الغرب الكاذب يفضح نفسه في أوكرانيا

يونيو 21, 2022

صحيفة الوطن السورية-

تحسين الحلبي:

يستشهد العقيد المتقاعد من الجيش الأميركي دوغلاس ماك غريغور، وقد كان مستشاراً لوزير الدفاع الأميركي في إدارة دونالد ترامب وقد ألف خمسة كتب عن الحروب والسياسة الدولية، في تحليل نشره بعنوان «وصلت الأكاذيب إلى البيت» في 17 حزيران الجاري بعبارة للفيلسوف اليوناني ديوجين يقول فيها: «الأكاذيب هي عملة السياسة»، ويعلق ماك غريغور أن «إيجاد رجل صادق في واشنطن أصبح اليوم مستحيلا» ويتابع «فالصحافة الغربية قامت بكل ما في وسعها من أجل تصوير الجيش الأوكراني بقوة أكبر مما لديه، وكانت إدارة الحكم في واشنطن تقدم الأكاذيب طوال شهور للرأي العام الأميركي عن أسباب الحرب، وها هي وسائل الإعلام الأميركية والبريطانية والغربية الأخرى تحضر خطابها الإعلامي لعرض انهيار القدرة العسكرية الأوكرانية، بعد أن كان ذلك مطلوبا قبل فترة طويلة».

ويكشف ماك غريغور أن «الإعلام الغربي كان يعرف الحقيقة ولكنه تبنى ما تريده واشنطن من حربها ضد روسيا بوساطة الوكيل الأوكراني، رغم أن كييف خسرت الحرب أمام روسيا ولن يكون بمقدور كل المساعدات العسكرية الأميركية والأوروبية ولا التدخل الأميركي العسكري المباشر تغيير هذه النتيجة».

يستخلص ماك غريغور أن «المشكلة أمام الغرب لم تعد تنحصر بموضوع أراضي وسكان أوكرانيا الشرقية التي تسيطر عليها موسكو الآن، بل إن موسكو ستضمن السيطرة التامة على خيرسون وزابورجيا وكل الدونباس وعلى المدينتين الروسيتين تاريخياً خاركوف وأوديسا اللتين يتحدث سكانهما بلغة روسية وأصبحت المشكلة تتعلق بكيفية إيقاف كييف للقتال».

في النهاية يقر ماك غريغور أن الدول الأوروبية التي اصطفت مع واشنطن دفعت ثمناً اقتصادياً باهظاً بسبب مشاركتها في دعم أوكرانيا، ثم انتقلت هذه الأضرار الاقتصادية إلى البيت الأميركي إضافة إلى نفقات الدعم الأميركي التي بلغت 60 مليار دولار بمعدل 18 ملياراً شهرياً من واشنطن وحدها، ويستذكر غريغور سلسلة الهزائم والخسائر الأميركية في العقدين الماضيين بسبب نفقات حروب واشنطن في أفغانستان والعراق وليبيا وسورية، والتي ما تزال تراكماتها السلبية مستمرة تضرب مكانة ونفوذ واشنطن واقتصادها وبخاصة بعد خسائر جائحة كورونا في السنوات الماضية.

يستنتج غريغور أن الحزب الديمقراطي سيتلقى خسارة في الانتخابات النصفية للكونغرس التي ستجري في تشرين الثاني المقبل بسبب الأزمات التي ولدها للولايات المتحدة في سياسته الخارجية المهزومة وفي نتائجها السلبية الفادحة على الاقتصاد الأميركي مثلما دفع الرئيس الأميركي هيربرت هوفر فاتورة «الركود الكبير» في الاقتصاد الذي ضرب الولايات المتحدة عام 1929 وزعزع أركانها، فدفع ثمنه هوفر في انتخابات عام 1932 هو وحزبه الجمهوري.

إن ماك غريغور عارض التدخل العسكري الأميركي في كوسوفو في تسعينيات القرن الماضي، وكذلك أجرى مقابلة مع القناة الروسية آر- تي بالانكليزية عام 2014 ليعرب عن معارضته لأي تدخل عسكري ضد روسيا بعد استعادتها لشبه جزيرة القرم والدونباس من أوكرانيا وأعرب علناً عن رأيه بحق روسيا ضم الدونباس والقرم لأنهما روسيتان.

في السياق ذاته، يرى المستشاران في مجلس الأمن القومي الأميركي بين 2005- 2009 ستيفين هادلي وتشارلس كوبخان في حوار مع مدير مجلس العلاقات الخارجية الأميركي ريتشارد هاس في 31 أيار الماضي أن موسكو تمكنت من فرض نقاط قوة ميدانية عسكرية وسكانية داخل أوكرانيا على طريق تحقيق أهدافها وستستند لها في زيادة توسعها وسيطرتها بسرعة لكي لا يطول زمن هذه الحرب، كما يرى الاثنان أن خيارات الجيش الأوكراني بدأت تضيق كثيراً ولم يقدم الدعم الأميركي والأوروبي المباشر بالسلاح، نفعاً كثيراً في توسيع هامش مناورته في الدفاع والتحرك الميداني.

نخلص للقول إن جبهة موسكو وحلفاءها ما زالوا يثبتون تماسكاً ووحدة في الموقف في حين أن الدول الأوروبية ودول الأطلسي تفتقر لهذا العامل المهم والإستراتيجي بعد أربعة أشهر على الحرب الأميركية على روسيا وتدفع ثمنه اقتصاداً ومكانة دولية وعسكرية.

When the Lies Come Home

June 19, 2022

After lying for months, the media are preparing the public for Ukraine’s military collapse.

Douglas MacGregor at The American Conservative

Diogenes, one of the ancient world’s illustrious philosophers, believed that lies were the currency of politics, and those lies were the ones he sought to expose and debase. To make his point, Diogenes occasionally carried a lit lantern through the streets of Athens in the daylight. If asked why, Diogenes would say he was searching for an honest man.

Finding an honest man today in Washington, D.C., is equally challenging. Diogenes would need a Xenon Searchlight in each hand.

Still, there are brief moments of clarity inside the Washington establishment. Having lied prolifically for months to the American public about the origins and conduct of the war in Ukraine, the media are now preparing the American, British, and other Western publics for Ukraine’s military collapse. It is long overdue.

The Western media did everything in its power to give the Ukrainian defense the appearance of far greater strength than it really possessed. Careful observers noted that the same video clips of Russian tanks under attack were shown repeatedly. Local counterattacks were reported as though they were operational maneuvers.

Russian errors were exaggerated out of all proportion to their significance. Russian losses and the true extent of Ukraine’s own losses were distorted, fabricated, or simply ignored. But conditions on the battlefield changed little over time. Once Ukrainian forces immobilized themselves in static defensive positions inside urban areas and  the central Donbas, the Ukrainian position was hopeless. But this development was portrayed as failure by the Russians to gain “their objectives.”

Ground-combat forces that immobilize soldiers in prepared defenses will be identified, targeted, and destroyed from a distance. When persistent overhead intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets, whether manned or unmanned, are linked to precision guided-strike weapons or modern artillery systems informed by accurate targeting data, “holding ground” is fatal to any ground force. This is all the more true in Ukraine, because it was apparent from the first action that Moscow focused on the destruction of Ukrainian forces, not on the occupation of cities or the capture of Ukrainian territory west of the Dnieper River.

The result has been the piecemeal annihilation of Ukrainian forces. Only the episodic infusion of U.S. and allied weapons kept Kiev’s battered legions in the field; legions that are now dying in great numbers thanks to Washington’s proxy war.

Kiev’s war with Moscow is lost. Ukrainian forces are being bled white. Trained replacements do not exist in sufficient numbers to influence the battle, and the situation grows more desperate by the hour. No amount of U.S. and allied military aid or assistance short of direct military intervention by U.S. and NATO ground forces can change this harsh reality.

The problem today is not ceding territory and population to Moscow in Eastern Ukraine that Moscow already controls. The future of the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions along with the Donbas is decided. Moscow is also likely to secure Kharkov and Odessa, two cities that are historically Russian and Russian-speaking, as well as the territory that adjoins them. These operations will extend the conflict through the summer. The problem now is how to stop the fighting.

Whether the fighting stops in the early fall will depend on two key factors. The first involves the leadership in Kiev. Will the Zelensky government consent to the Biden program for perpetual conflict with Russia?

If the Biden administration has its way, Kiev will continue to operate as a base for the buildup of new forces poised to threaten Moscow. In practice, this means Kiev must commit national suicide by exposing the Ukrainian heartland west of the Dnieper River to massive, devastating strikes by Russia’s long-range missile and rocket forces.

Of course, these developments are not inevitable. Berlin, Paris, Rome, Budapest, Bucharest, Sofia, Vilnius, Riga, Tallin, and, yes, even Warsaw, do not have to blindly follow Washington’s lead. Europeans, like most Americans, are already peering into the abyss of an all-encompassing economic downturn that Biden’s policies are creating at home. Unlike Americans who must cope with the consequences of Biden’s ill-conceived policies, European governments can opt out of Biden’s perpetual-war plan for Ukraine.

The second factor involves Washington itself. Having poured more than $60 billion or a little more than $18 billion a month in direct or indirect transfers into a Ukrainian state that is now crumbling, the important question is, what happens to millions of Ukrainians in the rest of the country that did not flee? And where will the funds come from to rebuild Ukraine’s shattered society in a developing global economic emergency?

When inflation costs the average American household an extra $460 per month to buy the same goods and services this year as they did last year, it is quite possible that Ukraine could sink quietly beneath the waves like the Titanic without evoking much concern in the American electorate. Experienced politicians know that the American span of attention to matters beyond America’s borders is so short that an admission of defeat in Ukraine would probably have little or no immediate consequences.

However, the effects of repeated strategic failures in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria are cumulative. In the 1980s, General Motors wanted to dictate the kind of automobiles Americans would buy, but American consumers had different ideas. That’s why G.M., which dominated the U.S. market for 77 years, lost its top spot to Toyota. Washington cannot dictate all outcomes, nor can Washington escape accountability for its profligate spending and having ruined American prosperity.

In November, Americans will go to the polls. The election itself will do more than test the integrity of the American electoral process. The election is also likely to ensure that Biden is remembered for his intransigence; his refusal to change course, like Herbert Hoover in 1932. Democrats will recall that their predecessors in the Democratic Party effectively ran against Hoover for more than a half century. Republicans may end up running against Joe Biden for the next 50 years.


Douglas Macgregor, Col. (ret.) is a senior fellow with The American Conservative, the former advisor to the Secretary of Defense in the Trump administration, a decorated combat veteran, and the author of five books.

Gonzalo Lira: The Great Ukraine Blame Game Has Begun!

June 10, 2022

Blinken claims US will “follow facts” on Shireen Abu Akleh murder

June 8 2022

Source: Agencies

By Al Mayadeen English 

The US Secretary of State claims the US is looking for an independent and credible investigation for the murder of Palestinian-US journalist Shireen Abu Akleh.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken claimed Tuesday that the US will pursue accountability over the murder of Palestinian-US journalist Shireen Abu Akleh wherever facts lead.

Appearing at a forum for student journalists on the sidelines of a Latin America summit in Los Angeles, Blinken was confronted by a question on why there have been “absolutely no repercussions” for the Israeli occupation.

“I’m sorry, with respect, they have not yet been established,” Blinken said of the facts behind the case.

“We are looking for an independent, credible investigation. When that investigation happens, we will follow the facts, wherever they lead. It’s as straightforward as that,” he claimed.

The US Secretary of State said, “I deplore the loss of Shireen. She was a remarkable journalist, an American citizen.”

It is noteworthy that Palestine’s Attorney General Akram Al-Khatib had announced that an Israeli soldier shot and hit Abu Akleh, clarifying that the bullet hit her directly in the head.

CNN report, quoting witnesses, also said that the Palestinian-US journalist appeared to have been killed in a targeted attack by Israeli occupation forces.

In the same context, Yousef Jamal Al-Rantisi, a forensic expert and manager of the Gaza Center for Human Rights, released a forensic analysis of the evidence related to Abu Akleh’s murder, which concludes that she was deliberately shot and killed by Israeli occupation forces.

The Israeli occupation has angrily denied murdering Abu Akleh while asking the Palestinians to take part in a joint probe.

Dozens of lawmakers from Blinken’s Democratic Party have called on the FBI to lead an investigation to seek an impartial finding into the journalist’s murder.

Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs filed a report to the International Criminal Court regarding the brutal murder of Abu Akleh.

Gonzalo Lira: There Will Be No Peace Agreement

June 05, 2022

Grief days with changes in Narrative… or why Trolls are Doomed

June 03, 2022

Source

By F(unny) MAN

In the last days we have been observing some important developments:

The MSM defecators (1) are changing the Narrative from:

  • Weeeeeeeeee, we are the best of the best.
  • 404 Super-army of Call-of-duty soldiers are defeating the Russian Zombie hordes.
  • Russian Army is losing millions of men, thousands of tanks, hundredths of aircrafts.
  • Russia has no more men, ammo, missiles, whatever, and they will have to stop the offensive
  • United we will win (Ha! this, a very good one)

To admit that, something is happening (or could happen) that is closer to the reality that is developing in the Real World and on the ground (You know what I mean…) such as:

  • The “Diplomatic Solutions to the conflict that, 404 can and should find (from a position of Force) with Russia”
  • The “Shocking Victory that Putin the magician is about to pull off his hat”
  • The (at minimum) “600 daily casualties of the 404 army in the Donbass”
  • The “We will never pay in Rubles! But please, can we open an account in Gazprombank“
  • Et cetera…

As my grandpa always said; when you enter into conflict with reality, no matter how your wishes, your paranoia, or your narcissistic self-appreciation and wokeism are… you are in for a hard punch in the face.

We are slowly but surely seeing some kind of collective grief at play, because you can observe all phases developing (2) in front of you. You only have to look carefully at their, now serious, faces (not happy and cheering anymore) and declarations. Be they politicians in the zone A, MSM hosts, opinion makers, general analysts, vassals and puppets, or any other fauna of this political and informational ecosystem (3).

Every time I hear or read the reports about 404, I do have the feeling that what they are just bitterly saying can be resumed in this sentence: United we fight against Russia, from Victory to Victory till the final Defeat.

I suppose their days should be terrible because looks like the Russian have a never-ending supply of Tanks, Men, Talent, Aircraft, and Missiles. But what should you expect? The incredible hat of Putin the magician has no bottom end.

But let me tell you that, this grief, is also found in the troll scene. What many people might have been noticing lately is that the level of trolling has been reduced significantly in the last weeks. I have been observing a decline in the quantity and quality of troll commenting on those websites and Alternative Media (4) that some people use to look for real (I mean REAL) information, opinion, and analyses. I have the feeling that many of the trolls should also be in (or close to) the Depression phase of the grief.

I have contacted some of my troll-friends that, unfortunately, have to work as troll-commentators(5) fundamentally in well-known 3-letter-agencies such as CENSOREDCENSORED or CENSORED, and made a little bit of research and interviews… their words were stunning.

They speak about unhealthy conditions, miserable and delayed payment, alienation, abusive and violent working atmosphere, overworking hours, lack of respect at work, anxiety, psychological trauma, and ptsd (the answer to their trolling comments is terrible to their self-esteem) high incidence of suicide, high incidence of divorce, obesity, stress, sleep deprivation, fatigue, anxiety (again) and other problems. They openly state that they cannot work much longer under such pressure conditions. One of them even claimed to need more than 36 hours of psychological treatment after realizing he started to believe that the answers to their trolling comments seemed to be quite reasonable and articulated, and more likely truth worthy that the official narrative they have to push (as that it is obviously impossible).

One of my (closest) troll-friends is also considering leaving his Job in CENSORED after more than 25 years of trolling. With his experience and qualifications, he can always find a high-skilled job somewhere as a Self-Storage Manager or as Restroom Attendant.

I have to inform you that no trolls were harmed or exposed to light in the investigative research that was conducted to the writing of this article.

In the time you invested in reading this article, 26 trolls have died, 96 have quit, 238 have to get a two-week sick leave due to due to the problems, hardness, and complications related to their job.

1.) It is quite a gross definition, but… they defecate through one of the orifices in their body, just not the traditional one (6)

2.) The five stages of grief:

  • Denial
  • Anger
  • Bargaining
  • Depression
  • Paying in Rubles

3.) To get more information about these Fauna and Ecosystem, you just have to switch on your Television, there is a 24/7 documentary going on, all the time, nonstop… geeeez! do it at your own risk.

4.) Websites like this one CENSORED you are reading, or those of Mr. Martyanov CENSORED or Mr. Bernhard CENSORED just to mention some.

5.) They say you have to have friends even in Hell, and Hey! Trolls do have to eat too. They have Families, Troll-Wives and Troll-Kids. So long they do not work in the light of the day (with you-know-what-consequences) they have to make something productive of their lives and provide for those they are responsible for. Also, garden dwarves are not that abundant anymore.

6.) I know, self-referencing is not a good idea, but… I just Wonder… if they defecate through the mouth… they should get the Feed through the…

Gonzalo Lira: Those Lying Americans, lol

June 03, 2022

Sitrep Operation Z: Not your normal sitrep

June 01, 2022

Source

By Amarynth

We abandon our usual format for a different take.

How long can we stare into this carnage of killing without losing part of one’s own soul. https://t.me/mod_russia_en/1969

Missile troops and artillery have hit 128 command posts, 169 firing positions of artillery and mortar batteries, as well as 623 areas of AFU manpower and military equipment concentration.  The attacks have resulted in the elimination of up to 200 nationalists,

Operational-tactical, army and unmanned aviation have hit 61 areas of AFU manpower and military equipment concentration.  ▫️The attacks have resulted in the elimination of more than 140 nationalists,

This is in one day, a snippet from the Russian MoD report, not counting the night.

How long can we stare into the masks falling off the evil and foolish faces of all in the hegemonic declining powers, selling lies.

Moscow Warns Biden’s Ukraine Missile Backtrack – Risks “Direct Confrontation”

Just 24 hours after insisting he wouldn’t supply Kiev with long-range missile systems, Joe Biden has flip-flopped and now pledged “more advanced” anti-tank, anti-aircraft and precision systems after being pressured by officials – including Obama’s ambassador to Russia.

Biden claimed the US was not “encouraging or enabling Ukraine to strike beyond its borders” and didn’t want to prolong the war or enter conflict against Russia, but his move was viewed “extremely negatively” by Moscow.

And

Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov told RIA Novosti Wednesday that the supply of missiles and further weaponry would increase the risk of direct confrontation.

And

China Conducts “Necessary” Military Drills Near Taiwan After US “Collusion”

Chinese military commanders have confirmed recent seaborne and airborne military drills near Taiwan as a “necessary action” following what they call “collusion” between the US and Taipei.

Last week President Biden reiterated American intentions to back Taiwan militarily in the event of an invasion, while Senator Tammy Duckworth arrived for a surprise 3-day visit on Monday.

PLA Commander Shi Yi insisted Washington’s support “will push Taiwan into a dangerous situation” and the US “itself will face serious consequences.”

How long can we stare at Zelenski the dick on the televisions and newspapers and internet of the day without remaining nauseous?

How long can we stare at the ludicrousness of Ukie coping while all around are dying.

How long can we stare at the videos of a small girl killed by Ukies, convinced that she is their enemy. https://t.me/EurasianChoice/14503

How long can we stare into this abyss of dead human beings and the continuing supply of weapons.

https://t.me/EurasianChoice/14507

How long can we stare into the projections of the western madness onto Russia, saying Russia did something, while it is their own actions being projected.

How long before people understand that Russia is rebuilding in the footsteps of the SMO, fixing what is broken. First ship leaves port after liberation of Mariupol — Southern Military District https://tass.com/economy/1458209?utm_source=startpage.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=startpage.com&utm_referrer=startpage.com

How long before people stop saying: Russia Should …..

  • Russia is picking up her own dead and injured and wounded, as well as Ukrainian dead and injured and wounded because the Ukrainians do not even pick up their own dead and injured.  Even that! Russia must do for them.
  • Russia is feeding the people with emergency aid.
  • Russia is rebuilding areas, farming, villages and cities to a functioning state (Unlike the US NATO and partners in Afghanistan for example).
  • Russia is the only one that stood up against the odious Nazi ideology and its excesses against humankind, and again is clearing the world of that.
  • Russia and China are calling out the hypocrisy underneath the ugly and foolish faces of all in the hegemonic declining powers selling lies, by every method that is possible. They mock the evil, they speak against it, they expose it, and they are and will fight against it. That is why the ugly and foolish-faced are running the Cancel Russia campaign because they are being driven into a corner and cannot stand it any longer.

“There is no Russian culture without Russian tanks, #cancel Russia”

In my email box, I receive interesting solicitations. This one came in from the Ukraine:

Hello,

Please can you help me secure my wife and three kids in your country that are currently in danger here in Ukraine? I have enough money available to perfect the mission!

God bless you and Your help to us will reward you 30%.

Thanks.

Name and Rank (which I will not post).

Spam you say? This is a legitimate High Level Ukrainian commander who was even awarded the title of a Hero of the Ukraine and even on Wikipedia, the details fit. A shallow forensics show up that the IP is correct, there are no spam tracks and without detailed forensics, this looks legitimate. If it is, he is asking Russian oriented people for help! Fancy that!  Those brave Ukrainian fighters ….

But where is the opposition?  We start here — this video is the sitrep for today. Larry took time and recorded a professional video. The most important sentence in there, is: “We Have To Stop This” and it was a cry from the heart.

This is my cry today. How Long? And We have to Stop This!

More opposition:  A little about CELAC, the new and building Latin American organization, that stepped up and are stopping it, in the face of Biden’s Summit for the Americas. You all remember the Summit for Democracy?

The hegemon is being shot down, brought down, talked down, financed down, and downing itself. These young people are saying We Have to Stop This!

To answer the question: How Long? Just a little longer until we start talking about
404-CollectiveWest.

Enjoy your discussion.

Whose Lies Can You Trust?

May 29, 2022

Source

by James Rothenberg

I read that we’ve entered a “post truth” age. I dislike the term because it seems too sure of itself, as if it encompasses all there is to encompass. As if it should come to mean the same thing to everyone. The worst is “holocaust”, a word I’ve forbidden myself to use for the reasons just mentioned.

Sure, something’s been accelerating. It’s hard to miss the competitive manipulation taking place in the “information age”, another shorthand though with more authenticity. At a certain point in his presidency, the Washington Post catalogued 10,000 of Donald Trump’s lies. They were practically giddy about it. “Now we’ve got him!”, they seemed to be saying. “10,000!”.

Isador Feinstein Stone published the newsletter, I. F. Stone’s Weekly, from 1953-1971. Albert Einstein, Bertrand Russell, and Eleanor Roosevelt were among the first subscribers. (If the reader is unimpressed, this is a good place to stop.) As an investigative journalist, Stone’s bedrock principle was that all governments lie. It’s tempting to say that we find too few like him today. More to the point, there are always and everywhere too few like him. They are the anti-authoritarians.

Once we accept as a given that all governments lie, it reduces to, whose lies can you trust? The answer is easy. You’ll trust the lies of your own country before any other. An example of “post truth”? No, the truth about the lies.

To lie is to be at cross-purposes with the target of the lie. It exposes an adversarial relationship between the two. The unavoidable conclusion is that government is in an adversarial relationship with its own people. How do these cross-purposes come to exist between our government and the people it lies to?

First we should define the sides in this internal conflict because it’s not just government on one side. Multinational corporations have become such a potent force that government must consult with them, and vice versa. Their symbiosis is based on capitalism with a revolving door existing between the public and private sector. When you’re high up in one, you’re not far from the other.

We wouldn’t know we were being lied to without government’s microphone, the mega corporations that disseminate information to us, also a potent international force. And then, easy to overlook, what is government but the only two competing political parties in America, “both sides of the aisle”. There is an aisle, and Democrats and Republicans do sit on opposing sides. And they do have their differences. Otherwise you couldn’t tell them apart. But these differences largely run along cultural lines, and increasingly so.

Not that these are unimportant. They’re very important, but the parties come to be identified mainly by their stances and clashes on sexuality, civil rights, reproduction, religion, immigration and skin color to the exclusion of what could be the most crucial area to disagree on, but isn’t.

Are we to assume that because they differ so strongly on certain things, that their agreement on other things is a good indication of their virtue? I think not because such conformity is less a sign of reasoned judgment than of subordination to larger interests. The result of their general agreement is that we have no major political party independent of capitalist imperialism as promulgated by Wall Street, the Pentagon, the State Department, and the intelligence/security industry.

This is where the “national interest” is manufactured, the great secret plans that are hammered out for our own good. Ordinary people cannot be entrusted to determine the interests of their own country because they might be at odds with the manufactured kind.

Imagine if the public had had a say over the question, in 2003, of whether or not we should invade Iraq. No, forget that. That’s not a good example. The public was in favor of it. But why? For months we were the target of an intense propaganda campaign to sway our support for a decision to attack that had already been made. If you convince people that we’re fighting them “over there” so that we don’t have to fight them “over here”, well, that figures to be enough to win them over.

Now go back to 1991 and the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Much talk about a “peace dividend”. Nice ring to it. The United States has had the lion’s share of the world’s wealth since WW2, and now it had the wealth and no viable rivals anywhere in sight.

However, it was considered to be in the “national interest” to expand NATO, an alliance solely formed to counter the communist menace of the Soviet Union, which no longer existed. There was to be no peace dividend. It’s a made-up thing anyway.

Since then, 13 countries have joined NATO pushing east toward Russia’s borders. Russia’s leadership regards it as a provocation. You can argue against this but only if you wouldn’t consider it a provocation if Russia had formed a military alliance with Cuba, Mexico, and Canada, or any of the three. I suspect patriotic Americans will reject this dialectic.

Imagine if the public had had a say over the question, in 1991, of whether or not we should expand our military alliance with its attendant costs, or whether we should reap the dividend by seeking a more cooperative relationship with the whole of Eurasia including the Middle East. Missing was the propaganda campaign to win our support for a peace dividend so that we could spend “over here” instead of “over there”.

People will instinctively choose peace over war. We are naturally possessed of that much empathy for others. You have to be marshaled into killing. That we identify with peoples’ suffering is evident in all the Ukrainian flag flying. That’s people, not states. States deal in straight power concepts. It is in the anarchist spirit to resist this.

To declare that Ukraine is a pawn in a great-power game greatly overstates the country’s role. A pawn can force a win by checkmate or through progression. A better metaphor is Ukraine is the board the game is being played on. The main players are the United States and Russia.

The US-led NATO contingent would like to diminish Russia as a regional power so that it can fully concentrate on its primary target, China. Russia would like to diminish NATO and expand its influence throughout Eurasia.

On February 4, Russia and China formally announced a strategic partnership, essentially declaring their intention to remake the world order. This wouldn’t have come as a surprise to the United States because it sits atop the existing world order — precariously — and knows perfectly well about the threat China poses to its hegemony. Russia needs China. China doesn’t need Russia, but finds it useful. This accounts for its “hands off” policy in Ukraine.

Putin seems to have calculated, correctly, that the United States has no appetite for a direct military clash over Ukraine. The partnership building with China was likely decisive in ordering the strike. The United States is in full-hypocrisy mode when Nancy Pelosi pledges, “to help the Ukrainian people as they defend democracy for their nation and for the world.”

You’re supposed to be oblivious to the United States orchestrated coup, in 2014, that removed a democratically elected Ukrainian president because he was not sufficiently pro-West. The script never changes. But you can trust it.


James Rothenberg writes on U.S. social and foreign policy.

دبلوماسي أميركي سابق: كذبنا على الأوكرانيين

 الإثنين 23 أيار 2022

البناء

أقر السفير الأميركي السابق لدى موسكو مايكل ماكفول، أمس، بأنّ الدبلوماسيين الأميركيين الذين وعدوا كييف بالانضمام إلى حلف “الناتو” على مدى السنوات الماضية “كانوا يكذبون عليها».

ورداً على سؤال حول كذب واشنطن على المسؤولين في كييف بشأن آفاق انضمام أوكرانيا إلى حلف “الناتو”، أجاب ماكفول: “نعم، نعم، هذا هو العالم الواقعي».

في المقابل، علقت المتحدثة الرسمية باسم وزارة الخارجية الروسية ماريا زاخاروفا على تصريحات السفير الأميركي بالقول: “كما تقول الحكاية الشعبية “على خطى فرقة بريمن”.. وهنا سقط البنطال الأنيق عن الحمار ورأى الجميع ذيله العادي”.

يذكر أنّ الرئيس الأوكراني، فلاديمير زيلنسكي، قال في آذار/مارس الماضي، بأنّ على «أوكرانيا التصالح مع فكرة مفادها أنها لن تكون جزءاً من حلف شمال الأطلسي».

وأضاف زيلنسكي: «لقد سمعنا طوال أعوام، بشأن الأبواب المفتوحة المفترضة، لكننا سمعنا أيضاً أنه لا يمكننا الانضمام إليه. هذا صحيح، ونحن في حاجة إلى الاعتراف بذلك».

وفي سياق متصل، رأت عضو الكونغرس السابقة تولسي غابارد أن عدم وجود أهداف أميركية واضحة في أوكرانيا قد يؤدي إلى تكرار السيناريو الذي واجهته بلادها في العراق أو أفغانستان.

وأوضحت غابارد، في تصريح لقناة “فوكس نيوز”، أن “إدارة الرئيس جو بايدن فشلت في تحديد المهام في هذا الصراع”، مشيرة إلى أنه “يمكننا أن ننظر إلى أفغانستان والعراق، وهو مثال حديث جداً لما يحدث عندما لا تكون لديك مهمة محددة”.

وتابعت غابارد أن «المواطنين الأميركيين قد شعروا بالفعل بآثار العقوبات، المتمثلة في ارتفاع أسعار السلع الأساسية»، في إشارة إلى العقوبات الغربية، التي قادتها الولايات المتحدة ضد موسكو.

ولفتت إلى أنّ “الشعب الأميركي له الحق في معرفة كم تكلفه أوكرانيا، وما الذي سيحصل عليه نتيجة اهتمام واشنطن بدول ما بعد الاتحاد السوفياتي”.

مقالات مرتبطة

Empire of Bioweapon Lies

May 13, 2022

Pepe Escobar

An ongoing U.S. bioweapons program in Ukraine was one of the Top Three reasons that led to the launch of Operation Z, Pepe Escobar writes.

What are the roots that clutch, what branches grow / Out of this stony rubbish? Son of man, / You cannot say, or guess, for you know only / A heap of broken images, where the sun beats, / And the dead tree gives no shelter, the cricket no relief, / And the dry stone no sound of water. Only / There is shadow under this red rock, / (Come in under the shadow of this red rock), / And I will show you something different from either / Your shadow at morning striding behind you / Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you; / I will show you fear in a handful of dust.

T.S. Eliot, The Waste Land: I. The Burial of the Dead, 1922

This glimpse of “fear in a handful of dust” already ranks as one the prime breakthroughs of the young 21st century, presented this week by Chief of Russian Radiation, Chemical, and Biological Protection Force Igor Kirillov.

The provisional results of evidence being collected about the work of U.S. bioweapons in Ukraine are simply astonishing. These are the main takeaways.

  1. U.S. bioweapon ideologues comprise the leadership of the Democratic Party. By linking with non-governmental biotechnology organizations, using the investment funds of the Clintons, Rockefellers, Soros and Biden, they profited from additional campaign financing – all duly concealed. In parallel, they assembled the legislative basis for financing the bioweapons program directly from the federal budget.
  2. COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers Pfizer and Moderna, as well as Merck and Gilead – of Donald “known unknowns” fame, and affiliated with the Pentagon – were directly involved.
  3. U.S. specialists tested new drugs in the Ukraine biolabs in circumvention of international safety standards. According to Kirillov, acting this way “Western companies seriously reduce the costs of research programs and gain significant competitive advantages.”
  4. According to Kirillov, “along with U.S. pharmaceutical companies and Pentagon contractors, Ukrainian government agencies are involved in military biotechnology activities, whose main tasks are to conceal illegal activities, conduct field and clinical trials and provide the necessary biomaterial.”
  5. The Pentagon, Kirillov pointed out, expanded its research potential not only in terms of producing biological weapons, but also gathering information on antibiotic resistance and the presence of antibodies to certain diseases among the population in specific regions. The testing ground in Ukraine was practically outside the control of the so-called “international community”.

These findings, amply documented, suggest a vast “legitimized” bioweapon racket reaching the highest levels of the American body politic. There’s no doubt the Russians plan to thoroughly unmask it for the benefit of world public opinion, starting with a War Crimes Tribunal to be set up this summer, most probably in Donetsk.

An ongoing U.S. bioweapons program in Ukraine was one of the Top Three reasons that led to the launch of Operation Z, side by side with preventing an imminent NATO-managed blitzkrieg against Donbass and Kiev’s desire to re-start a nuclear weapons program. These are Top Three red lines for Russia.

The strength of the collected evidence may directly correlate with what was largely interpreted as a carefully measured Victory Day speech by President Putin. The Kremlin does not bluff. It will certainly privilege the meticulous presentation of – bioweapon – facts on the ground over grandstanding rhetoric.

The return of Nord Stream 2

Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN Dmitry Polyaniskiy announced Russia’s demand for an open meeting of the UN Security Council to present further evidence related to U.S. biolabs in Ukraine. Even if the meeting would be vetoed by the U.S., the evidence will be entered by Russia on the UN records.

These developments provide an extra indication there’s absolutely no space left for diplomacy between Russia and the U.S./collective West, as Polyaniskiy himself suggested when commenting the possible accession of Ukraine to the EU: “The situation has changed after Mr. Borrell’s statement that ‘this war should be won on the battleground’ and after the fact that the European Union is the leader in deliveries of arms [to Ukraine].”

It gets worse. The next chapter is Finland’s drive to join NATO.

The Americans gamble that Finland – and Sweden – joining NATO will totally discredit Putin’s Operation Z as having accomplished next to nothing strategically: after all, in the near future, potential U.S. hypersonic missiles stationed in Finland and Sweden will be very close to Saint Petersburg and Moscow.

Meanwhile, Russian unmasking of the bioweapon racket will drive a toxic section of American political elites to turbo-charge their warmongering. It’s all following a carefully calculated script.

First, these bioweapon-supervising “elites” ordered the massive Kiev shelling of Donbas in early February. That forced the Kremlin’s hand, pushing it to launch Operation Z.

We should always remember that the ultimate goal in the U.S. plan of training Ukrainians for war since 2014 was to alienate Germany from Russia – as Germany de facto controls Euroland economically.

Imperial control of the oceans allows the Empire to strangle Germany at will into subservience by cutting them off from Russian energy – as the British did to Germany in WWII when Britannia ruled the waves. The Wehrmacht could not supply their mechanized army with fuel. Now, in theory, Germany and the EU will have to look to the seas – and total U.S. dependency – for their natural resources.

The remote-controlled Kiev regime dominated by SBU fanatics and Azov neo-Nazis is making it even harder – by shutting off all natural gas from Russia through Ukraine into Europe, reducing the flow by more than one third.

That translates as U.S.-enforced blackmail to force the EU to increase the Ukro-weaponizing against Russia. The practical consequences for Germany and the EU will be dire – in terms of shut down industries and cost of home heating and electrical power.

Russia, meanwhile, will rely on a bolstered Pipelineistan maze to China and East Asia as well as high-speed rail to transport all its natural resources.

Blowback against the Americans though is not off limits. Stranger things have happened. If gas transit to Europe via Ukraine is totally cut off, there are no alternatives. And that – assuming there are working IQs in Berlin – would open the way for a renegotiation on the future of Nord Stream 2.

As the head of the Energy Development Center Kirill Melnikov notes, “the Yamal-Europe gas pipeline is practically idle and one of the Nord Stream 2 lines is also ready for operation though the German regulator has not issued permission for its launch yet.”

That prompted Melnikov to a priceless comment: “If purchases remain the same, Germany will probably need to urgently allow the launch of one of the Nord Stream 2 lines in order to replace the Ukrainian transit route.”

No one ever lost money betting on the astonishing stupidity permeating EUrocrat decision levels. Even facing economic suicide, the EU is desperate to “abandon” Russian oil. Yet a full ban is impossible, because of energy-deprived Eastern Europe.

Every impartial energy analyst knows replacing Russian oil is D.O.A., for a number of reasons: the OPEC+ deal; the ghastly divide between Washington and Riyadh; the never-ending JCPOA renegotiation, where the Americans behave like headless chickens; and the crucial fact – beyond the understanding of EUrocrats – that European oil refineries are designed to use oil from the Urals.

So just when we thought we could enjoy the summer by watching Europe commit hara-kiri, it’s time to stock up on those Aperol Spritz. Get ready for a new hit series, season 1: Inside the American bioweapon racket.

Two months of Operation Z

May 12, 2022

Source

By Ljubiša Malenica 

After two months of conflict, situation inside Ukraine is somewhat clearer. However, despite the fact that we can now, with more understanding, observe what is happening on the ground, media and propaganda sources, between which the border is often blurred, complicate and make it difficult to build a completely clear picture of the unfolding events. Moreover, certain media, especially the Western ones, have completely abandoned even an attempt at objective reporting and turned, simply put, into propaganda mouthpieces without any credibility.

This text will try, based on available data from numerous sources, to offer a possible explanation for the most important events of the Russian military operation in Ukraine and to point out its importance in the context of continental security in Europe.

To begin with, we will look at the number of soldiers that each side had at its disposal at the beginning of the conflict. Before any Russian soldiers crossed Ukrainian border, both sides grouped troops for an extended period of time. While Kiev was increasing the number of its units in the Donbas area, that is, in the operational zone of what Kiev authorities called the anti-terrorist operation, Moscow was deploying troops on the border with Ukraine. According to Russian sources, before the beginning of the conflict, Kiev deployed nearly 125.000 soldiers in eastern Ukraine, close to half of its regular military forces.[1]During the current fighting in Ukraine, plans for offensive against Donbas republics were confirmed by captured Ukrainian soldiers[2] with additional documentation related to these preparations being revealed by Russian troops in territories previously controlled by Kiev.[3]

All of the above can be dismissed as Russian propaganda, but it should be noted that according to Western sources, the military forces of the two Donbas republics, together, in 2021 numbered just over 40.000 soldiers.[4] In general, total number of troops for Donbas republics varies, according to different sources, between forty and fifty thousand soldiers. One of the generally accepted, though blunt, rules of war points out that in case of an attack on fortified positions, it is desirable that the attacking side has three times number of soldiers in comparison to defenders, the well known 3:1 ratio.[5][6]

As can be seen, before the Russian operation, the ratio of conflicting troops in Donbas roughly corresponded to this rule, so it can be concluded, with a dose of caution, that Kiev really intended to conduct in Donetsk and Lugansk something similar to the Croatian operation “Storm”.[7]

In terms of numbers, at the very beginning of the Russian offensive, Ukrainian army had 245.000 active-duty soldiers,[8] along with an additional 220.000 in reserve.[9] According to some sources, Kiev had as many as 900,000 soldiers at its disposal in the reserve.[10] The number of members in paramilitary formations ranged from fifty to one hundred thousand.[11] After the start of the conflict, between six and ten thousand foreign mercenaries arrived in Ukraine, though numbers varie wildely depending on the source.

On the other hand, when talking about the number of Russian troops on the border, before beginning of the conflict, most of the Western media agreed in the estimate of one hundred thousand Russian soldiers.[12][13] We have already pointed out that most often used figure for military forces of Donetsk and Lugansk is close to 50.000. Generally speaking, in terms of the total number of Russian forces in Ukraine at the moment, figures between one hundred and fifty to two hundred thousand soldiers are used.

If we accept that 900.000 reservists is unrealistic, and consider only the lesser number, we see that at very beginning of the conflict, more than half a million soldiers[14] were available to Kiev, as opposed to a maximum of 200.000 Russians and pro-Russians. According to Zelensky’s order, Ukraine mobilized its reserve units[15][16] already on February 23, and on April 8, Zelensky ordered a new, third, wave of mobilization related to reserve officers.[17]

Taking into account this information, it is clear that from the very beginning, balance of forces in terms of available manpower was, roughly speaking, 3:1 in favor of Ukraine. The romantic Western narrative that the conflict is between a weak but brave Ukraine and a strong but evil Russia has no basis in reality and serves exclusively as a propaganda construction.

Both sides have, on several occasions so far, presented results of their military actions, with information about their own and opponents’ losses. Apart from Russia and Ukraine, other indirect participants in this conflict, such as the United States and its NATO satellites, have published their own estimates, but, interestingly enough, only of Russian losses. According to Ukrainian sources, more than 20.000 Russian soldiers have been killed so far[18]. On the other hand, Moscow claims that the number of Ukrainian soldiers killed in the conflict so far surpasses 25.000. According to NATO sources, after a month of fighting, total Russian losses, killed together with the wounded, missing and captured, amounted to more than 40.000 men.[19] United States used similar figures in early April, as US authorities claimed at the time that number of killed Russian soldiers exceeded more than ten thousand.[20] During an interview for the American CNN, on April 14, Zelensky pointed out that number of killed Ukrainian soldiers is close to 3.000.[21]

Here Mariupol comes into play. In addition to its strategic and moral significance, Mariupol is important because it provides an opportunity to try and see more clearly the number of KIAs from the Ukrainian side. Namely, according to Russian sources, at the beginning of the siege, there was slightly more than 8.000[22] Ukrainian soldiers inside Mariupol. On the other hand, Kiev claims that Mariupol garrison did not number more than 3.500 people, in total.[23] So far we know two facts. During siege, between 1.200 and 1.500 Ukrainian soldiers surrendered to Russian troops.[24] We also know that there are up to two thousand Ukrainian fighters in the underground corridors of Azovstal, both ordinary soldiers and those from the Azov Battalion.[25] If we accept the Ukrainian version, we come to a paradoxical situation. Namely, during the heavy siege of Mariupol, characterized by daily battles, almost no soldier of the Ukrainian garrison died!

The math is quite simple and clear. If close to 1.500 Ukrainians surrendered, and close to 2.000 of them are still inside Azovstal, it can be concluded that the number of Ukrainian dead in Mariupol ranges from a few dozen to a maximum of a few hundred soldiers. From the initial garrison of 3.500 soldiers, almost all survived the full siege that began on March 2, that is, the siege that lasts a little more than sixty days at the time of writing. Statistically, this situation is impossible given that it tries to reconcile the fact that Russian troops occupied Mariupol completely, except for Azovstal itself, and assumption that very few Ukrainian soldiers were killed during this conquest, perhaps only a few.

Things look markedly different if Russian figures are taken into account. According to Moscow, the initial garrison numbered more than 8.000 soldiers. The two previously mentioned facts we know remain unchanged. The logical conclusion is the assumption that more than 4.000 Ukrainian soldiers died during the siege of Mariupol. If we accept this as a reasonable argument, then it further must be accepted that number of dead with which Zelensky appears before the public are nothing but propaganda. The case of Mariupol shows that more Ukrainian soldiers were killed in this city alone than Kiev claims to have died during the entire conflict.

It will be necessary to wait until end of the conflict for true information, but for purposes of this text and consideration regarding the number of soldiers killed on both sides, we can use two military statistical rules. It must be immediately pointed out that, although generally accepted, they do not represent highly precision tools but more of a general picture statistical aids. We have already pointed out the first, and it refers to the necessity of the attacking troops to be three times larger in number than the units which are defending fortified positions.[26] The second rule refers to ratio of dead and wounded soldiers[27] within the same army. This rule points out that number of wounded soldiers in relation to the number of killed ones, roughly speaking, usually corresponds to a ratio of 3:1. The lowest ratio of wounded to dead soldiers, which author encountered, was 2.5:1. According to US sources, troops of the United States, during their wars in the last three decades, were able to achieve a ratio of 10:1 and sometimes even 17:1. Such a high number of wounded in relation to number of killed soldiers is mostly attributed to progress of medical science, medical care on the battle lines, and the improvement in quality of personal protection for soldiers. At the same time, the fact that American troops fought against far, technologically speaking, inferior opponents must also be taken into account.

For purposes of this paper, we will be guided by a ratio of 3:1, since this is the accepted average ratio in both cases. Although it would be wisest for a person watching this conflict from the sidelines to approach each source with a certain amount of reserve, Ukraine’s statements regarding military losses, both its own and Russia’s, must be taken with a high dose of skepticism. This is a natural product of the fact that Kiev official channels have served as just another amplifier of propaganda announcements since very beginning of the Russian military operation. It is quite understandable that civilian population, especially in the modern world, decides on its own to get involved in propaganda war that accompanies every conflict, through false footage and staged images. It is understandable when state information warfare agencies construct various forms of propaganda pieces behind the scenes. What should be inadmissible is that official representatives of the Ukrainian authorities take part in this type of conflict, if preservation of trust in the same representatives is a goal.

So far, top Ukrainian officials, including Zelensky, have willingly participated in spreading illusions about the existence of “Ghost of Kiev”,[28] the real events on Snake Island and the fate of Ukrainian soldiers there, the alleged Russian bombing of nuclear power plants, and clearly staged “massacres”in Bucha and Kramatorsk,[29] on the number of foreign mercenaries in Ukraine and the like. Given the long list of violations of this kind by regime in Kiev, the statements of Ukrainian authorities must be taken with suspicion.

In accordance with this, our attitude towards the number of killed Russian soldiers, according to the sources of the Ukrainian army, must be guided by suspicion as well. According to Kiev, more than 25.000 Russian fighters have died on the territory of Ukraine so far.[30] When we take into account the previously mentioned ratio of dead to wounded soldiers, the total number of Russian soldiers unavailable for further combat operations, in under seventy days of fighting, is close to catastrophic one hundred thousand. Let’s compare this with the initial estimates of the total number of Russian troops participating in the conflict. If we accept the maximum scenario, of 200.000 soldiers, Russian side lost squarely 50% of its manpower in Ukraine in roughly two and a half months. To the author, who has no military experience, such losses seem catastrophic, but more importantly, such losses would, logically, in major part, prevent further offensive actions of the Russian infantry, given that this level of losses leads to a conclusion that Ukrainian soldiers are not only more numerous but are qualitatively better than Russians. On the other hand, if we take a more conservative scenario of total number of Russian troops in Ukraine, that is, some 150.000, picture on the ground becomes even grimmer and indicates the inevitable collapse of Russian military operations.

However, when you look at the current situation, Russian military formations have retained their offensive capabilities and are currently showing initiative in the Donbas area. Moreover, judging by available data from the field, advance of Russian troops is slow but constant. Opposite to this, no large-scale Ukrainian offensive has been observed for the entire duration of the conflict. Certainly, at the start of the military operation Ukrainian units at local level were able to organize counterattacks or small-scale offensive actions, certain villages and smaller settlements swapped hands several times but the overall situation, translated into lines on the map, has shown a remarkably high degree of stability in terms of territory possession and control.

There is no doubt that in the first days and weeks of the conflict, Ukrainian forces offered strong resistance, which was accompanied by saturation of social networks with videos and pictures of destroyed Russian, or allegedly Russian, equipment and captured Russian soldiers. Turkish Bayraktar, which almost took on mythological qualities after the conflict in Artsakh, also played a significant role in this period. Foreign portable systems, such as Javelin, Stinger and NLAW, have further strengthened the offensive capabilities of Ukrainian troops against both Russian armor and aviation. Despite all of this, in a period of several weeks, Russian units managed to take, roughly speaking, one quarter of Ukraine. The only great achievement of the Ukrainian troops was reflected in “recovery” of territories that were previously controlled by Russian units deployed on the Northern and Kiev fronts. And this success, if we can call it that, stemmed from the fact that Ukrainian forces took control of the areas from which Russian troops had previously willingly withdrawn.

This observation opens the question of both Kiev and Northern front, that is, their true purposes. Depending on the source, one encounters variations of three different scenarios. The first scenario, represented by Kiev itself and a large number of Western media, sees Russian withdrawal as a defeat, caused by inability to capture the Ukrainian capital and marked with high material and human losses. Bear in mind that this is the Western interpretation of Russian intentions, given that Moscow has never mentioned capture of Kiev as one of its goals. If we accept the narrative that Ukrainian units defeated Russians near Kiev, we must assume the existence of technical capacities for such an endeavor, that is, use of appropriate air and armored forces, and other means of war. If we further assume that Ukraine had such technical capacities after thirty days of war, then we must logically ask why those same capacities were not used to destroy a huge Russian column, 60 kilometers long, that was stationed not far from Kiev for days.[31] The Western media incessantly droned about this concentration of Russian forces and showed satellite images of trucks and other techniques stretching along the highway. For a country that enjoys air superiority, such a sluggish column is a gift from heaven, and it represents extremely attractive target even for ground units. Everyone is free to draw their own conclusions, however, during the entire period of existence of this column, not a single air strike or armored and infantry attack was organized by Ukraine.[32]

Second scenario represents a kind of compromise between first and the third. This rationale for Russia’s behavior presupposes that Northern and Kiev fronts were in fact opportunistic attempts to seize the capital and several other major cities while forcing the Ukrainian General Staff to redeploy its available forces from their initial positions on a nearly 3.000-kilometer long line of contact.[33][34]

The final possibility is that both of these fronts were in fact, from the very beginning, feint fronts[35] whose main purpose was to attract and keep in place a significant part of Ukrainian forces in the north and northwest of the country so as to ensure easier maneuvering and advance for Russian troops on the Southern and Eastern fronts, while simultaneously hampering attempts to replace losses and provide logistical support to Ukrainian troops in Donbas. Led by the assumed number of Russian troops in Ukraine, each front could field maximum of thirty-five to fifty thousand Russian soldiers at the beginning of the operation. DPR and LPR troops are included here. Personal opinion of author is that with this number of soldiers, it was not possible to take Kiev, a city of 2.5 million inhabitants, under any circumstances. If we presume Kiev had a garrison of only 30.000, then Russians would need to have at least 100.000 soldiers besieging just the capital, not to mention need to control all those territories which were under Russian control while North and Kiev fronts were active. Also bear in mind many larger cities remained under Ukrainian control, which would require even more Russian troops. Even some Western sources, after Moscow announced its withdrawal from the Northern and Kiev fronts, warned that this was not a defeat for Russia but a regrouping of Russian troops so they could be redeployed in Donbas proper.[36][37][38][39]

We have already mentioned that Maria Zakharova placed number of Ukrainian soldiers in the east close to 120.000, before Russian troops entered Ukraine. Western sources currently estimate that there are between 40.000 and 60.000[40] Ukrainian troops in Donbas, roughly the equal number to that before conflict escalated in 2021.[41] Assuming that these figures are correct, or at least approximately true, it can be concluded that Northern and Kiev fronts attracted close to 50% of Ukrainian forces from Donbas area.

As in the previous phase, it is now clear that Ukrainian forces currently do not have the ability to organize a major military operation that would critically jeopardize the results of Russian advances so far. The air superiority of Russian Federation is unquestionable at this point, and can be easily noticed by the daily campaigns of bombing raids by Aerospace forces of the Russian Federation, complemented by often use of cruise missiles. Russian helicopter units continue their operations, as well as armored and motorized forces, but we see very limited activity of these branches from the Ukrainian force, unlike in the first weeks of conflict. The agony of Ukrainian and Nazi troops captured in Azovstal continues, especially in the light of the fact that Zelensky himself recently pointed out it was impossible to relieve the besieged troops through a military operation.[42] If it is already impossible to organize a large-scale military operation to regain Mariupol, then the same can be assumed regarding a possible operation aimed at supporting Ukrainian troops in Donbas.

At the time of writing, transfer of main operations to the Donbass theatre is noticeable. This front is important for both Russia and Ukraine. One of main reasons is the fact that, according to various estimates, the most capable[43] Ukrainian troops are situated in Donbas. From Moscow’s perspective, eliminating this group would mean removing the best Ukrainian units from the battlefield. From Kiev’s perspective, these troops have the best chance of blunting and eventually stopping Russia’s advance, especially given the fact that Ukraine has been fortifying the area of ​​current operations for eight years.

In everyday events, a special aspect of this conflict has remained largely neglected. Main reason for this is the constant propaganda work of the Western media, which managed from the very beginning, to create a romanticized image of the Ukrainian army. When main Western media talk about Ukrainian troops, in most cases positive terms are used, and even when they refer to well-known neo-Nazi units. Overnight, they all became “brave Ukrainian defenders”, “fighters against Putin’s aggression”, “protectors of Europe from tyranny”, gaining these and many other positive characteristics. On the other hand, the narrative about Russians is diametrically opposed, and terms like “aggressors”, “murderers”, “rapists of Ukrainian women and children”, “Putin’s war machine” and similar are in plentiful supply.

When an individual encounters this Hollywood-made portrayal of conflicting parties again and again, certain mental image of Ukrainians and Russians inevitably begins to emerge. Hyperhumanized, Ukrainian forces are waging a just war, their struggle is also our struggle, they are the guys from the neighborhood, factory workers, teachers, musicians, everyday good people. Opposite them are the Russians, faceless “orcs” emerging from the dark Asian steppe, not even people, but only cogs in the great mechanism of Putin’s war machine that will destroy the whole of Europe as soon as it ends with Ukraine. The dehumanization of the enemy is not foreign to any war, but in this case it has a secondary goal, and that is to present Ukraine as a weaker party, in every sense.

As we have already pointed out, only in terms of available manpower, Ukraine had an advantage of at least 3:1 at the beginning of the conflict, when we compare maximum assumptions about the number of soldiers on both sides. Additionally, often overlooked is the fact that Russian soldiers are currently in conflict with soldiers trained according to NATO standards. Moreover, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg confirmed this when he pointed out that the alliance countries had trained “tens of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers in previous years, provided modern equipment and supported reforms. Ukraine’s forces are now larger, better equipped, better trained and better led than ever before”.[44][45] According to Western sources, within Yavoriv base alone, five Ukrainian battalions were trained during a single year.[46]

Military assistance of the United States, which amounted to more than 2.7 billion dollars in the period from 2014 to 2021, depended on military reforms within Ukraine. One of these reforms focused on Ukraine’s ability to integrate its logistical support with other NATO units during joint operations.[47] Back in 2016, Poroshenko himself sought and obtained experienced military advisers from United States, Canada, Great Britain, Lithuania and Germany, whose purpose was to modernize Ukrainian units and reach NATO standards by 2020, thus achieving a high degree of compatibility with units from other alliance countries.[48][49] Ukraine maybe never would officially become a member of NATO, but judging by the mentioned sources, most of the military institutions in the country are already organized in accordance with NATO procedures and that is telling.

From the author’s perspective, what is currently happening in Ukraine is a conflict between the Russian and Western concepts of war, that is, the concept of war as conceived by NATO. Among other things, this conflict is also a question of the prestige for the West, which has so far seen itself as the most militarily capable bloc on the planet. Having trained Ukrainian ground army[50] to NATO standards and equipped it with anti-tank and anti-aircraft portable systems, the West is now observing performance of these forces against Russian troops. This is, as well, one of reasons for the omnipresent Western propaganda campaign. Moreover, within this conflict, it is necessary to view Ukrainian media and propaganda sources as organic offshoots of Western intelligence agencies and public relations firms, of which at least 150 have participated in creating and spreading propaganda for Kiev since the beginning of hostilities.[51][52] Likewise, make no mistake, majority if not all intelligence at disposal of Kiev is of NATO origin.

In an event that Ukrainian troops are defeated by Russian units, it will be clear that equipping and training army in accordance with NATO standards does not guarantee the highest level of combat capability. At the same time, the possible defeat of Ukraine will shake the reputation of NATO itself, especially the United States, whose last year’s debacle in Afghanistan is still fresh in memory. Russia’s eventual victory would be the second major case in modern times where forces equipped and trained by the West have been defeated by non-Western armies.

In this context, one should also observe the huge military aid that has been pouring into Kiev for two months now by countries of the West and European Union. As US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently pointed out, the United States wants “to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can’t do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine.”[53] This only confirms what many analysts have already pointed out, that Kiev and Moscow are not at war in Ukraine, but Russia against the collective West led by Washington. The United States needs, both for domestic and foreign policy, Russian defeat in Ukraine.

This is the only way to explain the fabulous sums of money which have, in form of military equipment and financial support, flooded into Kiev from both the United States and European Union. A spokeswoman for the US president, Jen Psaki, told a news conference on April 28 that “as you know, we had $3.5 billion in military security assistance. We have about $250 million of that left in drawdown. So, obviously, we will work to expedite that and provide that to the Ukrainians”.[54] For reference sake, US Congress approved this aid package on March 10![55][56] A new package of American aid for Ukraine,[57] more than 30 billion dollars, is already prepared, according to the lend-lease principle that was used during the Second World War. Under this new tranche of aid, more than fifteen billion dollars will be spent for military purposes. Moreover, if you follow the process of creating this act, you can see that it was introduced into the Senate procedure[58] on January 19, 2022, that is, 15 billion dollars for Kiev in the form of American military equipment was planned at least a month before the Russian operation.

At the same time, most countries within NATO and the collective West provide military assistance to Ukraine. However, some countries, such as Bulgaria,[59] have refused to provide military assistance to Kiev from the outset for reasons of their own political stability, while others, such as Canada[60] and Greece, have ended shipments of military equipment due to depletion of reserves which jeopardize their own security.[61] In a recent address to Bundestag, German Minister of Defense, Kristina Lambrecht, pointed out Berlin’s limitation on further arming Ukraine comes due to problems facing Bundeswehr itself. According to Lambrecht, Germany has on paper 350 Puma infantry fighting vehicles, but in reality, only 150 of them are combat capable. The situation with Tiger combat helicopters is no different – only 9 out of 51 can take off.[62][63] On April 28, Stoltenberg pointed out that NATO allies had sent military aid worth eight billion dollars to Ukraine since start of the conflict.[64]

As we can see, the lion’s share[65] of this burden has been taken over by Washington, but when you consider that West mostly procures its weapons from the United States, it is clear that this “aid” is actually a kind of financial incentive for the US military-industrial complex.[66] According to American sources, by April 22, Washington had delivered more than 11.000 portable anti-tank systems to Kiev, including 4.500 Javelins. In the same period, Ukrainian troops received close to 1.400 Stinger systems. So far, these deliveries also included personal protective equipment, Humwie off-road vehicles, helicopters, huge amounts of ammunition, UAVs, radar systems, patrol boats and more.[67]

Thanks to this feverish pace of weapons delivery to Kiev, people connected with US army warn of reduction to their own stockpiles of weapons. The head of Raytheon pointed out that it will be possible to replenish Stinger reserves, not just in United States but also in other NATO countries, only in 2023 and 2024 due to lack of components and production capacities.[68] The situation regarding Javelin reserves is no better. According to sources from the American administration, number of Javelin systems in US reserves has been reduced by one third, and their replacement can be expected in just under three years.[69][70][71]

It is important to keep in mind that all portable systems that arrive in Ukraine end up in three categories. Some of them reach end users at the front, some are captured by Russian troops, while some, apparently, end up on the black market and are sold to unknown actors.

Free, and therefore questionable, author’s estimate is that Russian units have so far captured at least several thousand different portable anti-tank and anti-aircraft systems. Washington and its allies do not seem to be worried about the undoubted fact that specimens of their vaunted systems have probably already ended up in hands of Russian engineers.[72] At the same time, the West seems unconcerned about the possibility that advanced military equipment will fall into hands of various other groups, with special emphasis on criminals and terrorists, given that United States loses the ability to track delivered equipment as soon as it crosses the Ukrainian border.[73] Proliferation of this weapons among current opponents of the West, Russian Federation and CPR, certainly does not exclude possibility of its spread among various militias and terrorist organizations in the Middle East and elsewhere in the future. On the contrary, Moscow and Beijing might be more than willing to create problems for US in the same manner Washington is creating for them in Ukraine and Taiwan. With everything mentioned above, question of the efficiency for all these Western systems delivered to Ukraine must be raised.

A little over a month ago, during one of his speeches, Zelensky pointed out that Kiev needs 500 Javelins and the same number of Stingers, on a daily basis.[74] We can assume with some certainty that this is an exaggeration, but what if we reduce the number of these systems to 100 Javelins and Stingers per day? The legitimate question is where and why so many of these systems are consumed on a daily basis. The two answers that arise, although they may not be the only ones possible, are that the capabilities of the Russian armor and aviation were underestimated or that the capabilities of the delivered systems were overestimated.

A common feature of all Western systems, in which we will include Turkish Bayraktar, was a status of “miraculous” weapons that should drastically change the balance of power in conflict by its very presence. The Stingers were praised as an unsurpassed tool against planes and helicopters, Javelins against tanks and armored vehicles, while Bayraktars were presented as a danger against any type of unit found on the battlefield. Many analysts and amateur cheerleaders have missed that even some research institutions in the West have questioned the ability of these systems to influence the overall outcome of the conflict.[75]

However, what we see in the field at the moment is far from the image that was built through the media. In the first few weeks of conflict, we really had the opportunity to watch in action all of these Western systems against Russian troops, although it is necessary to point out that even then propaganda activities often smuggled videos from previous wars as events from conflict in Ukraine. After the first three to four weeks, all those who have been following this conflict since its beginning have seen a sharp decline in number of publications and videos showing either captured Russian soldiers or use of foreign weapons against Russian units. In that same period, a significant increase in material could be noticed from Russian sources, which showed destroyed or captured Ukrainian equipment and downed drones, with special emphasis on Bayraktars. In his recent address to the public, Zelensky himself, referring to Turkish drones, pointed out that “with all due respect, Bayraktar and other drones can help, but it won’t affect the result”.[76][77][78] This is far from the earlier euphoric rhetoric[79] which accompanied Bayraktar, but also other drones such as Switchblade, Phoenix Ghost and Punisher.

Almost from very beginning of the conflict, Zelensky appealed[80] to Western governments for delivery of heavy weapons, which would include fighters, tanks, armored vehicles, artillery, air defense systems, infantry transporters and helicopters, in addition to already presumed shipments of light weapons and equipment. According to the Kiev wish list, which has been circulating on Russian side of the internet for some time, Ukraine needs more than 200 planes, more than 350 air defense systems, more than 400 tanks and other heavy weapons, which also number in the hundreds.[81][82] One Western analyst noted with irony that these quantities of weapons are not needed by a winning army but by military forces starting from zero. According to data of the Russian Ministry of Defense, the heaviest losses so far have been suffered by the units of Ukrainian infantry and armored forces, which to a certain extent coincides with Zelensky’s requests. The Ukrainian navy and aviation, as factors capable of influencing outcome of the conflict, have not existed since the first week of Russian operations.

According to current information, Zelensky’s appeals bore fruit, but only partially. European Union countries are indeed sending heavy weapons to Kiev, but in a significant number of cases they are non-modernized combat systems more than four decades old. Poland sends 200 T-72[83] tanks to Kiev, Germany is ready to sell 50 Leopard 1 tanks, last time modernized in the end of the eighties.[84][85] United States will deliver its M113 armored personnel carriers from Vietnam War, which are largely obsolete today.[86] The United Kingdom, Norway, Australia and other countries have also promised, and some have already delivered, combat vehicles and other heavy weapons to Kiev. Observing the rate of the conflict escalation, one wonders how long will they be able to finance Kiev, especially when we take into consideration current unenviable economic situation in the West coupled with negative forecasts of economic trends in the future.[87][88][89]

While heavy fighting continues in Donbas, the inability of Ukrainian troops to organize an effective counter-offensive, both quantitatively and qualitatively, raises the question of what will happen to Ukraine when/if Russian units fulfill their task and completely defeat enemies in Donbas. If this scenario unfolds, it is doubtful that another similar Ukrainian force exists, capable of taking on burden of fighting Russian troops. The defeat in Donbas, that is, the destruction or surrender of more than 50.000 Ukrainian soldiers, most likely represents an end to Kiev’s hopes for a positive outcome in the conflict and imposes capitulation as the only option. On the other hand, defeat of Russian troops entails the possibility of crisis and internal instability within Russian Federation together with impression of external weakness. Even the heavy weapons that Zelensky demands do not have to affect the course of the fight at all, considering that Russia has initiated more frequent attacks on transport hubs, bridges, electric network and presumed ammunition and equipment warehouses. Attacks with cruise missiles on energy infrastructure and oil depots have been going on for several weeks, and the lack of this energy source is starting to be felt across Ukraine itself.[90][91]

At the same time, Ukraine has become a hole in which foreign weapons are disappearing and, most likely, finding buyers on the black market. Some certainly reach Ukrainian units, but some also fall into the hands of Russian troops. It is almost impossible to expect that this massive infusion of weapons will not jeopardize the security of both the Middle East and Europe itself, which, apparently driven by desire for economic suicide, could overnight find itself in a much worse situation, socially and economically, than the one it is in presently.[92] As prices of basic foodstuffs, utilities and fuel rise, governments across EU will have trouble explaining to their citizens why fabulous sums are being set aside for Ukraine and the new militarization of the continent. On the other hand, we should not forget the problems of Taiwan and China. Can the collective West afford to spend precious military reserves on Ukraine after Washington showed its intention to turn Taiwan into an Asian copy of Ukraine?

Russia’s central bank pointed out that full stabilization of country’s economy is expected in 2024. The ruble has already recovered and is stronger as a currency now than before the military operation began, while inflation has returned to the level recorded before Russian troops entered Ukraine.[93][94] Reorientation and restructuring of Russian economy is expected as a logical product of economic attacks, with special emphasis on opening up to Asian countries and developing its own capacities in order to replace imports from abroad. Russian Federation will reorient itself towards Asia, which will certainly be accompanied by difficulties and challenges, but where will Europe turn if it really cuts itself off from Russian energy sources.

One certain consequence from all these events will be a decline in the level of security and economic stability in Europe. The decline in living standards is almost inevitable, which will, in turn, lead to progressive radicalization or demoralization of the population. The internal cohesion of the Union, already on shaky ground, will only decrease. Political dependence on imperial policy of Washington will undermine the sovereignty of European Union and its prestige on the global level. All of this will be presented as a result of Vladimir Putin’s evil genius and despotic aspirations. As usual, this will not be the truth. The only culprit for the current situation is the NATO alliance and political elite of its leading country, United States. Negative economic and social trends within the collective West will provoke a backlash from their populations, characterized by violence. No matter what form of instability it takes, Europe will be far more exposed to the crisis, given that Washington will use every instrument at its disposal, for sake of its own survival, to transfer the negative consequences of its current moves onto its European satellites in the future.

  1. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukraine-army-donbass-troops-b1967532.html 
  2. https://tass.com/defense/1413035?utm_source=google.com&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=google.com&utm_referrer=google.com 
  3. https://tass.com/politics/1427539 
  4. https://www.iiss.org/publications/the-military-balance/the-military-balance-2021 
  5. https://faculty.nps.edu/mkress/docs/A_new_look.pdf 
  6. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA302819.pdf 
  7. https://euromaidanpress.com/2017/12/28/what-ukraine-can-take-from-the-croatian-scenario-of-conflict-resolution/ 
  8. https://www.ukrmilitary.com/2021/05/11000.html 
  9. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Forces_of_Ukraine 
  10. https://www.nationalworld.com/news/world/russia-ukraine-war-ukraine-army-size-compared-russia-uk-us-nato-3581362 
  11. https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.php?country_id=ukraine 
  12. https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000008180799/ukraine-russia-us-austin-milley.html 
  13. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60158694 
  14. https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.php?country_id=ukraine#viewNotes 
  15. https://www.overtdefense.com/2022/02/23/ukraine-calls-up-operational-reserves/ 
  16. https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/ukraine-mobilises-military-reserves-as-russia-sharpens-demands-101645615548369.html 
  17. https://tass.com/world/1434575?utm_source=google.com&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=google.com&utm_referrer=google.com 
  18. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FQnXDjnXIAEfcl0?format=jpg&name=small 
  19. https://web.archive.org/web/20220323154656/https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/russia-ukraine-latest-news-2022-03-23/card/russia-lost-up-to-40-000-troops-in-ukraine-nato-estimates-xyZjWxinMDHzdeRZvAeD 
  20. https://www.economist.com/briefing/2022/04/02/what-next-for-russia 
  21. https://thehill.com/policy/international/3271024-zelensky-says-up-to-3000-ukrainian-soldiers-killed-during-war-with-russia/ 
  22. https://www.voanews.com/a/russia-says-all-urban-areas-of-mariupol-cleared-of-ukrainian-forces/6532471.html 
  23. https://www.economist.com/europe/2022/03/21/hundreds-of-thousands-face-catastrophe-in-mariupol 
  24. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61092953#:~:text=Russia%20says%20more%20than%201%2C000,troops%20there%20were%20still%20fighting
  25. https://www.newindianexpress.com/world/2022/apr/23/mariupol-plant-survivors-long-to-see-sun-as-russia-eyes-east-2445628.html#:~:text=More%20than%20100%2C000%20people%2C%20down,with%20about%202%2C000%20Ukrainian%20fighters
  26. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3010327#:~:text=The%203%3A1%20rule%20of%20combat%20states%20that%20in%20order,military%20science%20points%20of%20view
  27. https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/nonfatal-casualties-and-changing-costs-war#:~:text=This%20is%20especially%20true%20for,%3A1%20to%2017%3A1
  28. https://orientalreview.org/2022/05/04/the-ukrainian-air-command-just-admitted-that-the-ghost-of-kiev-is-fake-now-what/ 
  29. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/04/03/new-srebrenica-mass-graves-found-around-kyiv-mayor-describes/ 
  30. https://kyivindependent.com/uncategorized/ukraines-military-russia-has-lost-20900-soldiers-as-of-april-20/ 
  31. https://edition.cnn.com/2022/03/11/europe/kyiv-russian-convoy-intl/index.html 
  32. https://sonar21.com/the-russian-timeline-critique-in-the-ukraine/ 
  33. https://srbin.info/en/svet/srpski-pukovnik-ovo-je-istina-o-specijalnoj-operaciji-u-ukrajini-evo-sta-sledi/ 
  34. https://sonar21.com/deception-in-operation-z/ 
  35. https://www.thepostil.com/the-military-situation-in-the-ukraine-an-update/ 
  36. https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/russia-invasion-ukraine-war-feint-defeat-1932510-2022-04-01 
  37. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maneuver_warfare 
  38. https://mronline.org/2022/04/14/the-ukrainian-conflict-is-a-u-s-nato-proxy-war-but-one-which-russia-is-poised-to-win-decisively-scott-ritter/ 
  39. https://www.snafu-solomon.com/2022/03/scott-ritter-former-marine-un-inspector.html 
  40. https://www.ft.com/content/384d981b-d3da-4fca-b6ab-21b1136bd2ab 
  41. https://web.archive.org/web/20170228171239/http://24today.net/open/484721 
  42. https://english.alarabiya.net/News/world/2022/04/20/Zelenskyy-says-Ukraine-army-unable-to-unblock-Mariupol-s-siege-by-Russia-without-help 
  43. https://www.ft.com/content/f299cb83-9f12-484b-8839-12ec96c87a72 
  44. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_193943.htm#:~:text=NATO%20Secretary%20General%20Jens%20Stoltenberg%3A%20NATO%20allies%20have%20supported%20the,invasion%20and%20invading%20Russian%20forces
  45. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/13/world/europe/yavoriv-military-base-ukraine.html 
  46. https://www.dvidshub.net/feature/jmtgu#:%7E:text=U.S.%20Soldiers%20deployed%20to%20the,Combat%20Training%20Center%20in%20Ukraine
  47. https://theconversation.com/in-2014-the-decrepit-ukrainian-army-hit-the-refresh-button-eight-years-later-its-paying-off-177881 
  48. https://defense-reforms.in.ua/en/#%D0%BD%D0%B0-%D1%89%D0%BE-%D1%81%D0%BF%D1%80%D1%8F%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0-%D0%B4%D1%96%D1%8F%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D1%96%D1%81%D1%82%D1%8C-%D0%BE%D1%84%D1%96%D1%81%D1%83-%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%84%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BC 
  49. https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/ukraine-relies-advice-defense-reform-advisory-board.html 
  50. https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/12/23/ukraine-russia-military-buildup-capabilities/ 
  51. https://www.mintpressnews.com/ukraine-propaganda-war-international-pr-firms-dc-lobbyists-cia-cutouts/280012/ 
  52. https://www.prweek.com/article/1748159/global-pr-community-rallies-help-ukraine-government-comms 
  53. https://edition.cnn.com/2022/04/25/politics/blinken-austin-kyiv-ukraine-zelensky-meeting/index.html 
  54. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2022/04/28/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-jen-psaki-april-28-2022/ 
  55. https://thehill.com/homenews/house/597471-congress-cuts-deal-on-136-billion-for-ukraine-aid-in-funding-bill/ 
  56. https://archive.ph/ajAvO 
  57. https://www.rt.com/russia/554740-ukraine-cash-us-weapons/ 
  58. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/3522/summary/00 
  59. https://www.rferl.org/a/bulgaria-military-aid-ukraine/31823010.html 
  60. https://torontosun.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-canada-runs-out-of-arms-for-ukraine 
  61. https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/greece-says-no-more-weapons-for-ukraine/ 
  62. https://mailbd.net/technology/defense-ministry-of-germany-on-the-supply-of-weapons-to-ukraine-our-capabilities-are-limited-71487/ 
  63. https://scooptrade.com/german-defense-minister-lambrecht-the-german-army-can-only-use-150-puma-infantry-fighting-vehicles-out-of-350/ 
  64. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2022-04-28/nato-s-stoltenberg-ukraine-military-aid-tops-8-billion-video 
  65. https://t.me/BellumActaNews/76516 
  66. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2022/04/28/ukraine-weapon-switcheroos-are-flushing-soviet-arms-out-of-europe/ 
  67. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/03/16/fact-sheet-on-u-s-security-assistance-for-ukraine/ 
  68. https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/26/raytheon-stinger-missile-stocks-delay-00027766#:~:text=The%20CEO%20of%20Raytheon%20Technologies,allies%20have%20rushed%20to%20Ukraine
  69. https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-war-has-us-javelin-missile-supply-down-33-biden-urged-act-1701153 
  70. https://www.axios.com/lawmakers-fret-dwindling-javelin-supply-077b8ae8-9867-41dc-bcc1-b814db378573.html 
  71. https://www.bloombergquint.com/gadfly/russia-ukraine-war-u-s-is-running-out-of-weapons-aiding-kyiv 
  72. https://bloknot.ru/v-mire/ukrainskij-krizis/e-kspert-rasskazal-kak-rossiya-budet-ispol-zovat-zahvachennoe-na-ukraine-zapadnoe-oruzhie-926317.html 
  73. https://edition.cnn.com/2022/04/19/politics/us-weapons-ukraine-intelligence/index.html 
  74. https://edition.cnn.com/2022/03/24/politics/ukraine-us-request-javelin-stinger-missiles/index.html 
  75. https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/what-do-uk-weapons-deliveries-add-ukraines-armed-forces 
  76. https://tfiglobalnews.com/2022/04/27/has-russia-invented-a-lethal-anti-drone-technology-that-has-made-zelensky-panic/ 
  77. https://newsfounded.com/turkeyeng/bayraktars-words-from-ukrainian-leader-zelensky-he-did-not-play-a-decisive-role-in-the-war-with-russia/ 
  78. https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1517959804370759680 
  79. https://eurasiantimes.com/ukraine-receives-more-game-changing-bayraktar-tb2-uavs/ 
  80. https://edition.cnn.com/2022/03/24/politics/zelensky-speech-nato-transcript/index.html 
  81. https://t.me/breakingmash/34068 
  82. https://news.rambler.ru/weapon/48520729-na-ukraine-opredelilis-i-teper-prosyat-u-es-konkretnuyu-voennuyu-pomosch-na-100-mlrd-dollarov-s-kolichestvom-i-ukazaniem-modeley/ 
  83. https://tass.com/defense/1445261?utm_source=google.com&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=google.com&utm_referrer=google.com 
  84. https://mezha.media/en/2022/04/12/leopard-1-german-tanks-for-the-armed-forces-of-ukaine/ 
  85. https://www.thedefensepost.com/2022/04/13/rheinmetall-leopard-tanks-ukraine/ 
  86. https://english.nv.ua/nation/us-sends-armored-personnel-carriers-to-ukraine-military-news-50238415.html 
  87. https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/04/18/errors-both-tactical-and-of-strategic-consequence/ 
  88. https://mises.org/wire/fight-russia-europes-regimes-risk-impoverishment-and-recession-europe 
  89. https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/us-trade-deficit-explodes-record-high-march 
  90. https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukrainians-suffer-gasoline-shortages-after-russian-strikes-on-fuel-infrastructure-11651313479 
  91. https://www.dw.com/en/ukraine-fuel-shortages-we-rely-on-supplies-from-our-neighbors/av-61652152 
  92. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/will-anyone-tell-europe-the-age-of-cheap-living-is-over-kml25mp7k 
  93. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-20/russian-inflation-is-back-to-pre-war-level-as-worst-appears-over 
  94. https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2022/4/20/russian-inflation-slows-to-pre-war-level-as-worst-appears-over

President Assad Visits Iran, Meets Iranian Leaders Khamenei and Raisi

ARABI SOURI

Syrian President Bashar Assad paid a working visit to the Iranian Capital Tehran, during his visit, President Assad and his hosts emphasized the strong relations between Syria and Iran, its historic roots, continuous developments, and its future growth.

During this visit, the Syrian and Iranian leaders paved the way to increase the cooperation and coordination between their two countries to the highest levels and in all fields including combating terrorism and economic aspects.

The following report by the Syrian Ikhbariya news channel details the visit and its outcome:

The video is also available on BitChute, and Rumble.

Transcript

President Bashar al-Assad made a working visit to the Iranian capital, Tehran, during which he met Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Khamenei, Leader of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, and Ibrahim Raisi, President of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The meetings dealt with the historical relations that unite Syria and Iran, which are based on a long path of bilateral cooperation and mutual understanding on the issues and problems of the region, and the challenges they face, in addition to topics and issues of common interest and the latest developments on the regional and international arenas.

During his meeting with Mr. Khamenei, President al-Assad affirmed that the course of events proved once again the correctness of the visions and the approach that Syria and Iran have followed for years, especially in confronting terrorism, this confirms the importance of continuing to cooperate in order not to allow America to rebuild the international terrorist system that it used to harm the countries of the world, especially the countries of the region over the past decades, noting that the United States today is weaker than ever.

His Excellency stressed that the Palestinian cause today is re-imposing its presence and importance more and more in the conscience of the Arab and Islamic world thanks to the sacrifices of the heroes of the resistance.

For his part, Khamenei reiterated Iran’s continued support for Syria to complete its victory over terrorism and liberate the rest of the Syrian lands, considering that Syria is achieving historic victories thanks to the steadfastness and courage of its president and the strength and steadfastness of its people and army.

Addressing President al-Assad, Khamenei added: We have no doubt that you will be able to liberate the rest of the Syrian lands and under your leadership, Syria will remain united, and we have to maintain the strong relationship that unites our two countries and peoples, this is beneficial not only for our two countries but also necessary for the region.

In turn, President of the Islamic Republic of Iran Ibrahim Raisi affirmed that his country has the serious will to expand relations between the two countries, especially the economic and trade relations, both public and private, and that it will continue to provide all forms of support to Syria and its people, especially in light of the difficult economic conditions the world is witnessing and will remain by Syria’s side to help it overcome difficulties, considering that any suffering for Syria is suffering for Iran.

Syrian President Bashar Assad Visits Tehran - Iran Meets Khamenei and Ebrahim Raisi - الرئيس بشار الأسد يزور طهران - إيران ويلتقي خامنئي وإبراهيم رئيسي
From the meetings President Bashar Assad held with Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and President Ebrahim Raisi

President al-Assad described Iran as the leadership and people of the brotherly, friend, and loyal partner, considering that the approach taken by the Islamic Republic of Iran in dealing with regional and international issues does not serve the interests of Iran and Syria only, but all the countries and peoples of the region.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Amir Abdollahian tweeted that President Assad’s visit and the high-level meetings with the Leader of the Islamic Revolution in Iran and the Iranian President have opened a new chapter in the strategic relations between the two countries; He added: We are determined to raise the relations between the two countries to the appropriate level.

The Iranian foreign minister concluded that “the defeat of the terrorist plot in Syria is due to the cooperation between the two countries.”

End of the transcript.

Despite the very strong decades-long unshaken relations and high level of agreement on most topics of importance between Syria and Iran and in the face of unprecedented challenges, the two countries are yet to achieve the needed levels of bilateral economic cooperation aspired to by the people in the two brotherly countries.

The Syrian – Iranian relations have withstood and overcome the US hegemony and US-led wars direct invasion, terrorism, attrition, blockade, sanctions, assassinations, destabilization, and direct piracy and theft. Their joint cooperation not only foiled the US’s evil plots for the region, but they also managed to weaken the US’s ability to impose its will on the rest of the world by breaking its military might after the illegal invasion of Iraq, and by breaking up the US proxies in the region, mainly Al Qaeda and ISIS.

The hefty price paid by the Syrian people has also saved the people of the world by absorbing the major terrorism and direct aggression shock and awe by the USA, Israel, NATO forces spearheaded by Turkey, and their proxy terrorists of Al Qaeda, and ISIS. The steadfastness of the Syrian leadership, army, and people has awakened Russia, China, and Iran to the dangers of the Western plots and allowed them to build their capabilities to come out of the cold and solidify a front against the imperial Zionist Nazi evil camp of NATO and its stooges.

Syrians are waiting to see a payback visit by the Iranian president to Damascus, it’s been over a decade since an Iranian president visited Syria, long before the US-led war of terror on the Levantine country despite several visits paid by the Iranian presidents around the world including to countries in the region that have been in the enemy camp against Syria, like Turkey, and like Egypt during the rule of the anti-Islamic Muslim Brotherhood president Morsy.


button-PayPal-donate

Syria News is a collaborative effort by two authors only, we end up most of the months paying from our pockets to maintain the site’s presence online, if you like our work and want us to remain online you can help by chipping in a couple of Euros/ Dollars or any other currency so we can meet our site’s costs.You can also donate with Cryptocurrencies through our donate page.
Thank you in advance.

Tucker Carlson: Violence is already beginning

May 07, 2022

On Wars, Propaganda and outright Lies

May 07, 2022

Source

By Francis Lee

Here is a typical political offering from the British centre-left. As follows:

‘’Putin’s war on Ukraine has led to thousands of deaths, upended the world order, and intensified the global energy crisis. At home in Britain, it has led to an outpouring of support for Ukrainian refugees – if not for black and brown people fleeing war and persecution – and provided cover for Keir Starmer to further crack down on the Left of Labour, from socialist MPs to Young Labour.

In this extract of an interview from the latest Momentum political education bulletin, The EducatorDavid Wearing (whomever he is!- FL) discusses the geopolitical interests at stake, the reactions of Western states, especially the UK, and how the Left in Britain can meaningfully engage in anti-imperialist struggle today.

Momentum a centre-left political grouping within the British Labour Party: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has caused untold devastation and loss of life. Evidence of fresh atrocities seem to emerge almost daily. Why has Vladimir Putin’s regime launched this war of aggression, in your opinion?’’ (Red Pepper – leftist British publication.)

————————————————————————————————

Francis Lee (FL). You see the Russians are the really bad guys, or so we are told, and this is regarded as being axiomatic coming straight from the NATO propaganda handbook, the media, and the political elites in the west. But actually, the war against the Eastern Provinces in the Donbass in Eastern Ukraine started shortly after 2014 when the US organized the coup in Independence Square. Kiev was eager to march East and ‘deal with’ (to put it mildly) the two republics who subsequently were put under a siege by the Ukrainian army and death squads and 14000 of the two Republics of Lugansk and Donetsk were killed after being under the Ukie siege from 2014 to the present time. Of course, no mention was made of this in Mr. Wearing’s piece.

David Wearing holds forth as follows: There’s a standard imperialist mentality at work. (Agreed, but read Washington for Moscow – FL) Moscow evidently regards Ukraine with a strong sense of entitlement; part of its sphere of influence in the same way that the United States has historically treated Latin America as its ‘backyard’ under the so-called ‘Monroe Doctrine‘, and sought to dominate the Middle East more recently. Reasserting substantive control over Russia’s near abroad has been an overriding strategic priority for Moscow since the mid-1990s at least.

Indeed, the guiding principle across two decades of Putin’s presidency has essentially been ‘Make Russia Great Again‘. His revanchist, authoritarian nationalism is a product of the 1990s, when Moscow lost its grip on many of its former Tsarist and Soviet possessions in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, and when the Russian economy imploded under neoliberal shock therapy. The ugly machismo of Putin’s rule is a backlash against all of this.

FL – Actually, it was Putin who pulled Russia out of the grip of the oligarchs and free riders who had almost destroyed Russia. Moreover, this would of course be yet another eastern expansion in NATO’s relentless march whose object is and always has been to place an ever-tightening tourniquet around Russia’s neck. It is the West through the instrumentality of NATO which has pushed right up to Russia’s borders in a defiance of the deal in 1991 where NATO would not move ‘’one inch’’ closer to Russia’s borders with a flight time of 5 minutes to Moscow by hypersonic missile.

In fact, Russia offered a peace deal with a view to winding down the conflict which involved an implementation of the Minsk Accords, restoration of the Lugansk/Donetsk independent republics and neutrality for Ukraine. Initially the Ukrainian diplomatic delegation seemed interested in these proposals during the peace talks in Turkey. But as soon as they got back home to Ukraine the delegation was told in short order – almost certainly by the Americans – that none of these proposals were acceptable. So, according to the hard-liners and the Americans, that leaves only war as an option.

But according to Mr Wearing

So, the imperial logic is obvious (yes, but whose imperial logic? FL) but it hardly adds up to a justification for war. Certainly not one you can sell to the Russian public as good reason to sacrifice their sons and daughters on the battlefield. Hence the various pretexts for the invasion that Putin has offered in terms of defending the Russian-speaking population in eastern Ukraine. We don’t need to detain ourselves with any of that. (sic! FLReally, why not?

Wearing continues: Every imperial aggressor throughout history has claimed to be acting on some noble, virtuous principle.

FL – In actual fact the USSR as it was then constituted, was only too glad to get rid of these burdens, i.e., the Baltics, Georgia et cetera.

Aside from geopolitical motives, there’s been a palpable sense of hubris from Putin following previous military victories in Chechnya, Georgia (Georgia who firstly attacked South Ossetia killing a number of Russian Peacekeepers) and Syria (Presumably the writer thinks that a Russian victory in Syria was a defeat for democracy, when it was actually a defeat for the Takfiris).

But this war has proved a major miscalculation, and the danger now is that — like the US in Vietnam and Afghanistan – he (Putin) digs in for the long term rather than suffer the humiliation of accepting defeat. Given the sheer viciousness of the Russian campaign so far, this is not something that the people of Ukraine can afford.

WearingClearly, responsibility for this heinous violence lies first and foremost with Putin and the Russian state.

(F.L., I beg your pardon, but heinous violence came from the Ukrainian military and particularly from the neo-nazi units who couldn’t wait to start shelling the Donbass and continuing to do so for 8 long years killing 14000 ethnic Russians in their homes. Moreover, by 2021 Ukie army decided to take a second bite of the cherry. One hundred thousand Ukrainian troops were about to roll over the Donbass, but Putin after all the dithering stopped them in their tracks with the Russian Regular Forces and the Don Bass Militias.

Such is the policy of the British left’s framing of the situation which is one that they don’t understand and have no wish to.)

DW: There’s been a debate within the US foreign policy establishment about the wisdom of expanding NATO going back over a quarter of a century. One side (the old conservatives and Cold War veterans) argued that expanding the alliance too far into Russia’s former sphere of influence would raise tensions between Washington and Moscow to a dangerous degree. The other side (the neo-liberals and neo-conservatives of the post-Cold War era) argued that Washington’s interests lay in opening the alliance up to any state that wanted to join. At least initially, it was the latter group that got their way.

This is a debate among imperialists about the best policy for Washington to adopt Moscow in its own imperial interests. So, it’s been a little odd to see the anti-expansionist position in that debate being portrayed in recent weeks as ‘pro-Moscow’. Take the US diplomat George Kennan, who argued in 1997 that ‘expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold-war era’, which would ‘inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion [and] restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations’. Back in the 1940s, Kennan had been one of the key intellectual architects of Washington’s entire Cold War strategy toward the USSR. It’s a sign of the depths to which the current debate has degenerated that even the sort of analysis offered by people like him is now routinely denounced as apologia for Putin.

For myself, I can see some logic in the arguments made by these old conservatives of the US foreign policy establishment. Clearly, they are attempting to explain, rather than excuse, their imperial adversary’s response to the expansion of NATO. And clearly some of their predictions have come true.

However, as socialist anti-imperialists we have our own language and frames of reference which are much more analytically useful than some of the shoddy euphemisms of the grand strategists. For example, we should dispense with talk of Russia’s ‘security concerns’ (Oh, yes Russia’s ‘paranoia’ about ‘security concerns’ regarding NATO’s inexorable moving up to the Russian border and stationing their hypersonic assets right on the Russian doorstep with 5 minutes flight time to Moscow and St. Petersburg – FL) as a ‘great power’, and instead refer more frankly and accurately to Russia’s imperial ambitions in places like Ukraine.

FL – (BS! Russia and Putin did not harbour any imperial ambitions, nor did it want a war either with any of its ex-soviet republics, or NATO’s relentless push to its western borders. It was NATO who were belligerently encouraged for exactly that eventuality, not Russia).

The term ‘security’ is one that mostly has an obfuscators effect in political discourse. Imperialists may see control over neighbouring countries as a matter of security, even ‘defence’, but the rest of us don’t have to indulge that.

We also need to think beyond how imperial powers should best manage competition over their respective spheres of interest. A better question for us might be, how can West, Central and Eastern Europe, including Russia, be made into a common home rather than a geopolitical battleground? This is likely a question for a post-Putin world, but we should start thinking about it now. If we’re lucky enough at some point in the future to enjoy another historical moment of détente between the West and Russia, and another interlocutor in Moscow like Mikhail Gorbachev, then we should seize that moment to build a durable peace, rather than squander it a second time.

FL – (But Gorbachov was tricked by the US – this in the shape of Chief US negotiator, James Baker, and the Americans whom NATO had promised would not move ‘’one inch further to the East’’ who then reneged on the promise. The NATO military machine then predictably moved right up to the old Soviet borders. From the US-NATO viewpoint this was a shrewd move, which caught the Russians napping. Well Putin must have mused ‘fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.)

Momentum: So that’s the Western meta-narrative around the confrontation with Russia. What about the West’s approach to the Ukraine war itself?

DW: The fact that the Western powers find themselves on the right side (‘’the right side indeed’’! Along with, Svoboda, C14, Right Sector, the Azov Regiment! These are the shock-troops of NATO under US leadership) the Ukraine war reflects imperial interests and expediency not some high moral principle. They perceive a clear geopolitical advantage to be gained either from a Ukrainian victory or at least a Russian military failure. Support comes in the form of arms supplies to Ukraine and sanctions against Moscow, but a no-fly zone or some other direct intervention has thankfully been ruled out so far, due to the entirely rational fear that this would trigger World War Three.

There’s been no groundswell of opposition to this from the left, and rightly so. Ukraine has no option but to defend itself (sic!) militarily, (by marching east presumably and attempting to over-run the Don Bass and killing its own citizens therein? FL) and it has the right to do so (yes, apparently on a regular basis. FL ), and it has the right to seek the means of self-defence. (self-defence! But of course, shelling your own citizens in the Don Bass – a strange form of self-defence this!) from the only sources credibly able to provide it, namely Russia’s Western adversaries.

But given the nature of Western power we are understandably wary. We are wary of sanctions having a devastating effect on the Russian population, and without seriously hurting the regime. We are wary of any escalation into a direct NATO-Russia war, which would be utterly catastrophic.

Already in the past few weeks we’ve seen US President Biden announce huge additional spending on nuclear weapons. Experts have long warned that upgrading and renewing nuclear arsenals makes the world less, nor safer. We can expect a serious rise in military spending in the UK, and in Germany as well, where decades of foreign policy have been torn up. It’s really important that we stand by our anti-militarist principles in this moment. That doesn’t mean an absolutist form of pacifism, but it does mean an insistence that people recognise that arms races inflame rather than guard against the danger of military conflict.

Finally, in the prevailing atmosphere of machismo, we need to ensure people don’t forget the non-military, humanitarian dimension. That means demanding swift and safe paths to entry for Ukrainian refugees (as part of our wider demand for a complete change in UK border policy). It means aid for displaced Ukrainians wherever they might be. And it means any other economic measures that might help, such as cancelling Ukraine’s national debt to support its recovery whenever the war finally ends.’’

FL – Yes, I get it, a sort of ‘soft NATO’ approach?

OK, so let’s have another version. The Soviet Union was invaded by Nazi Germany in 1941. During the retreat the Red Army was pushed back almost to Moscow. Ukraine was occupied by Germany and also by indigenous Ukrainian fascist collaborators – still unfortunately with us – for most of WW2. Not only did Bandera’s (OUN-B) and Shukeyvich (UPA) fascist (yes, fascists!) collaborate with the Wehrmacht particularly in the massacre in Volhynia (1943-44) of Poles, Jews, and Russians, they were also lauded by the local population (and still are to this day) of the inhabitants of the western Ukraine centred around the cities of Lviv, Ternopol and Vinnytsia, et al. Not to be missed are the statues of Bandera lovingly adorned with flowers in the major cities west of the river Dnieper.

Around the period of 2013, ultra-nationalist groups (inveterate fascists) in the shape of Right Sector and Svoboda C14, and those lovely chaps of the Azov Regiment (1) began to emerge from the shadows and appear among the genuine moderate majority and joined in pitched battles in Kiev with the Berkut (riot Police) daily which the opposition forces finally won. This was, according to the UK’s Guardian ‘newspaper’ a victory for democracy (sic!) and peoples’ power. Well, it might have started like this, but it soon transmuted into something very different. Nobody should be in any doubt about the political complexion of these ultra-nationalist groups – who were and continue to be more than a marginalist political-military force – who went on to hold 6 portfolios in the new ‘government’ based in Kiev. Nor should anyone be in any doubt about both the overt and covert roles played by both the US and EU officials (not forgetting the ever-present Mr. Soros, who is always a fixture in these situations) and the formation of the future interim government.

Throughout this period the EU and high-ranking US officials were openly engaged in Ukraine’s internal affairs. The US Ambassador, Geoffrey Pyatt, and the US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, Victoria Nuland, were strolling around Independence Square reassuring the protestors that America stood behind them. Also basking in the political sunlight were US NGOs (such as the National Endowment for Democracy – NED – directly funded by the US Government) and (USAID). Also involved was the US Human Rights Watch (HRW) and not forgetting of course the ubiquitous Mr. Soros. Identified as GS in the leaked Open Society Foundation (OSF) documents, others involved in the Ukrainian coup in the planning, were the already named, US Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt, along with the following: David Meale (Economic Counsellor to Pyatt, Lenny Benardo (Open Society Foundation – OSF) Yevhen Bystry (Executive Director International Renaissance Foundation – IRF) Oleksandr Sushko (Board Chair, IRF) Ivan Krastev (Chairman Centre for Liberal Studies, a Soros and US government-influenced operation in Sofia, Bulgaria) and Deff Barton (Director, US Agency for International Development AID – USAID – Ukraine). USAID is a conduit for the CIA.

Even right-wing thinkers such as George Freidman at Stratfor described these events as being ‘the most blatant coup in history.’

The new ‘government’ in Kiev was represented by a hotch-potch of oligarchs, Kolomoisky, Akhmetof, Pinchuk, Poroshenko, et al, and petty fuhrers including Pariuby, Yarosh, Biletsky, from the Western Ukraine with their violent armed Squadristi units (as in Italy’s period under Mussolini’s regime) terrorizing their opponents. The ultra-right Svoboda Party had a presence in the Ukrainian parliament (Rada). It was and still is a neo-nazi, ultra-right, anti-Semitic, Russophobic party with its base of support in the western Ukraine. The most important governmental post was handed to its fuhrer Andriy Parubiy who was appointed as Secretary of the Security and National Defence Committee, which supervised the defence ministry and the armed forces. The Parubiy appointment to such an important post should, alone, be cause for international outrage. He led the masked Right-Sector thugs who battled riot police in the Maidan in Kiev.

Like Svoboda, Right-Sector led by their own tin-pot fuhrer Dmitry Yarosh is an openly fascist, anti-semitic and anti-Russian organization. Most of the snipers and bomb-throwers in the crowds related to this group. Right Sector members had been participating in military training camps for the last 2 years or more in preparation for street activity of the kind witnessed in the Ukraine during the events in Independence Square in 2013-14. The Right Sector as can be seen by the appointment of Parubiy, is not able to control major appointments to the provisional government but he has succeeded in achieving his long-term goal of legalizing discrimination against Russians. What the Anglo-American left fail to understand – quite deliberately in my view – is the notion that the Ukrainian right-wing extremists are a marginal force in Ukraine. How much evidence do they need exactly? In fact, the politics of the western Ukraine is dominated by the ultras of the right, and every major city has statues of Bandera lovingly cared for and adorned with flower bouquets around his feet.

This discrimination took the forms of mass murder of the 45 people who passed out leaflets in the southern Black Sea port of Odessa when pro-Yanukovich supporters were attacked by fascist mobs and chased into a nearby building, a trade union HQ. The building was then set on fire and its exits blocked, the unfortunate people trapped inside were either burnt to death or, jumped out of the windows only to be clubbed to death when they landed. The practices of the political heirs of Bandera had apparently not been forgotten by the present generation. There is a video of the incident, but frankly, it was so horrific that I could only watch it once. (See more recently the whole murderous episode in the American publication Consortium News 2022). These barbarians were described by Luke Harding a ‘journalist’ of the Guardian as being ‘’an eccentric group of people with unpleasant right-wing views.’’ Yes, they were really nice chaps who got a little carried away!

One week later with the open support of Washington and its European allies, the regime installed by Washington and Berlin in February’s fascist-led putsch then began extending its reign of terror against all popular resistance in Ukraine. That was the significance of the events in the major eastern Ukrainian sea-port city of Mariupol less than a week after the Odessa outrage. (Mariupol has also come into the recent news for a second time around,)

After tanks, armoured personnel carriers and heavily armed troops were unleashed on unarmed civilians in the city, the Kiev regime claimed to have killed some 20 people. The Obama administration immediately blamed the violent repression on “pro-Russian separatists.’’

One week later Poroshenko, ex-Finance Minister in Yanukovich’s government, was elected as President on 29 May and duly announced that “My first presidential trip will be to Donbass where armed pro-Russian rebels had declared the separatist Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics and control a large part of the region.’’ This was the beginning of the Anti-Terrorist Operation the ATO. However, things didn’t quite work out as planned. After 2 heavy defeats at Iloviask and Debaltsevo the Ukie army was stopped in its tracks and the situation has remained static to roughly this day.

Until that is things changed. Some 8 years later the Ukie army started doing what comes naturally to them: namely to start shelling the Donbass again. It should be understood that the shelling had started in 2014 immediately after the Kiev coup. During the whole period some 14000 hapless citizens of the Don Bass were killed. Moreover, a large Ukie army of some 100,000 were beginning to mass outside of the Don Bass and were preparing their move.

There was no way that Putin was going to allow this. Not only would it mean mass murder of the Don Bass, but it would also put Ukraine (qua western proxy) right on Russia’s border with NATO hypersonic missiles 5 minutes flying time from Moscow. That settled it – Putin had had enough. The Russian Army moved in. It was left with no alternative.

No great power can allow a peer competitor to mass on its borders by any other great power. The US/NATO was precisely doing this. As Putin pointed out, the flying time for hypersonic missiles from the Russian border to Moscow was 5 minutes. See the American Realist theorist John Mearsheimer in this respect.

Yet, all we get from the legacy left is the incessant virtue signalling and anti-Russian rhetoric. In truth Putin didn’t want this war, but there was pressure building up not only from the US neo-cons but also internally in Russia for a more militant approach in both the Parliament and with the Russian public. Any disinterested account of Putin’s turned on the initial attack of NATO and its proxies and Russia’s counterattack. The neo-cons should have heeded Obama’s warning that Russia had an ‘escalation dominance’ and that the US would be advised to tread carefully on Russia’s doorstep.

Russia is slowly but inexorably winning the battlefield in what has been a total defeat for the regime in Kiev, and more importantly for the US-NATO bloc. The tectonic geopolitical plates seem to be moving.

Andrei Martyanov: They are terrified when seeing this banner

April 28, 2022

Please visit Andrei’s website: https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/
and support him here: https://www.patreon.com/bePatron?u=60459185

Sitrep: Operation Z

April 18, 2022

Source

By Nightvision

I didn’t plan on covering the Moskva anymore, as I like many want to move on past that topic. But since the unexpected release of the only known images of the stricken cruiser, there are a few things that must be stated for the record, simply because I see no one else in the resistance sphere stating them, and certainly they will be covered up on the other side, as everything the other side sees merely adds to their own delusions and selective biases, reaffirming their already-held (false) and propagandized beliefs. I will try to make it as concise/short as possible. First the main photo of the cruiser:

This image was taken and leaked from aboard the Turkish ship that answered the SOS call and helped rescue some of the sailors:

Upon cursory glance, this seems like a typical/likely missile strike. Center midships hit, portside list of ship, burn/explosion marks, etc, etc. However there’s a few major problems that few are discussing. Now keep in mind, I’m no naval expert but know enough to talk with some authority on certain things.

Firstly, the burn marks you see along the portside hull are clearly smoke/fume exhalation points along the ports which dot the hull. The larger burn marks which are slightly lower on the hull are actually where the ship has larger ports for torpedo tubes (special kind of torpedo that slides out and drops into the water). This can clearly be seen in a reference photo of the ship.

Click this link to zoom in on the high quality image: https://i.postimg.cc/s2nLj8kf/FQl-Tx-XOXMAMc3a-Xb.jpg

You see the red circles? Those are the lower / larger torpedo tube ports. They would have a larger amount of black fumes due to the presumable much more intense fire coming out of them if the torpedoes inside exploded or were on fire, etc.

So the first thing to get out of the way is, none of those black marks on the ship appear to be from any missile hits, they are merely the ports and torpedo slots emitting fire from the inside of the ship and burning/blackening the hull around them. You can see the red circles line up from both before and after images of the ship.

In the photo of the damaged ship, the large red circle clearly implies the area where a missile might have hit, as there is a lot of blackened areas there. But there is no clear sign of destruction, the blackened area appears to be roughly similar to the torpedo tube hole on the far right in the smaller red circle. In that center area there are ammunition departments plus power plant, so clearly an explosion from inside could have happened.

Here’s when the Sheffield was hit in the Falklands War 

https://youtu.be/hUsY_PznmTg?t=111

You can see the damage on the side.

And here’s some images of the USS Stark when it was hit by an Iraqi plane with an Exocet missile. Keep in mind both HMS Sheffield and Stark were hit by Exocets, and this missile is similar in size to the Neptune that Ukraine alleged to have used.

The difference is quite clear that there is massive damage seen, with an eruption outward of the metal after the explosion. No such damage is seen on the Moskva, only intense burn marks that are also visible from every porthole along the hull going aft.

Now one could argue that a large hole is perhaps hidden by the water as the ship is clearly listed heavily to the port side. But I think we would still see the top of the hole much more clearly because these sea-skimming missiles do skim the sea at about 50ft then drop a little lower at terminal phase, BUT they don’t drop THAT low where they’re literally on the water line. As you can see from the Sheffield and Stark hits, they still hit the hull at roughly 15-20ft up above water, not at mere inches above the water. They can’t be programmed to go TOO low on account of waves, otherwise they might strike a wave in stormy seas and be a wasted missile.

But these things are debatable so far. Here are some even more interesting things.

1. Firstly it has been noted by experts that in the Moskva photos, ALL life boats are missing which means they were deployed, which means already the Ukrainian side is caught in one lie because it means the sailors were in fact saved. The crane can even be seen in a sideward, non diametric position which means it was used to lower lifeboats to the water.

2. Now here’s some very interesting things. The last known satellite photos of the Moskva show it oriented with bow facing south/southeast, and its portside facing east.

This photo is from 2300 hours of April 12, the Moskva was hit some hours later the next day. The Moskva was supposedly stationary like many of the Russian frigates in this region. It would be impossible for Ukrainian missiles coming from the direction of Odessa NW to hit the portside which is here facing east.

Here’s another source of the last known photos of the ship.

Note the direction of Odessa and where the missiles would come from, then note the orientation of the ship and its later-to-be-damaged portside.

3. Now here’s where it gets even more interesting. The green circle on the original photo I posted shows the fire-control radar of the ship

This radar has been noted by naval experts to be in the ‘standby’ or neutral rearward facing position. You can check hundreds of photos/videos of the Moskva in transit on the internet, and the radar always faces rearward. But when it engages a target, it pivots and orients towards the target. So this suggests that during the hit of the Moskva, the fire control radar was not engaging any targets. Of course western ‘analysts’ say this means the Moskva was struck blind by their wunderwaffen stealth missiles and never saw them coming.

Butthere’s a major problem with that theory:

4. Their own story is in fact that the Moskva was “distracted” by multiple TB2 drones used as decoys, which the Moskva was targeting as it failed to notice the magical Neptune missiles broadside it. Here’s a graphic from their own tall tale:

You notice something I circled in red on their own graphic? They themselves are showing the fire-control radar pointing in the direction of the phantom TB2’s in this hypothetical mockup. That means according to their own theory, in order to have successfully ‘distracted’ the Moskva as they claim, the fire-control radar dome MUST have been kept busy by the TB2’s, yet clearly it remained in the standby peacetime position.

Using logic, no matter how you explain it, the Ukrainian side must be lying in at least one part of their statement. Either no TB2s were used and in fact a “stealthy” Neptune just happened to hit the Moskva with zero warning or they were used to distract and the radar should have been tracking them. But then why would you believe the second part of their statement about the Neptunes being used when they clearly lied about the TB2 decoy usage as proven by the radar’s stock position?

And by the way, there is some chance one can possibly believe that a sea-skimming missile might bypass radar, but there is no chance a high flying TB2 (and multiple of them at that) will go undetected, and anyway they admitted they were detected because they were “distracting the Moskva” radar operators according to the official story.

Now consider the following:

  • If Ukraine really had the capability of using some Neptune missile to hit the Moskva, why would it only use 2 and allow the Moskva to still stay afloat for almost a whole day afterwards, being towed to base? Even in the photo the Moskva is cleared of crew and unprotected, why couldn’t Ukraine continue firing to finish it off in that moment of uncertainty?
  • And further, why couldn’t the magical TB2’s also rain down their own missiles on the now crippled and de-crewed cruiser to finish it off?
  • If TB2’s were in the air, where’s the footage? Ukraine loves posting any possible footage of their use, so how come there’s no glorious high-def footage of Neptune missiles slamming into the ship from the perspective of the TB2’s magnificent Canadian-manufactured cameras/optics?

It all boils down to this fact: that if Ukraine lied about even one part of the story, such as the TB2’s which clearly is the most debunked part of the tale, then why would any other part be believable? And the photo also proves they lied about the 450 dead sailors because we know every single lifeboat was deployed as not even one is visible on the ship, which clearly suggests the vast majority, if not all, of the sailors survived. (the sailors reappeared in footage yesterday, anyway) This strongly suggests that the entire ‘Neptune missile’ hoax is just that.

The damage does not quite look like massive Exocet-sized missile strikes which would have gutted the hull, it looks like intense fire burn marks pouring out of every port and torpedo slot due to some internal detonation that gutted the inside of the ship right at that midway point beneath the smokestacks where the engine room lies. And big surprise – this was exactly the Russian MOD’s original explanation.

So if it wasn’t a missile, what caused it then? I don’t want to speculate as that’s a whole other topic for another time or another person. All I will say is that Andrei Martynov had some good suggestions in his recent video, particularly the sabotage part. Considering the ship was stationed in Sevastopol with sailors who might have clear connections via family to the Ukrainian side of the conflict vis a vis Crimea, etc., there could have been a vindictive sailor apt to pay back Russia for Ukraine. And as Martynov said, setting something on fire and blowing it up in the internals of the ship would be extremely easy for someone in the know. After all, as I’ve posted before, it’s happened many times in other navies including recently for the U.S. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/14/sailor-charged-over-fire-that-destroyed-us-warship-disgruntled-prosecutors-say when a disgruntled sailor completely destroyed the Bonhomme Richard with over $3 billion of damage.

Anyway, it’s still possible the Moskva was hit with missiles – I don’t discount anything. But look at the facts presented above and make up your own judgments.

Now onto the actual piece I intended to present today:

I wanted to do a quick ‘deep-dive’ on one of the current central topics in western circles around Ukraine, which is that the AFU is running out of ammo, particularly of the heavy variety – artillery shells and the like, which is by far the most important kind in a war; small arms fire won’t get you far as artillery continues to rule the battlefield, as it always has.

This CNN article states the U.S. is shipping 40,000 artillery rounds. Of course it can be assumed at least some of this load will be destroyed by Russian strikes, if not all of it.

The article says, “During some of the heavy earlier fighting, Ukrainian forces fired up to thousands of artillery rounds in a given day.”

This is easy to verify. The typical firing rate of various artillery systems can be anywhere from 3-10 rounds per minute (rpm). That means a single unit can fire anywhere between 180 to 600 shells in an hour.

Ukraine likely still has at least several hundred of various artillery systems if you count even the old towed-style soviet systems like D-30’s and such. So let’s just say (for quick argument’s sake) 200 units x 200 shells an hour = 40,000. This is already 40,000 shells in a single hour of firing (realistically this “hour of firing” can be spread out throughout the course of a day in let’s say 10 minute firing bursts, etc)

So clearly this demonstrates how rapidly such ammo stocks dwindle. These 40k shells sent by U.S. could be mere hours worth, or perhaps a few days at most if my hypothetical calculations overestimate the AFU shelling rates.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-04-14/russia-ukraine-war-u-s-is-running-out-of-weapons-aiding-kyiv

But it goes deeper than that. There are now questions about the fact that the massive arming campaign for Ukraine is depleting the stocks of all participating NATO countries.

“But President Joe Biden never planned for a war like this. The assumption was that Russia would quickly conquer much of the country, so the U.S. would be supporting a simmering, low-intensity Ukrainian insurgency. Instead, Ukraine’s successful resistance has led to an ongoing, high-intensity conventional fight, with prodigious consumption of munitions and intense attrition of key military assets.”

Funny how the logic here is reversed. We were told it was Russia that didn’t plan for a war like this, and it was Russia that would run out of ammo and supplies. But now they’re admitting that it was in fact the U.S. themselves who miscalculated and are running out…whoops! Add to that the way the article blithely treats Biden as the head of the Ukrainian state / war effort as if he’s the AFU Commander in Chief – totally normal. “But President Biden never planned for a war like this.” Who’s running this war anyway?

“Pentagon officials say that Kyiv is blowing through a week’s worth of deliveries of antitank munitions every day. It is also running short of usable aircraft as Russian airstrikes and combat losses take their toll. Ammunition has become scarce in Mariupol and other areas.”

“For the same reason, the war in Ukraine is a sobering preview of the problems the U.S. itself would face in a conflict against Russia or China. If forced to go to war in Eastern Europe or the Western Pacific, Washington would spend down its stockpiles of missiles, precision-guided munitions and other critical capabilities in days or weeks. It would probably suffer severe losses of tanks, planes, ships and other assets that are sophisticated, costly and hard to replace.”

Interesting! So it was actually the U.S. all along that had no stocks for war, not Russia.

In fact the Pentagon and MSM lied all along. Russia is by far the largest producer of armaments, shells, ammunition on earth, more than all NATO countries combined. The lie we were fed about Russia running out of fuel, ammo, food, etc., was laughable and seen through by any analyst with a brain from the beginning.

But more shocking revelations abound:

“In the world wars of the last century, America’s unmatched manufacturing base ultimately powered it to victory. But today, replenishing the free world’s arsenal might not be so easy.

American economic leadership is no longer based primarily on manufacturing. Shortages of machine tools, skilled labor and spare production capacity could slow a wartime rearmament effort. The U.S. can’t quickly scale up production of Stinger missiles for Ukraine, for example, because the workforce needed to do so no longer exists.”

And this bombshell: “American stockpiles of key weapons are smaller than one might imagine, partly because of production constraints and partly because most of the Pentagon’s roughly $750 billion budget goes to manpower, health care and things other than bullets and bombs.”

I’ve wrote multiple times now in previous SitReps the small inconvenient fact most people don’t know, that a huge portion of U.S.’s entire vaunted military budget goes just to the upkeep and maintenance of its system of 900+ global bases. That number of bases costs gargantuan, unprecedented amounts of funds to maintain and run.

Of course this is why the Pentagon has convened all the top arms makers for emergency meetings, presumably to discuss the issues of trying to ramp up production to fill dwindling draw down supplies.

https://www.reuters.com/world/pentagon-asks-top-8-us-arms-makers-meet-ukraine-sources-2022-04-12/

But there are other sources that have echoed the sentiment that right now the U.S. lacks even the manufacturing capacity to reproduce many of these armaments in great quantities, like the stingers mentioned in the article. One third of all U.S. Javelin stockpiles have already been sent to Ukraine and have paid no dividends, and mostly fallen into the hands of RF forces.

And on top of that the arms producers are actually facing “supply chain issue” of critical components (like microchips etc), like the rest of the world, which is hampering their ability to ramp up production on any of these key units.

“The latest batch of U.S. military equipment has begun arriving in Ukraine, including: – 18 155mm howitzers – 11 Mi-17 helicopters – 200 armored personnel carriers – 300 Switchblade drones – 500 Javelin missiles – 10 counter-artillery radars.”

“For perspective: 500 Javelins will cover three to five days of fighting. 18 howitzers will account for maybe 3% of deployed field artillery. That many or more get lost in a week. The rate of assistance is a fraction of the rate of depletion.”

And on that note, we segue perfectly into today, where the major update is that Russia has ramped up its strikes drastically. Sources in Kiev state they are using 50% more aviation and large amounts of depots were struck overnight including in Lyvov near the Polish border.

“Fmr deputy of Verkhovna Rada, Ilya Kiva, citing his sources, reports that as a result of a missile strike on a facilty in #Lvov, a whole arsenal of foreign weapons and ammo was destroyed this morning. It was delivered from EU and was intended to be sent to the Kharkov direction.”

“Novorosinform REPORTED:Military Aid From #Europe is Destroyed, The Former Deputy of the Verkhovna Rada announced that an arsenal of Weapons and ammunition Delivered By the West to #Ukraine was destroyed by #Russian Missile strikes last night at the #Lviv Railstation.”

“1/2 The Russian Aerospace Forces launched a strike with high-precision missiles at the 124th Joint Logistics Support Center of the Logistics Forces Command of the Ukrainian troops in the Lviv region, the Russian Defense Ministry reports. 2/2 The logistics center and the large consignments of foreign weapons that were delivered to Ukraine from the United States and European countries over the past 6 days were destroyed.”

Footage of some of the Lyvov strikes: https://twitter.com/RWApodcast/status/1516085727058178052

So for all those people asking for days if/when/how/why about Russia destroying western shipments, there’s your answer, it just blew away a huge week’s worth of accumulated equipment on the Polish border, including many dead from the AFU which are even reported on Ukr channels.

And so this brings us to the last point: there are many indications that Phase 2 Offensive may have begun today. There is a huge uptick in fighting all along every frontline along with these new strikes. There are huge gains being reported hourly around Izyum direction and on the southern front, west of Donetsk. It’s too early to say definitively if it’s begun or just the early preparatory work but so far it’s right on time with what many have been saying, which is that Phase 2 would begin early this week.

I’ll leave the specific updates for the next report, so as to let them accumulate as it’s still early. But I’ll mention a few general things.

There are huge smoke plumes coming off of Azovstal and Wargonzo reports RF elements are storming from the north and have already captured the northern part of the Azovstal industrial complex

https://twitter.com/Levi_godman/status/1516085674046377990 https://twitter.com/PelmeniPusha/status/1516086393549824007

In the now intense battles in the north (near Izyum), our side reports that the AFU is throwing everything they have into the battle, not only multiple new planes shot down which means they’re desperately using the last of their aviation, but entire units have been completely wiped out and captured. And from the new captures it’s discovered many of them are from cities in the far West which means these are already the mobilized reserves sent to stop the Russian advances.

Also reports state many of the newly captured are of extremely low morale as they are no longer putting up much resistance. One report said when previously they would attempt to fight out of encirclement, now they are laying down their arms immediately at the first sign of encirclement and not even bothering to fight. There are so many new surrenders I can barely even keep track anymore and post all the videos, and this includes many new graphic ones of destroyed units.

Good map of one of the advances in the north (there’s at least 7+ more village captured apart from this one) 

Meanwhile Chechens and others continue to do clean up on the Illych factory: (18+ video) https://www.bitchute.com/video/qpciZxPBLTZD/

Tons more prisoners are caught and processed:

And eliminated (18+) https://www.bitchute.com/video/u1leHRIalcsy/

https://www.bitchute.com/video/B1XasHkRffdP/

The two British merc prisoners have now begged Boris Johnson to be exchanged:

Fabricating Putin Quotes, Banning Paraplegic Athletes to Undermine Russia: How Low Can the West Go?

April 10, 2022

Source: Al Mayadeen

Rick Sterling 

There has been massive and widespread publicity about Ukraine. It is a simple Hollywood script:  Ukraine is the angel, Russia is the devil, Zelensky is the hero and all good people will wear blue and yellow ribbons. 

Fabricating Putin Quotes and Banning Paraplegic Athletes to Undermine Russia: How Low Can the West Go?

Mobilizing a population to vilify and hate a targeted enemy is a tactic that leaders have used since before the dawn of human history, and it is being used to demonize Russia and Vladimir Putin in the current conflict. If we want to join the march to war, we can join the hate fest.  But if we want a more objective and honest assessment of events, we must rely upon facts that our government and its cheer-leading mainstream media are not anxious for us to view. 

In the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, all things Russian are being punished. Russian athletes, including paraplegics, are barred from international sports competitions. Century-old Russian writers and musicians such as Tolstoy and Tchaikovsky are being removed from bookshelves and concerts. Even Russian bred cats are not exempt. 

If such actions are justified, why was there no such banning of US athletes, musicians, or writers after the US invasion of Iraq?  Moreover, why are so few people outraged by the bombing and killing of 370,000 Yemeni people?  Why are so few people outraged as thousands of Afghans starve because the United States is seizing Afghanistan’s national assets which were in western banks?   

Why Ukraine?

There has been massive and widespread publicity about Ukraine. It is a simple Hollywood script:  Ukraine is the angel, Russia is the devil, Zelensky is the hero and all good people will wear blue and yellow ribbons. 

Maintaining this image requires propaganda to promote it, and censorship to prevent challengers from debunking it. 

This has required trashing some long-held western traditions. By banning all Russian athletes from international competition, the International Olympic Committee and different athletic federations have violated the Olympic Charter which prohibits discrimination on the basis of nationality. 

Censorship

The West prides itself on free speech yet censorship of alternative viewpoints is now widespread in Europe and North America. Russia Today and other Russian media outlets are being blocked on the internet as well as cable TV. Ironically, numerous programs on RT were hosted by Americans, for example, journalist Chris Hedges and comedian Lee Camp. The US is silencing its own citizens.  

Censorship or shadow banning is widespread on social media. On April 6, one of the best informed military analysts, Scott Ritter @realScottRitter, was suspended from Twitter. Why?  Because he suggested that the victims of Bucha may have been murdered not by Russians, but rather by Ukrainian ultra-nationalists and the US and UK may also be culpable. 

The 2015 Netflix documentary titled “Winter on Fire: Ukraine’s Fight for Freedom” deals with the Maidan (Kiev central square) uprising of 2013-2014.  It ignores the most essential elements of the events: the management provided by the US and the muscle provided by ultra-nationalists of the Right Sector and Azov Battalion. The attacks and killing of Ukrainian police are whitewashed away.  

By contrast, the 2016 documentary “Ukraine on Fire” provides the background and essential elements of the conflict.  It is not available on Netflix and was banned from distribution on YouTube for some time. 

Most people in the West are unaware of the US involvement in the 2014 Kiev coup, subsequent US funding and training of ultra-nationalist and Neo Nazi battalions, and the eight-year war in eastern Ukraine resulting in fourteen thousand deaths. 

Sensational Accusations 

Backed by US and UK intelligence agencies, Ukraine knows the importance of the information war. They make sensational accusations that receive uncritical media coverage. When the truth eventually comes out, it is ignored or buried on the back pages. Here are a few examples: 

– In 2014, eleven civilians were killed in eastern Ukraine when an apartment was hit in rebel-held territory.  Ukraine tried to blame Russia even though no bombs were coming from Russia and the population is ethnically Russian. 

– At the beginning of the current conflict, Ukrainian President Zelensky claimed that soldiers on Snake Island died heroically rather than surrender. Actually, all the soldiers surrendered. 

– Ukraine and western media claim a maternity hospital in Mariupol was bombed by Russia. Evidence shows the hospital was taken over by Ukrainian military forces on March 7, two days before the bombing on March 9.  

– The latest sensational accusations are regarding dead civilians in Bucha, north of Kiev. Again, there is much contrary evidence. The Russian soldiers left Bucha on March 31, the mayor of Bucha announced the town liberated with no mention of atrocities on March 31, the Azov battalion entered Bucha on April 1, the Ukrainian Defense Ministry published a video of  “Russian” atrocities on April 3. 

In most cases, western media does not probe the accusations or use simple logic to ask if they make sense.  However in the case of Bucha story, the NY Times had to acknowledge they were “unable to independently verify the assertions by Ukraine’s Defense Ministry.” 

Self Censorship 

In addition to actual censorship, there is widespread self-censorship. Instead of reading what the Russians are saying, western political “analysts” engage in outlandish amateur psychology and speculation. With no factual basis, they speculate about what Putin wants and his mental state. 

This is convenient if one does not want to deal with real issues and arguments. 

Most western analysts and journalists are afraid or unwilling to read or listen to what the Russian leaders say. That is unfortunate because those speeches are more clear and direct than those from western politicians who rely on public relations, spin, and platitudes.   

Fabricating quotes 

Ignorance of Russian foreign policy is such that Truthout online magazine recently published an article that contains a sensational but completely invented quote from Putin. It says,

Putin here is clear enough: “Ukraine has no national rights that Russians are bound to respect. Prepare for reunification, reabsorption, or some other euphemism for subaltern status with Mother Russia.”

Putin said no such thing and any moderately knowledgeable person would recognize this to be fake. 

When I emailed the co-author, Carl Davidson, asking where the quotation came from, he admitted inventing it. This is significant because the statement goes to the core of what the conflict is about. Is Russia trying to absorb all of Ukraine? Do they intend to occupy Ukraine?  Anyone who reads the speeches of Putin and Lavrov, such as here and here and here, knows they do not. Davidson’s fabricated quote suggests he has not read the speeches himself.

Ukraine in the Global Context 

The article with the made-up quote contends that “Putin is part of a global right-wing authoritarian movement that seeks to ‘overthrow’ the 20th Century.”  This analysis is close to that of the US Democratic Party, which sees the major global division being between “authoritarianism” vs “democracy”.   

It is highly US-centered and partisan, with Putin somehow lumped with Trump. It is also self-serving, with US Democrats as the embodiment of “democracy”.  It is completely contrary to a class analysis. 

This faulty analysis has major contradictions. It is well known that Biden is unpopular. Biden’s latest approval rating is under 42%. It is less well known in the West that Putin is popular in Russia. Since the intervention in Ukraine his approval rating has increased to over 80%.  

Also largely unknown in the West, most of the world does NOT support the Western analysis of the Ukraine conflict.  Countries representing 59% of the global population abstained or voted against the condemnation of Russia at the UN General Assembly. These countries tend to see US exceptionalism and economic-military domination as a key problem. They do not think it helpful to demonize Russia and they urge negotiations and a quick resolution to the Ukraine war.  

Cuba said, “History will hold the United States accountable for the consequences of an increasingly offensive military doctrine beyond NATO’s borders which threatens international peace, security and stability…. Russia has the right to defend itself.” 

South African President Ramaphosa blamed NATO saying, “The war could have been avoided if NATO had heeded warnings from amongst its own leaders and officials over the years that its eastward expansion would lead to greater, not less, instability in the region.”

The Chinese representative said, “The final settlement of the Ukraine crisis requires abandoning the Cold War mentality, abandoning the logic of ensuring one’s own security at the expense of others’ security, and abandoning the approach of seeking regional security by expanding military blocs.” 

Many western anti-war movements are critical of Russia’s invasion. Others, such as the US Peace Council, see the US and NATO as largely responsible. However they all see the necessity of pressing to stop the war before it gets worse.  

In contrast, the western military-industrial-media complex is fueling the war with propaganda, censorship, banning, demonization and more weapons. It appears they do not want a resolution to the conflict. Just as they supported NATO pushing up against Russia, knowing that it risked provoking Russia to the point of retaliation, they seem to be pushing for a protracted bloody conflict in Ukraine, knowing that it risks global conflagration.  Yet they persist, while crying crocodile tears.  

The opinions mentioned in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Al mayadeen, but rather express the opinion of its writer exclusively.

كيف ستعيد أميركا تشكيل العالم بعد أوكرانيا

 السبت 2 نيسان 2022

رأي أسعد أبو خليل

ملامح مرحلة جديدة في تكوين العالم وتوزيع القوى والقوّة فيه ترتسم بسرعة. الحكومة الأميركيّة في طور تأنيب الضمير (الإمبريالي) ومراجعة الذات (الحربيّة). هي غير راضية عن شكل الكوكب. كانت تظنّ أن انهيار الاتحاد السوفياتي سيضمن لها السيطرة على الكون لأجيال وأجيال. ما مِن إمبراطوريّة تظنّ أن سيطرتها يمكن أن تزول أو أن تضمحلّ. ضمان الاستمراريّة الأبديّة للسطوة الأميركية هي الشغل الشاغل لمخطّطي البنتاغون. كان واحد من أولى أعمال وزير الدفاع الأميركي الأسبق، دونالد رامسفيلد، تشكيل لجنة من الخبراء والمؤرّخين لاستخلاص دروس عن انهيار الإمبراطوريّات في التاريخ (أتى ببرنارد لويس، المستشرق الصهيوني، من أجل أن يشاركهم انطباعاته عن الخطر الإسلامي وعن دروس انهيار الإمبراطوريّات الإسلاميّة.). كل تقارير «استراتيجيّة الأمن القومي» التي تصدر عن كل إدارة جديدة تكون مهووسة بالأخطار المحتملة من جهات محدّدة، خصوصاً الصين. لم تكن أميركا تحسب حساباً للخطر الروسي. هي اليوم في مرحلة إعادة النظر. من المرجّح أن هناك إعادة تنظيم للميزانيّة العسكريّة والاستخباراتيّة لرصد ميزانيّة أكبر لمواجهة الخطر الروسي (الكونغرس زاد على رقم الميزانية التي طلبها منه بايدن). لا تزال أميركا تستخف بالقوّة الروسيّة مقارنة بخوفها من الخطر الصيني الداهم. القوة الاقتصاديّة هي أهم عناصر القوّة في الحسبان الأميركي لأنها هي التي تؤهل لميزانيّات عسكريّة ضخمة. ميزانيّة روسيا العسكريّة لا تصل إلا إلى 8 في المئة من الميزانيّة العسكريّة الأميركيّة العملاقة. اللحاق مسألة صعبة، والحصار الاقتصادي الخانق الذي باتت أميركا تتقنه لخنق الشعوب فعّال للغاية في إضعاف القوة العسكريّة. وحدهما إيران وكوبا، أوجدتا طرقاً ووسائل للخروج من الحصار الجائر بخسائر أقلّ (نسبيّاً، لكن الـ«إيكونومست» اعترفت قبل أسابيع أن اقتصاد إيران أفضل ممّا كان وممّا تريده له أميركا).

ميشال مورو غوميز ــ كوبا

أميركا غير راضية عمّا يجري في أوروبا اليوم. هي كانت واثقة أنها حاصرت روسيا وستمنعها من ممارسة أي نفوذ خارج حدودها. حتى في داخل حدودها، هي كانت ناشطة في التجسّس وفي الاختراق عبر منظمات المجتمع المدني ومن قبل الإعلام المُسمّى «جديد» و«مستقل» (ماذا لو أطلقنا على الإعلام المُموَّل من إيران وصف «المستقل» كما تطلق وسائل إعلام «جديدة» على نفسها وصف المستقلّة فقط لأنها تتلقّى التمويل من حكومات ومؤسّسات أوروبيّة رجعيّة، لكنها تجزم أن لا أجندة عند حكومات أوروبا لأنها منزّهة). وكان أي معارض روسي، ولو لم يحظَ بشعبيّة في بلاده، يتلقّى تغطية واسعة وبطوليّة في إعلام الغرب. وكل معارض روسي يمرض، يكون هدفاً لمؤامرة من بوتين. وقبل أسابيع نشرت صحف غربيّة خبراً عن مقتل صحافيّة روسيّة كانت قد انتقدت بوتين. هكذا كانت العناوين. لكن عندما تقرأ الخبر تدرك أن الموضوع هو عنف شخصي، وأن صديقها قتلها وأنه ليس من أسباب سياسيّة لما جرى. ولنتذكّر أن يحيى شمص (المتهم بصلات مخدراتيّة) تلقّى تغطية واسعة في إعلام الغرب فقط لأنه معارض لحزب الله. فلنتوقّف لبرهة عند هذه المفارقة: تلقّى يحيى شمص تغطية في إعلام الغرب أكبر بكثير من تغطية النائب محمد رعد، الذي نال أكبر عدد أصوات في آخر انتخابات. هذا يعطينا فكرة عن معايير وحسابات الغرب (أشكّ أن واحداً من المراسلين الغربيين، أو واحدة، التقت بمحمد رعد). أميركا قلقة من التحدّي الذي لاقته من بوتين في هذه الأزمة. لم تكن تتوقّع ذلك مع أنه كانت هناك مؤشرات على نقمة روسيّة-صينيّة من سلوك الغطرسة الأميركي والذي تجلّى في الغزو الغربي لليبيا.

الحكومة الأميركية غاضبة جداً وهذا يظهر في سلوكها. حظر الإعلام الروسي وإصدار تنبيهات تويتريّة عن روابط لإعلام معاد ــــــ مع دولة ليست أميركا في حالة عداء رسمي معها ــــــ يشي بحلول مرحلة جديدة في العلاقة الدوليّة وفي إدارة الوضع الداخلي. ما إن تحرّك الجيش الروسي حتى اضمحلّ الخلاف في الداخل الأميركي وأصبح اليسار الصغير في الكونغرس الأميركي متحمّساً للحرب، ويشارك القوى المتنفّذة في الحزبيْن في عنفوان الوطنيّة والإصرار على السيطرة الأميركية الكليّة. لم تعد مساحة النقاش في الغرب كما كانت حتى في سنوات الحرب الباردة. كانت هناك إمكانيّة مناقشة فرضيّات الإدارات الأميركيّة عن الاتحاد السوفياتي، لكن هذا غائب اليوم. تجول بين الصحافة الأوروبيّة والأميركيّة ولا تجد أي مساحة نقديّة. ليس هناك من رأي معارض أو مختلف. حتى الكتّاب الذين يعارضون ــــــ أو كانوا يعارضون ــــــ توجّهات إمبراطورية الحرب سكتوا، لا بل أسهموا من خلال كتاباتهم في المجهود الحربي (هالني مثلاً كتابات ميشيل غولدبيرغ، الكاتبة في «نيويورك تايمز»، والتي عرفتها بعد 11 أيلول وكانت في موقع «صالون» من القلّة المعترضين على التعامل الأميركي مع المسلمين).


ماذا ستفعل أميركا في خلال الأزمة وبعدها. على الأرجح أن الإدارات المتعاقبة ستلجأ إلى جملة من السياسات والأعمال بما فيها:

أولا- تدعيم حلف شمال الأطلسي وزيادة الإنفاق العسكري فيه. ألمانيا باشرت بزيادة الإنفاق العسكري وسيكون مطلوباً منها الأكثر. ألمانيا أعلنت على الفور زيادة إنفاقها العسكري بنسبة 112 مليار دولار، ممّا يزيد نسبة الإنفاق من مجمل الناتج القومي إلى 2 في المئة من 1.53 في المئة والتزمت ستّ دول في حلف شمال الأطلسي بزيادة الإنفاق العسكري بنسبة 133 مليار دولار. حتى السويد الحيادية المسالمة التزمت بالزيادة. وسويسرا ضربت بحياديّتها التاريخيّة عرض الحائط كي تمتثل للمطالب الأميركيّة بالإذعان والطاعة من قبل كل دول أوروبا، في «الناتو» وفي خارجه. ونسبة الـ 2 في المئة من الناتج القومي على الإنفاق العسكري كانت قد وصلته دول اليونان وكرواتيا وبريطانيا وإستونيا ولاتفيا وبولندا ولتوانيا ورومانيا وفرنسا ــــــ وهذه النسبة كانت قيادة «الناتو» قد طلبتها. أميركا كانت في مرحلة إعداد للمعركة المقبلة. وبدلاً من تخفيض عدد أعضاء الحلف، ستصرّ أميركا على زيادة الأعضاء وقد تصرّ في مرحلة لاحقة على ضمّ أوكرانيا إلى الحلف لاستفزاز روسيا واستدراجها إلى مواجهة عسكريّة. وليس مستغرباً لو أن أميركا أصرّت على حيازة ألمانيا على السلاح النووي (تحتفظ أميركا بسلاح نووي على الأرض الألمانيّة بالرغم من معارضة الشعب هناك لذلك في السبعينيّات والثمانينيّات). وعدد الأسلحة النوويّة الأميركيّة في أوروبا غير معروف (سرّي) وهو يُقدَّر بـ 100 منتشرة في ست دول على الأقلّ. وهذا السلاح نُشر منذ الخمسينيّات ولم يؤثّر انهيار الاتحاد السوفياتي على وضعه. أي أن أميركا تستعمله ليس فقط لتخويف الاتحاد السوفياتي بل لبسط سيطرة أميركيّة تامّة على القارّة.

ما إن تحرّك الجيش الروسي حتى اضمحلّ الخلاف في الداخل الأميركي وأصبح اليسار الصغير في الكونغرس الأميركي متحمّساً للحرب


ثانيا- التفكير الجدّي في إنزال السلاح النووي التكتيكي إلى الميدان. والسلاح النووي التكتيكي هو سلاح يقضي على أحياء في مدن بدلاً من تدمير مدينة بكاملها. و«نيويورك تايمز» نشرت قبل أيّام مقالة تحاول فيها جعل فكرة استعمال النووي التكتيكي مقبولة من العامة. وقد أدلى مسؤول استخبارات سابق في أميركا برأيه، وقال: «لا يمكنك إدارة الخدّ الأيسر كل الوقت». والحديث عن السلاح النووي التكتيكي سبق هذه الأزمة. ومن المعروف أن أميركا هدّدت نظام صدّام به. ففي اللقاء الشهير قبل الحرب في 1991 بين جيمس بابكر وطارق عزيز، هدّد جيمس بابكر، في تلميح كان أقرب إلى التصريح، بأن أميركا ستردّ بصورة فظيعة إذا أصاب جنودها سلاح كيماوي عراقي (لم يكن النظام العراقي يملك سلاحاً كيماوياً كما هو معروف). وأميركا كانت على وشك استعمال النووي التكتيكي في معارك تورا بورا في أفغانستان كي تهدم الجبال فوق رؤوس المختبئين فيها عندما أصيبت بالحنق من الفشل في العثور على حليفها السابق، أسامة بن لادن. طوّرت أميركا بعدها قنبلة الـ«مواب» وهي قنبلة ذات قدرات تدميريّة هائلة لا يفوق قدرتها إلا السلاح النووي. ولم تتوقّف أميركا عن رمي الـ«مواب» على أفغانستان ــــــ التي لم تعانِ، بنظر إعلام الغرب، وإعلام التمويل الغربي إلا بعد مغادرة جيش الاحتلال الأميركي لها.

https://33abe0676e26405add2d42ea62ee16e9.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-38/html/container.html

اليوم، أميركا في موقع صعب. كيف تقترب من الصين أكثر وهي تكنّ عداءً نحو الصين يفوق عداءها نحو روسيا؟ والعلاقة بين الصين وروسيا ممتازة

ثالثا- جعل حلف شمال الأطلسي حلفاً عالمياً. لقد رُفعت مرتبة قطر في التحالف مع أميركا. في الوقت الذي كان فيه حكام العرب ينتظرون الفرصة للقاء بايدن (الذي لا يزال يرفض مهاتفة محمد بن سلمان)، دعا بايدن الأمير القطري إلى لقاء خاص وحميم في البيت الأبيض، وتمّ الإعلان عن رفع مرتبة قطر إلى «حليف أساسي من خارج الناتو». واللقاء بين بايدن والحاكم القطري سبق الحرب على أوكرانيا وهو تضمّن حديثاً عن مدّ ألمانيا وأوروبا بالغاز القطري (يبدو أن أميركا كانت مستعدّة جيداً لهذه الأزمة، قبل أشهر من التدخّل العسكري الروسي). ولقد أخذت قطر مرتبتها الجديدة على محمل الجدّ وهي تحاول جاهدة الظهور بمظهر الدولة الغربيّة في عواطفها الجيّاشة نحو الشعب الأوكراني. لم يلقَ شعب فلسطين هذه العاطفة الجيّاشة من قطر من قبل. إعلام النظام القطري لم يكن في هذه الأزمة إلا اجتراراً لإعلام حلف شمال الأطلسي، وتتعامل «الجزيرة» وغيرها مع أوكرانيا أنها هي قلب العروبة النابض.

رابعا- إيلاء الحلفاء بين الأنظمة الاستبداديّة أهميّة أكبر وتولية مصالحهم في العلاقات. أسابيع فقط من الحرب الروسية على أوكرانيا وأميركا تصلح علاقاتها مع النظام السعودي والإماراتي. النظام القطري لا يحتاج إلى عناية خاصّة لأنه مطلق الطاعة والولاء ومرتبته التحالفيّة ارتفعت في نظر واشنطن. والنظام السعودي عبّر عن امتعاضه في حديث مع «وول ستريت جورنال» عن كثرة الإشادة الأميركيّة بالحليف القطري. لكن تحفّظ الحكومة السعودية والإماراتيّة، وحتى حكومة العدوّ، عن اعتناق موقف «الناتو» بالكامل (بالنسبة إلى روسيا) أزعج الحكومة الأميركيّة. لكن بدلاً من رفع العصا بوجه الحلفاء، عمدت واشنطن إلى إرضائهم وتكرار مواقف الدعم والتعهد بالدفاع عن أمن النظام. لم تعد أميركا تتحمّل رقصات توازن بينها وبين العدوّ الروسي. وأميركا هي اليوم في حالة عداء مطلقة ضد روسيا. والحلفاء من أمثال السعودية والإمارات سيحظون بالمزيد من الدعم الأميركي، السياسي والعسكري. سنسمع عن شحنات سلاح جديدة وعن قواعد أميركية جديدة وعن وفود وزيارات كثيرة. والحاكم السعودي الشاب بات في موقع تفاوضي حول صعوده إلى العرش، وحظوظ نيله الرعاية الأميركيّة لصعوده باتت شبه محسومة. الاهتمام بطغاة الخليج كان بادياً هذا الأسبوع، حيث حرص وزير الخارجية الأميركي، أنتوني بلينكن، على ترضية محمد بن زايد ومبعوثين سعوديّين. والأكاديمي الشاب، غريغوري برو، على حق عندما علّق قائلاً إن هذا الاهتمام من قبل إدارة بايدن بالأنظمة الاستبداديّة بالخليج ينسف نظريّة هنتنغتون من أساسها.

خامسا- حظر التسليح الروسي. هناك قانون أميركي من عام 2017 يُعرف بأحرفه الأولى، قانون «كاتسا» وهو يفرض عقوبات على الدول التي تدخل في عقود مع روسيا في مجال الدفاع والاستخبارات «بصورة كبيرة». أي إن القانون ضبابي وهو كان يفترض أن يعاقب تركيا والهند لاستيرادهم شبكة «أس 400». لكن مرتبة الحلفاء أدّت إلى التساهل كما أن علاقة تركيا بروسيا وبأوكرانيا أفادت أميركا لتمرير رسائل. لكن مساعي التفاوض التركيّة قد لا تكون مُحبّذة في واشنطن لأن أميركا تريد من هذه الحرب أن تستمرّ إلى ما لا نهاية لو أمكن من أجل استنفاد طاقات وموارد روسيا. وقد كتب ديفيد شينكر (عرّاب نخبة «ثوّار» لبنان) مع زميل له من «مؤسّسة واشنطن» مقالة في «وول ستريت جورنال» يدعوان فيها إلى التشدّد في العقوبات على الحلفاء الذين يستوردون السلاح من روسيا. لن تتساهل أميركا في هذا الخصوص بعد اليوم. أي إنه من المتوقّع أن تزيد المبيعات الأميركية من الأسلحة.

اليوم، أميركا في موقع صعب. كيف تقترب من الصين أكثر وهي تكنّ عداءً نحو الصين يفوق عداءها نحو روسيا؟ والعلاقة بين الصين وروسيا ممتازة

سادسا- التعامل مع مثلّث القوة في العالم. ريتشارد نيكسون نظر إلى توزيع القوى في العالم ورأى أن العالم المثلث الأقطاب يحتّم محاولة طرف فيه جذب طرف آخر له. هذا ما حفّزه على تجاوز موانعه العقائديّة من أجل أن يبيع تايوان ويغضّ النظر عن عدائه المرضي ضدّ الشيوعية لكسب الصين إلى صف أميركا. لم تصبح الصين حليفة لكن كل ما يحتاجه المُخطّط في العلاقات الدوليّة أن يكون طرفه أقرب إلى طرفٍ ثانٍ من الطرف الثالث في المثلّث. وهذا ما حصل وأضعف الموقع السوفياتي. كان وضع الاتحاد السوفياتي سيكون أفضل بكثير لو أنه اعتنى أكثر بإصلاح العلاقة مع الصين لتفويت الفرصة على التآمر الأميركي ضدّه. اليوم، أميركا في موقع صعب. كيف تقترب من الصين أكثر وهي تكنّ عداءً نحو الصين يفوق عداءها نحو روسيا؟ والعلاقة بين الصين وروسيا ممتازة وهي أوثق بعد أزمة أوكرانيا لأن الصين تحتاج إلى تعاون روسي من أجل اجتراح سبل تجاوز العقوبات الأميركية القاسية والوحشيّة (هي وحشيّة على الشعوب قبل أن تكون ضد الأنظمة). ومهما حاولت أميركا أن تُبعد الصين عن روسيا، فليس لديها ما تعطيه للصين غير تخفيف حدّة العداء الشديد. وتخفيف حدة العداء لا يغيّر من التخطيط الاستراتيجي الأميركي الذي يتعامل مع الصين على أنه الخطر الأكبر. أميركا كان لديها الكثير لتقدّمه للصين في عام 1970: عضويّة مجلس الأمن وطرد تايوان من الأمم المتحدة بالإضافة إلى إنشاء علاقة ديبلوماسيّة، بالإضافة إلى التعامل مع الصين على أنها دولة أكبر مما كانت في حينه. ماذا تستطيع أن تقدّم أميركا للصين اليوم؟ اعتبارها دولة عظمى وهي كذلك من دون مبالغة أميركية ديبلوماسيّة.

سابعا- جرّ روسيا إلى حروب إنهاك. هناك نظريّة أن الحرب الروسية في أوكرانيا لم تكن إلا فخّاً نصبته أميركا لها. وأميركا تحمّست كثيراً لهذه الحرب وكان واضحاً أنها كانت تعدّ لها. كانت القوّات الأميركيّة قد انتشرت في أنحاء مختلفة من أوروبا خصوصاً في بولندا، بالإضافة إلى تولّي أجهزة الاستخبارات الأميركيّة مهمّة تقرير أجندة الصحف الأميركيّة. فتحتُ ثلاث صحف من باب التجربة: «نيويورك تايمز» و«واشنطن بوست» و«غارديان» البريطانيّة. نفس الأخبار والعناوين موجودة في الصحف الثلاث، ومنسوبة كلّها لمصادر عسكريّة واستخباراتيّة أميركيّة. كانت الصحف البريطانيّة تتميّز عن الصحف الأميركيّة لكن ذلك تغيّر منذ الحرب في سوريا حين تطابقت التغطية بالكامل وأصبحت الـ«غارديان» أكثر تصلّباً في الصهيونيّة وفي تأييد آلة الحرب الأميركيّة من صحف أميركا. قد تصل أوكرانيا وروسيا إلى تسوية لكن أميركا ستعطّلها. طلع المبعوث الأوكراني إلى مفاوضات تركيا بين الطرفيْن بتصريحات متفائلة لكن وزير الخارجيّة الأميركي سرعان ما أبطل مفعول التفاؤل وخفّض منسوب الترحيب بشأن التقدّم في المفاوضات. أميركا تبحث عن حرب أفغانستان جديدة كي تغرق روسيا في حرب لا تنتهي إلا بانهيار الدولة. ليس هناك من تعداد للسلاح الذي هطل على أوكرانيا، لكن تذكّر أو تذكّري أن حتى السويد والنروج شاركت في الحرب الأوكرانيّة.

ثامنا- التركيز على دول العالم النامي في الاستراتيجيّة الأميركيّة لصنع تحالف عالمي ضد أعدائها. الصحف الغربيّة ضجّت بقوّة التحالف العالمي الذي تقوده أميركا (طبعاً تحت مسميّات الحريّة ــــــ وتحالف الحريّة هذا يضمّ مستبدّين من كل حدب وصوب)، لكن الوقائع في تصويت الجمعيّة العاميّة للأمم المتحدة أثبتت عكس ذلك. كانت أميركا تريد أن تحصل على إجماع كل دول العالم لكن تحالفها كان غربيّاً صرفاً. دول كبرى في العالم النامي حاولت الحفاظ على مسافة من موقف أميركا. الهند وجنوب أفريقيا والصين وباكستان كلّها تحافظ على علاقة وديّة مع روسيا. ستضطرّ أميركا إلى إنفاق المزيد من المال وشحن المزيد من السلاح وشنّ المزيد من الحروب لجلب المزيد من دول العالم النامي إليها. لقد فضحت هذه الحرب الطابع العنصري الصارخ للتحالف الغربي ومعاييره. لم يعد ممكناً ستر طبيعة سيادة العنصريّة البيضاء في صلب التحالف الغربي. لا يمحي ذلك الترحيب بمسؤول من هذه الدولة الآسيويّة أو نشر خطاب وزير الخارجية الكيني الذي هو في الأساس أداة بيد الإدارة الأميركيّة. (واختفى وزير الخارجية الكيني عن الساحة بعد خطابه في الأمم المتحدة، والذي أرادته البروباغندا الأميركيّة أن يصبح شهيراً لأنها استعملته بصورة عنصريّة كي تُكسي عدوانيّتها بلسان فرد أفريقي).

تاسعا- الحرب الدعائيّة ستستعر أكثر من أي وقت. رأينا ذلك على مرّ الأسابيع الماضية. «واشنطن بوست» (وهي أكثر مطبوعة ملتصقة بأجهزة الاستخبارات الأميركيّة) دعت جهاراً إلى تكرار تجربة الحرب الباردة في شنّ «حرب ثقافيّة» ضد روسيا وغيرها من أعداء أميركا. لكن الصحيفة نسيت أن الحرب الثقافية الماضية تضمّنت نشر عقيدة بن لادن وصحبه حول العالم لأن تلك العقدية كانت مؤاتية ضد الشيوعيّة.

نحن في مرحلة قلقة ومضطربة من العلاقات الدوليّة. صحف الغرب (وتوابعه في بلادنا) مشغولة بالتدخّل العسكري الروسي في أوكرانيا. لكن التدخّل الأميركي في أوكرانيا لا يقلّ عن تدخّل روسيا. هل من شكّ أن ضبّاطاً أميركيّين يقودون كل العمليات العسكريّة الأوكرانيّة؟ هل من شك أن هناك شركات علاقات عامّة تكتب خطب القادة الأوكرانيّين (لقد علمنا رسميّاً أن شركة علاقات عامّة استأجرتها حكومة بايدن كي تكتب خطب سفيرة أوكرانيا في أميركا). أميركا لن تتوقّف، هي ستستمرّ لأنها في طور الانتقام من تحدّي روسيا لها. والانتقام الأميركي، كما رأينا بعد 11 أيلول، أبشع بكثير من عوائد القبائل العربيّة القديمة.

* كاتب عربي ــــ حسابه على تويتر
asadabukhalil@

Zakharova: West Uses Expulsion of Russian Diplomats as Information, Political Attack

April 6 2022

By Staff, Agencies

Western countries in recent decades have begun using the declaration of Russian diplomats as persona non grata as an information and political attack, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told Sputnik radio on Wednesday.

“Over the last decades, the collective West has begun to use the declaration of Russian diplomats as persona non grata, that is, imposing sanctions on them, isolating them from the opportunity to work in the region they had studied… as a tool not of diplomatic work, but of information and political attack,” she said.

According to Zakharova, the West “necessarily needs to show some kind of heaping of their actions.”

“They call it solidarity, but it has nothing to do with it,” the diplomat added.

The spokeswoman then drew attention to the fact that the expulsion of Russian diplomats has always been carried out publicly, loudly, and demonstratively.

Western countries even went so far as to start making public the names of diplomats and providing their personal data, Zakharova said, adding that “All of this was accompanied… by conditions beyond our understanding, under which our diplomats had to leave the country.”

“All this was done on purpose to create a sense of guilt on the Russian side for something that no one had done, at least under the headlines under which Russian diplomats were expelled. There was nothing in terms of factual arguments, it was purely a verbal attack,” she underscored.

%d bloggers like this: