Andrew Korybko
Sep 25, 2024
The most important points are that: Ukrainian corruption could lead to an end of EU support; there’s no willingness in Poland to conventionally intervene there unless perhaps the front collapses; NATO and EU membership are unlikely; Poland doesn’t want US nukes; and it’s not serious about overthrowing Lukashenko right now.
Russian pranksters Vovan and Lexus recently published a nearly half-hour-long recording of their video call with Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski, which his spokesman said might have been conducted in March, in which they successfully impersonated former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. What follows is a summary of what Poland’s top diplomat revealed and a brief analysis of what it all means. He began by expressing surprise at how long it took Ukraine to lower its mobilization age.
This segued into him reaffirming that Poland will encourage Ukrainian citizens in its territory to defend their fatherland, including by training some of them, but he clarified that it can only deport lawbreakers at the moment. Ukraine would thus have to issue an arrest warrant if it wanted Poland to extradite a particular citizen. Sikorski’s view is that draft-dodgers shouldn’t receive social benefits, though the whole EU has to agree in order for these people not to move around searching for the best deal.
The conversation then moved along to a few words about corruption, which Sikorski said is the shortest and fastest way for Ukraine to lose Western support if sensational allegations are confirmed. He believes that the greatest problem for it right now though is Russia’s attacks against its electricity grid, which he heard had destroyed approximately 70% of its production capacity. If this worsens, then large parts of Ukraine will become inhabitable and lead to a new wave of refugees, which worries Poland.
On the subject of peace, Sikorski advised the prankster who he thought was Poroshenko not to get into a formula like the Minsk Accords where Ukraine loses control as he phrased it, mentioning that this is possible if Zelensky tries to involve more countries in his plans. Putin isn’t susceptible to moral pressure, and some of those that Zelensky is courting like South Africa, India, and Brazil don’t care about Ukraine’s borders. They just want the conflict to end and are perfectly happy for Ukraine to pay the price.
Although Ukrainian and US interests aren’t identical according to Sikorski, the US knows that its credibility is at stake so he doesn’t expect it to sell Ukraine down the river because that would affect the US’ credibility vis-à-vis all American allies. Trump’s people have told Sikorski that he’ll threaten Putin with escalation if he wins in order to get a better deal, but Sikorski sounded a bit skeptical. In any case, he said that everything depends on how long Ukraine can sustain the conflict.
He also advised the fake Poroshenko that his country mustn’t lose Odessa or let Russia come closer to the Dnieper, but he also said that Poland has no interest in sending troops to Ukraine unless they’re UN peacekeepers. Tusk wouldn’t approve of it, plus Sikorski said that it’s already very controversial to even discuss the scenario of Poland intercepting Russian missiles over Ukraine, which would mean joining the conflict. These calculations could change, however, if the front started to collapse.
Another fact inhibiting the possibility of a conventional Polish intervention in Ukraine is Warsaw’s unwillingness to confirm so-called “Russian propaganda” about its alleged plans in this regard. According to Sikorski, both of Poland’s main political parties are on the same page about Ukraine, so no sudden policy changes are expected no matter what might happen on the home front. After clarifying that, he then transitioned to discussing the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO, which he doesn’t think is likely.
He believes that Western Europe is using that scenario as a bargaining chip with Russia, which he doesn’t think is a bad thing per se since it they’re hinting to Russia that Ukraine won’t join the bloc if Russia withdraws. If it doesn’t, then the rest of Ukraine could join, but none of them have the willingness to cross the absolute red line of going to war with Russia over this issue. Even Macron’s rhetoric is insincere and aimed at making Putin wonder what the West will do, the strategy of which Sikorski supports.
As for Ukraine joining the EU, Sikorski was adamant that it’ll happen in stages and is impossible to do right away, perhaps taking up to a decade in total. He also advised the fake Poroshenko not to listen to anyone who tells him otherwise since they only want to further delay this process. The hardest chapter to negotiate will be agriculture, he warned, since it’ll force a complete revision of the bloc’s common agricultural policy that’ll become a very difficult problem for its member states.
On that topic, he also mentioned that Poland was very displeased with Zelensky wanting to meet with Tusk or the Agricultural Minister over this year’s farmers’ dispute, which Sikorski condemned as a propaganda stunt. Wrapping up this subject, Sikorski added that the balance of power inside the EU would change if Ukraine joined since it and Poland would together more votes and MEPs than Germany. That’s something that few might have thought about and which more should reflect on.
The last three significant things that he talked about with the fake Poroshenko was the possibility of Poland hosting US nukes, Nord Stream II, and regime change in Belarus. Regarding the first, he clarified that Poland wouldn’t be able to use them and would just deliver them to US jets, similar to a postman delivering a $1 million check to someone else. It wouldn’t be theirs, and in fact, it might even cause some political problems if it leads to the formation of troublesome peace movements like in Germany.
Duda is only talking about this because he feels sidelined during his last year in office and wants to attract attention to himself, or so Sikorski speculated. He also doesn’t believe that Poland hosting nukes would scare Putin since it doesn’t really matter whether they’re there or in neighboring Germany. He was then asked about the Nord Stream II attack, praised whoever did it, and claimed that the US had advance knowledge but didn’t stop it.
Drawing to a close, he advised the Belarusian opposition against acting prematurely since he claimed that the government is so repressive that they can’t hope to overthrow it. Instead, they should wait until political changes occur in Russia, which he said could precede such changes in Belarus. They’ll get crushed if they act now and need to wait for the right moment instead. That’s sensible enough but contradicts expectations about Poland wanting to promote regime change there right away.
Reflecting on everything, a few points stand out the most: Ukrainian corruption could lead to an end of EU support; there’s no willingness in Poland to conventionally intervene there unless perhaps the front collapses; NATO and EU membership are unlikely; Poland doesn’t want US nukes; and it’s not serious about overthrowing Lukashenko right now. Observers should remember that these are the official assessments of Poland’s Foreign Minister shared in discretion with what he thought was a close friend.
They therefore shouldn’t be dismissed, and it might even be due to the sensitivity of what they revealed that the pranksters didn’t publish their video of him until sometime later. Although they deny any connections to Russia’s special services, it’s difficult to imagine these patriots sitting on such a goldmine of information without trying to pass it along to them somehow or another. Hopefully the government became aware of what Sikorski revealed and formulated their policies to take maximum advantage of it.
https://korybko.substack.com/p/heres-wh ... to-russian
******
European Union morphs into NATO’s financial war machine
Finian Cunningham
September 24, 2024
Two key posts – in foreign and defense policy – reveal the militarist and anti-Russia direction of the European Union.
Two key posts – in foreign and defense policy – reveal the militarist and anti-Russia direction of the European Union.
Ursula Von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission – which works as the executive branch of the European Union – announced her new team of commissioners for the next five years.
Taking over as foreign affairs minister for the 27-nation bloc is Kaja Kallas who is a staunch Russophobe and vigorous supporter of Ukraine. Kallas has called for more EU and NATO military funding for Ukraine to “defeat Russia” and the break up of the Russian Federation.
The former Estonian prime minister has led the movement to destroy Soviet Red Army monuments across the Baltic states. (This is while her investor husband continues to profit from doing business with Russia.)
Working closely alongside Kallas will be another rabid Russophobe, the former Lithuanian prime minister Andrius Kubilius, who is taking up a newly created EU post as defense commissioner. The creation of that post is an alarming sign of how the EU bloc has transitioned from a trade and political union to a military organization.
But what’s even more alarming is the assigning of such an anti-Russia hawk as Kubilius to oversee military policy.
At a time when relations between the EU and Russia have become so fraught with tensions, the European bloc is giving politicians from hostile Baltic states a driving seat to push relations even further towards conflict.
Indeed, the first announcement Kubilius made as the prospective new defense commissioner was that the European Union would likely be at war with Russia in the next six to eight years. That assessment is shared by Kaja Kallas.
Kubilius said the sole focus during his tenure is ramping up military spending by the EU nations to boost NATO and aid Ukraine. He said that he will be working closely with foreign policy chief Kallas to tap funds.
What this means is that the European Union is moving towards making it mandatory for national budgets to allocate more to military procurement. That’s a breakthrough for all the worst reasons.
Kubilius is reportedly aiming for a budget of €500 billion over the next five years to be spent on the military by the EU.
That increase would represent about half of the projected EU total budget.
His comments indicate the purpose of the massive redirection of finances – to boost NATO. Kubilius noted that “the European Union has instruments to get larger financing, which NATO doesn’t.”
That implies that under his formulation and compulsory directives from Brussels, the EU will make it mandatory for member states to spend more on the military.
NATO and the EU have overlapping membership with 23 members of the EU’s 27 also being part of the U.S.-led military alliance. Non-NATO members are Austria, Cyprus, Malta, and Ireland.
NATO states are expected to spend a minimum of 2 percent of their GDP on military. That amounts to about $380 billion for European members of NATO in 2024. That is a huge increase compared with what was spent by these members only a few years ago. But what the NATO planners want is more and more going forward. The problem is locking that expenditure in.
The trouble for NATO planners is the 2 percent figure is not mandatory. It is subject to national policy. While most members of NATO are hitting that target currently, there is no guarantee it will continue. Changes in national governments might result in spending slipping back to former levels of 1-1.5 percent of GDP as was the case before the proxy war in Ukraine blew up in 2022.
What the NATO hawks in the EU desire most is to lock in military spending year-on-year. NATO does not have the legal means to enforce such a commitment as mandatory on its members. But the EU can do it through its supranational powers as served by centralized directives from Brussels.
The Baltic states of Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia have upped their military spending to nearly 3 percent of GDP when Kallas and Kubilius were in office.
Moreover, Kubilius has previously proposed that all EU members devote an extraordinary, additional 0.25 percent of their GDP to make mandatory military donations to Ukraine to “ensure victory over Russia”, amounting to €100 billion a year.
This is an astounding transformation of the European Union. The organization has its roots in the 1950s as a loose trade federation of Western European nations – principally France and the Federal Republic of Germany – which proclaimed that lessons of the Second World War had been learned and would never be repeated because of commitments to good neighborliness and commercial partnership. In its earlier incarnations, the European bloc sought out friendly relations with the Soviet Union, primarily with energy trade being a cornerstone of cooperation.
Since the supposed end of the Cold War in 1991, the EU has expanded in line with the expansion of NATO. Its powers have become evermore centralized and usurping national policy. A striking feature of both NATO and the EU is the hardening of Russophobic policy that has come with the leveraging of anti-Russia Baltic states. Historically, these states were virulent collaborators with Nazi Germany in its genocidal war against the Soviet Union. The Baltic states still harbor fascists who venerate the Third Reich. Hence, the destruction of Soviet-era war monuments and the rehabilitation of public displays commemorating Nazi collaborators.
NATO’s proxy war in Ukraine against Russia is the continuation of Western imperialist designs on subjugating Russian territory that was previously pursued by Nazi Germany.
The European Union has subverted its earlier ideals of pacifism and cooperation to become part of NATO’s war machine. Crucially, what the EU brings to the war machine is legalized enforced funding, even for nations that are not part of NATO.
Added to that is the EU is being directed by people who drool about war with Russia: Von der Leyen, the former German defense minister and descendant of Nazi ideologues, is aided and abetted by Kaja Kallas and Andrius Kubilius who cannot think of Russia without fantasizing about its “defeat”.
The Nazi specter is resurrected in NATO and its EU financial wing.
https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/ ... r-machine/
Thirst for money enriches oligarchs, but bankrupts Europe
Lucas Leiroz
September 24, 2024
Despite the exorbitant profits of the defense sector, European industry suffers from a lack of innovation, given the constant Ukrainian demands, which leads to a prolonged crisis.
There are many reasons why Europe wants to prolong the war in Ukraine. Irrational liberal ideology and commitment to the project of a unipolar global order are undoubtedly the most important reasons. However, business and private profit cannot be ignored. According to many recent reports, there has been a huge increase in the profits of military-industrial companies in a number of Western countries, which explains the thirst for war of the pro-Ukrainian oligarchies.
One of the most notorious cases of this war profiteering is taking place in Germany. The military giant Rheinmettall is seeing its profits growing amid a wave of systematic support for the Kiev regime. By continuously and incessantly sending weapons, the German company has managed to escape a serious financial crisis and now has a chance to once again rank among the world’s leading defense companies.
Rheinmettal ‘s business was in a bad way. The company was on the verge of abandoning the military sector to focus on civilian production, since most of its profits were coming from the production of automobile parts. However, Germany’s participation in military assistance programs led the corporation to revitalize its production of weapons and ammunition, once again becoming a global giant in the sector.
Armored vehicles, tanks, ammunition, artillery pieces and air defense systems are some of the products in Rheinmettal’s current industrial catalog. After making adventures into industrial base projects on the Polish-Ukrainian border, the company is now working on opening a new factory in Saxony, where it expects to produce more than one hundred thousand artillery shells per year.
Obviously, the German state is interested in these profits. Recently, an action plan by the German government was announced to use part of the profits of Rheinmettal for reindustrialization projects – which seem more necessary now than ever, since Germany has been the country most affected by the anti-Russian madness. It only remains to be seen how this reindustrialization will be possible without Russian gas and cheap energy.
In short, Germany believes it is profiting from the war. But this calculation is wrong – as well as dangerous and irresponsible. The profits do not go to the German people, but to a small number of defense oligarchs who employ an absolute minority of German society. Furthermore, the real economic revival is minimal, since the constant demand for weapons requires a systematic production routine that hinders any research project in technological innovation. In other words, Rheinmetall – as well as the entire Western military-industrial complex – is doomed to continually produce the same type of equipment according to its current samples, without any relevant innovation.
Industry without innovation has little chance of long-term success. Western weapons, which have already proven to be largely unsuitable for the Ukrainian battlefield, are likely to become increasingly obsolete, and there will be no capacity for technological renewal, since, thanks to anti-Russian sanctions, the precarious European society is reaching a pre-industrial stage of development.
And, still on the subject of sanctions, it is important to emphasize that increased spending on the military industry could be a ticking time bomb for a country without reliable sources of cheap energy. After the blockade of Russian gas, Germany has been experiencing a period of profound energy instability, depending on unusual alternative sources to meet its needs – such as burning wood or buying American gas at exorbitant prices. This scenario is completely inconsistent with a situation of economic development and stability.
Germany will discover an old lesson in economics: the private profits of the oligarchies do not reflect a real situation of economic development and social well-being. Without solving the problems generated by sanctions – which obstruct technological innovation – and without relieving the pressure on the systematic production of weapons, not even constant demand will be able to save Germany and the whole of Europe from a deep crisis.
Despite the profits, aid to Ukraine remains an obstacle to European economic progress, pleasing only transnational oligarchies.
https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/ ... ts-europe/
******
France deploys colonial security forces to repress cost of living protests in Martinique
For the first time in over 60 years, French special security forces have been deployed to Martinique in an attempt to suppress protests over the soaring cost of living
September 24, 2024 by Ana Vračar
Source: Screenshot
The people of Martinique have taken to the streets throughout September to protest the cost of living crisis. In response, local authorities imposed a curfew, while the government in Paris approved the deployment of a special security forces unit (compagnie républicaine de sécurité, CRS) to the island—marking the first such action in over 60 years.
This move has been heavily criticized by local parliamentarians and left leaders in France. The CRS had been effectively banned from Martinique after their violent suppression of protests in 1959, which left three young people dead and sparked public outrage. The disregard for this ban, including by newly appointed Ministers of the Interior and for Overseas France, has been interpreted as a sign of deep disrespect toward the people of Martinique. Jean-Luc Mélenchon of France Unbowed condemned the move, stating it reflects the liberals’ and right-wing’s lack of understanding regarding the island’s relationship with mainland France.
The grievances behind the current protests are largely the same as those raised in previous demonstrations, including mass mobilizations in 2009, with the underlying feature being the colonial subjugation of the island by France in all areas of life. The difference in prices between mainland France and its so-called overseas territories is so striking that even the most basic necessities cost significantly more in Martinique than in Europe. This disparity is not mitigated by higher incomes, leaving most Martinicans struggling to afford essentials like transportation, telecom services, and, most critically, food. For example, a carton of eggs in Martinique is 65% more expensive than in France, vegetables are 88% more expensive, and fruit can costs more than double, according to price comparison platform Kiprix.
Bottled water, which is on average 114% more expensive than in mainland France, is an everyday need for Martinicans. Due to decades of land contamination with the pesticide chlordecone by France, it is still widely regarded as the only safe option for residents.
Read more: Mobilizations against effects of chlordecone poisoning gain momentum in Martinique and Guadeloupe
The protests have garnered support from progressive groups, including local trade unions. The General Confederation of Labour Martinique (CGTM) issued a series of statements linking the current crisis to decades of exploitation of both land and workers. While the corporate elite continues to enjoy record profits, workers are left in a state of perpetual austerity, the CGTM argued. Successive governments have ignored this issue, creating a situation where wages would need to increase by at least €500 just to match real expenses. In addition to salary increases, the CGTM is calling for increases in pensions and social benefits—demands they say can now only be achieved through widespread mobilization.
Mélenchon noted the patience shown by the people of Martinique in voicing their demands in the past. He warned that the years of neglect have now led to an understandable eruption of anger. The key question now remains: will the new government find an adequate solution to this crisis? Judging by the fact that it leans heavily towards the right, there is little cause for optimism. “France will face a grave crisis if it abandons overseas territories to violence and repression as the only solutions to their problems,” Mélenchon warned.
The real solution, as outlined by progressive parliamentarians in Martinique, is for mainland politicians to listen, show respect, and demonstrate solidarity. This scenario might have been more plausible had Emmanuel Macron respected the outcome of July’s snap election and allowed the New Popular Front (NFP) to form a government. The left-progressive platform’s program addresses all of the demands raised by Martinican trade unions, including freezing prices on essential goods. However, with right-wing Michel Barnier now heading the government, the deployment of security forces to Martinique may only be the beginning of more brutality against the population of France’s colonies, also known as “overseas territories”.
https://peoplesdispatch.org/2024/09/24/ ... artinique/
*****
EU state declares war on beavers
Polish PM Donald Tusk has blamed the critters for a catastrophic flood
FILE PHOTO. A beaver is pictured swimming on a river in Poland. © Getty Images / Daniel Sztork
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has called for decisive action against beavers, suggesting the industrious rodents are partly responsible for the severe flooding across the country.
The prime minister made the remarks on Saturday during a meeting with cabinet members and local officials at a crisis headquarters managing the flood response in the southwestern city of Glogow. Tusk called for quick action to tackle the disaster, urging municipalities to swiftly report their needs as well as to closely monitor the condition of dams still standing.
A sizable part of his speech, however, was dedicated to beavers, with Tusk suggesting the critters were partly to blame for the disaster and that action against their presence at man-made earthworks was needed.
“Sometimes, we must choose between our love for animals and the safety of cities, villages, and the integrity of dams,” Tusk stated, invoking the catastrophic 2010 floods and the alleged role beavers played in them. At the time, the Polish government accused the animals of causing great damage to levees.
Worst flooding ‘in decade’ hits EU state’s capital (VIDEO, PHOTOS)READ MORE: Worst flooding ‘in decade’ hits EU state’s capital (VIDEO, PHOTOS)
“Within [the existing] rules, do everything you have to, I will defend these decisions. The dams are an absolute priority today,” Tusk stated, urging officials to take action against beavers. The prime minister promised to deliver any legislation needed “within a week” should the existing legal framework prove to be insufficient for flood prevention.
“I know that it will not help much with this flood, but it will certainly help with repairing the dams and controlling the situation in the future,” he said.
The catastrophic flood hit Poland as well as other Central European nations in mid-September amid heavy rainfall generated by Storm Boris. The flooding caused widespread destruction in the region, with multiple dams overspilling or rupturing. So far, over two dozen fatalities have been reported in the region, with the tally expected to grow further, since the flooding is still ongoing and the damage has not been fully accessed.
Beavers, as well as their smaller digging rodent counterparts, have been repeatedly blamed for floods worldwide. The animals are known for clogging man-made canals, digging tunnels through levees and weakening the earthworks from the inside. Environmentalists, however, believe such animals to be an important part of the ecosystem and actually prevent both floods and drought rather than cause them through regulating the downstream flows of rivers.
https://www.rt.com/news/604593-poland-b ... lood-tusk/
pic.twitter.com/Chbke6Th97
