fact, the famines in both Ukraine and China were the last in a long cycle of famines of the pre-socialist era. US historian Grover Furr has debunked the myth that the Ukrainian ‘Holodomor’ famine was a deliberate act by Stalin.

Similarly, the claim that WW2 was the “immediate result” of the Soviet-German “non-aggression pact” is an utter falsehood. There were a number of similar European agreements with Nazi Germany before this, and several were more substantial.

The Anglo-German Naval Agreement of 1935, for example, helped Germany rebuild its fleet, while Britain, France, and Italy conceded Berlin’s claim to part of Czechoslovakia, in the 1938 Munich Pact. Then, there were the active fascist collaborations between Germany, Spain, and Italy, including the Italian-German Pact of Steel.

Much of Europe’s fascist collaboration coalesced under an Anti-Comintern Pact created by Nazi Germany and Japan in 1936 to oppose communist states. This pact later drew in support from Italy, Hungary, Spain, and – during the war – from Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, Romania, and Slovakia. Fascism was aflame across Europe in the 1930s and 1940s. Key European agreements with Nazi Germany are set out below, in Table 1.

Table 1: Key European agreements with Nazi Germany

1933, 20 July
Concordat with the Vatican
Mutual recognition and non-interference
https://www.concordatwatch.eu/reichskon ... text–k1211

1933, 25 August
Haavara agreement with German Jewish Zionists
Agreement to transfer capital and people to Palestine
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/haavara

1934, 26 January
German-Polish Non-Aggression Pact
To ensure that Poland did not sign a military alliance with France. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/blbk01.asp

1935, 18 June
Anglo-German Naval Agreement
Britain agreed to Germany expanding its navy to 35% the size of the British. https://carolynyeager.net/anglo-german- ... ne-18-1935

1936, July
Nazi Germany aids fascists in Spain
Hitler sent air and armored units to assist General Franco. https://spartacuseducational.com/SPgermany.htm

1936
Rome-Berlin Axis agreement
Italian – German fascist and anti-communist alliance. https://www.globalsecurity.org/military ... t/axis.htm

1936, Oct-Nov
Anti-Comintern Pact
Anti-communist treaty, initiated by Nazi Germany and Japan in 1936 and which later drew in 9 European states: Italy, Hungary, Spain, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, Romania and Slovakia

1938, 30 September
Munich Pact
Britain, France, and Italy concede Germany’s Sudetenland (Czech) claims. https://www.britannica.com/event/Munich-Agreement

1939, 22 May
Pact of Steel
Consolidates the 1936 Italian German agreement.
https://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=228

1939, 7 June
German–Latvian Non-Aggression Pact
Sought peace with Nazi Germany.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/43211534

1939, 24 July
German–Estonian Non-Aggression Pact
Sought peace with Nazi Germany.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/43211534

1939, 23 August
USSR (Molotov-Ribbentrop) Non-Aggression Pact
Sought peace with Nazi Germany, protocol defined spheres of influence.
https://universalium.en-academic.com/23 ... ssion_Pact

What is fascism?

The term is used far too frequently, but it has real meaning. We cannot be trapped by particular 20th-century histories of fascism – conceptual elements must be identified.

Fascism is a heavily militarized, anti-democratic, and racist-colonial regime that engages with a private, capitalist oligarchy. While primary fascism is an imperial project, there is also subordinate fascism in former colonies like Brazil and Chile, which integrates itself with the imperial power of the day. Fascist regimes are especially hostile to socialist and independent states and peoples. They differ from extreme right regimes only by openly crushing any semblance of social and political democracy. Imperial cultures and interventions, which always and everywhere negate the possibility of local democracy or accountability, are inherently fascist and remain at the root of contemporary fascism.

NATO’s fascism was built by the imperial and colonial history of many (but not all) of the European states, where the crushing of local communities and nations was justified by fabricated theories of race and racial superiority. The denial of this colonial-fascist history has led to suggestions that, as a Russian documentary put it, the rise of Hitler was “something atypical of European democracies; the Fuhrer’s doctrine of superior and inferior races rather appeared out of thin air in Europe due to an unlucky turn of events.”

In fact, the fascism of Nazi Germany had deep roots in European colonial history and culture. As Gerwin Strobl’s book ‘The Germanic Isle’ points out, Adolf Hitler himself was a great admirer of the “ruthlessness” of the British Empire and dreamed of such achievements. For its part, the USA built myths of ‘liberty’ while running the largest slave economy in human history. As the great Latin American resistance leader Simon Bolivar said two centuries ago, “The United States appears to be destined by Providence to plague America with misery in the name of liberty.”

Beyond the European ‘appeasement’ of Nazi Germany there was active European and North American collaboration with fascists before, during, and after WW2.

First of all the Anglo-German Naval Agreement of 1935 helped re-arm Nazi Germany, breaking with the 1919 Versailles Treaty limits on German ships and submarines but pretending to keep the German navy a fraction of the British. Then several North American companies, notably General Motors, Ford, and IBM, invested directly in the Nazi regime’s economy, infrastructure, and military. There were many influential North American and British admirers of the Nazis. On the verge of WW2, British bankers funneled third-party (Czech) gold into the Nazi-controlled banks.

Ford assisted the Nazi war machine before and into WW2 through its motor vehicle factories in Germany and occupied Vichy France. It made use of German slave labor from Nazi concentration camps, though the company later complained that it had no control over these labor regimes. While the Ford company struggled to escape these allegations, Polish officials and former inmates named Ford as “one of 500 firms which had links with [slave labor from the Nazi death camp] Auschwitz.” IBM, a ‘New Deal’ company close to the Roosevelt administration, also invested in Nazi Germany through the 1930s and into the early years of the war, helping build Nazi information systems.

The Swiss sold millions in arms to the Nazis, both before and during WW2. Despite pretensions of neutrality, between 1940 and 1944, “84 percent of Swiss munitions’ exports went to Axis countries”. Yet, according to researcher Bradford Snell, “General Motors was far more important to the Nazi war machine than Switzerland .. GM was an integral part of the German war effort”.

North American and European investment in and collaboration with the Nazis continued well into WW2. One aspect of this was a desire to participate in what was, between 1940 and 1942, “a spectacular investment boom, primarily directed towards widening the industrial base for war”. No doubt that encouraged Ford and GM to keep collaborating with Hitler.

After 1939-40, when Nazi Germany had invaded much of western Europe, Berlin counted on the support of many European fascist and collaborationist states, as well as civilian volunteers. Alongside its alliance with fascist Italy, Nazi Germany could count on the support of fascist Spain, despite General Franco’s alleged policy of neutrality.

Then there were the pro-fascist statelets set up by the Nazis, Vichy France, and the Quisling regime in Norway. The Germans created multiple SS divisions, with tens of thousands of willing pro-fascist volunteers, in the Netherlands, Croatia, and Albania. Vichy France under WWI hero Marshall Petain enacted a racist anti-Jew law (Statut des Juifs) which made Jews second-class citizens in France and so more readily subject to Nazi predations. The fascist regime of Vidkun Quisling similarly encouraged participation in local SS divisions, helped deport Jewish people, and executed Norwegian patriots.

Danish King Christian X may have been friendly with the Jewish community, but he did not stand up to the Nazis. It is often falsely claimed that King Christian “donned the Star of David in solidarity with the Danish Jews”. This is quite false. In reality, the Danish regime opposed resistance activities and shared intelligence with the Nazis. One of the factors in this collaboration was that Denmark was “technically an ally of Germany”. Under pressure, they had signed the Anti-Comintern Pact. Despite great efforts to sanitize this history, in 2005 Danish PM Rasmussen apologized on behalf of Denmark for the extradition of minorities and resistance figures to Nazi Germany, many of whom were sent to their death.

Substantial Nazi collaboration took place in all the Baltic states: Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia all had Waffen SS divisions. They, along with ultra-nationalist Nazi collaborators in Ukraine, played a key role in local massacres of communists, Jews, and Gypsies.

Between 1941 and 1944, hundreds of thousands were slaughtered in Ukraine, many by local ultra-nationalist Nazi collaborators, like Stepan Bandera. Russian historian Lev Simkin says, “In practice, the Holocaust of the Jews began in Ukraine,” with the June 1941 invasion of the Soviet Union. The mass killings were linked to Hitler’s paranoid view of dangerous Bolshevik Jews. Mass killings of Jews in Kiev, Lvov, Kherson, and other parts of Ukraine have been well mapped out. These are some of the sites of current Russian fighting with Ukraine’s Neo-Nazis. During WW2, most of Ukraine’s pre-war Jewish population of about 1.5 million “was wiped out”.

Academic studies have shown a “massive participation of Baltic nationals in the murder of Jews in the Holocaust.” Many tens of thousands of Jews were killed in Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, much of this by local hands. There has been a strong reaction to exposure of this ugly history of fascist collaboration. Lithuania, for example, is said to want to hide its “ugly history of Nazi collaboration” by accusing Jewish partisans of war crimes.

Across Europe, there was large-scale participation in the fascist slaughter. In Hungary, Nazi leader Adolf Eichmann was said to be “reliant on the collaboration of the Hungarian authorities” to deport more than 400,000 Hungarian Jews to the death camps.

All this underlines the fact that WW2, from the European and North American sides, was not fundamentally a fight against fascism, even though those states fought a fascist ‘Axis’. The war was more of a competition between imperial blocks, with the Hitler-led coalition determined to colonize ‘living space’ (lebensraum) in the east. The struggle of patriots in eastern Europe and Russia, as well as much of the western resistance, was certainly anti-fascist. Those leading the western states, however, were not idealists.

After WW2 the USA immediately sought to take advantage of Nazi science and technology in their subsequent ‘cold war’ against the emerging socialist bloc. The allied powers smashed anti-fascist forces in Greece and militarily occupied western Germany. The Soviet Union, for its part, ensured that it dominated those close neighbors, which had been most deeply embedded with its fascist enemies: in particular the Baltic states, Ukraine, and eastern Germany.

The US began a project of secretly recruiting Nazi scientists to its war machine. North American use of German rocket specialist Werner Von Braun is often cited with reference to the peaceful Apollo space project. However, Von Braun was an SS officer who had hand-picked slave labor from concentration camps. The US military wanted him for his rocket and missile expertise. In the secret but now notorious ‘Operation Paperclip’ thousands of Nazi scientists were recruited and given safe haven in the USA, for their value in building up the US military. The Pentagon was particularly interested in the Nazi development of a “whole arsenal of nerve agents” and in Hitler’s work towards “a bubonic plague weapon”.

For all their later complaints about other states possessing weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), the US military wanted every type of WMD at its disposal. And they were prepared to use them on civilian populations, as their biological and chemical attacks in Korea and in Vietnam showed, and as the gratuitous and horrific nuclear ‘demonstration’ attacks on the civilian Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki demonstrated. Masters of doublespeak, and with a doctrine of ‘plausible deniability’, US officials hide their own atrocities as much as possible.

Emerging as the dominant power after WW2 Washington, which had used fascist tactics – invasions, coups, dirty wars – to intervene in most other countries of the Americas, began to employ these same methods on other continents. So the terrible war in Korea led to a permanent US military occupation in the south of the peninsula, the democratic government of Iran was overthrown and replaced by a dictatorship in 1953 and the next terrible US ‘anti-communist’ war against the people of Vietnam failed, only after millions had been slaughtered.

In the 21st century, Washington backed multiple coup attempts against Venezuela, the biggest oil producer in the Americas and historically important for fuelling the US war machine. In 2002 the USA and Spain-backed coup plotters who kidnapped elected President Hugo Chavez, falsely claimed that he had resigned, tore up the constitution, dismissed the elected National Assembly, and announced the head of the Chamber of Commerce Pedro Carmona, as President. Carmona only lasted two days, but multiple coup attempts followed. This was pure fascism. Venezuela decided that a strong state, with a large civilian militia, was necessary to defend itself from relentless US-backed fascism.

At the same time, fearing the loss of its dominant role in the world, Washington launched multiple wars in the Middle East, in futile attempts to contain the growing influence of Iran, post-Soviet Russia, and China. The wars against Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Syria, and Yemen are not the subject of this article. However we should observe the US-NATO use of massive proxy armies, al Qaeda and ISIS styled, infused with sectarian Saudi ideology, across the West Asian region and into Africa, in the shape of ‘Boko Haram’.

In Russia’s 2022 retaliatory war on Ukraine – provoked by a post-2014 war on the Russian-speaking population of eastern Ukraine and by a NATO military build-up, intended to destabilize and weaken Russia – we see a combination of the US fascist method and the older European colonial mentality. The US maintains its double-speak over ‘liberty’, while the Europeans speak of lesser human classes. In Ukraine, ultra-nationalists such as Azov and Right Sektor describe themselves as Nazis who want to kill Russians, Jews, and Poles. NATO and its embedded media try to hide this ugly reality.

German and European Union official Florence Gaub, for example, uses racist rhetoric to dehumanize Russian people, “Even if Russians look European, they are not European, in a cultural sense. They think differently about violence or death. They have no concept of a liberal, post-modern life, a concept of life that each individual can choose. Instead, life simply can end early with death.” Critics called this a very German reversion to the Nazi concept of ‘Untermenschen’ or inferior races.

21st-century fascism has arisen in new circumstances but carries the key elements of the 20th-century project: an imperial, heavily militarized, deeply anti-democratic, and racist-colonial regime embedded in a private, capitalist oligarchy. It spawns subordinate fascism, every bit as venomous as its parent: a global imperial project which remains the key enemy of all democratic peoples.

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2022/04/ ... t-history/

Peace Movement Needs to Demand Dismantling of NATO
Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on APRIL 28, 2022
Harry Targ

Image
[Source: greatgameindia.com]

NATO went from fighting socialism to enforcing global empire

It looks a lot like a return to the past. Founded in 1949 to defend against the “Soviet threat,” the NATO alliance is facing a return to mechanized warfare, a huge increase in defense spending, and potentially a new Iron Curtain falling across Europe. After struggling to find a new post-Cold War role, countering terrorism following the September 11 attacks on the United States in 2001 and a humiliating withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, NATO is back encroaching on its original nemesis.[1]

U.S. Plans for the Establishment of Global Hegemony: 1945-47

During World War II an “unnatural alliance” was created between the United States, Great Britain, and the former Soviet Union. What brought the three countries together—the emerging imperial giant (the United States), the declining capitalist power (Great Britain), and the first socialist state (the Soviet Union)—was the shared need to defeat fascism in Europe. Rhetorically, the high point of collaboration was reflected in the agreements made at the Yalta Conference, in February 1945, three months before the German armies were defeated.

At Yalta, the great powers made decisions to facilitate democratization of former Nazi regimes in Eastern Europe, a “temporary” division of Germany for occupation purposes, and a schedule of future Soviet participation in the ongoing war against Japan. Leaders of the three states returned to their respective countries celebrating the “spirit of Yalta,” what would be a post-war world order in which they would work through the new United Nations system to modulate conflict in the world.

Within two years, after conflicts over Iran with the Soviet Union, the Greek Civil War, the replacement of wartime President Franklin Roosevelt with Harry Truman, and growing challenges to corporate rule in the United States by militant labor, Truman declared in March 1947 that the United States and its allies were going to be engaged in a long-term struggle against the forces of “International Communism.” The post-war vision of cooperation was reframed as a struggle of the “free world” against “tyranny.” It was really a struggle between two kinds of political/economic orders: one socialist, another capitalist.

The Economic Foundations of a New World Order

In addition to Truman’s ideological crusade, his administration launched an economic program to rebuild parts of Europe, particularly what would become West Germany, as capitalist bastions against the ongoing popularity of Communist parties throughout the region. Along with the significant program of reconstructing capitalism in Europe and linking it by trade, investment, finance and debt to the United States, the U.S. with its new allies constructed a military alliance that would be ready to fight the Cold War against International Communism.

For Joyce and Gabriel Kolko (The Limits of Power, 1972) and other revisionists, the expansion of socialism constituted a global threat to capital accumulation. With the end of the Second World War, there were widespread fears that the decline in wartime demand for U.S. products would bring economic stagnation and a return to the depression of the 1930s.

The Marshall Plan, lauded as a humanitarian program for the rebuilding of war-torn Europe, was at its base a program to increase demand and secure markets for U.S. products. With the specter of an international communist threat, military spending, another source of demand, would likewise help retain customers, including the U.S. government itself. The idea of empire, which William Appleman Williams so stressed (The Tragedy of American Diplomacy, 1959), was underscored by the materiality of capitalist dynamics.

The Marshall Plan inspired European integration of states that were major recipients of Marshall Plan funds. The first significant economic organization, The European Coal and Steel Community, became operational in 1952. Its membership included France, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg. It encouraged the production and trade of core resources such as coal, steel and iron. In 1957, the purview of the ECSC was expanded with the creation of the European Economic Community (EEC) and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom).

Other, overlapping European institutions were created during the 1950s and beyond involving the original six and additional countries. In May 1960 seven European nations, not in the EEC, formed the European Free Trade Association to foster trade and economic integration. (In 1973, three countries including Great Britain joined the EEC).

Finally in 1992, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Maastricht Treaty established the European Union (EU) which, by 2019, had 27 member countries (nine from the former Soviet bloc) with a GDP of 16.4 trillion euros (the EU currency), constituting 15% of world trade. In addition, European nations are embedded in a network of regional and international organizations that deal with trade, finance, indebtedness, security and human rights. (See the diagram below.)

Image

Description automatically generatedThe reigning scholarly study of these efforts in the 1960s and beyond, integration theory, postulated that the greater the cross-national interactions of European countries the lesser the likelihood of war among them. Studies were carried out designed to discover how and why integration seemed to be working in Europe but less so in troubled locations, such as on the African continent.

But from another vantage point “regional integration” inspired by and connected to the United States political economy can be seen as a near complete fruition of the vision of U.S. and capitalist hegemony initiated in those crucial early years after World War ll. The 21st century policy program of the United States and most of Europe has been to establish on a global basis a capitalist economic model.

Ideologically, the presupposition is that this model is historically exceptional and therefore must resist threats to its survival and growth. The so-called communist threat of the 1940s is the “authoritarian” threat of the current century. And to the extent that capitalist hegemony is not achievable by consent, it might need to be instituted by force.

While world history is more complicated than this narrative suggests, there is enough plausibility to it to justify fears, particularly when the military instrument—NATO—expanded eastward. From this point of view, NATO itself may not be the only threat to countries in Europe and Asia. But the use of it as a part of global expansion of economic and political institutions, coupled with the ideological expression of American exceptionalism, could create fear and aggression.

NATO As the Military Arm of a Drive for a Hegemonic Global Political Economy

Representatives of Western European countries met in Brussels in 1948 to establish a program of common defense and one year later with the addition of the United States and Canada, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was formed. The new NATO charter, inspired largely by a prior Western Hemisphere alliance, the Rio Pact (1947), proclaimed that “an armed attack against one or more of them…shall be considered an attack against them all” which would lead to an appropriate response.

The Charter called for cooperation and military preparedness among the 12 signatories. After the Soviet Union detonated its first atomic bomb and the Korean War started, NATO pushed ahead with the development of a common military command structure with General Eisenhower as the first “Supreme Allied Commander.”

After the founding of NATO and its establishment as a military arm of the West, the Truman administration adopted the policy recommendations in National Security Council Document 68 (NSC 68) in 1950 which declared that military spending for the indefinite future would be the number one priority of every presidential administration.

As Western European economies reconstructed, Marshall Plan aid programs were shut down and military assistance to Europe was launched. Greece and Turkey joined NATO in 1952 and, fueling the flames of the Cold War, West Germany was admitted to NATO in 1955. (This stimulated the Soviet Union to construct its own alliance system, the Warsaw Pact, with countries from Eastern Europe.)

During the Cold War, NATO continued as the only unified Western military command structure against the “Soviet threat.” While forces and funds only represented a portion of the U.S. global military presence, the alliance constituted a “trip wire” signifying to the Soviets that any attack on targets in Western Europe would set off World War III. Thus, NATO provided the deterrent threat of “massive retaliation” in the face of a first-strike attack.

With the collapse of the former Warsaw Pact regimes between 1989 and 1991, the tearing down of the symbolic Berlin Wall in 1989 and, finally, the collapse of the Soviet Union itself in 1991, the outspoken purpose for maintaining a NATO alliance presumably had passed. However, this was not to be.

In the next 20 years after the Soviet collapse, membership in the alliance doubled. New members included most of the former Warsaw Pact countries. The functions and activities of NATO were redefined. NATO programs included air surveillance during the crises accompanying the Gulf War and the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia.

In 1995, NATO sent 60,000 troops to Bosnia and in 1999 it carried out brutal bombing campaigns in Serbia with 38,000 sorties. NATO forces became part of the U.S.-led military coalition that launched the war on Afghanistan in 2001. In 2011 a massive NATO air war on Libya played a critical role in the overthrow of the Gaddafi government.

An official history of NATO described the changes in its mission: “In 1991 as in 1949, NATO was to be the foundation stone for a larger, pan-European security architecture.” The post-Cold War mission of NATO combines “military might, diplomacy, and post-conflict stabilization.”

The NATO history boldly concludes that the alliance was founded on defense in the 1950s and détente with the Soviet Union in the 1960s. With the collapse of Communism in the 1990s, it became a “tool for the stabilization of Eastern Europe and Central Asia through incorporation of new Partners and Allies.” The 21st century vision of NATO has expanded further: “extending peace through the strategic projection of security.” This new mission, the history said, was forced upon NATO because of the failure of nation-states and extremism.

NATO and Ukraine Today

Reviewing this brief history of NATO, observers can reasonably draw different conclusions about NATO’s role in the world than from those who celebrate its world role. First, NATO’s mission to defend Europe from aggression against “International Communism” was completed with the “fall of Communism.” Second, the alliance was regional, that is pertaining to Europe and North America, and now it is global. Third, NATO was about security and defense. Now it is about global transformation.

Fourth, with the U.S. as NATO’s biggest supporter in terms of troops, supplies and budget (22-25%), NATO is an instrument of United States foreign policy. Fifth, as a creation of Europe and North America, it has become an enforcer of the interests of member countries against, what Vijay Prashad calls, the “darker nations” of Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Sixth, NATO has become the 21st century military instrumentality of global imperialism. And, finally, there is growing evidence that larger and larger portions of the world’s people have begun to stand up against NATO.

In the context of this complex history, Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, following eight years of war in Eastern Ukraine. After four weeks thousands of Ukrainians have been killed and more than four million have fled their cities and towns. The President of Ukraine, spokespersons from some NATO countries, and some U.S. politicians have called for a “no-fly zone” over Ukraine which would escalate the war to a near-nuclear war situation. In addition, NATO countries, and particularly the United States, have dramatically increased military expenditures. Impactful economic sanctions have been leveled against Russia, and economic instabilities are beginning to affect Europe and the United States. In addition, vital work around combating climate change has been stalled and important pieces of legislation to fulfil social needs have been eliminated from legislative consideration.

What Needs to Be Done?

To quote a tired but true slogan, “war is not the answer.” The Russian invasion of Ukraine threatens the lives and property of Ukrainians, the lives of Russian soldiers and protesters, raises fears of an escalation of war throughout Europe, and raises the danger of nuclear war.

“We” need to support “back-channel negotiations” in process as occurred during the Cuban missile crisis, demands that Russia stop the violence and withdraw its military forces from Ukraine, diplomacy at the United Nations, and summit meetings of diplomats from Russia, Ukraine and Europe. And conversations on the agenda should include forbidding Ukraine from joining NATO, establishing regional autonomy for Ukraine citizens who want it, pulling back NATO bases from Eastern European states, and/or abolishing NATO itself because the reason for its creation in the first place, defending against the Soviet Union, no longer exists.

The “we” at this moment could be a resurgent international peace movement, taking inspiration from peace activists in Russia and around the world. As horrible as this moment is, it is potentially a “teachable moment,” a moment when peace becomes part of the global progressive agenda again and people all around the world can begin to examine existing international institutions such as NATO.

And while we react with shock and condemnation of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, whatever the complicated and understandable motivations, we need to be familiar with the historic context of the very dangerous warfare that we are living through now.

As James Goldgeier wrote more than 20 years ago on a Brookings Institution web page: “The dean of America’s Russia experts, George F. Kennan, had called the expansion of NATO into Central Europe ‘the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era.’ Kennan, the architect of America’s post-World War II strategy of containment of the Soviet Union, believed, as did most other Russia experts in the United States, that expanding NATO would damage beyond repair U.S. efforts to transform Russia from enemy to partner.”[2]

Notes:

1.Sabine Siebold and Robin Emmott, “Russia may not stop with Ukraine—NATO looks to its weakest link,” Reuters, March 21, 2022. ↑
2.James Goldgeier, Brookings Institution, “The U.S. Decision to Enlarge NATO: How, When, Why, and What Next?“ June 1, 1999. ↑

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2022/04/ ... g-of-nato/

Seems like fighting socialism and enforcing global empire are the same thing. They didn't really miss a beat.

************************************************

From Cassad's Telegram account:

***

forwarded from
Poddubny |Z|О|V| edition
❗️Under Izyum, the formations of the Kyiv regime have yet another zrada. The militants of the VFU (combined BTGr of the 1st brigade of the National Guard and units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine) were surrounded, pressed against the Oskol reservoir, which is located east of Izyum.

On April 20, the General Staff assigned the command of the 1st brigade the task of launching offensive operations. The BTG was supposed to advance on Izyum. Any competent officer understands that the idea is suicidal. But for the sake of PR in Kyiv, they are ready for any sacrifice. The boys went on the attack, but quickly got hit in the face and were blocked on three sides by Russian troops, and on one side by water. There are now 1000 people in the circle. Naturally, the boys asked for help. In a secret telegram that came from the command, it was written: "NikolayIrina KharitonUlyanaYana." The General Staff refused to organize a breakthrough and deblockade. Now the Russian artillery is methodically grinding the BTGr.

That's the way it is, lads.

And you want to fight for these?

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Fri Apr 29, 2022 2:51 pm

SVO in Ukraine. Broken myths.
April 29, 16:59

Image

SVO in Ukraine. Broken myths.

1. The tank on the battlefield is outdated.
2. Tanks cannot be effectively used in urban areas.
3. Bayraktar is an invincible weapon.
4. The future belongs to compact professional armies.
5. Tactical drones are not needed.
6. Divisions / corps / armies are not needed, enough brigades.
7. Mobilization economy is not needed.
8. PMCs are not needed. And in general, PMCs do not exist in Russia.
9. The concept of massive artillery suppression is a thing of the past.
10. In Russia, they forgot how to make rockets.
11. A strong fleet is not needed on the Black Sea.
12. "Shell" is good for nothing.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/7585657.html

Security experience
April 29, 14:36

Image

Security experience

Communicated with a participant in our military operation. A person with serious combat experience. Now a volunteer. In his former life he wore epaulettes.
Here is his opinion on some aspects of what is happening.

“I would like the top, where decisions are made, to finally think about the urgent.
Namely, about those measures that are necessary just like the prudent and measured grinding of the Armed Forces of Ukraine on the main fronts: about the front in the already “deep rear” Here ,

on the territory of the Zaporozhye region, a bridge was torn down, in Kherson, suddenly “for unknown reasons”, reed thickets caught fire, the fire spread to the private sector, periodically something similar happens on the border of the Belgorod, Kursk, Bryansk regions (or even on their territory) .. what does it say?

That it is time to begin to understand that we live in a country at war, that it is time to untie the hands of the special forces of the VNG to conduct reconnaissance and search activities and use them to the fullest (and not just to protect columns and objects).

It is time to intensively and on a large scale, and not to carry out special operational-search activities by the FSB, it is time to guard bridges and important objects (it is not necessary to equip VOPs next to them, there are also less expensive, but very effective methods).

It’s time to recall the experience of creating security lanes at the border (5 kilometers) and moto-maneuverable groups of border guards and behind the tape, it’s time to strengthen the security of military camps, houses of officers and military units, and not start patrols-troikas “for show” .

In general, it’s time to wake up for commanders and chiefs of various ranks that have not yet reached. "

I’ll add on my own about moto-maneuverable groups. During the war in Afghanistan in 79-89, the Soviet border guards acted just like that. Detachments of the Border Troops of the KGB of the USSR went to the adjacent territory to a depth of 30 kilometers in order to eliminate potential threats.In general, few people know that the last Soviet soldiers who left Afghanistan were special forces, who ensured the exit of the columns, and it was precisely the border guards who controlled the area along the Pyanj

. now the situation is not much different.The threats are there.Ukraine is gradually turning into Afghanistan.Therefore, it's time to start cleaning up the border area.

Not to mention the cleansing of the bandit underground in the Kherson region. Since they have come, since the flag has been raised, it is necessary to build a safe life.


https://t.me/boris_rozhin/45863 - zinc

Fully agree.
Attempts by NATO and Ukraine to intensify sabotage and terrorist activities on the territory of the Russian Federation and the liberated territories of Ukraine will require further intensification of measures aimed at defeating the enemy’s intelligence network and underground gangs.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/7585421.html

*****************************

HOW EASY IS IT TO AVOID A THIRD WORLD WAR?
matthew ehret

28 Apr 2022 , 8:36 pm .

Image
Soviet and American soldiers gather on the banks of the Elbe River, Germany, on April 24, 1945 (Photo: Ria Novosti)

Every day, European and American audiences are being subjected to a barrage of information telling them what to think about developments in Ukraine as the conflict reaches its third month since Putin launched his military intervention on February 24.

From CNN, BBC, Fox News to everyone else, a wave of commentators promotes opinion patterns, while images of terrible horror flash before our eyes. The narrative framing ensures that mainstream media viewers are subjected to a constant state of fear, hysteria, and revulsion over Russia's alleged crimes against humanity. Where evidence was once a prerequisite for judgment, under the cautious control of the "perception managers" of the Five Eyes alliancemere accusations and repetitions are enough. The audience that previously doubted the reliability of those same media that lied about weapons of mass destruction, President Assad's chemical weapons or the Russiagate hoax , now finds itself increasingly encouraging that empire against which more than one liberal he had protested and scorned for years.

Despite the lack of credibility of the CIA-infested media, a recent April 6 publication by the Pew pollstertells us that not only “seven in ten Americans now view Russia as an enemy” but also Americans view “NATO is increasingly viewed in a favorable light.” It is unusual these days to find agreement on anything between the two political camps, but on the issue of Russia being the enemy of the United States, one exception was found with 72% of Democrats and 69% of Republicans coming to an agreement. consensus. Those numbers don't even come close to the days of America's illegal assault on Iraq or Libya, which saw nearly a million deaths and great cultures dragged back to the stone age, thanks to tax dollars. of the Americans.

And so we find ourselves speeding towards an abyss, as on April 15 members of the British special forces officially entered Kiev to train Ukrainian forces. This clearly increases the risk of military clashes with Russian forces (and thus triggering Article 5 of the collective suicide pact that is NATO).

As a "good ally of the UK", the US now feels much more pressure to follow suit.

Journalist Michael Tracey recently noted that "Chris Coons, the Democratic senator from Delaware, who fills Joe Biden's old job, and basically serves as a personal emissary for the Administration, has started making the rounds to bring up the next phase of the intervention by the United States. Again: Coons is not just a senator, he's the senator who basically operates as a direct conduit to Biden. And so Coons started going around declaring that it's about time Congress and Biden figure out when they'll be willing to send 'not only weapons, but also troops to assist in the defense of Ukraine', that is very revealing. 'Putin will only stop when we stop him,' Coons warned on television last Saturday."b]

Some argue that this is not much of a problem since the Western alliance had already been supplying lethal weapons and training Ukrainian cannon fodder for years for its inevitable war with Russia, so what difference does it make if NATO-affiliated troops join the fight now while an impending war is on the cards? Russia is, after all, the modern day Hitler and poor Zelensky is the greatest human being since Martin Luther King, so it seems we're morally obligated to do all we can, right?

Also, other nations like Finland and Sweden have made public their intentions to be absorbed into NATO, and why shouldn't they? Russia intervened militarily in Ukraine based on the danger of Kiev joining NATO, so it stands to reason that the best protection for the other countries bordering Russia is… joining NATO?

Despite the fact that ISIS-affiliated groups from Syria were sent to Ukraine to continue their jihad against Russia, and despite the fact that even mainstream news agencies have had to grudgingly admit the presence of neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine , Westerners they barely react, ignoring such repulsive facts with the phrase "there will always be some bad apples".

The sanctions continue to open new fissures in East-West relations as well as breaks in already fragile supply chains that require vast inputs of Russian oil, coal and Russian natural gas, not to mention minerals, wheat and fertilizers, to avoid collapse. Millions of Europeans and Americans are already suffering after more than two years of lockdowns with the danger of new "health crises" looming on the horizon. Job insecurity, inflation, and sky-high gas prices are what they really care about, but online polling systems, like Pew, are always ready with new statistical samples to help people recalibrate their bad thoughts according to values. “more acceptable”.

The same media advisers assure us that there was never a solution to this crisis beyond a military confrontation with the Russian villains, in an abstract battle to the death for democracy and freedom. We are constantly told that the blame for the terrible events of the last two months of the war falls squarely on Putin, who is said by scores of pundits to fervently want to overthrow the Western order, undermine democracy and restore an authoritarian neo-Soviet empire in everyone.

Those claims are, of course, lies. The fact is that Putin had done everything imaginable to prevent the military escalation now underway, beginning with his speech at the Munich Security Conference in 2008, laying out the blueprint for military containment against his nation and demanding Western respect for security concerns that exist in Russia.

From the moment Victoria Nuland installed a puppet government in 2014, the predominant ethnic Russian populations in the Dombas of eastern Ukraine watched their fellow citizens in Odessa being burned by hordes of Nazis, and rushed to vote to secede from kyiv in the form of two breakaway republics.

Putin could have quickly recognized these new aspiring states in 2014, but instead he chose to go the Minsk II path, doing his best to keep the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics as integral members of an undivided Ukraine. . For eight years we saw Russian diplomats do everything they could to keep Minsk II alive, and for eight years we saw only the abrogation of this peace process and more than 14,000 Eastern Ukrainian lives lost instead.

By December 2021, the fact of a planned military intervention in eastern Donbass and Crimea was impossible to ignore and Putin made it clear that the entire conflict could be avoided if the stipulations of the Minsk II treaty were simply followed, while binding agreements were signed. to keep Ukraine on neutral territory, outside any anti-Russian military bloc. Easy.

The benefits of such an elegant solution are infinitely more favorable than the accelerated breakdowns of supply chains, food production and electricity supply that will harm Europeans, Americans and, more importantly, Ukrainians more than it would to the Russians, who are seeking new markets in Asia, hungry for its abundant resources. The obvious avoidance of a thermonuclear war is also not a minor victory for those who decide to think with a cool head during these times of existential crisis.

However, time passes, and the doors to a bright future of cooperation are closing faster with each passing minute. Therefore, it is important to take the opportunity of the anniversary of Elbe Day (April 25) to remember and revive the spirit of the brotherhood between Russia and the United States that jointly crushed the Nazi machine during World War II, whose shared sacrifices they created the possibility of an era of cooperation and brotherhood that, even at this late stage, could be revived.

Matthew is a journalist, a Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow, and an expert on the Chinese Silk Road Initiative for Tactical Talk. He is a regular author for various political and cultural websites, including the Los Angeles Review of Books, China Channel, Strategic Culture, and Oriental Review. He is also the author of three books in the Canadian Untold Story series .

This article was originally published in English in Strategic Culture on April 27, 2022, the translation for Misión Verdad was done by Camila Calderón.

https://misionverdad.com/traducciones/q ... ra-mundial

Google Translator

**************************************

Gas Flares: Europe Has a Hissy, Flails About as Russia Imposes Gas Payment Countersanctions and Economies Already Feel Blowback Bite
Posted on April 29, 2022 by Yves Smith

On the whole, European and US leaders are continuing to make a very poor showing of the situation they instigated with Russia. The Biden Administration decided to seize $300 billion of Russian foreign exchange reserves, overconfident that they would crater the Russian economy. Ironically, however, the sanctions greatly reduced the Russian need for foreign exchange for trade, since respectable US and European companies took it upon themselves to stop or limit exports to Russia. And Russian banks don’t fund in dollars or euros (in contrast with the 1990s, when the economy was significantly dollarized). And the world still needs Russian oil, gas, metals, you name it.

So after an initial shock and awe plunge, the rouble is very close to its highs versus the dollar over the last two years…despite the dollar being at its highest level against major currencies in the last 20 years. From XE:

Image

And Russia energy revenues have been fine, thank you very much:


Russia projected a budget surplus before this crisis and its government income will be even higher due to the increase in energy revenues. Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin told the Duma in early April that all receipts would now be spent into the economy. As you can see from the embedded document below, the government is embarking on more investment, loan discount, and tax relief programs. But Russia spent decades having to be a good budget-balancing-surplus running economy because (per above) it was significantly dollarized and had to look fiscally responsible to support the value of the rouble. Russia will suffer a serious recession, not just due to adaptation to having to produce even more internally, but also due to not being willing to run deficits when it is now able to operate as a fiat currency issuer.

And even though the real economy shock has yet to fully manifest itself, the Russian top team is doing what it can to get in front of those issues, and they’ve also been warning the public that a second phase of difficulties is in the offing, which they expect to be the most acute starting soon and for the following six months.

In other words, Russia managed the initial financial shock vastly better than the US and Europe imagined was possible. That leaves the West with the big problem that Russia can and is pushing back. It is telling that only very mild Russian counter-sanctions are putting Europe on tilt.

The US and even more so Europe look to be hoist on their own sanctions petard. Yet they’ll be damned if they’ll formally walk back, even though there’s a lot of fudging going on.

To recap: Putin announced its so-called “gas for roubles” program late last month, with details to follow. The reasoning was simple: Russia had just had $300 billion of what amounted to payment on past commodities exports stolen. It was not going to have payments on its gas exports to “unfriendly” countries subject to being clawed back again. The only way to assure that was to get payments in rouble, since rouble payment and clearing is under the control of the Russian Central Bank.

As we anticipated, Russia implemented pretty much the only version that would respect Putin’s boundary conditions, which included adhering to the terms of current contracts.1 So all that really changed was that gas buyers would have to set up accounts at Gazprom Bank, which was not sanctioned.2

Russia did not make this requirement effective until the next payments were due, and the earliest were the end of April..

If you take the war out of the picture, this matter would otherwise be a pretty routine commercial dispute: “You stiffed me on some (actually really big) payments. Rather than argue about that, I’m requiring a minor change in payment arrangements to prevent that from happening.”

But the screeching from Europe was astonishing. You’d think they believed they had the right to have Russia send them gas for free.

Amusingly, EU national leaders except of Hungary said no to Russia. Italy and Germany, the two biggest importers, were particularly noisy. The European Commission supported that action by warning that the Russian mechanism would violate sanctions.

Then it appears everyone began to work out that there was no ready or even medium-term substitute for Russian gas, as we’ve discussed long form and won’t belabor now.

On top of that, bad economic news started coming in even before any Russian gas cutoff took place. Per Eurostat, “European Union annual inflation was 7.8% in March 2022, up from 6.2% in February. A year earlier, the rate was 1.7%”

Inflation in Italy hit a 26 year peak in February. Germany’s producer price index rose a stunning 30.9% year to year. Food prices were rising sharply and expected to get worse. From Food Institute:

Aldi Nord in Europe expects increases of 20 to 50 percent in its purchase prices this week, reported WDR (April 4)….

Increases were already in the double digits in February. Bread rolls and semi-hard cheese were up 7 and 4.7 percent respectively, while egg (+16.3), lettuce (+17.1), butter (+20.4), tomato (+27) and cucumber (+30.3) saw more substantial increases, according to the Federal Statistics Office of Germany.


And heating price increases are expected to be grim. Recall that Germany has a high rate of residential rentals due to strong tenant rights. From a Der Spiegel interview with CEO Rolf Buch, head of Volnovia, the largest residential landlord in Germany:

Spiegel: What price increase should gas consumers expect?

Buch: It’s hard to predict. One thing is certain: we all need to address this issue now. Those who don’t increase their utility bills will face high surcharges next year. For some, this can be up to two months’ rent.


A week ago, the European Commission reversed itself. But Poland, Bulgaria, and Finland are still saying no. So Russia is halting shipments to them, which has led to screeches of “blackmail” and promises of yet more sanctions. Russia is also not allowing syphoning off of transiting gas, which it tolerated when Ukraine did it. From CNBC on Wednesday:

Early Wednesday morning, Gazprom released a statement saying it had halted supplies to Poland and Bulgaria — both heavy consumers of Russian gas — due to payments not being made in the Russian currency. It said supplies would resume once these payments were made.

In the statement, Gazprom warned both countries against any “unauthorized withdrawal” of gas supplies flowing through their territories.

“Bulgaria and Poland are transit states. In case of unauthorized withdrawal of Russian gas from transit volumes to third countries, supplies for transit will be reduced by this volume.”

But the real fun comes with Russia refusing to sell gas to the Gazprom subsidiary in Germany that Germany expropriated. That operation wasn’t just an office with a bunch of employees. It had valuable hard assets like storage opeartions. So this sure looks like Russia wants compensation before it turns the spigot back on. From Business Insider:

Russia’s Gazprombank turned down a ruble payment from a trading firm Germany had seized from Moscow, sources told Bloomberg.

The payment for some April and May gas deliveries to Germany and Austria was rejected even though the trading firm — Gazprom Marketing & Trading (GM&T) — offered to pay in rubles, as Russian President Vladimir Putin has demanded.

GM&T previously was controlled by the German subsidiary of Russian state-run Gazprom, but Germany took over the unit in April. Now, the rejected ruble payment suggests Moscow looks to shut out a German-controlled GM&T.

Back to the national hold-outs. Only 6% of Finland’s energy comes from gas, so even though 65% of that is from Russia, Finland has said in early April it expected to be able to replace that by fall. But Poland is in a pickle. 18% of its total energy is gas and half is from Russia, plus 30% is oil, of which 2/3 is Russia-supplied. Poland at least has enough gas reserves to carry it through the winter.

Bulgaria imports 73% of its gas from Russia, which is 10% to 15% of its total energy use but has much lower reserves than Poland.

In other words, on paper the refusniks are better able to weather a loss of supply than the really big dependents like Germany and Italy. But according to Alexander Mercouris (and I have not been able to verify independently), the Polish plan to fill the gap amounts mainly to getting gas from other EU buyers. Ahem, this is gas musical chairs, with the loss of Polish and Bulgarian buys amounting to chairs being removed. Even if Poland can procure some from its neighbors, it’s going to have significant Russian content and come at a higher price than a direct buy. Stubborness is costly.

(more...)

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2022/04 ... -bite.html

******************************************

While fueling Ukraine proxy war, NATO and EU are militarizing the Balkans

The proxy war in Ukraine threatens to drag the Balkans into a larger regional conflict, as the US, EU, and NATO militarize Bosnia and increase pressure on Serbia, and Ukrainian drones crash in Croatia.

ByJake KallioPublished2 days ago

Image

While much of the world’s attention is focused on the war in Ukraine, the NATO-affiliated European Union Force (EUFOR) mission deployed combat troops to Bosnia, to the city of Banja Luka, on April 20.

These soldiers were sent to the Balkans ostensibly to monitor a peaceful protest organised by a Bosnian Serb veterans’ organisation, which was supported by the Bosnian Serb ruling party and its president Milorad Dodik.

The increasing visibility of EUFOR and NATO troops in Bosnia is exacerbating already high tensions in the former Yugoslav countries, following the dramatic escalation of violence in Ukraine this year.

The EUFOR intervention in Banja Luka followed similar “pre-cautionary” demonstrations of force in Bosnia over the last several months, including flyovers by French fighter jets and exercises in which EUFOR troops marched down commercial streets in central Sarajevo and drove around civilian areas in armored vehicles.



The protests in Banja Luka result from conflicting interpretations of jurisdiction under the Dayton Agreement, the deal that ended Bosnia’s four-year civil war in 1995.

The Dayton Accords established a tenuous political system for Bosnia and Herzegovina which saw power divided between two “entities” along the armistice line: the Croat and Muslim “Federation” and Serb “Republic”.

While Dayton formally incorporates Russia and other non-NATO countries into its oversight body, the agreement is in practice administered by NATO governments and by Austria, which together appoint a “High Representative” who has sweeping powers to overrule democratic decisions of the respective entity governments.

While nominally neutral, Austria plays a key role in implementing NATO policy in Bosnia, and its status within the former Yugoslav republics as a historic colonial power and major foreign investor undermine its claims to objectivity.

Dayton also laid the framework for what in effect became a permanent military occupation of Bosnia, first directly under NATO, and later under a joint EU-NATO operation known as the European Union Force Bosnia and Herzegovina, or EUFOR.

Image
The symbol of EUFOR

While the ostensible purpose of EUFOR is to prevent the re-emergence of armed conflict between Muslims and Serbs, its contribution to regional and inter-community security is ambiguous at best, and the military occupation of Bosnia is routinely used by the West to exert political domination over the region.

In 2014, a wave of anti-privatization and anti-corruption protests began in Tuzla, a mainly Muslim mining town in Bosnia known for a tradition of socialist and labour militancy.

The protests were notable for broad solidarity between Muslim, Croat, and Serb protestors, and the shared contempt for the dysfunctional administrative structures and nationalist elites (including the aforementioned Dodik) created by Dayton.

In response, the Western-appointed High Representative threatened to suppress the protests with Austrian troops.

In a region with vivid recent memories of a horrific civil war, such Western threats were sufficient to send protestors home.

US and European Union emphasize role of Balkans amid Ukraine war
In response to Russia’s military incursion in Ukraine this February, the United States, European Union, and NATO have increased their activities with EUFOR, holding meetings featuring senior representatives from the US, UK, Germany, France, and Italy.


This March, the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, Josep Borrell, traveled to Bosnia to meet with EUFOR leadership.


Then in April, a bipartisan group of US senators took a tour of the Balkans to, in their own words, “convey continued U.S. support for its allies amid Russian aggression against Ukraine and the implications for European security in the region.”

Democratic and Republican senators met with representatives from EUFOR and NATO in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The US embassy in Sarajevo said the meeting was held “to discuss ways we can bolster cooperation and partnership.”


EUFOR commanders have likewise been coordinating with the US ambassador to Bosnia, Michael J. Murphy, stressing “the importance of shared cooperation and partnership.”


This Western coordination threatens to drag the Balkans into a larger geopolitical conflict.

Ukrainian explosive-armed drone accidentally hits Croatia

Bosnia is not the only former Yugoslav country where NATO’s contributions to peace and security are dubious.

In March, a Tupolev Tu-141 drone carrying a bomb entered Croatian airspace via Hungary and crashed in a residential neighbourhood in central Zagreb, likely as a result of an error.

Image
A Tupolev Tu-141 drone

It was later revealed that this drone, which is similar to a cruise missile, belonged to the Ukrainian military, and had sought to attack Russian forces.

While no one was hurt, the passage of the explosive-armed drone through hundreds of kilometres of NATO airspace without being intercepted raised questions in Croatia about the ability of NATO to provide for the country’s safety.

Western pressure on Serbia
The Serbian and Bosnian Serb governments have faced increasing pressure from Western governments seeking to harm bilateral relations with Russia, despite their repeated statements deploring the escalation of violence in Ukraine and calling for a peaceful resolution for the conflict.

This pressure led Serbia to vote in the United Nations General Assembly to suspend Russia from the UN Human Rights Council, which was a broadly unpopular move within Serbia.

According to the stated goals of US policy, the pressure on Serbia makes little sense: Serbia is a small, middle-income country that plays no role in Russia’s war effort.

Serbian neutrality is much less important for Russia than the roles played by Israel and Turkey, which unlike Serbia, have received little criticism in the Western press for their ambiguous position in the conflict.

Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić has repeatedly implied that the pressures placed on his country are intended to destabilize the Balkans, not to help Ukraine.

Whatever one thinks of Vučić or the war, given the pattern of facts, this explanation is more plausible than the official Western one.

The Kosovo precedent

The Serbian government has also expressed its concerns with Russia’s invocation of the 1999 NATO intervention in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (now Serbia and Montenegro) as a legal pretext for Russia’s own actions in Ukraine.

NATO’s 1999 intervention, conducted intentionally without UN Security Council authorization partly as a demonstration of NATO’s willingness to act unilaterally in violation of international law, nonetheless offered a flimsy legal pretext for military action: it first recognized a secessionist republic in Kosovo before immediately bombing Serbia to protect it.

While Kosovo independence has never received broad international recognition – mainly because of the global consensus that its secession and NATO’s intervention were both in direct violation of the UN charter – NATO was nonetheless able to force Serbia to accept a permanent occupation of Kosovo after 78 days of bombing.

Camp Bondsteel, that US Army base that hosts NATO’s Kosovo presence, is a key logistics hub for military operations across Asia. It is one of the world’s largest US military bases and has been implicated in grave human rights violations by US personnel, including rendition.

Much like the US base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Camp Bondsteel’s location in a legal grey area, under military occupation and without civilian oversight, offers advantages for covert operations.

Image
Ukrainian soldiers being trained at the US Army’s Camp Bondsteel base in Kosovo in 2010

Proxy conflict in the Balkans

As in Bosnia, the constant threat of renewed NATO aggression is an ever-present phantom in Serbian politics.

Despite claims that its military occupations are intended to preserve regional stability, NATO has never demonstrated a desire to see durable peace and reconciliation among the Balkan countries.

On the contrary, perceived regional instability is a reliable pretext for maintaining a permanent military presence in a strategic location, without the democratic oversight, control, or transparency that would come with regular NATO membership.

The Balkans have experienced major wars every few decades throughout the history of modern states – often proxy conflicts between neighbouring superpowers – and during a period of intensified conflict in Europe, the region needs renewed diplomacy, not militarist provocations.

Yet in line with NATO’s maximalist, escalatory posture in Ukraine itself – explicitly seeking to sacrifice Ukraine in an apocalyptic proxy war to weaken Russia – NATO has done nothing to secure or reassure the peoples of the Balkans.

Perhaps the biggest danger is the creation of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Claims that the region is doomed to instability and violence risk feeding an escalatory cycle that may bring about the very violence one hopes to avoid.

While this may be good news for Western arms manufacturers, it does nothing to protect the lives of Croats or Albanians.

Despite racist lies about “ancient ethnic hatreds” and violent cultures, however, armed conflict and instability have been repeatedly imposed on the Balkans by self-interested foreign powers, exploiting the same internal fractures and divisions that exist anywhere else.

It is external provocations that threaten the region, not any fundamental conflicts between its peoples.

None of this is to say that recent Russian diplomacy in the region has been particularly positive either. Remarks by Russia’s ambassador to Bosnia and Herzegovina, Igor Kalabukhov, were widely condemned, after he threatened retaliatory action should the country begin a process of NATO accession, citing Russia’s recent actions in Ukraine as an example of a possible response.

Escalatory rhetoric and actions on both sides – but particularly on the side of NATO, which has an extensive recent history of military aggression in the region and a significant military presence in both non-NATO former Yugoslav republics – is enhancing the grave danger of renewed violent conflict in the region.

Bombings in Transnistria threaten to expand war
The western Balkans is not the only place that has seen efforts from various actors to broaden the scope of the Russia-NATO proxy war by opening new fronts.

Transnistria, the disputed region on Moldova’s eastern border with Ukraine, which hosts a small Russian peacekeeping force, was hit by a series of bombings of unknown origin this April, targeting government institutions and radio infrastructure.

Moldova’s pro-EU president Maia Sandu has made similar remarks to Vučić, suggesting efforts to destabilize the formally neutral country. Exactly which forces are encouraging escalation in each of these cases, and why, is not always clear.

Both Russia and NATO have acted in ways that undermine the sovereignty and territorial integrity of weaker states, and both have engaged in escalatory rhetoric. However, efforts to prolong, intensify, and broaden the geographic scope of armed conflict, including efforts to draw Moscow into secondary proxy conflicts, are entirely consistent with the stated US program to maximize costs and destabilization within Russia itself.

The situation in Ukraine has made it abundantly clear that US policy makes no effort to protect its ostensible allies, including NATO members.

Not only does Washington see Ukrainian lives as an acceptable price to pay in a proxy conflict against Russia; economic devastation of Europe and explosive-armed drones landing in Zagreb are also acceptable.

This is an extremely dangerous period of history, for the Balkans, for Europe, and for the world.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov even stated that the risk of a nuclear war in the current circumstances is “considerable.”.

Coordinated efforts to encourage diplomacy, de-escalation, and peace have never been more urgent.

https://multipolarista.com/2022/04/27/u ... e-balkans/

That 'drone' looks more like a cruise missile, like a V-1.

********************************************

From Cassad's Telegram acount:

***

forwarded from
Voenkor Kitten Z
Military expert Boris Rozhin with a brief summary of the results of the operation to denazify and demilitarize Ukraine at 117.00 on April 29, 2022, especially for the Voenkor Kotenok Z @voenkorKotenok channel :

1.
Mariupol.
The grouping of the Armed Forces of Ukraine at Azovstal is completely blocked and is subjected to constant attacks. Unable to escape, stocks are running out. A significant part of the forces of the allied forces from near Mariupol were transferred to the Donetsk and Zaporozhye directions.
2.
Zaporozhye.
On the line Vasilievka-Orekhov-Gulyaipole without any changes. Fighting continues on the near approaches to Gulyai-Pole and settlements to the east of it.
3.
Nikolaev.
The enemy was pushed back in the direction of Nikolaev itself, having suffered heavy losses. Attempts to counterattack ended unsuccessfully. Attempts to activate the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Krivoy Rog and Nikopol directions have also been stopped.
4.
Odessa.
The city is preparing for a possible start of hostilities in the event of a breakthrough of Russian troops near Nikolaev. There are also signs of an increase in the NATO grouping in Romania, which may enter the territory of Moldova and the Odessa region.
5.
Carbon.
The enemy is holding the Novomikhailovka-Ugledar-Velikaya Novoselovka front line.
6.
Marinka.
Fighting continues in the area of ​​the waste heap. There is no significant progress in the village yet. The DPR army controls about 35-40% of the territory of Maryinka.
7.
Avdiivka.
In Avdiivka itself, there are no changes. To the north, fighting is going on near the Konstantinovka-Avdeevka highway, in the area of ​​​​Novoselka-2 and Novobakhmutovka. There are also battles in the Troitsky area.
8.
LPR.
Fights in the industrial zone of Rubizhne, where the remnants of the Armed Forces of Ukraine defended themselves in the southern districts of the city. There are battles for Orekhovo, south of Lisichansk, as well as on the outskirts of Severodonetsk.
9.
Raisin.
In the Oskol area, the remnants of a free combat group of the Armed Forces of Ukraine with a total number of up to 1000 people fell into the operational environment. Fighting continues in the Pashkov area, north of the Barvenkovo-Slavyansk highway. Fighting continues in the area of ​​Yampol and Krasny Liman.
10.
Kharkov.
Fighting continues for the village of Russkaya Lozovaya on the northern outskirts of Kharkov. The enemy is also trying to be active, relying on the Zolochevsky fortified area, as well as to the east of Chuguev.

@voenkorKotenok

***

forwarded from
Rybar
🇺🇦🌉In the Odessa direction, they are trying to restore the bridge in the area of ​​\u200b\u200bthe settlement of Zatoka - the very strategically important bridge that was intensively “calibrated” on April 26 and 27 .

The repair and subsequent protection of this transport hub by means of air defense is a priority not only for the Ukrainian command, but also for neighboring countries. Repair crews were attracted from Romania and Moldova.

Moreover, the importance and value of the “unused” bridge is confirmed by the fact of the transfer of the Starobelsk patrol boat (Island type) and several naval guard boats of the Ukrainian Navy, equipped with Igla and Stinger MANPADS. The remnants of the Ukrainian “mosquito fleet” must be protected at all costs from missile strikes.

This is presented to the public as part of a full-scale exercise of the Ukrainian interspecific grouping of troops and forces on the border with Transnistria .
#railroads #bridge #Odessa #Ukraine @rybar *Support us: 4377 7278 0407 7977


Telegram
Rybar
🇺🇦Head of Ukrzaliznytsia Oleksandr Kamyshin announces a repeated missile attack on the bridge across the Dniester estuary in the village of Zatoka, Odesa region, today at 6:45 am.
#railroads #Odessa
#Ukraine @rybar

***

forwarded from
Rybar
🇬🇧🇺🇸🇺🇦How do the Air Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine navigate in the airspace of Russia?

"Beregini" posted documents confirming the delivery of the latest aeronautical databases for Ukrainian air transport by the American company Boeing . In turn, the Americans received all this thanks to the Jeppesen subsidiary .

Jeppesen is one of the largest companies in the aeronautical information market. In its military division Jeppesen Government and Militaryofficially declare support for Kyiv in their correspondence with Ukroboronprom and the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine. Both companies are subsidiaries of Boeing and have offices in many countries around the world.

The letters also mention the free provision of the Ukrainian Air Force and the management of civil aviation and air navigation databases , relevant software for aircraft and helicopters, as well as some special military equipment.

To further develop interaction and understand the changing requirements of Ukrainian customers, Jeppesen management invites representatives of Kyiv to London for the so-called "negotiations" and "training". They will certainly not return empty-handed.

❗️The main problem for Russia is close cooperation with Jeppesen before the start of the NWO . In 2010, the company received access to aeronautical information of Russian domestic airfields. In 2017, she developed air traffic optimization models over Moscow commissioned by Aeroflot Airlines and Vnukovo Airport. In addition, almost any pilot can install the software of this company on his personal tablet. For so many years of cooperation, all the information about the Russian sky (and not only) accumulated in terabytes on the servers of an American company. The open part of it is of little interest to us, but the part that was “not for everyone” is now available to the Ukrainian side.

Although Jeppesen joined the anti-Russian sanctions and stopped the transfer of aeronautical information and support of its databases to Russian airlines , domestic pilots still use the company's software on the vast majority of foreign-made aircraft . And perhaps it is time to seriously think about some kind of alternative. All private users of this software should also take note of this material.
#Russia #USA #Ukraine @rybar with @wingsofwar *Support us: 4377 7278 0407 7977

***

forwarded from
Readovka explains
A strike force of NATO countries near the borders of Ukraine and Belarus - what is it for? Is it really about an ordinary peacekeeping mission?

In light of the latest information about the aspirations of Poland and other NATO members , several questions arise. Firstly, what contingent is now formed on the eastern borders of the bloc, and secondly, why are all these forces being accumulated?
It is impossible to accurately assess the grouping of NATO countries, drawn to the borders of the Republic of Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova and Russia, having only information from open sources.

However, from what is known, a total contingent of 50,000 to 100,000 people can be inferred.This includes units deployed by Poland, and the American contingent, and units of various NATO countries deployed in the framework of exercises in the Baltic states. There is also information about a serious Romanian group in the Moldovan direction. Just as we wrote earlier, combat aircraft are also being transferred to Europe. In the shortest possible time, the size of the NATO contingent can be doubled.

NATO's ultimate strategy on this issue is currently unclear, but several options could be considered. Firstly, this can be done for a banal intimidation of Russia and an attempt to put pressure on the course of a special operation in Ukraine, and secondly, in the West they perfectly understand that Ukraine as a country no longer exists and see its future on the principle of occupation sectors. And the third option is the most terrible, but the least likely: NATO decided to go all the way and, if lend-lease and hybrid warfare do not stop the Russians, then regular units of Western countries will step in. This, of course, is a 100% threat of the use of nuclear weapons. It looks utopian, but in 2022 everything is possible.

forwarded from
Rybar
🇺🇦🌉In the Odessa direction, they are trying to restore the bridge in the area of ​​\u200b\u200bthe settlement of Zatoka - the very strategically important bridge that was intensively “calibrated” on April 26 and 27 .

The repair and subsequent protection of this transport hub by means of air defense is a priority not only for the Ukrainian command, but also for neighboring countries. Repair crews were attracted from Romania and Moldova.

Moreover, the importance and value of the “unused” bridge is confirmed by the fact of the transfer of the Starobelsk patrol boat (Island type) and several naval guard boats of the Ukrainian Navy, equipped with Igla and Stinger MANPADS. The remnants of the Ukrainian “mosquito fleet” must be protected at all costs from missile strikes.

This is presented to the public as part of a full-scale exercise of the Ukrainian interspecific grouping of troops and forces on the border with Transnistria .
#railroads #bridge #Odessa #Ukraine @rybar *Support us: 4377 7278 0407 7977

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Fri Apr 29, 2022 11:49 pm

Briefly about Ukraine. 04/29/2022
April 29, 18:56

Image

Briefly about Ukraine. 04/29/2022

1. Mariupol.
The grouping of the Armed Forces of Ukraine at Azovstal is completely blocked and is subjected to constant attacks. Unable to escape, stocks are running out. A significant part of the forces of the allied forces from near Mariupol were transferred to the Donetsk and Zaporozhye directions.

2. Zaporozhye.
On the line Vasilievka-Orekhov-Gulyaipole without any changes. Fighting continues on the near approaches to Gulyai-Pole and settlements to the east of it.

3. Nikolaev.
The enemy was pushed back in the direction of Nikolaev itself, having suffered heavy losses. Attempts to counterattack ended unsuccessfully. Attempts to activate the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Krivoy Rog and Nikopol directions have also been stopped.

4. Odessa.
The city is preparing for a possible start of hostilities in the event of a breakthrough of Russian troops near Nikolaev. There are also signs of an increase in the NATO grouping in Romania, which may enter the territory of Moldova and the Odessa region.

5. Carbon.
The enemy is holding the Novomikhailovka-Ugledar-Velikaya Novoselovka front line.

6. Marinka.
Fighting continues in the area of ​​the waste heap. There is no significant progress in the village yet. The DPR army controls about 35-40% of the territory of Maryinka.

7. Avdiivka.
In Avdiivka itself, there are no changes. To the north, fighting is going on near the Konstantinovka-Avdeevka highway, in the area of ​​​​Novoselka-2 and Novobakhmutovka. There are also battles in the Troitsky area.

8. LPR.
Fights in the industrial zone of Rubizhne, where the remnants of the Armed Forces of Ukraine defended themselves in the southern districts of the city. There are battles for Orekhovo, south of Lisichansk, as well as on the outskirts of Severodonetsk.

9. Raisin.
In the Oskol area, the remnants of a free combat group of the Armed Forces of Ukraine with a total number of up to 1000 people fell into the operational environment. Fighting continues in the Pashkov area, north of the Barvenkovo-Slavyansk highway. Fighting continues in the area of ​​Yampol and Krasny Liman.

10. Kharkov.
Fighting continues for the village of Russkaya Lozovaya on the northern outskirts of Kharkov. The enemy is also trying to be active, relying on the Zolochevsky fortified area, as well as to the east of Chuguev.

The broadcast of hostilities in Ukraine continues as usual in Telegram - https://t.me/boris_rozhin (if you are interested, subscribe)

PS. A fragment of a Natsik's notepad from Azov, where there is a note that it is necessary to get rid of "refuseniks" (those who refuse to fight). During the assault on Mariupol, soldiers shot by the Nazis were repeatedly found, who wanted to surrender or escape, mixing with the civilian population.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/7586035.html

Google Translator

**********************************************.

Ukraine - Doubling Down

The Russian side is making some progress in the war in Ukraine. While the differences on the map look small the repositioning of forces that had threatened Kiev is finished and the Russian military is now seriously degrading and grinding down the Ukrainian forces in Donbas.

March 31 2022

Image

Source: Liveuamap
April 29 2022

Image

According to the daily reports of Russia's Ministry of Defense the Ukraine is losing several hundred soldiers and some 30 armored vehicles per day, most of them to artillery. A flood of gruel pictures posted on Telegram by both sides confirm this. Several Ukrainian attempts to counterattack Russian forces have failed.

'Western' propagandists are noting that their side is losing.

Anders Åslund @anders_aslund 14:02 UTC · Apr 28, 2022
The War: Ukraine has experienced setback in the past few days. A senior Ukrainian official announced yesterday that Russian troops had taken part of the Kharkiv region. Yesterday, Russia announced that it has captured the entire Kherson region. No Ukrainian advances.
Not good.


The typical U.S. reaction to losing is to double down.

This can be done financially:

Jack Detsch @JackDetsch - 19:25 UTC · Apr 28, 2022
DATA: A cumulative total of U.S. military aid to Ukraine since Russia's Feb. 24 invasion.
February 25: $350m
March 12: $550m
March 16: $1.35b
April 1: $1.65b
April 5: $1.75b
April 13: $2.55b
April 21: $3.35b
April 24: $3.67b
April 28: $14.67b (if approved by Congress)
.

Most of above sums will go the U.S. arms industry to deliver weapons for which the Ukraine has little use or which never will reach the frontline. The rest will be pilfered by Ukrainian oligarchs.

That financial doubling down will not be very effective.

There is also the possibility of doubling down by widening the war. This could be in Bosnia where attacks on the Serbian population could drag the Russian ally Serbia into another war. An additional war could also be created in Transnistria (marked as a lengthy strip on the left of the above maps). This could involve not only forces from the Ukraine but also from Moldova, Romania and Poland. In the early 1990s a small war between Moldova and the Russian population in Transnistria ended in 1992 with a ceasefire and Russian peacekeeper troops on the ground.

In a piece about Biden's new pledge of money to Ukraine the NYT notes:

The Ukrainian military said it was moving more troops to the border with Transnistria, a small breakaway region in Moldova, on Ukraine’s southwest flank, hundreds of miles from the fighting on the eastern front.

Should those troops do something Russia does not like it will likely use its air and missile capabilities to destroy their fighting power. President Putin certainly did not mean Transnistria when he recently spoke to Russian lawmakers and threatened retaliation:

Let me emphasise once again: if anyone intends to intervene from the outside and create a strategic threat to Russia that is unacceptable to us, they should know that our retaliatory strikes will be lightning-fast. We have the tools we need for this, the likes of which no one else can claim at this point. We will not just brag; we will use them if necessary. And I want everyone to know this; we have made all the decisions on this matter.

That threat was likely a response to rumors that the U.S. and UK are planing to deliver longer range missiles to Ukraine to be use against targets on Russian grounds. That would be another form of doubling down but also a way more dangerous one.

Ukraine is a victim here but not a victim of Russia but of much bigger plans in the U.S. which did its best to instigate this war (recommended).

As Michael Hudson explains (vid), the economic consequences of this war will be catastrophic for many countries and people. But the neocons who are running the war do not care about those. They have a plan to profit from it. They want to stay the unipolar power of the globe. To them it is a game and their main motives include an ingrained hatred towards Russia.

Posted by b on April 29, 2022 at 15:19 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/04/u ... .html#more

*************************

The West stole $300 billion from Russia
April 29, 23:25

Image

Big interview with Lavrov on the current situation in Ukraine.

The West stole $300 billion from Russia

Question: What guarantees will suit Russia to ensure its own security, as well as to complete the Russian special military operation in Ukraine? What guarantees, in turn, should the Ukrainian side receive to ensure its security, independence and freedom?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: We have submitted many proposals. Over all these years, we have initiated various draft agreements and treaties with NATO and OSCE member countries. Last December, we proposed another initiative to the US and NATO - to conclude with both of them separate agreements on security guarantees for all countries in the Euro-Atlantic space without joining any military alliances.
Every time we have taken such steps, they have been effectively rejected, with varying degrees of courtesy. In 2009, we proposed a European Security Treaty, which the North Atlantic Alliance refused to consider. The draft document, in particular, systematized what all OSCE member states signed at the highest level. The heads of state and government adopted special declarations in Istanbul in 1999 and then in 2010 in Astana, they assumed obligations on the indivisibility of security, securing for each country the right to choose allies. At the same time, in accordance with these obligations, no country should strengthen its security at the expense of the security of others. And no organization in Europe should claim a dominant role in this geopolitical space. We suggested
In 2009 there was the first attempt. NATO countries have stated that there will be no legally binding guarantees outside the Alliance. This means the following: what they signed as members of the OSCE (their presidents and prime ministers) were empty words. Later we tried again. There have been several such attempts. The last one was in December last year, when we once again proposed to stop the escalation of tension and confrontation. All these years, NATO, despite all the promises of its leaders, has been getting closer and closer to the Russian borders.
We were told that we have nothing to fear, because NATO is a defensive alliance and does not pose any threat to our security. But the North Atlantic Organization was a defensive alliance when there was a Berlin Wall made of concrete and a geopolitical "wall" between NATO and the Warsaw Pact countries. But when the Warsaw Pact and the USSR ceased to exist, NATO decided that the line of defense should be extended to the East. And they moved that defensive line five times. NATO Secretary General J. Stoltenberg said last year that NATO has a global responsibility for security, especially in the Indo-Pacific region. It is easy to guess that the next line of defense will be the South China Sea region. Especially when the leaders of the countries of the Alliance, for example, British Foreign Secretary E. Truss, recently stated, that NATO should be a global player. We can hear over and over again statements about the defensive nature of the Alliance, but this is a lie.
The proposals submitted by us in December 2021 stipulated that we all give security guarantees that will ensure the safety and security of Ukraine, all European countries and, of course, Russia.
They have been made public and are available to the public. You can see that it was a fair offer that was rejected because NATO didn't want to sacrifice what they call the "open door policy". Although such principles do not exist in the Washington Treaty. The Washington Treaty establishes that all NATO member countries, by consensus, may invite (or may not) any country to join, provided that the country meets the NATO criteria and, more importantly, adds security to this organization. Given the expansion of NATO in recent years, I do not think that the Alliance was attentive to this important criterion. How has NATO's security been strengthened by North Macedonia, Montenegro and other countries? This was just a cover to advance plans to expand the Alliance.
But back to the topic of Ukraine, which was made an instrument of deterrence and irritation for Russia. In recent years, the Kyiv regime has canceled everything Russian - language, education, media. Even the everyday use of the Russian language was made an administrative offense. They systematized legislation, promoting and encouraging Nazi theories and practices, pumping weapons into Ukraine. They supported the illegal and unconstitutional coup d'état in 2014, in response to which the inhabitants of Crimea and Donbass refused to live under the rule of people who violated the guarantees received from the EU. Because the coup took place the next morning after the signing of the agreement between the opposition and the president of the country, and the EU member states (France, Germany and Poland) became its guarantors. The leaders of the Maidan simply staged this bloody coup, actually "spitting in the face" of the European Union. They treated the EU in the same way that US Deputy Secretary of State Walter Nuland did when in December 2014 she spoke with the US ambassador in Kyiv and said what should be done with the EU. I can not repeat it (this is obscene).
At the end of last year and the beginning of this year, the Ukrainian regime intensified shelling of the eastern territories of the country in the Donbass, which is a gross violation of the Minsk agreements signed in February 2015 and approved by a UN Security Council resolution. When they targeted civilians and civilian infrastructure - schools, hospitals, kindergartens - we were left with no choice. All these years we have hoped that the West will insist on the implementation of the Minsk agreements by Kyiv. The West, however, proved that it was not at all interested in a peaceful resolution of this conflict on the basis of the Minsk Package of Measures, according to which these territories were to be provided with a special status. What did the West need? Blindly support everything that the Kyiv regime does if it is directed against the interests of Russia. These were and are the true goals of our Western "friends".
When in February of this year the two republics once again asked us for their recognition, we were left with no other choice. We recognized them and, at their request, launched an operation by our military contingent in order to protect the lives of the civilian population and be sure that there is no threat to their security and the security of the Russian Federation emanating from Ukrainian territory.
We are participating in the negotiations: when President Zelensky, shortly after the start of the special military operation, proposed to start negotiations, we immediately agreed. I believe we conducted these negotiations in good faith, unlike the Ukrainian representatives, who constantly changed their positions. Day after day they said diametrically opposed things. The guarantees that were discussed are contained in the draft prepared by the Russian Federation, taking into account the position of the Ukrainian side. If they were honest and conscientious negotiators, we could gradually make significant progress in the negotiation process, and Ukraine would be given security guarantees from a number of countries (initially five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany, Turkey, perhaps someone else). We had nothing against it. The main thing is to understand how consistent they are. Especially in that as regards the territories to which these guarantees will apply. You understand that we cannot allow these guarantees to extend to Crimea and the regions of Eastern Ukraine, which we have recognized as independent states. Initially, when the negotiators met in Istanbul, they agreed that security guarantees should not include Crimea and the regions of eastern Ukraine. But then they changed their mind. We are "stuck" because of their inconsistency, because of their desire to "play games" every time, and, as far as I can guess, because of the instructions they receive from Washington, London and other capitals, not to force the negotiation process. which we have recognized as independent states. Initially, when the negotiators met in Istanbul, they agreed that security guarantees should not include Crimea and the regions of eastern Ukraine. But then they changed their mind. We are "stuck" because of their inconsistency, because of their desire to "play games" every time, and, as far as I can guess, because of the instructions they receive from Washington, London and other capitals, not to force the negotiation process. which we have recognized as independent states. Initially, when the negotiators met in Istanbul, they agreed that security guarantees should not include Crimea and the regions of eastern Ukraine. But then they changed their mind. We are "stuck" because of their inconsistency, because of their desire to "play games" every time, and, as far as I can guess, because of the instructions they receive from Washington, London and other capitals, not to force the negotiation process.

Question: When the special military operation began on February 24 this year, Russia described Ukraine's desire to join NATO as a threat to Russia's existence. You said in an interview on Russian television this week that if the US and its allies continue to pump weapons into Ukraine, the risk of the war escalating into a nuclear conflict cannot be underestimated. I'm sorry, I took your quote from the translation and noticed that you used the word "war". Nuclear war is a real threat to all of us. What Russia is trying to stop by launching a special military operation in Ukraine. Perhaps this peaceful operation conveyed the wrong idea about these goals?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: You quoted one of my statements, and this is not a very accurate quote. I was asked whether a nuclear war is possible, whether the risk of nuclear war has become closer and more acute, and whether Russia admits such a possibility. I said not at all what you quoted. From the very beginning of our cooperation with the D. Trump Administration, we advocated reaffirming the statement of M. S. Gorbachev and R. Reagan in 1987, namely, issuing a joint Russian-American declaration at the highest level, which there can be no winners in a nuclear war and therefore it must never be unleashed.

Question: I did not say that the risk of an escalation of the war should not be underestimated ...

Foreign Minister Lavrov: Wait a second. I said that we were in the forefront in making promises to all nuclear countries never to start a nuclear war. We were unable to convince the Trump team, they hesitated, but the Biden administration realized the importance of such a declaration. In June 2021, during the summit in Geneva, it was adopted. Then in January of this year. At the Russian initiative, all five nuclear powers issued a similar statement at the level of presidents and heads of government.
We are not "playing" with nuclear war. In January of this year. V.A.Zelensky again mobilized Western support against Russia. In his Russophobic rhetoric, he stated that no one is going to change policy on the Russian language and Russian media, and will not persecute neo-Nazi battalions that are supported by the state and openly wear swastikas and decals of Waffen-SS divisions. Then he said that Ukraine made a mistake when it refused the status of a nuclear power, and they may again consider the possession of nuclear weapons. Recently, the Prime Minister of Poland said that Warsaw would welcome the transfer of American nuclear weapons from Germany to Poland. We have never played with such dangerous things. That's what I was talking about. We should all stick to the declarations that nuclear war is unacceptable, made by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council. To make sure this is the case, the West must discipline our Ukrainian and Polish colleagues, who see no danger in juggling such dangerous words.

Question: There was a dangerous play on words, which was widely covered by the press.

Foreign Minister Lavrov: It was played in the way you described. We know how the Western media sets the tone, how unworthily they do it. We are used to it.

Question: Don't you think it was just a mistranslation?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: I have just explained and cited specific examples of statements that provoke discussion of the possibility of nuclear war. They came from Ukraine and Poland.

Question: All the more so since Russia advanced a corresponding statement in the UN Security Council in January of this year.

Foreign Minister Lavrov: A statement initiated by Russia. Don't forget about it.

Question: Does Russia think it is at war with NATO in Ukraine over arms supplies to Ukraine?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: We do not believe that we are at war with NATO. This would be another step towards increasing the risks of what we have just discussed. Unfortunately, NATO itself believes it is at war with Russia. Alliance and EU leaders. Many of them (in Great Britain, the USA, Poland, France, Germany and, of course, the head of European diplomacy J. Borrell) directly, publicly and persistently declare that "Putin must lose", "Russia must be defeated." In my opinion, those who use such terminology believe that they are at war with whoever they want to defeat. They supply weapons to Ukraine. We know the routes that are used for these purposes. As soon as these weapons reach the territory of Ukraine, they become the target of our special operation.

Question: I'm asking this question because I imagine a situation where many will wake up and hear the news that a NATO plane or ship has been destroyed by the Russian armed forces on charges of transferring weapons to Ukraine.

Foreign Minister Lavrov: As I have already said, any supply of arms to the territory of Ukraine is a legitimate goal. Because these weapons will be given to a regime that is waging war against its own population, against civilians in the east of the country.

Question: The intensification of the Russian special operation in the Donbass. What is the ultimate goal in eastern Ukraine, beyond what was declared to be the defense of two self-proclaimed republics?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: I have already told you that our goal is to protect these two republics. They were under the blows of the Ukrainian regime for a long eight years. When the coup took place in 2014, they said they wanted nothing to do with the people who came to power illegally and asked to be left alone while they figured out what was happening. They never attacked another part of Ukraine. They were declared terrorists, and a terrorist operation was launched by the leaders of the coup, who seized power by illegal means of force.
For eight long years, people have been victims of Ukrainian aggression. 13,000 civilians were killed and infrastructure was destroyed. A huge number of crimes were committed by the Ukrainian regime. The purpose of our operation is openly declared - to protect these two republics and to make sure that no threat will come from Ukrainian territory for the security of these people and for the security of the Russian Federation. It was a response to what NATO was doing in Ukraine to prepare that country for an aggressive stance against the Russian Federation. They were provided with offensive weapons, including weapons that could reach Russian territory, and military bases were built, including on the Sea of ​​Azov. Dozens of military exercises have been held, many of them were conducted on the territory of Ukraine with the assistance of NATO, and most of these exercises were directed against the interests of Russia. Therefore, the purpose of this operation is to make sure that these plans do not materialize.

Question: But what would you say to a military analyst who says that Russia now wants to gain control over the Donbass and Ukraine's sovereignty in order to secure a corridor to Crimea? How do you view the development of the military operation?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: I have told you the objectives of the operation. The military means to achieve these goals is not for me to discuss. This is not up for debate in response to any speculation by military experts. Military experts are paid for their speculations. Let's let them continue.

Question: Do you expect the operation in Donbass to be completed by May 9?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: It will be completed as soon as the goals that I have already described to you are implemented and achieved.

Question: On Wednesday, an ammunition depot exploded on Russian territory adjacent to Ukraine. There was also a fire in fuel depots on Monday. Situations like this happen regularly. Are they exacerbating the crisis in Ukraine?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: The Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation presented information on these situations. Some of them were incidents, some were the result of helicopter attacks from Ukraine. It became clear that the goals of the military operation, which I described, must be achieved. I can assure you that in the course of this military operation, the "adventures" of the Kyiv regime were taken care of.

Question: Russia is the most sanctioned country in the world. There are many sanctions. How long can Russia resist these painful sanctions? The West believes that with sanctions they will force the Russian Federation to sit down at the negotiating table and move closer to a compromise.

Foreign Minister Lavrov: They are not very smart and, of course, they do not know history. After the Soviet Union disappeared, the professions of the Sovietologist and Rusologist also disappeared. The West and the US thought that Russia disappeared after the collapse of the Soviet Union and was already “in the pocket” of the US. Therefore, allegedly, there is no need to study Russia, Russia will do what they say. But it happened differently.
The sanctions did not come as a surprise to us. For several decades in the history of the Soviet Union, in the history of the Russian Federation, there was no moment when we lived without sanctions. When we joined the World Trade Organization (WTO), the United States realized that Russia's entry into the WTO would not take place without the repeal of the Jackson-Vanik amendment, which discriminated against us and did not comply with WTO standards. They wanted us to join the WTO. But after the removal of the Jackson-Vanik amendment, new restrictive measures were immediately introduced in the form of the Magnitsky Act. There was no "break" in the sanctions regime against the Russian Federation.
After the Crimeans refused to remain in the ultra-radical Ukraine under the Nazi regime, they adopted more and more sanctions. They never stopped this process, but only increased every 6-12 months. This latest endless wave of sanctions finally shows the real "face" of the West. It, as far as I now understand, has always been Russophobic. To believe that this wave of sanctions is going to make us "cry for help and beg forgiveness" would require you to be a bad planner and know nothing about Moscow's foreign policy or how to deal with Russia. We have already drawn the most important conclusion: we cannot rely on the West for anything, especially in the areas of the economy, technology, food, and other daily needs that are strategic. We will never say that we will not maintain relations with anyone. If people realize that they were grossly mistaken and were wrong, we will try to renew the relationship in the future. In any case, we must be self-sufficient in key areas for the life of our country.
The fact that Americans and others are running all over the world, threatening people, forcing them to join the sanctions, to vote against Russia, not worthy of self-respecting countries. Recently, US Deputy Secretary of State W. Sherman said that in the context of the ongoing events in and around Ukraine, they should help India understand what is best for its security. How do you like it? This was not said to a small island nation, it was said to India. The same was publicly said to China. “China must play by the rules,” British Foreign Secretary E. Truss seems to have said so. "China must respect the rules, otherwise it will be punished" - and this was stated publicly, without any hesitation. The nature of these colonial relations is absolutely unacceptable. And these people are telling us that this is a battle between "democrats" and "autocrats"! What kind of democracy are they talking about? They themselves "spit" on democracy in international relations. They just tell you what to do. They are not autocrats, they are dictators. They threaten to punish people, countries that will not join their policies. That's shameful. It is a shame for Western civilization if it decides to act in such a way.

Question: The Ukrainian conflict affects the entire world food security, especially in my region. What is your view on such negative effects of the special military operation?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: Even you have been brainwashed, as far as I understand. The food crisis did not start this year. It started many years ago. For several reasons, including COVID-19, as well as a miscalculation by Western countries. They were too preoccupied with directing food and supply systems to themselves. Of course, the current situation has exacerbated the problem. But in the end, Russia was left with no choice but to defend itself and its allies from the Ukrainian regime. Western sanctions have severed food supply chains. Dozens of foreign ships are in Ukrainian ports in the Black and Azov Seas because they are under sanctions. We are ready to let them go. But the Ukrainian government is not cooperating. There are many mines in the seas. We are ready to clear the sea of ​​mines so that ships can go. Some of them just with food. We are talking about the lack of consent on the part of Ukraine to allow foreign ships to leave their ports. In addition, sanctions prohibit Russian ships from going anywhere, prohibit Russian companies from any logistical activities and the use of infrastructure. If there is a desire to see the real causes of this food crisis, some people need to look in the mirror.
UN Secretary General A. Guterres was in Moscow on April 26 this year, I raised these issues at a meeting with him, because he publicly announced the food, energy and financial crises. I told him that he should be ashamed not to mention sanctions as a key reason for disrupting food supply chains. And you know what he said to me? I hope he doesn't get mad at me for revealing the secret. He said yes, the reason was not mentioned in the UN report, but at the press conference on the presentation of this report, when asked, he replied that, of course, sanctions also play a role. Judge for yourself.

Question: I understand. I agree with you that the situation was bad. But a special military operation also contributed. Earlier, Russia suspended the supply of hydrocarbons to Bulgaria and Poland due to non-payment in rubles. Will the lack of supplies affect only Bulgaria and Poland or someone else?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: The contracts that were signed before this situation provided for payments in dollars and euros. These payments were made directly to Gazprom accounts and kept in Western banks. When, after the start of a special military operation in Ukraine, our Western "friends" stole from us more than 300 billion dollars, in fact they stole what they themselves paid for gas. In other words, they have been using our gas for free all these years. To avoid the continuation of this robbery, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree according to which, from now on, it will be necessary to pay not to Gazprom to its accounts in Western banks, but to pay Gazprom-Bank, as before, in dollars and euros. Nothing will change. The same amount in foreign currency, which is stipulated in the contract. And then in "Gazprom-bank" euros and dollars will be transferred to the ruble account. This is an absolutely necessary scheme to avoid the continuation of the shameless robbery in which these countries are involved. You must have heard that London, Washington, Brussels are discussing the possibility of confiscating the money they "froze" or transferring this money to someone else.
The United States was created through the principles of the "gold rush" - "first come, first served", and "whoever fires first wins." We don't want to be part of this game and we don't want to be part of this robbery. They have a choice. They pay the same amount, in the same currency, as they are used to. The rest will be done automatically. If they refuse the ruble scheme, then it turns out that they do not want us to receive money for our own goods. This is their choice. Most of Russia's key partners have agreed to the procedure I have described. If Poland and Bulgaria put their ideological ambitions above the interests of their peoples, the interests of their budget, then this is their choice.

Question: Do you expect most countries to conclude the same treaty.

Foreign Minister Lavrov: I have just told you. You don't listen to me. I said that most of Russia's key gas-buying partners have already switched to the payment method I described. I want to emphasize again - there is no difference in the currency they will pay, but it will be a bank, not Gazprom. Because Gazprom was actually robbed.

Question: Turkey has closed its airspace to Russian aircraft from Syria. They say it's because of the Syrian mercenaries that Russia sends to Ukraine. It's true?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: We have never used mercenaries. I can assure you that people in Syria are busy with their own affairs.

Question: Why did Turkey close its airspace?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: We are cooperating with Turkey on many issues, and we understand each other on all of them. Turkey and Russia are partners who respect each other's interests. And who never impose anything on their partners.

Question: Russia's Permanent Representative to the UN VA Nebenzya says that the Pentagon finances biological laboratories in Ukraine. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian also says the US has biolabs in 30 countries. US Permanent Representative to the UN L. Thomas-Greenfield refuted these allegations.

Foreign Minister Lavrov: The answer is simple – they are lying. This is not an accusation, it is documented. The documents were discovered by our armed forces when they entered the territory of Ukraine.
And it is not only the Chinese Foreign Ministry that claims that the Americans have dozens of laboratories. The Pentagon Defense Threat Reduction Agency operates about thirty laboratories. The documents found and submitted to the UN prove beyond any doubt: on the territory of Ukraine, the Pentagon in its biological laboratories was engaged in research that was contrary to the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention.
Political scientists and experts in the US are now trying to start a discussion about what Washington is doing in Ukraine and other parts of the world. Globally, the US has hundreds of military biolabs. It is no coincidence that US Deputy Secretary of State Walter Nuland said that they have done everything necessary to prevent pathogens from falling into the hands of Russia. She actually confessed that what they were doing was not a peaceful act. They are setting up laboratories around Russia and China. They even (we have information) tried to drag Mongolia into this "game".
We conclude memorandums and agreements with all our neighbors. We have already signed agreements on cooperation in the field of biological safety with several countries. They guarantee that Russian biological safety and biological science will be in the public domain and subject to mutual exchange of inspections. This US activity is most likely in direct violation of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention and is an explanation for why the Americans are single-handedly blocking our proposals, supported by virtually everyone else, to establish a verification mechanism in the context of the Convention. We have been trying to complete this since 2001, but the Americans are blocking it.

Question: Your troops have been on the territory of Ukraine since February 24 of this year. is more than 2 months. Have you found any bioweapons or bioweapons research centers?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: Yes, as I said, we found documents, samples that were analyzed. Much of this information was provided by the UN. These laboratories contained the most dangerous pathogens, including tuberculosis, anthrax, cholera, brucellosis and others. These are dangerous substances, so we have no doubt that there should be an investigation. We will continue to do this. We have reason to believe that biological and chemical weapons are something we should focus on much more frequently in our dialogue with the United States. It must be insisted that they must publicly explain why they once again postponed the commitment to destroy all chemical weapons, why they built these military biological laboratories without agreeing to open verification under the Convention, and much more.

Question: How will this situation affect the UN? Is there an existential threat to the UN at the moment, can the Organization repeat the path of the League of Nation?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: Yes, it is possible, if we continue to observe the actions of the West, led by the United States, to transfer the discussion of important issues from the UN to closed non-inclusive formats like the Summit for Democracy, which was convened by President Joe Biden in 2021. The invitees were chosen Washington individually. Among them, you will find countries that Americans have never called democratic. But they were invited to the summit for democracy because they were obedient servants of Washington, or they were recognized as such.
A few years ago, France and Germany announced the creation of an alliance of multilateralists. We asked them: why do this outside the UN, because what could be more multilateral than the World Organization? The UN includes all states with the exception of a few unrecognized ones. This is a universal Organization. They told us that they needed something separate, since there are many autocratic countries and monarchies in the UN. We explain to them that this is the pluralistic picture of the world community. If they want to be multilateral, they cannot avoid including all of them. But they have created an "alliance of multilateralists" based, as they say, on the values ​​of the EU. Many initiatives like this one – on freedom of the media, on cybersecurity – have been created by European countries outside of the UN, even though
But the main thing is democracy in international relations. If you want to have honest relations, then it should be like this: the US says what they think, the Russian Federation says what it thinks, China and everyone else (India, Egypt, Turkey, South Africa, Brazil) represent their interests in such a way as it should be in the general debate of the UN General Assembly. And then the countries that are listening must decide whose point of view is closer to them. This is a democratic way of discussion. Then reaching a consensus, a compromise. And so the position of each is reflected in the common document.
The Americans operate in the UN quite differently. They simply dictate their own rules, threaten people and countries. They tell countries that if they don't do what they're told, they'll be cut off from help. They tell specific ambassadors that if they don't want to vote the way they've been told, then they shouldn't forget that they have an American bank account and their kids go to an American university. I am not kidding. I have several friends who suffer from this kind of treatment.
The key theme is the UN Charter. It states that the unification of nations is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of states. Analyze what Americans around the world are doing, and you will immediately come to the conclusion that they do not care about this principle.

Question: Many countries accuse Russia of violating the UN Charter because Russia sends military forces to the territory of an independent, recognized state and UN member of Ukraine.

Foreign Minister Lavrov: Do they believe that the Americans were right to go to Iraq, Syria and start bombing Libya? When the US says that it is threatened ten thousand kilometers from its borders, some people grumbled, some of them expressed their concern. But there was no hysteria like the one we are seeing today. Russia has been warning for years that a problem is brewing, that we cannot tolerate the threat that NATO and the US pose right on our borders, not thousands of miles away. By the way, I saw one interesting message from the Middle East in the Telegram messenger. They write that if you cannot sleep because of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, then there are some tips to help you calm down. Firstly, imagine that this is happening in Africa or the Middle East, secondly, that Ukraine is Palestine, thirdly,
There is also an anecdote about the Estonian zoo. The Estonian Zoo has a swimming pool where crocodiles live. A mother with a small child was watching a crocodile. There was a guy standing next to him drinking beer. Suddenly, somehow, the child fell right into the pool to the crocodiles. The guy jumped into the pool, saved the child and gave him back to his mother. She thanked him, saying that he was a brave Estonian guy. To which he replied that, “unfortunately”, he is not Estonian, but Russian. The next morning, the Estonian newspapers were headlined: "Drunken Russian deprived the crocodile of dinner."

Question: The UN Secretary General visited you on Tuesday and met with you and then with Russian President Vladimir Putin with two proposals: to establish contact for Russia, Ukraine and the UN to consider the possibilities of opening humanitarian corridors and, secondly, proposed a coordinated the work of the UN, the ICRC and Russia. Appreciated the interest of the Secretary General in being useful. We agreed that his people (his representatives have been in Russia for a couple of months now), together with the Ministry of Defense, will coordinate the delivery of humanitarian convoys. They were explained what the mechanism would be to control how humanitarian corridors are announced and how people who keep civilians (if they are there) as human shields react to their proposals.

Foreign Minister Lavrov: There is no need for anyone to help open humanitarian corridors. There is only one problem. The humanitarian corridors announced daily are ignored by Ukrainian ultra-nationalists who sit in a steel mill on the outskirts of Mariupol. The Kyiv regime either does not order them to release civilians (if there are civilians there), or cannot tell them what to do and has no power over them.


Question: Should Moldova worry about Russia's special military operation? The goals of Russia's special military operation in Ukraine have been announced. They are to protect the civilian population in the east of Ukraine and to ensure that there are no threats from the territory of Ukraine to this population and to Russia. That's all. Question: After one day the shooting ends, after all the destruction, the killing of people inside Ukraine, after all the accusations, threats from both sides, is it possible that Ukrainians and Russians can restore trust between themselves and live side by side in cooperation, as they did they do it in the past? Or is it already too late? Foreign Minister Lavrov: I have not the slightest doubt that the two peoples will live in peace and good neighborly relations.

Foreign Minister Lavrov: They have to worry about their own future because they are being dragged into NATO. And I don't think it would add security to Moldova.

https://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/1811531/ - zinc

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/7586227.html

Google Translator

********************************

Washington Uninterested in Peace in Ukraine - Chinese Spox

Image
China says U.S. seeks to prolong the ongoing conflict in Ukraine as long as possible. Apr. 29, 2022. | Photo: Twitter/@SuldanMohamed_

Published 29 April 2022 (2 hours 0 minutes ago)

The U.S. seeks to prolong the conflict in Ukraine and undermine Russia, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijan said.

On Friday, the official told a briefing that the U.S. is uninterested in peace in Ukraine, so it is making every effort to prolong the conflict for as long as possible.

China has advocated peace since the start of the conflict in Ukraine on February 24 and has called for a halt to any actions that fuel the fire. In this regard, the Chinese spokesperson said that “while the international community is calling for the end to hostilities, the U.S. keeps adding fuel to the fire and shows readiness to fight until the last Ukrainian.”

"Their real goal is not to achieve peace but to make sure that the conflict is prolonged. As the Americans say, they seek to weaken Russia", Zhao said, adding that "as for whether the U.S. brings peace or war, security or chaos, I guess we all know the answers to those questions."

The conflict has damaged relations between China and the U.S., which despite all its efforts, has failed to push the Asian country to condemn Russia; instead, China has remained on the sidelines of international sanctions against Moscow.


U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has said that Washington's aid to Ukraine aims to weaken Russia to the point where "it can't do the kinds of things it has done by invading Ukraine."

President Joe Biden on Thursday asked Congress for another 33 billion dollars as part of its efforts to support Ukraine during the ongoing conflict with Russia. On the same day, American legislators voted on a Lend-Lease plan for Kiev that would facilitate Washington's delivery of arms to Ukraine if President Joe Biden approved it.

Given that Ukraine would have to pay for those deliveries eventually, Russia has already issued warnings saying the move risks pushing Ukraine into a debt pit that would affect the country for generations.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Was ... -0017.html
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Sat Apr 30, 2022 1:01 pm

Difficulties of the second phase of a special military operation
April 30, 13:57

Image

Difficulties of the second phase of a special military operation

Quite often we encounter a lack of understanding by ordinary people of what is happening at the front. In some ways, this is the fault of television experts, who for eight years have dispersed jingoistic patriotism about “worthless Ukrainians”. In some ways, this is a banal lack of understanding of the specifics of military operations in the region.

In the Kharkov and Lugansk regions, relatively slow rates of advance of the allied troops are maintained. In the south, in the Donetsk and Zaporozhye regions, progress is almost imperceptible at all.

Therefore, some may have an erroneous idea that the second phase of the NMD announced by the Russian military command has stalled.

However, it is not.

The main task of the second phase involves the establishment of complete control over the Donbass. And here it is necessary to take into account several factors:

▪️The Donbass grouping of the Armed Forces of Ukraine consists of the most trained and motivated units, including those deployed from Western Ukraine.

▪️The enemy had eight years to think over and implement a defense in depth along the entire line of contact with the forces of the LPR and DPR.

▪️The Ukrainian side deliberately does not carry out the evacuation of the population from the combat zone, using civilians as human shields. Evacuation is carried out only when military personnel mix with civilians as part of the evacuation convoys. Slowly but surely there is progress in the Izyum direction. The allied forces have completed the operational encirclement of Liman: the entire area is under the fire control of the Russian side.

All this, of course, complicates the main task of the second phase of the SVO, but does not make it impossible.

Currently, the allied forces are making active attempts to break into the defense of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in several places at once:

▪️

▪️

▪️The battles for Rubizhne continue, where the enemy defenses are gradually being ground down.

▪️The people's militia of the LPR liquidated a powerful fortified area in Novotoshkovsky and advanced towards Orekhovo.

▪️The assault on Popasna continues: for a month and a half, regular troops, "Kadyrovtsy" and "Wagnerites" have been slowly taking the city. the possibility of continuing the offensive simultaneously in several directions; access to a large transport hub - the city of Bakhmut, the occupation of which will disrupt the supply of part of the units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine; the possibility of creating several boilers with cutting off the Slavic-Kramatorsk group from the rest of the forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Donbass. The settlement is located on a hill, where there is a whole network of natural water obstacles. This significantly slowed down the pace of the offensive in the early days.

Popasnaya is called almost the Stalingrad of the current special operation. The comparison, although overly pretentious, is still correct. Yes, there is a successful operation to liberate Mariupol.

But if we compare the scale of the forces and means involved, as well as the prospects for the operation, then Popasnaya is one of the critical points for the success of the second phase of the NWO.

What gives control over Popasna:Understanding these prospects, the command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine transferred part of the units from the Rubizhne-Severodonetsk-Lysichansk agglomeration to Popasnaya. This made it possible to partially compensate for the losses suffered by the 24th Lviv mechanized brigade.

▪️

▪️

▪️



And although the allied forces already control most of the city, the assault on Popasna is still one of the most difficult operations at once for several reasons.

Difficulties of Popasnaya

▪️

▪️For 8 years, the Armed Forces of Ukraine have made the city a powerful fortified area, surrounding it (especially along the southern outskirts) with a system of platoon and company strongholds, which are interconnected by communications. These communications make it possible to covertly transfer personnel and armored vehicles to firing positions with the possibility of prompt withdrawal to shelters.

▪️The elimination of strongholds, where units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are now trying to withdraw from the city, the allied forces will probably deal with after the liberation of the territory of Popasna itself.

▪️Most of the city is a private sector, in which Ukrainian soldiers dug trenches, trenches and equipped dugouts in the basements. Cleaning every house takes a lot of time and effort.

▪️In rare high-rise buildings, units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine created positions for snipers and fire spotters.

▪️There are still civilians in Popasna, which does not allow the allied forces to fully use aviation and artillery. , the entire eastern part of the city, the Popasnaya-1 railway station, and the building of the local administration are under the control of the allied forces. Several strongholds were liquidated around the city. There is an additional cleansing of the southwestern outskirts and preparations for an offensive towards the Popasnyansky car repair plant. The servicemen of the Armed Forces of Ukraine gradually understand the futility of further resistance and surrender in small groups.

And so it turns out that it will take more time to storm a town of twenty thousand than to liberate half a million Mariupol.

However, this operation is gradually coming to an end.

At the momentThe result of Popasna's liberation will not be long in coming, and the second phase of the special military operation will proceed at a different speed. (c) Rybar https://t.me/boris_rozhin/46062 - zinc

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/7586844.html

Izyum direction. 04/29/2022
April 30, 11:14 am

Image

The attack on the Izyum direction..

1. Yampol is being cleared or has already been cleared.
2. Up to 1000 Vushnikov are pressed to the river near Oskol.
3. Fighting on the outskirts of the Red Estuary.
4. Between Krasny Liman and Slavyansk yesterday the Armed Forces of Ukraine blew up the railway bridge.
5. Fighting continues in the area of ​​the village of Pashkovo south of Kurulka, a few kilometers from the Barvenkovo-Slavyansk highway.
6. Also ongoing fighting for Orekhovo west of Novotoshkovsky.

Both sides note heavy losses of the Armed Forces of Ukraine from the fire impact of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/7586640.html

Google Translator

*******************************************

WASHINGTON BETS ON A WAR OF ATTRITION AGAINST RUSSIA
29 Apr 2022 , 12:01 pm .

Image
Pentagon Chief Lloyd Austin publicly admitted that the US wants to weaken Russia (Photo: AFP/Getty Images)

On March 29, the talks between Russia and Ukraine from Istanbul (Turkey) were outlined with relative optimism, arousing world interest in the possibility that a détente or an end to the war could be reached.

A month later, there is nothing concrete on the table and the possibilities of agreements remain deadlocked.

Rather the events in the Ukraine seem to be complicated and protracted. From government spokespersons, especially in the West, the words "ceasefire" have practically disappeared from speeches and communiqués.

The warmongering language and announcements from the United States and Europe have not stopped increasing. The news has been covered with announcements of arms shipments to Ukraine by allies of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), in an overwhelming propaganda orchestration, and even surpassing the already amazing paradoxes that have been unleashed with this conflict , because even the head of European diplomacy, Josep Borrell, raised the issue in an intemperate manner, indicating that "the war will be decided on the battlefield ."

For his part, Volodímir Zelenski has had a vague and contradictory discourse. His remote appearance before the governments and parliaments of several countries during the month of April strengthened his calls for the shipment of weapons and the indirect or direct participation of NATO in the war. Basically, from the declarative ground, he moved away from any possibility of détente in what could be considered a reversal of his positions at the end of March.

Image
NATO's portable Javelin anti-tank missiles are part of successive arms shipments to Ukraine (Photo: EFE)

Recently, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov indicated that Ukraine failed to assess the withdrawal of Russian troops three weeks ago from the Kiev and Chernigov regions, in the north of the country, and from the Sumi region, in the northeast.

"We changed the configuration of our military presence in Ukraine, this was announced immediately after the meeting in Istanbul" on March 29, he noted.

"We said that since we believe that (the Ukrainians) have put under consideration what could form the basis of an agreement, we, as a gesture of goodwill, changed the configuration in the Chernigov and kyiv regions, but this was not appreciated, but Bucha was organized immediately," he said.


In his opinion and in a position clearly bored by Ukraine's delays, Lavrov indicated that serious negotiations with Zelensky cannot be carried out, since he "constantly changes his point of view in diametrically opposite directions."

"He talks a lot. It depends on what he drinks or smokes, he says a lot," said the head of Russian diplomacy.

Why does peace in Ukraine now seem further away?

CONFESSION OF PARTY

In the open and communicational scene of the conflict, the positions of the actors are being narrated by the facts.

This April 27, the government of Joe Biden announced that it would submit to Congress the approval of "aid" of 33 billion dollars to Ukraine, of which some 20 billion would go to new war material. This large amount of weapons and equipment would add to the several billion dollars that the United States and other NATO members have allocated to Ukraine.

In strictly military terms, a large part of the weapons allocated so far could not change the outcome of the war, but it could prolong it, and this is the admission that has come from the main military spokesperson for the US government. The war in Ukraine has become a war of attrition.

US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin publicly stated that his government "wants to see a Russia weakened to the point where it can't do the things it has done," he said, adding: "We want Ukraine to win."

For his part, a spokesman for the National Security Council said Austin's comments were in line with US goals in recent months, namely "to make this invasion a strategic failure for Russia," CNN reports .

"One of our goals has been to limit Russia's ability to do something like this again. That's why we're arming the Ukrainians with weapons and equipment to defend against Russian attacks and that's why we're using sanctions on their foreign trade. that are directly targeting Russia's defense industry to undermine Russia's economic and military power to threaten and attack its neighbors."

The remarks about Russia's alleged intentions to generate "aggressions" further west define Washington's position. Basically they refer to the continuity of the conflict, projecting it in the long term in a more complex and multifactorial picture of wear on Russia.

According to Austin, Russia "has already lost a lot of military capability and a lot of its troops and we want them to not be able to quickly restore their capabilities."

The Pentagon chief also indicated the possibility that the causal factors of the conflict, such as Ukraine's possible accession to NATO, remain intact.

"I think in the future, if there is a chance, Ukraine will once again look to apply to become a NATO member, but again, that's probably a little further down the road," he said.

The West intends to change the course of the Russo-Ukrainian conflict through indirect involvement, incorporating it into its strategic interest in degrading Russia.

Simultaneously, the political, economic, communicational and cultural fronts, which point to the isolation of Russia, are added to new targeted actions that Washington would be orchestrating inside the Eurasian country, specifically through soft power actions to generate shocks in various terms.

The warning comes from Russian President Vladimir Putin, who recently indicated that the West's interest is "to weaken and divide Russia."

"Western leaders themselves no longer hide that the sanctions are not directed against individuals or companies... Their goal is to deal a blow to the entire national economy, the social and humanitarian sphere, every family and every Russian citizen," Putin said.

Far from all the rhetoric of "helping" Ukraine, Western governments have preferred to sacrifice it by confining the country to a prolonged, painful and unnecessary conflict. Ukraine has been turned into a proxy state and into a functional piece -just as it was before February- for Atlanticist strategic purposes.

The shock wave in the implementation of the western strategy of lengthening the critical war knot also implies the long-term projection of multidirectional economic hostility. This formally occurs against Russia but is imposed against other countries through pressure and intimidation to break international trade structures.

This roadmap also drags the countries of the world that right now are being affected with differentiated impacts of the coercive measures against Russia. The crisis can only get worse.

The scale and depth of the loop caused by the continuation of the war is unprecedented in recent times.

https://misionverdad.com/globalistan/wa ... ntra-rusia

Google Translator

**************************************

Russia destroys 389 Ukrainian targets in 24 hours

Image
The Ministry of Defense indicated that in recent attacks by the Russian armed forces, at least 35 command posts were destroyed. | Photo: EFE
Published April 30, 2022 (47 minutes ago)

The Russian Defense Ministry noted that 120 Ukrainian nationalists were neutralized in the latest military aviation operation.

The Russian Defense Ministry announced on Saturday the destruction of 389 Ukrainian targets, including 15 rocket and artillery weapons and ammunition depots during the last night.

Defense Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov said that in the recent attacks by the Russian armed forces, at least 35 command posts, 41 strongholds and 169 concentration areas of soldiers and mercenaries on Ukrainian territory were destroyed.

Konashenkov noted that in the latest military aviation operation, 120 Ukrainian nationalists, four tanks and six armored vehicles were neutralized.

The missile forces in turn attacked four Ukrainian military installations: two command posts of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, a battery of multiple rocket launch systems and a radar station.


During yesterday from the air, the operational-tactical and military aviation of the Russian Aerospace Forces also hit nine military concentration areas and killed more than 120 "nationalists", four tanks and six armored vehicles.

The senior Russian military officer commented that the anti-aircraft defense shot down 18 unmanned devices, including three Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2 drones.

Offering the balance of the military operation in Ukraine, Igor Konashénkov reported that two projectiles were intercepted over the towns of Gorlovka, in the Self-proclaimed People's Republic of Donetsk, and Snezhkovka in the Kharkov region.


Since the beginning of the Russian military operation for the protection of the Donbas region, Russian forces have destroyed 142 aircraft, 112 helicopters, 658 drones, 279 anti-aircraft missile systems, 2,656 tanks and other armored vehicles, 307 multiple rocket launchers, 1,189 units of field artillery and mortars, as well as 2,492 special military vehicles.

https://www.telesurtv.net/news/rusia-de ... -0008.html

Google Translator

********************************

Russia: US Bill on Frozen Assets Is a Distortion of Int´l Law

Image
Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Friday described US President Joe Biden’s suggestion to transfer frozen Russian assets to Ukraine as “outrageous” and a “violation of all legal norms". | Photo: Twitter @anadoluagency

Published 29 April 2022 (7 hours 36 minutes ago)

Moscow views the U.S. bill allowing the transfer of the seized Russian assets to Ukraine as a “flagrant” distortion of the law, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday.


U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on Thursday that Washington is considering the possibility of seizing the sanctioned assets of the Russian government and using them in projects to help Ukraine.

Moscow views the U.S. bill allowing the transfer of the seized Russian assets to Ukraine as a “flagrant” distortion of the law, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday. According to Peskov, such legislation is nothing but "expropriation of private property".

"This clearly demonstrates how fragile all the generally recognized foundations are now, in the field of private property, economics, politics, and everything else," he said. "This can cause nothing but rejection and incomprehension."


The Justice Department said it would support such legislation, even though the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) had earlier criticized the initiative as a potential violation of constitutional due-process protections.

The legislation idea was first introduced by Democratic Senator Michael Bennet and his Republican colleague Rob Portman in late March, arguing that Ukraine has faced the worst refugee crisis since War World II, and transferring the seized assets of the Russian oligarchs to the Ukrainians would "help with ongoing humanitarian efforts".

Last month, the United States announced the creation of “Task Force KleptoCapture” – an agency that would pursue "corrupt Russian oligarchs” and sanctions violators. This is one among many other actions taken within the Western push to sanction Russia for its military operation in Ukraine.

The Kremlin said that the goal of its special operation was to "demilitarize and de-Nazify" the neighboring country. However, the Western countries deemed it an invasion and slapped sanctions targeting Russia's economy, businesses, media, sports and culture, along with other areas.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Rus ... -0030.html

************************************************

How the CIA Oversaw Belgium’s Secret Nazi Army
Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on APRIL 29, 2022
Asa Winstanley

Image
Gladio secret agent Michel Van Ussel. (BBC)

“We knew we were protected” — NATO’s terrorist army recruited fascists and targeted ordinary civilians to strike fear into the heart of the populace and abort radical political change.


“It was advisable not to be too specific, because this was one of the most secret organisations that has ever existed” — That’s how former Belgian Gladio agent Michel Van Ussel recalled the line he was sold by his recruiter in 1987.

He related his involvement in NATO’s secret terrorist network at the opening of an extraordinary 1992 BBC documentary series.

The secret soldiers were given high-powered short wave radios that could communicate over distances more than 6,000 km, funding, secret code names, access to arms caches and training in bases near London and Boston.

The secret army in Belgium was only one link in a chain of state-sanctioned terrorist groups that stretched all across Europe — Operation Gladio. The ultimate masters of this network were the CIA. The footsoldiers were often members of the far-right: extreme monarchists, fascists and outright Nazis.

The goal: preventing radical political change and keeping Europe under the control of US empire using brutal covert operations and false flag terrorist attacks.

In his book on Gladio, Swiss historian Daniele Ganser explains that an investigation by the Belgian Senate later found that (identical to the rest of the Gladio network) the Belgian secret soldiers were all “thoroughly anti-communist” in political orientation.1

They were also involved in atrocities in former imperial domains overseas: “Members of the Belgian secret army much like their colleagues of the secret Portuguese army had also operated in the Belgian colonies in Africa.”2

But NATO’s secret Nazi army in Belgium was responsible for atrocities at home too.

These false flag operations aimed to strike fear into the population while simultaneously implicating the Communist Party (which, like in Italy and France, was relatively mainstream and often came close to winning elections).

In 1990, Operation Gladio was revealed to the world by Italy’s prime minister. The admission caused shock waves all over Europe. Just as in Italy, the Belgian parliament set up an inquiry.

Belgian defence minister Guy Coeme asked his army chief, “Whether there existed in Belgium a Gladio like organisation.” Despite his government role supposedly leading the armed forces, Coeme maintained that he had never heard of such a structure.3

The minister’s blissful ignorance is an indication of the “parallel structures” secretly running European countries which were emphasised by renegade Italian Gladio agent Vincenzo Vincguerra (an unrepentant fascist terror-bomber).

Gladio was a network of unaccountable hidden armies stacked with fascists, which manipulated European governments on behalf of the CIA and MI6 for decades.

Defence Minister Coeme also demanded “to know whether there exists a link between the activities of this secret network, and the wave of crime and terror which our country suffered from during the past years.”

Image
A wanted poster from the Brabant massacre. (The Brussels Times)

In speaking of a “wave of crime and terror” the defence minister was primarily referencing the Brabant massacres of 1982-1985.

This string of 16 seemingly motiveless massacres of civilians in supermarkets across the Brabant region by a shadowy group of gunmen struck fear into hearts across the country. Many people were injured and 28 were killed.

Only very small sums of money were ever involved — often less than $5,000 — and victims were gunned down mercilessly.

The aim seemed to be pure terror. No one was ever caught for the crimes. But the attacks all shared the same hallmarks: “Massive brutality and professionalism was employed.”

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2022/04/ ... nazi-army/

The Shelling of the Sokol Market by Ukraine Forces in Donetsk
Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on APRIL 29, 2022
Fergie Chambers

DONETSK, DONETSK PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC— It took less than one day in DPR for this author to witness Ukraine purposely shelling civilians.

This afternoon, fellow journalist Eva Bartlett and I visited the Sokol Market, in the Kirovsky District, a western residential district of Donetsk.


Earlier in the day, at 11:40am, among the busiest hours, Ukrainian forces, just miles away in Krasnogor, fired 10 Grad rockets at the market. Initial reported were two dead, since updated to five: a woman who worked at the market in her 50’s, and a man in his 60’s, a local teacher, who was buying supplies for his mechanics class. At least 23 more were injured, including a woman who was already a refugee from Mariupol, employed at a market grocery stand, and two teenagers. Our taxi driver, who drove us to the market, waited for us, and drove us back into town, was from the Kirovsky district; he told us that the old man who died had been his teacher in high school.

Image
One shell hit this storefront in the building supply area of the market

There is no military presence in this neighborhood whatsoever, no base, no embedded soldiers, nothing. Gennady Andreevich, an employee of the neighborhood safety commission, called it a very “sleepy” district, where there is only this market, a strip of shops, a park, and a number of Soviet-era residential buildings. The area has seen sustained, constant strikes since 2014, sometimes nearly every month. One of the residential buildings was hit as recently as two weeks ago. These sorts of markets are the central point of social gathering, commerce, and employment for the vast majority of working people in Russian culture, who cannot afford to frolic in more luxurious, capitalist-developed urban centers. The perpetrators of these atrocities understand implicitly that the eyes of bourgeois mass media are never fixed on the poor, and as such, they are regularly targeted.

Image
This woman died in the shelling; authorities had to tend to the wounded first, and she remained on the market row when we arrived

The sounds of Russian/DPR artillery, responding to the attacks by shelling the Ukrainian military installations, was constantly audible in the background of our time there today.

Unfortunately, what we witnessed today has become business as usual for the citizens of Donetsk and beyond. This is just one small example of what these people face, day in and day out. “There is absolutely no military reason to strike places like this. They do this to strike fear in our hearts,” said Gennady Andreevich, “ but it does not work.” Indeed, in spite of 8 years of attacks, and now endless constraints from isolation and sanctions, including a limit on running water to a few hours in the evening, this city of over a million continues to move on with life; shops remain open, public transport runs, and the populace is united in its will to resist its attackers.

Image
This was the site of the largest shell, which injured a number of people. Their blood is seen here, with a DPR soldier onlooking. A fragment of the shell is in the nearest box.

The western erasure of the massacre of the people in Donbas, at the hands of Ukrainian fascists, is an absolute disgrace. Of course, we would expect this from the heavily propagandized majority of the western populace, who are nursed and indoctrinated by reactionary corporate media, but the silence and lack of clarity on the part of the western “left” is stunning. Donbas’s civilian population has been relentlessly assaulted by fascist proxies of the United States and NATO for nearly a decade; but yet, the implicit Russophobia of a “left” so deeply damaged by decades of anti-communist social engineering leaves them confused, unable to see that the people of Donetsk, Lugansk, and truly, all Russians in Ukraine, are the bearers of a torch of righteous people’s resistance.

Gennady Andreevich toured us through the carnage, showed us the calm of the surrounding environs, and pointed to a number of places nearby which had been shelled in the months and years prior, including his own administrative office this past March. Two of his co-workers were killed in that attack. At one point in our exchange today, he looked at me sternly and said, “sooner or later, God will sort them out, the people who are doing this.”

Image
A local high school mechanics teacher also died in the shelling

Let it be so, and may those who claim the banner of anti-Imperialism shake the dust from their eyes, and recognize that the arms our tax dollars send to Ukraine, the fruits of political confusion and ambivalence, have been, and will continue to be unleashed on people who only want to exist in their own land. Let them see that the struggle of Donbas is a pivotal piece of the global struggle against the most vicious empire in human history, that of the United States war machine, and all of its tentacles and allies.

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2022/04/ ... n-donetsk/

Borotba: Fighting Fascism is the Duty of Everyone on the Planet
Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on APRIL 29, 2022
Borotba

Image

Statement by Borotba (Struggle), a revolutionary Marxist organization banned in Ukraine since 2014. Translated for Struggle-La Lucha by Greg Butterfield.

May 9 marks the 77th anniversary of the Day of Victory over Nazi Germany.

Almost a century separates us from those events. However, right now we see what a colossal impact they continue to have on the entire world community.

World War II didn’t just start. It didn’t come out of nowhere. A tangle of contradictions in international politics led to it, which they didn’t try to untie by diplomatic means, but to cut with the help of war.

The reasons that divided the world into supporters of the ideas of Nazism and anti-fascists more than 80 years ago still exist today. Western corporations and finance capital, which for many years armed Hitler, created a combat-ready army in order to send it against those from whom they felt threatened: the Soviet Union.

Now we see exactly the same thing: Western transnational corporations and financial capital over the past 8 years have been very intensively creating an army of Nazis, supporters of white supremacy, in order to direct it against Russia. More than 120,000 well-motivated fighters, pumped up with far-right propaganda, were gathered at the borders of the Lugansk and Donetsk People’s Republics (LPR and DPR), preparing to kill the peaceful civilians of Donbass and Crimea, just like their predecessors in 1941.

However, this was not allowed to happen.

Today, speaking about the process of denazification, it is important to understand the causes that led to the world war 80 years ago, and which still exist in the world.

It is important to realize that in Ukraine, it is not Russia that is fighting against Ukraine, but two political currents fighting: anti-fascists and Nazis. That is why thousands of far-right militants from all over the planet wearing runes and swastikas poured into Ukraine. That is why we see stripes with a hammer and sickle on the soldiers of the Russian special forces, and red flags of Victory on the tanks.

We want to appeal to our brothers and sisters from other countries of the world:

Comrades! Know this! In Ukraine, we are fighting, including against your enemies. Against those who came from your hometowns. Against the Nazis of America and Georgia, against the far right from Poland and Sweden. Against those trained by Spanish and Lithuanian instructors.

We know that the future of all humanity is being decided in Ukraine today!

And we urge you not to be silent!

May 9 is the Day of Victory over fascism! On this day, we call on everyone to take to the squares of your cities to pay tribute to the anti-fascists of Spain who died in the battles against Franco, the Italian partisans who fought against Mussolini! To the Greek People’s Liberation Front (ELAS) fighters, anti-fascists from the People’s Liberation Army of Yugoslavia! To the prisoners of concentration camps and the participants in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising!

We call for rallies in memory of those who did not give up! In memory of Ernst Thälmann, Aris Velouchiotis, Bruno Buozzi, Jean Moulin and millions of others who died at the hands of Nazism!

Today, like 80 years ago, the world is divided into two halves: supporters of Nazism and their opponents. We know you are on the right side!

Show it to everyone on May 8 or 9, 2022, by going to the main square of your city with red flags and St. George’s ribbons raised high!

We will win!

Borotba

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2022/04/ ... he-planet/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Sat Apr 30, 2022 10:53 pm

May Day declaration against NATO’s imperialist proxy war on Russia
April 30, 2022 Struggle - La Lucha

Image

Open letter for May Day

On May Day, the international day of solidarity of the workers of the world, the following groups and individuals proclaim our united opposition to the greatest threat to the global working class: imperialist war. We declare our refusal to accommodate ourselves to the war drive of world imperialism against Russia. We hoist on our banners today the following:

*Down with NATO’s proxy imperialist war in Ukraine!
*For the right of Russia to defend itself against imperialist encroachment!

Those on the left who seek to emulate the propaganda of the ruling class by reducing this global conflict to a national struggle for Ukrainian “self-determination” ignore the following:

Although Russia has been a capitalist state since 1991, it is not an imperialist power in its own right. Imperialism is more than when one state employs military force against another. Imperialism is a stage of capitalism represented by the dominance of finance capital. Russia is not part of the “imperialist club” but a relatively backward, dependent capitalist economy.

The military operation of Russia in Ukraine is a desperate effort to stop it from being used as a spearhead in the long held plans of western imperialism to turn Russia into a semi-colony to loot its vast internal resources. Ukraine’s integration into the NATO war machine was well advanced before Russia launched its defensive military operation. Russia faced the prospect of its entire western border becoming part of the NATO alliance and a staging ground for the deployment of advanced weaponry, including nuclear weapons, missile defense systems and troops aimed squarely at Russia.

The 2014 Maidan coup, led by fascist shock troops on the ground and guided by U.S. imperialism, installed an effective puppet government in Kiev. Since the coup, this government has not only been a direct tool of U.S. imperialism, but has violently suppressed all leftists, ethnic Russians and other minorities. The repression provoked a bloody civil war in Ukraine as residents of the Donbass established the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk to defend themselves from the violently Russophobic Kiev regime and its fascist attack dogs.

This is why we reject the policy of “revolutionary defeatism” being advocated by many centrist Marxist tendencies. It is not enough to just oppose NATO intervention in Ukraine. Opposition to imperialism means extending support to those directly in its crosshairs. This means offering support to both the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk and to the Russian state. Russia has the right to defend its sovereignty by military force against imperialism’s proxy war.

We are also committed to the genuine independence of Ukraine. However, this cannot be achieved under the aegis of an imperialist war alliance that is using Ukraine as a pawn.

We oppose the proxy war in Ukraine because it is part of imperialism’s drive to World War 3. The efforts to subordinate Russia through sanctions, war and regime change, are part of U.S. imperialism’s ever more reckless efforts to maintain its global hegemony and reverse its economic decline against both its imperialist rivals in Europe and rising China. The rivalries are fuelled by the ongoing capitalist economic crisis deepened by the COVID-19 pandemic. A NATO victory in Ukraine would not lead to peace but only advance imperialism’s war plans against China.

A war between NATO and its allies against either Russia or China risks wiping out billions of lives in a nuclear war and unleashing horrors that would dwarf the worst infernos of the 20th century.

On May Day we recommit ourselves not only to resistance to imperialism but to building an independent movement of the working class internationally to overthrow capitalism through world socialist revolution. The signing and sharing of this statement on May Day is aimed at starting to rebuild concrete links between the genuinely anti-imperialist Marxist forces as part of this process.

The struggle against imperialism must be forged into a struggle against the capitalist system and all the capitalist ruling classes! War will only truly end when there are no more nation states or classes!

Workers of the world unite!

Groups that have already signed include:
Revolutionary Communist Action (Greece)
Classconscious.org (Australia/USA)
Communist League (LCFI-Brazil)
Consistent Democrats (LCFI-Great Britain)
Militant Trend Bolshevik (LCFI-Argentina)
Socialist Workers League (LCFI- USA)
Bolshevik Group (South Korea)
Trotskyist Fraction Proletarian Vanguard (Brazil)
Socialist Fight (Great Britain)
Red Border (Brazil)
Socialist Unity Party (USA)
Anti-imperialist Aotearoa
Brazilian People’s Communist Party
Planning Beyond Capitalism (USA)
Socialist Party (USA)
Young People’s Socialist League (USA)
US Friends of the Soviet People
Nigeria Automobile Technicians Association, NATA
New Communist Party of Britain
Communist Workers League (USA)

Individuals that have already signed include:
Mohammad Basir Ul Haq Sinha, Bangladesh
Willi Eberle, Zurich, Switzerland
Mark Andresen, Great Britain
Elizabeth Hoskings
Alex Jordan Dillard, USA
Mike Gimbel, Retired Executive Board member, Local 375, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, USA
Joana Marisa Borges Boaventura, Brazil
Marcelo Bastos, Brazil
Márcia do Amaral Miranda, Brazil
JM Considine
James Hall, Great Britain
Irene Bolger, Australia
Anthony Hubert Codjoe, Ghana
Karen Harris, Canada
Moises Delgado, USA
Mark Copestake, Great Britain
Elizabeth Hoskings, Great Britain
Botagoz Datkhabaeva, Kazakhstan
Andy Coombes, UNITE member, Great Britain
Angie Graham, Great Britain
Kevin O’Connor, Great Britain
Candice McKenzie, Australia
Paul Humphries, Great Britain
Clive Healiss, Great Britain
Louise Hart, Great Britain
Jane Elliot, Great Britain
Danny Coll, Great Britain
Issac Cohen, Great Britain
Kathy McConaghie, USA
Myung-Seok Kim, South Korea
Chang-Won Kim, South Korea
Diana Isserlis, Great Britain

To sign the letter please send an email to: ClassConscious@protonmail.com or emancipacaotrabalho@gmail.com.

https://www.struggle-la-lucha.org/2022/ ... on-russia/

*****************************************

Hundreds arrested in Ukraine for helping Russian troops since anti-collaboration law enacted

MSTYSLAV CHERNOV AND YURAS KARMANAU
KHARKIV, UKRAINE
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
PUBLISHED YESTERDAY

Image
A man suspected to be a Russian collaborator is detained during an operation by Security Service of Ukraine in Kharkiv, Ukraine, on April 18.
FELIPE DANA/THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Viktor appeared nervous as masked Ukrainian security officers in full riot gear, camouflage and weapons pushed into his cluttered apartment in the northern city of Kharkiv. His hands trembled and he tried to cover his face.

The middle-aged man came to the attention of Ukraine’s Security Service, the SBU, after what authorities said were his social media posts praising Russian President Vladimir Putin for “fighting with the Nazis,” calling for regions to secede and labelling the national flag “a symbol of death.”

“Yes, I supported (the Russian invasion of Ukraine) a lot. I’m sorry. I have already changed my mind,” said Viktor, his trembling voice showing clear signs of duress in the presence of the Ukrainian security officers.

“Get your things and get dressed,” an officer said before escorting him out of the apartment. The SBU did not reveal Viktor’s last name, citing their investigation.

Viktor was one of nearly 400 people in the Kharkiv region alone who have been detained under anti-collaboration laws enacted quickly by Ukraine’s parliament and signed by President Volodymyr Zelensky after Russia’s Feb. 24 invasion.

Offenders face up to 15 years in prison for collaborating with Russian forces, making public denials about Russian aggression or supporting Moscow. Anyone whose actions result in deaths could face life in prison.

“Accountability for collaboration is inevitable, and whether it will happen tomorrow or the day after tomorrow is another question,” Zelensky said. “The most important thing is that justice will be served inevitably.”

Although the Zelensky government has broad support, even among many Russian speakers, not all Ukrainians oppose the invasion. Support for Moscow is more common among some Russian-speaking residents of the Donbas, an industrial region in the east. An eight-year conflict there between Moscow-backed separatists and Ukrainian government forces had killed over 14,000 people even before this year’s invasion.

Some businessmen, civic and state officials and members of the military are among those who have gone over to the Russian side, and Ukraine’s State Bureau of Investigations said more than 200 criminal cases on collaboration have been opened. Zelensky has even stripped two SBU generals of their rank, accusing them of treason.

A “registry of collaborators” is being compiled and will be released to the public, said Oleksiy Danilov, head of Ukraine’s Security Council. He refused to say how many people have been targeted nationwide.

With martial law in place, authorities have banned 11 pro-Russian political parties, including the largest one that had 25 seats in the 450-member parliament – the Opposition Platform For Life, which was founded by Viktor Medvedchuk, a jailed oligarch with close ties to Putin.

Authorities say pro-Russian activists in southeastern Ukraine, the site of active fighting, are helping the invaders by acting as spotters to direct shelling.

“One of our key goals is to have no one stab our armed forces in the back,” said Roman Dudin, head of the Kharkiv branch of the SBU in an interview with The Associated Press. He spoke in a dark basement where the SBU had to move its operations after its building in central Kharkiv was shelled.

The Kharkiv branch has been detaining people who support the invasion, call for secession and claim that Ukrainian forces are shelling their own cities.

Allegations of collaborating with the enemy carry strong historic resonance in Ukraine. During World War II, some in the region welcomed and even co-operated with invading forces from Nazi Germany after years of Stalinist repression that included the “Holodomor” – a man-made famine believed to have killed more than 3 million Ukrainians. For years afterward, Soviet authorities cited the co-operation of some Ukrainian nationalists with the Nazis as a reason to demonize today’s democratically elected leaders of Ukraine.

Human rights advocates know of “dozens” of detentions of pro-Russian activists in Kyiv alone since the new laws were passed, but how many have been targeted nationwide is unclear, said Volodymyr Yavorskyy, co-ordinator at the Center for Civil Liberties, one of Ukraine’s largest human rights groups.

“There is no complete data on the (entire) country, since it is all classified by the SBU,” Yavorskyy told AP.

“Ukrainian authorities are actively using the practice of Western countries, in particular the U.K., which imposed harsh restrictions on civic liberties in warring Northern Ireland. Some of those restrictions were deemed unjustified by human rights advocates, but others were justified, when people’s lives were in danger,” he said.

A person in Ukraine can be detained for up to 30 days without a court order, he said, and antiterrorism legislation under martial law allows authorities not to tell defence attorneys about their clients being remanded.

“In effect, these people disappear, and for 30 days there’s no access to them,” Yavorskyy said. “In reality, (law enforcement) has powers to take anyone.”

The Ukrainian government knows the implications of detaining people over their opinions, including that it risks playing into Moscow’s line that Kyiv is repressing Russian speakers.

But in wartime, officials say, freedom of speech is only part of the equation.

“The debate about the balance of national security and ensuring freedom of speech is endless,” Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba told AP.

In the town of Bucha, which has become a symbol of horrific violence in the war, Mayor Anatoly Fedoruk said there were collaborators who gave invading troops the names and addresses of pro-Ukrainian activists and officials in the city outside Kyiv, with hundreds of civilians shot to death with their hands tied behind their backs or their bodies burned by Russian forces.

“I saw these execution lists, dictated by the traitors -– the Russians knew in advance who they’re going to, at what address, and who lives there,” said Fedoruk, who found his own name on one of the list. “Of course, Ukrainian authorities will search for and punish these people.”

In the besieged port city of Mariupol, officials accused collaborators of helping the Russian military cut off electricity, running water, gas and communications in much of the city in a matter of days.

“Now I understand perfectly why the Russians were carrying out such precise, co-ordinated strikes on objects of critical infrastructure, knew about all locations and even times when Ukrainian buses evacuating refugees were supposed to depart,” said Mariupol Mayor Vadym Boychenko.

Political analysts say the invasion and the brutality of the Russian troops against civilians have turned off many Russian sympathizers. Still, many Moscow supporters remain.

“Russian propaganda took deep roots and many residents of the east who watch Russian TV channels believe absurd claims that it’s Ukrainians who are shelling them and other myths,” Volodymyr Fesenko of the Penta Center think tank told AP. “Naturally, Ukrainian authorities in the southeast are afraid of getting stabbed in the back and are forced to tighten security measures.”

Unlike Viktor, whose Kharkiv apartment was raided, 86-year-old Volodymir Radnenko didn’t seem surprised when Ukrainian security arrived at his flat Saturday to search it after detaining his son, Ihor. The military said the son was suspected of helping the Russians in shelling of the city – some of which occurred in Radnenko’s neighbourhood about 15 minutes before the officers showed up, and the smell of smoke lingered in the area. At least two people were killed and 19 others wounded in the region.

“He is used to thinking that Russia is all there is,” Radnenko told AP after the officers left. “I ask him: ‘So who is shelling us? It’s not our (people), it’s your fascists.’ And he only gets angry at that.”

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/a ... ince-anti/

And yet the propaganda besotted become incredulous when you explain that some of those dead in Bucha were 'disloyal' victims of the Nazi SBU cause grandfatherly Biden assured them that there are no Nazis in Ukraine. It's maddening.

*******************************************

Poland reportedly interested in annexing part of Ukrainian territories

Lucas Leiroz, researcher in Social Sciences at the Rural Federal University of Rio de Janeiro; geopolitical consultant.

While the Western world continues to claim that Russia is interested in "annexing" or "fragmenting" Ukraine, current reality shows that the geopolitical players interested in attacking Kiev's sovereign territory are others. Recent investigations reported by Russian intelligence point out that the Polish government, supported by the US and other Western powers, plans to invade and seize territorial portions in eastern Ukraine. As expected, Polish officials deny involvement in this type of maneuver and the Western media remains absolutely silent.

In a new episode of the military conflict in Ukraine, the head of Russia's foreign intelligence service stated that the US and Poland are currently planning to take "military-political control" over western Ukraine through a future armed intervention. In a press release, Sergey Naryshkin, head of the SVR (Russian acronym for Foreign Intelligence Service), said that, according to information received by his agency, Washington and Warsaw are planning to gain control over Polish historic possessions in western Ukraine.

“According to the intelligence acquired by Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service, Washington and Warsaw are engaged on plans to establish Poland’s tight military and political control over its historic possessions in Ukraine", he said during a public statement on April 28.

Naryshkin also pointed out some strategic details about how the occupation of the western Ukrainian region would take place. The process is related to the already admitted Polish intention to start a "peace operation" in Ukraine, which is already supported by the West to some extent. The Poles would use as an argument that their operation would aim to protect the Polish population and heritage against "Russian aggression" and then initiate an absolute political and military control in that region.

Obviously, the only stance taken by the Polish government has been absolute denial. Stanislaw Zaryn, spokesman for Polish Interior Minister Mariusz Kaminski, denied on the same day all information alleged by the Russians. Unlike the Moscow’s official, however, the spokesman did not offer more in-depth information about what the real Polish strategic objectives with a possible "peace operation" would be, only continuing the already known Western speech about the "information warfare and the spread of fake news" supposedly practiced by Russia.

These were some of his words about the case: "Sergey Naryshkin continues Russian information operation against Poland and the US. Russia's intelligence chief is spreading insinuations against Poland and the US, convincing falsely that both countries are preparing a Polish annexation of western Ukraine".

In fact, the claim does not seem unsubstantiated. Warsaw has historic territorial claims in western Ukraine. Many Polish cities after the Second World War became part of the then Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, including Lviv, which is today a major point of military and geostrategic importance. In these regions, it is possible to speak Polish or Ukrainian with "Polishisms", the Roman Catholic faith is practiced and there is a strong ethnic presence of Poles.

In recent years, due to the stability of relations between NATO (of which Poland is a member) and Kiev, the matter concerning historically Polish territories has practically been "forgotten" by geopolitical experts. But, in the same sense, it is absolutely reasonable to think that, in the midst of conflicts and tensions, Poland with the support of NATO wants to retake these territories, which would have great geostrategic value for the western alliance.

It is also necessary to mention that, interestingly, the western media has avoided commenting on the case, even though it is a serious issue and with a strong possibility of escalation in the Ukrainian conflict. Apparently, for the mainstream media, it is forbidden to talk about “attempts to balkanize Ukraine” when the player involved is a NATO member.

On one side of the war of narratives, there is an intelligence agency claiming to have reliable sources and providing details on how its predictions will come to completion, while on the other there is only a formal denial and baseless accusation about alleged "Russian lies". In fact, there is no way to predict what will happen, but it is reasonable that there should be at least concern on the part of international society and an effort to prevent Warsaw from starting another escalation of the conflict by annexing Ukrainian territories.

Source: InfoBrics

http://infobrics.org/post/35656/

By all means, give Poland the accursed Galatia, they deserve each other.

***************************************

Azovstal. View from space.
April 30, 21:53

Image

Azovstal. View from space. Photos from Maxar,
It will not be restored after the end of hostilities.

Image
Image
The US military-industrial complex is making extraordinary profits thanks to NATO's war against Russia (Photo: File)

As Russian forces have just deployed the second phase of the special military operation in Ukraine, the United States has already provided $3.4 billion in weaponry, ranging from heavy artillery to tactical drones and armored vehicles, to support the kyiv government. and its avowedly Nazi factions.

The latest military aid package of 800 million dollars was the eighth delivery of aid and last Thursday, the 28th, the president of the United States, Joe Biden, sent a request to the United States Congress for an aid of 33 billion dollars that includes 20.4 billion in military and security assistance.

The US House of Representatives also passed legislation facilitating defense equipment lend-lease deals with Ukraine and other Eastern European countries, reviving a law put in place against Hitler during World War II and paving the way for more US weapons reach the region.

National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan has described US military assistance as "the weapons Ukraine needs" to defend itself from Russia, consisting of:

*More artillery, armored vehicles, anti-tank missiles and anti-aircraft systems;
*Assistance in developing Ukraine's capabilities to conduct cyber warfare;
*More intelligence sharing;
*Support in the production of ammunition;
*Assistance in the clearance of mines and other explosives, as well as in the protection of Ukraine against chemical, biological and "dirty" bombs;
*Further increased US presence on NATO's eastern flank.

For its part some Europeans have not been left behind, the United Kingdom provided Ukraine with 120 heavily armored Mastiff patrol vehicles. The Czech Republic has delivered howitzers, tanks and heavy infantry fighting vehicles, including 56 light tanks originally from East Germany. Denmark and the Netherlands have sent anti-tank weapons. Finland has sent rifles, anti-tank weapons and undisclosed equipment.

Image
Military aid from 30 countries is unloaded from a plane at Boryspil International Airport, outside Kiev, Ukraine (Photo: Al Jazeera)

Australia approved the delivery of 20 Bushmaster armored vehicles, Slovakia sent its S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems, Estonia confirmed the shipment of nine 122mm towed D-30 howitzers and hundreds of shells, Germany promised 100 Leopard-1 tanks from bases Bundeswehr storage; however, Turkey refused to supply Ukraine with its S-300 ADSs.

The list described seems to indicate that the pretensions of NATO, headed by the United States, do not go through dialogue, a political solution or diminishing the influence of the Euro-Atlantic alliance in the conflict that was triggered by the eight years of violence unleashed by kyiv. over the Donbas and caused up to 14,000 deaths.

MORE FUEL TO THE FIRE

The Baltic countries and Germany are supplying Ukraine with expired Soviet weapons at the same time that the defense capabilities of the countries indirectly participating in the conflict on the side of kyiv are diminishing. In this way, the corporations of the American Military Industrial Complex (MIC), plus those of Europe and Turkey, determine how to solve the problems that have arisen.

US weapons arrive as a substitute to the territory of European countries that are supplying Soviet weapons to Ukraine, an example is the deployment of US Patriot air defense systems instead of S-300s in Slovakia. Despite the Pentagon's insistence that this measure is temporary, negotiations are under way to permanently base US weapons in all countries on NATO's eastern flank.

Analysts clarify that the fact that Washington speaks of military aid has never implied that such aid should be exclusively free, on the contrary, Ukraine will have to pay all its allies for weapons at the end of the conflict.

While Russia claims to have destroyed 2,496 Ukrainian tanks and armored fighting vehicles, and 1,093 pieces of field artillery and mortars, US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken declared on April 25 that "the strategy we have put underway - massive support for Ukraine, massive pressure against Russia, solidarity with more than 30 countries participating in these efforts - is having real results.

He added that "We are seeing that, as far as Russia's war goals are concerned, Russia is failing and Ukraine is succeeding. Russia has sought as its main objective to totally subjugate Ukraine: to take away its sovereignty, to take away its independence. That has failed." .

Separately, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned that Western support for Ukraine was turning the war into a proxy conflict between NATO and Russia, with the inherent risk of triggering a third world war. "I would not like to artificially raise those risks. Many would like that. The danger is serious, real. And we should not underestimate it," Lavrov said on Russian state television.

The Russian ambassador in Washington, Anatoly Antonov, also told the Rossiya 24 television channel that "what the Americans are doing is adding fuel to the fire", adding that "I only see an attempt to raise the stakes, to aggravate the situation, to see more losses.

Image
Ukrainian military fire a Javelin anti-tank missile during NATO-led military exercises at an "unknown" location in Ukraine (Photo: Reuters)

The same American officials have warned that they do not know where the arsenal supplied to Ukraine, which has "one of the largest arms trafficking markets in Europe", will end up, according to the Global Organized Crime Index . This has generated statements such as that of Maria Zajárova, spokesperson for the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who warned last Thursday that Western weapons supplied to that country may fall into the hands of some terrorists, in the same way that happened with deliveries to the Syrian “opposition”, which ended up promoting the Islamic State and spreading to Europe and Asia with multiple attacks.

THE ASTRONOMICAL EXPENSE IN A DEFENSE THAT DOES NOT DEFEND

Military outlays in the national budget of no other country come close to that of the United States. In fiscal year 2019, the Pentagon's budget was nearly three times greater than China's defense spending and more than 10 times greater than Russia's. The US total surpassed the defense of the next 10 countries combined and alone accounted for a hefty 38% of military spending worldwide. Besides:

*The United States spent 725 billion dollars on national defense during 2020, according to the Office of Management and Budget, this represents 11% of federal spending.
*Some 690 billion dollars were spent by the Department of Defense (DoD) on military activities and the remaining 34 billion on related activities carried out by the Department of Energy and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
*Of the 690 billion dollars, there was an expense in operation and maintenance of 279 billion.
*On military personnel spending, such as pay and retirement benefits for service members, $161 billion was spent.
*Procurement of weapons and systems cost $139 billion in 2020, and nearly $100 billion was spent on research and development of weapons and equipment. This implies that the sum of both amounts remains in the hands of the corporations: 239 billion, just over a third.
*More than $10 billion was spent on building and running military installations, such as barracks and family homes, and $1 billion on a variety of other activities.
*At the time of the Vietnam War, a much larger share of military spending was devoted to military personnel and the acquisition of weapons and systems.

According to the DoD's own accounting, taxpayers have spent $13.34 trillion on the US military from 2000 through fiscal year 2019 in 2020 inflation-adjusted dollars. Add another $3.18 trillion for the Administration of Veterans, the annual average amounts to 826 billion dollars.

Image
Comparison between the other 11 countries with the highest defense spending compared to the United States (Photo: Peter G. Peterson Foundation)

In an editorial published in Scientific American magazine , Union of Concerned Scientists chief Elliott Negin argues that "if the Pentagon were a private corporation, gross mismanagement would have bankrupted it years ago," he refers to the inefficient controls by the DoD itself and Congress that have allowed tens of billions of dollars to be squandered a year, and the last 20 years "are plagued by a parade of overpriced, botched and poorly done projects."

Its overpriced and ineffective weapons systems and programs have fetched some $46 billion, the three-time failed Bradley tank alone has cost some $22.9 billion over the last 17 years, and a ballistic missile defense system, proposed by Reagan in the framework of Star Wars, it has cost 67 billion since the 90s.

The projected cost of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter was $1.5 billion over its lifetime, yet the 490 units manufactured have more than 10 serious flaws and almost 900 software defects. The Pentagon still plans to buy an additional 2,400 units over the next 25 years even though more than half of the current fleet was grounded for maintenance between 2017 and 2018.

Other malfunctioning systems, according to Negin, include the $22 billion Zumwalt destroyer; the $30 billion littoral combat ship, which the Navy is already withdrawing from circulation because it's virtually unusable; and the Air Force's $43 billion KC-46 refueling tanker, which offers little improvement over current refuelers.

This is without counting the serious environmental threats that the functioning of the US defense implies and its demonstrated inefficiency in the face of health threats that cost almost a million deaths, 20% of those that occurred in the world.

THE BIG WINNERS OF ALL TIME

There is a very fluid circuit between the high military officials in the United States, its Congress and the arms manufacturers that results in mutual benefit, and also makes the latter maintain an influence in global politics.

The Open Secrets page revealed that, in the last 20 years, the American WCC and its affiliates spent more than 2.6 billion dollars in political pressure groups (lobbying) and their goal is to get up to half of a Pentagon budget that it will probably top $800 billion next year.

Their efforts have paid off, capturing up to half of the $14 billion allocated to the DoD during that time. In 2020, for example, Lockheed Martin received $5,803 in contracts for every dollar it spent on lobbying.

In the last five years alone, the United States accounted for 39% of global arms exports, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. The largest recipient of that fraction was Saudi Arabia, which received almost a quarter of the 43%, which was directed to the Middle East.

The Biden administration approved a $500 million contract for support for Saudi Arabia's helicopter fleet in September and another $650 million for air-to-air missiles in November, even as the Democrat promised to end support for the Saudi-led war. by Saudi Arabia in Yemen. In that war, bombs from the manufacturers Raytheon, Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics have been used mainly for eight years and have claimed more than 100,000 lives due to the conflict, famine and disease.

As stated, almost a third of the 740 billion dollars budgeted by the Pentagon for 2022, is dedicated to the acquisition, research and development of weapons, and US manufacturers deliver tens of billions in sales of these to the Foreign.

Image
The accumulation of capital in companies linked to the Military Industrial Complex implies dangerous trends in the evolution of political-military relations in the United States (Photo: Global Times)

The three megacorporations spent $40.9 million of the $117 million (35%) the defense industry spent on lobbying efforts during 2021 and more than 20 registered lobbyists who lobbied the Pentagon or White House on behalf of Lockheed Martin , Raytheon or General Dynamics since the beginning of the war also have previous jobs in the same agencies with which they contacted for the giants of the military complex, he emphasized.

There are names of visible war hawks that emerged from those companies:

*Former Defense Secretary Mark Esper spent the seven years prior to that role as a registered lobbyist for Raytheon.
*The current head of the Pentagon, Lloyd Austin was until 2020 on the board of Raytheon Technologies.
*Secretary of State Antony Blinken, like Austin, came to the Biden administration from the investment firm Pine Island Capital Partners, a Washington, DC-based company dedicated to investing in the aerospace and defense sectors.
*WestExec Advisors, a consultancy launched by Blinken and former officials of the Barack Obama administration (2009-2017), announced in 2021 a strategic partnership with Teneo, a global advisory firm that has made millions from the interests of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

As the demand for weapons from Ukraine increases, these companies have reduced their lobbying operations. Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and General Dynamics spent $16.9 million on lobbying in the first quarter of 2022, yet all except General Dynamics spent less on lobbying this quarter compared to last. same period last year.

On April 25, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) announced a major arms sale to Ukraine. The $165 million munitions deal is the largest direct military sale to Ukraine to date. Earlier this month, the Pentagon awarded a $19.5 million contract to Raytheon and Lockheed Martin for Javelin missiles and a $19.7 million contract to AeroVironment for Puma spy drones.

" HOW FAST CAN THEY DO THIS?"

Senior researcher at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, William Hartung, told OpenSecrets that "they don't have to push the government to say 'Let's arm Ukraine,' the government comes to them and says 'How fast can you do this? ' So in that sense, they may not need to push as hard as they would in another time period."

Thus, although the vast majority of weapons shipped to Ukraine so far have come from the Pentagon's arsenal, on April 13 senior Pentagon officials met in classified mode with the CEOs of the Big Five, as well as L3Harris Technologies, BAE Systems and Huntington Ingalls Industries, to "accelerate the production and deployment of systems" for Ukraine, the United States and their allies.

Even amid supply chain woes, COVID-19 and inflation, and some Q1 profits eroding, defense industry eyes how rising global tensions could boost business in years to come , for this they have ready their restructuring demands that go through tax matters and will reach the desired goal: Sell more weapons with less supervision and transparency.

The withdrawal of the Biden administration from the 20-year war in Afghanistan, which cost US taxpayers some $2.26 trillion, seemed like economic relief to his country, but the outbreak of the Ukraine crisis has led many to suspect that the US CIM is simply changing the battlefield in order to continue making profits.

https://misionverdad.com/globalistan/co ... en-ucrania

Google Translator

*********************

From Cassad's Telegram account:

***

Forwarded from
Reporter Rudenko V
0:31
The people who managed to leave the Azovstal plant today said that they left the shelter on their own and did not know about the buses.

They went out at their own risk. They made their way through the broken fence.

***

Forwarded from
WarGonzo
According to Azovstal. We talked to several sources directly among the negotiators and colleagues who are really in the subject. This is the situation at the moment. 77 buses arrived under the auspices of the UN. Not everyone entered the factory. Ours agreed to let through only the number that is necessary for the declared number of civilians. The first 25 people who left, about whom Rudenko wrote, evacuated on their own, not as part of the upcoming humanitarian action. Later, another 20 came out - allegedly already from the "Azov", they were taken to Bezymyanny for filtration. The militants, holding the remaining civilians hostage, are trying to bargain. They demand almost no seats in buses, and with weapons. Our position, at least at this stage, is categorical. Only civilians. And only through filtering. No cat and mouse with neo-Nazis. We hope she stays that way. Reasons not to show integrity - no. Negotiations are ongoing. All this differs little from the conditional "Nord-Ost", Beslan and the hospital captured by Basayev. The same picture, exactly. Note, however, that the information we have collected is not official.

@wargonzo

***

Forwarded from
Voenkor Kitten Z
Today, the Internet and mobile communications have disappeared in the Kherson region, and all operators at once. Neither Lifecell, nor Vodafone, nor Kyivstar is working. At first, residents thought about the accident, but a little later, Vodafone confirmed that this was a planned, coordinated decision by Ukrainian operators.

In fact, this is a direct continuation of the story of the shelling of Kherson by Ukrainian ballistic missiles. In Kyiv, they themselves signed that Kherson is not Ukraine, that Ukraine does not need it, and Ukraine will no longer be. At the same time, it is clear that Bankova would like Kherson to repeat the fate of Mariupol much more. I am sure that they are very sorry that the Ukrainian soldiers had to flee the city at such a speed that they did not want to destroy it.

But what's done is done. Kherson is now Russian. And it will be Russian. So its inhabitants will cause maximum damage. After all, one must understand that disconnecting communications is the same act of genocide as the launch of Tochka-U in residential areas. People are deprived of the opportunity to work, communicate with loved ones, receive notifications about all the same shelling.

Now the main question is how quickly Russian and Donetsk operators will be able to restore communications in the city. This needs to be done as soon as possible - in an accelerated, front-line format. Not even today, but yesterday. In this situation, this is a great opportunity to show people the difference between the Ukrainian non-state and Russia, which not only freed people from the Ukronazi oppression, but will never leave them.

@voenkorKotenok

***

Forwarded from
Unofficial Bezsonov "Z"
The Ukrainian authorities say that everything is fine at the front, that there will soon be a counteroffensive to the Urals and other heresy. They claim that all the problems voiced by their own fighters are nothing but Russian propaganda. There are documents and some stripes, photographs from the company stronghold of the 3rd airborne assault company of the 1st battalion of the 79th airmobile brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, which were shared with me by the participants in the destruction of ukrov in that sector. On all fronts, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are suffering total losses. But on Ukrainian TV, pink ponies are jumping and the sun is shining on vineyards.
Telegraph
Documentation of the 79th Brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine
Personnel records, chevrons and photographs:

***

Сolonelcassad
Regarding Gerashchenko's hysteria after some people started leaving Azovstal. Who is on the humanitarian corridor, and who is captured.

His pathetic attempts to intimidate the people who remained in the basements are aimed at prolonging their stay there as much as possible in order to continue spinning "a humanitarian series about an evacuation to Turkey that will not happen."
Hence the stories about the fact that "the Russians will kill everyone" in order to intimidate the civilians and the remaining AFU soldiers who are thinking about how to escape and surrender. The Internet is on Azovstal, and what is happening with those who have already surrendered is not difficult to see, at least on footage from the Makeevskaya colony.

In fact, as it is not difficult to see from the published videos, nothing threatens civilians at all, and the Ukrainian military is not in danger of death, but captivity with the possibility of an exchange someday. Their treatment is normal, they are fed, treated, their knees are not shot, their throats are not cut.

War criminals are waiting for captivity and trial in the DPR. Of course, no one will be killed without trial, when open trials with sentencing of Ukrainian war criminals are much more profitable in terms of demonstrating the inevitability of retribution for the crimes committed.

Hence the attempts to delay the approach of retribution.

***

Image

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin?q=%23%D0%BA ... 1%82%D0%B0

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply