Greed, usury and the world

January 30, 2023

Source

by Naresh Jotwani

The Saker recently posted an article (here) on the important subject of the quality of leadership in the US. In a comment to that article, I asked him the following question:

From what you have accurately pointed out, is it possible also to draw the following inescapable conclusions?

1. Money which was poured into the think-tanks came not from the Neocon minions themselves but their paymasters, who are presumably very wealthy people.

2. Therefore “big money” of some variety wanted and presumably still want to “take over” US foreign policy. The money paid in is an investment seeking return.

3. Greed and arrogance drive big money.

So we are forced to conclude:

4. Unbridled greed and arrogance of certain people are creating difficulties for billions of people around the world.

Your opinion will be greatly appreciated!

Promptly, the Saker replied as follows:

1) yes
2) yes
3) yes
4) and yes again

I agree with every point you make.
Actually, the root of most evil on our planet is usury and its “byproducts”. I recommend Michael Hudson as THE authority on this topic 🙂

We see that the two words ‘greed’ and ‘usury’ are central to the two excerpts cited. We can hope therefore that an understanding of the meaning and background of these two words will add much to the background and significance and of Saker’s article.

Greed

Greed is a character trait, like a dark and bottomless hole, deep in the emotional make-up of a person. It distorts the affected person’s all-round outlook, and affects the entirety of his or her life and relationships. By its very definition, greed is insatiable. A need may one day be satisfied, but never greed. Unlike a need, greed has no connection with the essential material necessities of rational human life. It can therefore be dubbed an irrational trait, a character flaw. Since a greedy person is never contented, contentment as a goal of life is denied to him or her.

Does nature or nurture play the bigger role in the growth this trait in an individual?

While nature – genetics? – may indeed play a role, a far bigger role is probably that of nurture, as reflected in the person’s upbringing, education, social environment … et cetera. For example, severe deprivation may accentuate the expression of greed in an individual.

Usury

Usury is defined as ‘the lending or practice of lending money at an exorbitant interest’. ‘Exorbitant’ here implies that the rate of interest is designed with the specific aim of cruelly exploiting, impoverishing or even ruining the borrower.

The ideal of a healthy free-market economy is premised on both parties to a transaction benefitting from the transaction. Usury goes against that spirit in the sense that the borrower – the weaker party – is forced into a transaction which is not in his or her long term interest. A short term critical need knowingly or unknowingly pushes a person into a ‘debt trap’.

Usury is an expression of greed – but not the only possible expression of greed. Greed manifested in a schoolyard brawl, a family dispute or in bureaucratic corruption does not involve usury. Of course we must assume that usury does always involve greed as its core drive, since it is difficult to imagine an usurious practice not driven by greed.

Institutionalization of usury

While greed is a personal trait, the practice of usury can and very often is institutionalized. The institutionalization of usury requires immense cunning and cleverness. The stated mission of any such institution cannot say out loud the part about exploitation or impoverishment. If that part became known, the truth would chase away most borrowers; truth is bad for the business of usury. Therefore the underlying usurious nature of such institutions must be disguised by words such ‘helping the needy’, ‘free market’, ‘financial services, ‘modern lifestyle’ et cetera. Institutionalized usury can only prosper with the help of lies.

The stereotype of the usurious moneylender in an Indian village is based on the harsh reality of a not-too-distant past. An individual village moneylender may not formally ‘institutionalize’ the business, but a ‘caste network’ of such moneylenders across a few dozen villages behaves pretty much as an informal institutionalized structure.

In that sense, a moneylender family and caste – or, equivalently, tribe – must be understood as the earliest forms of institutionalized usury. In a traditional moneylender family, we assume that a child would learn about usury at the grandfather’s knee.

Far more imposing institutions of usury come with ‘progress’ and ‘development’ – institutions such as banks, regulators, central banks, innumerable laws, finance schools, hedge funds, law firms, lobbying firms … and so on. People soon learn that, since there is much easy money to be made through such rackets, there is no longer a need to bother with hard work.

Institutions provide nurture and selection

Once institutions of usury come into being – families, castes, tribes, banks, finance schools et cetera – nature is hugely supplemented by conscious nurture in enlarging and empowering the usurious class. The interplay of nature and nurture then becomes deep and thorough-going. Political power, which is usually spineless, yields readily to financial power, and the healthy economy of a society comes under the iron-grip of the non-productive usurious class.

Historically, between usury and greed, the latter certainly has to be older. Greed can exist even in the absence of money as medium of exchange and store of value; but usury depends explicitly on the use of money. Money in the form of clay tablets – or whatever – was invented about five thousand years ago, and therefore usury would have followed soon. Quite plausibly, greed might well have spurred the initial development of instruments of usury. Necessity is the mother of invention, after all.

Institutionalized usury is a powerful vehicle giving traction to unrestrained play of greed in society. This is because the disguising verbiage which serves as cover for usury displaces any other truly human values which the society might earlier have cherished. Older values and traditions are derided as not being ‘the best business practices’. In the absence of truly binding values – family, community, citizens’ duties to one another – the society crumbles.

In such a society, the most ruthless ‘players in the game of usury’ are shaped, toughened and honed by years of nature, nurture and relentless competition. Suborning the pliable political class from behind the curtains is second nature to them. While such ‘players’ may be admired or venerated by many, they shun any commitment or responsibility for the public good.

Tribal factors

A ‘caste’ or ‘tribe’ – or even ‘nation’, in the original sense of that word – is like a very large extended family, bringing people together who are of similar background and traditions. In a heterogeneous world, such groups provide secure identity for family and community life. As people migrate from place to place, and interact with alien groups, staying together in the form of a cohesive group becomes a central and essential mechanism of survival.

Inevitably however, that survival mechanism engenders a strong feeling of ‘us’ versus ‘the others’ or ‘the other groups’. The inevitable result of that strong feeling is the attitude that (a) helping one of your own is a virtue, (b) hurting one of your own is a vice, and (c) virtue and vice simply exchange places if an alien individual or group is involved. Thus one wins group acclaim – and brides? – by robbing others to the benefit of one’s own group.

Group acclaim plays a big role in nurturing and reinforcing characteristic trends within a tribe. If a tribal hero who robbed a neighbouring tribe of ten pieces of gold wins laurels – and brides? – then some young boys will surely dream of out-shining their hero by robbing twenty pieces of gold. Vice practiced against another tribe is seen as virtue. In this sense, around the world, tribal values often fall far short of any notion of universality.

Therefore if we think about greed in a tribal context, then we must admit that its aggressive expression towards ‘others’ is not only permitted but often held up as virtue or exemplar, whereas its intra-tribe expression is moderated by intra-tribe relationships.

Oh, the irony of it all … !

Bright, western-educated children of Indian village money lenders are today making their careers in western financial businesses. One can imagine such a bright young ‘finance expert’ visiting his ancestral village and donating some money to the local school. For his generosity, the villagers would fall over one another to garland, fete and all-but-worship the ‘village boy done good’. The proud father would puff at his beedi and look on. But the simple-minded villagers would not be at all aware that, back in the shining capital city, the very same village boy lobbies aggressively for laws which facilitate the financial exploitation of communities such as theirs. Insufficiently aggressive lobbying will cost the bright boy his lucrative job.

Present status and geo-economics

Today institutionalized usury operates relentlessly, at peak efficiency – aided by powerful technology and by thousands of years of practice and refinement of art. Its unforgiving iron clutches extend all around the world. The current conflict in Ukraine is the latest and the most prominent symptom of the tectonic geo-economic stresses it generates.

Behind geo-politics lies geo-economics, and unfortunately greed plays a huge part in today’s global economic systems. To be fair, greed has probably always played a huge part in global economic systems – but it is only the current system which we witness first hand.

To an outsider, geo-economic issues seem to be THE central issues in the conflict. Nobody fights a war for democracy, or liberalism, or a third person’s well-being. Wars are always about riches, about ‘us versus them’. All other verbiage is at attempt to throw dust in other people’s eyes.

A major conflict on core issues has to be existential for both sides. Therefore talk of ‘the end of our civilization’ by a prominent financier does not come as a surprise. The civilization based on usury and fraud should feel threatened by the ongoing conflict. But then history has shown us again and again that – while civilisations come and go – life goes on.

Misfits of two types

Imagine that an individual who is not really greedy at heart finds himself or herself working with overtly greedy colleagues in a brazenly usurious institution. Clearly such an individual will be a misfit there. Over time, the individual must make a difficult choice: either become like everybody else around, or change jobs.

Conversely, an overly greedy individual may find himself or herself working with a group of contented and honest colleagues. This individual will also be a misfit. One imagines that such an individual will find it impossible to become contented and honest. Therefore the choices open to him or her are: try to corrupt everybody else around, or change jobs.

Other manifestations of greed

Like usury, price-gouging is also a form of economic violence. Like usury, price-gouging is also driven by greed, and often becomes institutionalized. The recent shameless hawking of certain types of vaccines is an example of price-gouging.

Different types of fraud – usury, price-gouging, corruption et cetera – are combined by clever people to multiply hugely their returns on investment. An example: Lend money at an exorbitant rates to country X so that she can ‘develop her economy ’; in simple language, force the country to mine A, B or C mineral and sell it to the lender at rock bottom prices. That would be usury, price-gouging, corruption and slave labour combined in highly synergistic manner, as taught by the best ‘business schools’ around the world.

But obviously price-gouging, usury, financial fraud, bonded labour et cetera are all siblings, all born out of limitless greed and sociopathic behaviour. While the present article discusses specifically only usury, clearly many of the observations made herein apply to all types of exploitation of the economically weak by the economically strong.

ماذا بعد الحرب في أوكرانيا…؟

 السبت 21 كانون الثاني 2023

زياد حافظ

في هذه المحاولة الاستشرافية في مطلع 2023 قراءة وتساؤلات لمرحلة ما بعد الحرب في أوكرانيا. ننطلق في هذه القراءة من فرضية نناقشها في ما بعد أنّ روسيا ستحسم المعركة العسكرية في أوكرانيا ما قبل نهاية ربيع 2023. لكن هذا لا يعني انّ الصراع مع الحلف الأطلسي بشكل عام والولايات المتحدة بشكل خاص قد ينتهي. فالسؤال يصبح كيف سيتعامل الحلف الأطلسي وخاصة الولايات المتحدة مع الحقائق الميدانية التي تكون قد تحقّقت في الميدان؟

هناك عدة حالات ممكنة ولكن باحتمالات متباينة مبنية على قراءة في ذهنية القيادات الغربية والإمكانيات المتوفرة ضمن ميزان قوّة مختلّ لصالح روسيا بشكل عام وخاصة لصالح المحور العالمي الرافض للهيمنة الأميركية و/ أو الأطلسية. وما يُعقّد المشهد هو اعتبار الطرفين المتخاصمين أيّ روسيا والحلف الأطلسي أنّ الحرب في أوكرانيا حرب وجودية وبالتالي لا يمكن لأيّ طرف أن يتصوّر مخرجاً إلاّ النصر القاطع. وبما أنّ فرضية هذه القراءة تتبنّى حتمية النصر الروسي ما يبقى علينا هو تصوّر ما يمكن أن يقدِم عليه الأطلسي. وعندما نتكلّم عن الأطلسي نقصد بالدرجة الأولى الولايات المتحدة، ثم الاتحاد الأوروبي كمؤسسة، ثم الدول الأوروبية التي تماهت مع سياسات الولايات المتحدة وأخيراً بيروقراطية الحلف الأطلسي كمؤسسة قائمة بحدّ ذاتها. غير أنّ الحلقة الأساسية هي الولايات المتحدة لأنّ ما يمكن أن تقدم عليه سينجرّ بشكل أو بآخر على مؤسسة الحلف الأطلسي والاتحاد الأوروبي.

أما الحلقة الأضعف فهي الدول الأوروبية التي ستتعرّض إلى اضطرابات اجتماعية وسياسية بسبب التراجع الاقتصادي الناتج عن سياسة العقوبات المفروضة على روسيا وخاصة في قطاع الطاقة التي كانت تستوردها بشكل رخيص من روسيا دون أن تجد البديل الاقتصادي الذي يحرّرها من الاتكال على روسيا. والنتائج البنيوية على الاقتصاد الأوروبي هي تفكيك البنية الصناعية التي كانت ركيزة الطبقة الوسطى والاستقرار الاجتماعي. ليس هناك من آفاق إيجابية للاقتصاد الأوروبي في ظلّ ذلك التحوّل البنيوي خاصة مع صعود دول الجنوب الإجمالي وفي مقدّمته الصين والهند والبرازيل الذين سيتقاسمون الناتج الصناعي العالمي. دول أوروبا قد تكون دول متاحف التاريخ وللسياحة والترفيه وليس أكثر. فتصبح دولاً لا وزن لها في إدارة شؤون العالم. وهذا الهبوط لن يكون سهلاً بل ترافقه توترات اجتماعية وانتفاضات سياسية تعيد النظر في البنى السياسة والاقتصادية والاجتماعية لهذه الدول. وما سيساهم في ذلك الانحدار الكارثي هو الرداءة غير المسبوقة للقيادات السياسية سواء كانت في الحكم أو في المعارضة. المشهد البريطاني يتلاقى مع المشهد الألماني والمشهد الفرنسي، تلك الدول التي كانت تتصدّر المشهد الأوروبي. فأما دول الأطراف في أوروبا فقد تغرق أيضاً في حروب عرقية ودينية دون أن تكون لها ركيزة تستند إليها. فعلى سبيل المثال وليس الحصر اسبانيا تواجه حركة انفصالية في منطقة كتالونيا، وإيرلندا الشمالية قد تنفصل عن المملكة المتحدة لتلتحق بالجمهورية الإيرلندية، واسكتلندا قد تستقلّ عن المملكة المتحدة، وكورسيكا عن فرنسا، وبلجيكا تنقسم إلى قسم فرنسي وقسم فلمنكي. وما تبقّى من أوكرانيا خارج القبضة الروسية قد يذهب قسم منه إلى بولندا، والقسم الآخر إلى رومانيا ومولدوفيا. خارطة أوروبا مُعرّضة لتغيير جذري أسوة بما نتج في الحروب الأوروبية في القرون الماضية. كما هناك كلام عن انشطار إيطاليا بين جنوب فقير وشمال ثري. أما النعرات الطائفية في منطقة البلقان فمن السهل إشعالها مجدّداً مع سقوط الحكومات المركزية في حقبة الضيق الاقتصادي.
تصدّعات أوروبا

أما الاتحاد الأوروبي كمؤسسة فيشهد تصدّعات داخلية عززتها الإجراءات العبثية بحق روسيا وارتداداتها على الاقتصادات الأوروبية. فالزمرة الحاكمة في مؤسسة الاتحاد الأوروبي ملتزمة عقائدياً بمقرّرات دافوس لإعادة التعيين للاقتصادات القائمة نحو اقتصادات أكثر «لطفاً بالبيئة» على حدّ زعمهم. وهذا التوجه إلى مصادر طاقة نظيفة ومتجدّدة بشكل قسري وسريع سيؤدّي حتماً إلى تفكيك البنية الصناعية القائمة ما يوقع دول الاتحاد في حالة فقر وتراجع حضاري شبيه بالقرون الوسطى. فالطاقة هي مصدر الحضارة والعبث فيها له ارتدادات خطيرة على سكّان هذه الدول. لكن عدداً من حكومات دول الاتحاد يتململ من طغيان الزمرة المسيطرة على الاتحاد خاصة أنها لا تخضع لمساءلة ومحاسبة. وحكومة فيكتور اروبان المجرية تقود حملة التمرّد ضدّ الاتحاد قد تتبعها حكومة صربيا. من جهة أخرى أبدت بعض الدول الأوروبية كألمانيا وفرنسا امتعاضها من استغلال الولايات المتحدة للشحّ في قطاع الطاقة لفرض أسعار اضعاف ما كانت تدفعه لروسيا. ونعتت هذه الدول الولايات المتحدة بالتصرّف «غير الصديق» مع الحليف!

أما الدول الأوروبية فالتصدّعات التي أحدثتها الحرب الأوكرانية تتفاقم خاصة أنّ النموذج الاقتصادي النيوليبرالي المسيطر بعد سقوط الاتحاد السوفياتي وصل إلى طريق مسدود. كما أنّ النظام النيوليبرالي حوّل السلطة الفعلية للشركات الكبرى وخاصة بيوت المال التي لا تكترث لحال المواطنين. وهذه القوى المسيطرة على القرار السياسي والاقتصادي والثقافي في تلك الدول تستولد نخباً وقيادات من المستوى الرديء على صعيد العلم، والفهم، والأخلاق. وبالتالي ليس في الأفق المنظور إمكانية بروز قيادات أوروبية تضع مصلحة دولها فوق أيّ اعتبار وخاصة تلك الاعتبارات التي تريد إعادة الهندسة الاجتماعية وفقاً لمقرّرات منتدى دافوس. لذلك لا يمكن أن نتوقع خلال السنة الجديدة أيّ تغيير جذري في المشهد الأوروبي إلاّ ربما المزيد من التوترات والفوضى الأمنية والاقتصادية والاجتماعية ما يجعل أوروبا تفقد دوراً كانت تقوم به على الصعيد العالمي. فكيف يمكن وصف سلوك القيادات الأوروبية التي حوّلت أوروبا من ثاني كتلة اقتصادية في العالم، وربما في بعض الأحيان الأولى، إلى مجموعة دول مترهّلة. هذا انتحار جماعي أقدمت عليه قيادات حمقاء بكلّ معنى الكلمة.

تبقى الولايات المتحدة العنصر الأساسي في الحلف الأطلسي. والمشهد الأميركي معقّد حيث الخطاب السياسي السائد لدى المؤسسة الحاكمة وخاصة عند المحافظين الجدد الذين قبضوا على القرار السياسة الخارجية لا يسمح بأيّ تراجع أمام روسيا. لقد أصبحت الطبقة الحاكمة والمحافظون الجدد أسرى الخطاب السياسي حيث الانتصار على روسيا بات شرط ضرورة للبقاء. فلا يتصوّر المحافظون الجدد عالماً وروسيا موجودة على الأقلّ بشكلها الحالي. فلا بدّ من قلب النظام القائم في روسيا والإتيان بنخب سياسية تساهم في تقسيم روسيا إلى عدّة ولايات أو دول ضعيفة تحول دون إمكانية نهوض لدولة لها وزن على الصعيد الدولي. والمحافظون الجدد يحرصون على إجهاض أيّ محاولة للتفاهم مع روسيا تفادياً لحرب قد تخسرها حتماً الولايات المتحدة مهما كانت الكلفة عالية على روسيا. فعلى سبيل المثال وليس الحصر تسبّب المحافظون الجدود تسريب خبر لقاء بين مدير وكالة المخابرات المركزية وليم بيرنز ونظيره الروسي في أنقرة لإجهاض أيّ محاولة لمنع التصعيد في أوكرانيا الذي إذا ما استمرّ سيضع الجيش الروسي في مواجهة مباشرة مع الجيش الأميركي. وهذا الأمر لا يريده الطرفان سواء كان الرئيس الروسي بوتين أو الأميركي بايدن. لكن المحافظين الجدد لهم أجندة مختلفة ولا يكترثون لنتائج حتمية عن مواجهة عسكرية مباشرة بين الدولتين.

أجندة المحافظين الجدد!

السؤال المطروح هو هل يستطيع المحافظون الجدد تجاوز التحفّظات داخل الإدارة الأميركية التي لا تريد المواجهة المباشرة مع روسيا؟ ليس من السهل الإجابة خاصة أنّ المرحلة السابقة شهدت نصر المحافظين الجدد في توريط الولايات المتحدة في الصراع الذي كان بالإمكان تجنّبه مع روسيا. فهم من رفضوا التعامل مع العروض الروسية لحلّ الأزمة في أوكرانيا، وهم بالأساس من قام بالانقلاب على الحكومة المنتخبة شرعيا في أوكرانيا في 2014 وفي مقدمتهم فيكتوريا نيولند زوجة روبرت كاغان كبير المنظرين للمحافظين الجدد. وهم من استعمل اتفاقات منسك في 2015 للمراوغة لتمكين القوّات الأوكرانية لمواجهة روسيا. وهم من أجهضوا الاتفاق الذي تمّ الوصول إليه في أنقرة بين روسيا وحكومة زيلينسكي في نيسان/ ابريل 2022 بعد 3 أشهر من بدء العملية العسكرية الروسية في أوكرانيا. وهم من يدفعون إلى تفريغ ترسانات الدول التي كانت في كنف حلف وارسو وإرسال السلاح والذخائر لأوكرانيا. وهم من يدفعون البنتاغون لتفريع ترسانة الولايات المتحدة من الأسلحة المتطوّرة وإرسالها إلى أوكرانيا. النتيجة لكلّ ذلك هو تدمير كلّ السلاح المتوفر لأوكرانيا وقتل الجنود ودون تحقيق أيّ تقدّم على الأرض. فسجل المحافظين الجدد هو تراكم هائل من الفشل ولكن لا يوجد من يُسائل ويحاسب. ولذلك ستستمرّ إدارة بايدن في ارتكاب الحماقات تلو الحماقات دون تحقيق أي نتيجة لصالح الولايات المتحدة حتى يصبح تحطّم أوكرانيا أمراً واقعا لا يمكن الهروب منه.

المحافظون الجدد لهم أجندة من بند واحد وهي فرض هيمنة الولايات المتحدة على العالم وإنْ أدّى ذلك إلى تدمير الحلفاء وتهديد العالم بحرب نووية لن ينج منها أحد. فهم لا يكترثون لآثار سياساتهم طالما كانوا متمسكين بمفاصل صنع القرار في الولايات المتحدة سواء في الإدارة أو مراكز الأبحاث أو الجامعات أو الإعلام المرئي والمكتوب. وشبكة علاقات المحافظين الجدد لا تقتصر على الولايات المتحدة بل امتدّت إلى دوائر القرار في مكوّنات الحلف الأطلسي وإنْ كانت سياساتهم تدمّر تلك المكوّنات.

استطاع المحافظون الجدد أن يفرضوا سردية بين النخب الحاكمة في الولايات المتحدة والدول الأوروبية المتحالفة معها مفادها أنّ الصراع مع روسيا هو صراع بقاء بينما في الحقيقة هو صراع لتدمير روسيا والاستيلاء على ثرواتها الهائلة من المواد الخام، والطاقة، والمعادن الثمينة والنادرة. كما أنّ حجم روسيا الجغرافي يهدّد مصالح الولايات المتحدة فلا بدّ من تفكيك الدولة الاتحادية. وتعمّ مراكز الأبحاث في الولايات المتحدة عن خرائط محتملة لروسيا المفككة. وبالنسبة للولايات المتحدة فإنّ الهدف الحقيقي هو الحفاظ على هيمنتها وخاصة هيمنة الدولار الذي يواجه تحدّيات من اقتصادات ترفض تلك الهيمنة. والطابع الوجودي لهذا الصراع مبني على ثقافة الفكر الرأس المالي أن التوسّع هو الوسيلة الوحيدة للبقاء. وتاريخ الولايات المتحدة مبني على التوسّع الجغرافي، في البداية تجاه الغرب حتى الوصول إلى المحيط الهادي ومن ثمّ القفز إلى الجزر في ذلك المحيط وصولاً إلى الفليبين والشاطئ الشرقي للصين.

أما جنوباً، فكانت نظرية مونرو التي منعت الدول المستعمرة في القرن التاسع عشر من التواجد في أميركا اللاتينية وجعلها الحديقة الخلفية للولايات المتحدة. وتحفظ في أدراج الإدارات المتتالية خطط احتلال كندا إذا ما اقتضى الأمر! والآن تعمل الولايات المتحدة على التوسع في القطب الشمالي حيث توجد ثروات نفطية وغازية وشرقاً نحو القارة الآسيوية. وبالتالي لا بدّ من وضع اليد على روسيا.

المشروع الأميركي لوضع اليد على روسيا كان مكتوماً بعد سقوط حائط برلين. لكن سرعان ما تبدّدت الوعود المقطوعة للقيادات الروسية بعدم التوسّع شرقاً للحلف الأطلسي. وحجر الزاوية في مواجهة روسيا هو أوكرانيا وفقاً لنظرية زبغنيو بريجنسكي الذي اعتبر أوكرانيا ضرورة أساسية للقضاء على روسيا. المهمّ هنا أنّ التوسع الشرقي للحلف الأطلسي تجاه روسيا يشكّل خطراً وجودياً على روسيا لا يمكنها تجاهله خاصة إذا ما تمّ نشر الصواريخ البالستية النووية فيها كما يدعو إليه قادة النظام الانقلابي في أوكرانيا. حاولت القيادة الروسية إقناع الإدارات المتتالية بعدم التوسع شرقاً لكن العنجهية الأميركية لم تكترث للهواجس الروسية. لسنا هنا في إطار سرد تطوّر العلاقات الروسية الأطلسية/ الأميركية بل لنؤكّد أنّ صوغ الخطاب السياسي يدعو إلى المواجهة لدرء خطر وجودي يعني الوصول إلى الحرب لحلّ المشكلة. الحرب هنا لن تقتصر على الحرب بالوكالة كما هو الحال الآن في أوكرانيا أو ربما عبر بولندا في ما بعد بل في المواجهة المباشرة العسكرية مع روسيا.

ما يؤكّد عمق الأزمة بين النخب الأميركية مقال صدر يوم السبت في 7 كانون الثاني/ يناير 2023 في صحيفة «واشنطن بوست» والموقع من كوندوليزا رايس وزيرة الخارجية السابقة في ولاية بوش الابن وروبرت غيتس وزير الدفاع السابق في كلّ من ولايات بوش الابن وباراك أوباما. في المقال اعتراف واضح أنّ الوقت هو لصالح روسيا ولا بدّ من زيادة الجهود الأميركية (أيّ زيادة التمويل والإمداد لأنها مربحة للمجمّع العسكري الصناعي) وذلك لمنع النصر الروسي. فهذا الأمر سيكون له تداعيات كارثية بالنسبة للولايات المتحدة (خاصة للمجمّع العسكري الصناعي) وأنّ إمكانية تغيير تلك النتائج ستكون صعبة للغاية إنْ لم تكن مستحيلة. والهيمنة الأميركية على العالم أصبحت مطلباً «وجودياً» بالنسبة لتلك النخب التي لا تكترث لنتائج تلك الطموحات والتي لا تأخذ بعين الاعتبار التحوّلات التي حصلت في موازين القوّة. فمقال رايس وغيتس دعوة صريحة لاستمرار الحرب مهما كانت النتائج.

فما هي إمكانيات مواجهة مباشرة بين الحلف الأطلسي وروسيا، وبالأخصّ بين الولايات المتحدة وروسيا؟ حقيقة، إنّ المواجهة في أوكرانيا لها طابعان: الأول مع الحكومة الأوكرانية والثاني الذي تمّ إعلانه منذ بضعة أيام على لسان وزير الدفاع الاوكراني أنّ المواجهة هي بين روسيا والحلف الأطلسي. هدف العملية العسكرية الروسية في أوكرانيا هو تدمير الجيش الأوكراني وخلع النازيين من الحكم في أوكرانيا ومنع الحكومة من الالتحاق بالأطلسي. التطوّرات الميدانية أبرزت تدفق السلاح والذخيرة من مجمل دول الحلف الأطلسي دون أن يغيّر في ميزان القوّة في المعركة الذي كان ولا يزال لصالح روسيا. واليوم تعلن هذه الدول عن نفاذ سلاحها وذخيرتها لتزويد القوّات الأوكرانية بما كانت تملك من بقايا سلاح حلف وارسو. أما السلاح الغربي الذي يسيطر على معظم دول أوروبا الغربية فإنّ معرفة القوّات الأوكرانية بذلك السلاح ما زالت محدودة وتحتاج لوقت طويل للتتأقلم معها.

لكن هل تستطيع الولايات المتحدة الاستمرار بسياسة حرب رغم ضعف الجهوزية. ولا نقصد هنا الجهوزية العسكرية فحسب بل الجهوزية الاقتصادية. يشير الستير كروك وهو دبلوماسي سابق ومن أهمّ العقول السياسية المحلّلة للمشهد السياسي في آخر مقال له بتاريخ 13 كانون الثاني/ يناير 2023 على موقع «ستراتيجك كلتشار فوندشن» إلى أنّ الغرب يتجه تدريجياً لتحويل اقتصاداته لاقتصادات حرب وخاصة في ما يتعلّق بسلسلة التوريد في الإنتاج الصناعي. لكن في رأينا هذه عملية طويلة المدى خاصة بعد تفكيك البنية التحتية الصناعية في الولايات المتحدة والمملكة المتحدة وبالتالي القدرة على تحويل الطاقة الصناعية إلى طاقة إنتاجية حربية كما حصل في الحرب العالمية الثانية أمر مشكوك به في المدى المنظور. فاستبدال سلسلة التوريد التي اعتمدت خلال العقود الأربعة الماضية لتوطين مفاصل عديدة من القطاعات الصناعية في عالم الجنوب الإجمالي لا يمكن إنجازه بفترة قصيرة. فروسيا، ومعها الصين وسائر دول الجنوب الإجمالي لن يتركوا المجال لذلك التحويل.

لذلك نعتقد أنّ المعركة العسكرية الاستراتيجية بين روسيا وأوكرانيا قد حسمت في رأينا لصالح روسيا وأنّ ما تبقّى هو ترجمة الحسم الاستراتيجي إلى معالم مادية سواء في التقدّم الجغرافي أو في التغيير النظام السياسي في أوكرانيا وإنْ اقتضى الأمر دخول كييف لفرض نظام جديد. وقد يحصل ذلك خلال سنة 2023.

المواجهة مع الأطلسي طويلة

أما المواجهة مع الأطلسي فقد تطول خاصة أنّ الغرب يراهن على إطالة الحرب دون تدخّل مباشر للولايات المتحدة وسائر دول الحلف الأطلسي. ويعتمد المحافظون الجدد على سيطرتهم على الإعلام والسردية التي تقول بأنّ أوكرانيا «تنتصر» والقضية مسألة إمدادات فقط لا غير. لكن بدأت النخب الحاكمة تواجه معضلة تفسير انهيار خطوط الدفاع الأوكرانية وخاصة في منطقة سوليدار وباخوت. فهل ستتخذ الخطوة التالية بدخول جيوش الأطلسي بشكل مباشر في أوكرانيا؟

المزاج السياسي المعادي لروسيا في دول أوروبا غير مؤيّد للدخول في حرب مع روسيا. استطلاعات الرأي العام واضحة بهذا الشأن. فالمواطن الأوروبي بغضّ النظر عن رأيه في روسيا وحكّامها لا يريد ولا يتحمّل ثمن المواجهة. ولقد بدأت تظهر معالم «التعب» من أوكرانيا. ولكن المنحى الذي نشهده هو عدم اكتراث الحكومات الغربية للرأي العام الداخلي كما جاء على لسان وزيرة الخارجية الألمانية أنّ المانيا مستمرّة بدعم الجهود الحربية في أوكرانيا وأنها لا تكترث لآراء المواطنين وهذا بكلّ وضوح. لكن العديد من المؤشرات تفيد بأنّ الدول الأوروبية غير جاهزة وغير راغبة للدخول في حرب. أما الولايات المتحدة فهناك من يدفع إلى الدخول المباشر إلى أوكرانيا وإنْ كان الوجود العسكري الأميركي كـ «خبراء» و «مدرّبين» و «مستشارين» أصبح من المسلّمات. والمحافظون الجدد يدفعون إلى المواجهة المباشرة بعد استنفاذ الوكلاء علماً أنّ الجهوزية العسكرية الأميركية غير متوفّرة كما جاء على لسان رئيس هيئة الأركان المشتركة مارك ميلي في جلسة استجوابه في لجنة الدفاع في الكونغرس عند استلام مهامه. قال آنذاك في 2018 إنّ الجهوزية الأميركية لا تتجاوز 40 بالمائة وإنّ هدفه هو إيصال الجهوزية الأميركية إلى 60 بالمائة بحلول 2024.

وتأكيداً على ذلك يصدر معهد «أميركان هريتاج فونداشن» تقريراً سنوياً عن الجهوزية العسكرية الأميركية. وعلى مدى السنوات الخمس الماضية لم يتجاوز تقييم تلك الجهوزية مرحلة «الهامشية» أيّ لا تستطيع الحسم في أيّ مواجهة. وإذا أضفنا المحاكاة النظرية للمواجهة العسكرية مع أيّ من روسيا أو الصين أو إيران فكانت النتائج دائماً لصالح خصوم الولايات المتحدة. صحيح أنّ الولايات المتحدة تنفق أكثر من أيّ دولة في العالم لكن هذا الانفاق لا يعني تفوّقاً في الجودة كما تظهر التقارير حول فعّالية ركائز السلاح الجوّي أو البرّي الأميركي. وإذا أدخلنا في المعادلة السلاح المتفوّق الروسي خاصة في الصواريخ الفائقة لسرعة الصوت وغياب وسائل دفاع مضادة له فإنّ التفوّق التكتيكي والاستراتيجي للسلاح الروسي أصبح كاسراً.

وهناك خبراء عسكريون كـ اندري مرتيانوف يشكّكون بالقدرات البشرية لقيادة الأعمال العسكرية حيث خبرة القادة العسكريين الأميركيين في خوض حروب حقيقية ضدّ خصوم لديهم الحزم والعزم لا يُشجّع على إمكانية نصر عسكري. فتجربة الحرب الكورية والفيتنامية والعراقية والأفغانية تدلّ بوضوح إلى أنّ التفوّق الناري لا يعني بالضرورة النصر. لكن بعيداً عن هذه الاعتبارات ما نريد أن نقوله إنّ الولايات المتحدة غير جاهزة على الصعيد العسكري لخوض حرب طويلة مع دولة من طراز روسيا أو الصين على الأقلّ في المدى المنظور. لدى الولايات المتحدة قدرة نارية تدميرية هائلة تستطيع تدمير المعمورة آلاف المرّات ولكن ليس لديها كيف تترجمها في السياسة.

هناك عقول باردة خارج البنتاغون كدوغلاس مكغريغور او لاري جونسون أو فيليب جيرالدي أو راي مكغوفرن أو لاري ويلكرسون على سبيل المثال وليس الحصر تعي هذه الحقائق وتحاول ضبط إيقاع مسار السلطة السياسية. لكن المحافظين الجدد يتربّصون بها ويمنعون أن تصل تلك الآراء إلى مركز القرار. لذلك سيحتدم الصراع داخل الدولة العميقة بين من يؤيّد توجّهات المحافظين الجدد ومن يخشى من الوقوع في الهاوية. ولا نستبعد تكرار مشهد إنشاء لجنة بيكر ـ هاملتون جديدة التي كفّت يد المحافظين الجدد في إدارة بوش بعد الفشل في العراق. البديل عن كفّ يد المحافظين الجدد هو الحرب التي ستكون مدمّرة للولايات المتحدة وللعالم.

وهنا يكمن العامل الداخلي في الولايات المتحدة الذي قد يغيّر المعادلات بين الدولة العميقة والبيت الأبيض. مسلسل الفضائح التي تطال الرئيس الأميركي يتنامى ما يعني أنّ الدولة العميقة تريد التخلّص من إمكانية ترشّحه مجدّداً في 2024. فتعيين محقق خاص جمهوري الانتماء السياسي للكشف عن تفاصيل «الفضائح» يؤكّد أنّ المؤسسة الحاكمة بما فيها قيادة الحزب الديمقراطي تريد التخلّص من جوزيف بايدن والآتيان بـ كمالا هاريس في حال تنحّى بايدن عن منصبه، أو فتح الطريق لترشيح ميشال أوباما في 2024. في مطلق الأحوال فإنّ التطوّرات الداخلية قد تحوّل الأنظار عن الإخفاق في أوكرانيا ويتيح الفرصة لصوغ خطاب جديد يتجاهل الإخفاق في أوكرانيا. التغيير في السياسة التي تفرضه الوقائع يحتم تغيير في الأشخاص وهذا ما يمكن توقّعه في الأشهر المقبلة لمنع التدهور الذي الكارثي الذي يهدّد الجميع.

في الخلاصة نرى ما بعد الحرب في أوكرانيا الانتصار الكاسح لروسيا وتصدّع الاتحاد الأوروبي. كما سنرى تصاعد النقاش حول الدخول الأطلسي بشكل عام والولايات المتحدة بشكل خاص في حرب نووية محدودة بالنسبة للمحافظين الجدد. لكن في المقابل لا يستطيعون ضبط إيقاعها لأنّ روسيا لن تستجيب لرغبات المحافظين الجدد. فليس هناك من مواجهة نووية «محدودة»! لذلك لا نتوقع الوصول إلى تلك المرحلة بل ربما بداية تفكيك الحلف الأطلسي الذي فقد جدواه ومصداقيته. أما على صعيد الوضع الداخلي في الولايات المتحدة فتراكم الفشل في السياسة الخارجية سيظهر الحاجة للتغيير. من سيقود التغيير وكيف فهذا حديث ليوم آخر. الرهان هو على ما تبقّى من عقول باردة خاصة في أجواء التردّي لمستوى النخب السياسية في الغرب

*باحث وكاتب اقتصادي سياسي والأمين العام السابق للمؤتمر القومي العربي وعضو منتدى سيف القدس

Is Andrei Martyanov right in his criticism of US ruling “elites”?

January 20, 2023

Those of you who, like myself, try not to miss any videos or articles by Andrei Martyanov know that one of his “favorite” topics is the utter incompetence of western elites in general and US ruling elites specifically.  I am sure that his criticisms appear to be over the top to many people and that is normal.  It is completely counter-intuitive to assume that the ruling class (because that is what we are dealing with) of a nuclear superpower and, arguably, the most powerful country on the planet, could be ruled by clueless, ignorant, dishonest imbeciles.

So, is he right or not?  Does he speak because he is “anti-US” or a “Russian propagandist”?

I decided to chime in, because I know from the inside what Martyanov describes from the outside, so I want to share with you my own observations on this topic.

I studied in the USA for five years, from 1986 to 1991 and I got two degrees in this time period: one BA in International Relations from the School of International Service (SIS) at the American University and a MA in Strategic Studies from the Paul H. Nitze School for Advanced International Studies (SAIS) at the Johns Hopkins University. During these same years I also worked for several (very conservative) think tanks.  The following is a summary of observations I made during this time period and after.

First, and I think that this is crucial, I would argue that a generational change took place in the late 80s, but it all truly began with Ronald Reagan’s Presidency.  Let me explain.

It is an undeniable fact that, in the past, US colleges had a very good reputation worldwide.  Just the number of foreign students coming from all over the world is a good indicator of this reality.  And you cannot have a solid university/college/academy without solid, knowledgeable teachers.  During my 5 years in Washington DC, I had the chance to have teachers with very diverse and interesting backgrounds including people with the following backgrounds: (just a few examples I remember best)

  • UN Naval Intelligence
  • Office of Net Assessment
  • DoD (all branches except Marines)
  • White House
  • CIA
  • Northrop/McDonnell Douglas Corporation (YF-23 division)
  • PMCs (Israeli)
  • GAO

Most of our adjunct teachers, as opposed to tenured academics, had teaching as an “evening job” (literally) while during the day they would work on their “normal/real” jobs.  Even during the Gulf War, we had teachers who were planning strikes in Iraqi targets during the day and came teach classes in the evenings.

I would describe many of them as the “Colonel Macgregor types”  as he is very much of that old, Cold War, generation who had no use for the “crazies in the basement” and whose expertise was indisputable, even when their politics were not.

And yes, we also had the option of taking classes by folks form the CIA and the DoS.  But those are a special category, and here is why: most, but not all, of the folks which came from the agencies I listed above did not have early in their careers strong views about the USSR, Russia or the Russian people.  Instead, they would follow a rather “technical” career path first and then, over time, they would develop views about the Soviet Union and Russians.  Say a guy skilled with radar systems would end up studying Soviet radars and gradually develop a natural interest towards the people operating these Soviet radars.  In most cases, I would sum the views of this generation of people as follows: a strong dislike for Marxism, Communism and even Socialism (which, frankly, most of them were totally ignorant of) but  without any idealization of US tubocapitalism or imperialism which they viewed quite cynically as “we do it because we can” combined with “we take orders”.  They also had a very healthy respect for the professionalism of their Soviet counterparts and, quite often, a real fondness (no, I am not kidding) for the Russian people and culture.  One of my absolute best teachers was a former USN intelligence officer who spoke pretty good Russian and who was of Polish (!) origin.  We became good friends and I can absolutely attest to the fact that this man was a true russophile.  Now, I would not say that all our teachers were necessarily pro-Russian, but most of them saw the Marxist USSR as the ideological enemy and not the Russian people or culture as such.

There was no #cancelRussia in their minds.

Things were quite different with the folks from the CIA or the State Department.  I believe that most (but probably not all) of their members INITIALLY  chose “anti-Soviet” careers because they were motivated by a hatred of Communism/USSR/Russia and so they made their careers by being “hardliners”, i.e. folks who would parrot any kind of cliches about the Soviet Union, no matter how silly.

I should add that the former generation was mostly found in departments like international relations, security studies, strategic studies and the like while the latter typically taught in departments like political science or government studies.  At SIS/SAIS we called them “political science freaks” and they did not interact much with them.  And yes, those with STEM brains would typically come from STEM fields to an appreciation of Russian people and culture, while there were very few STEM types amongst the “political science freaks” (hence their choice of more ideological courses over more technical ones).

But then, as I mentioned above, Ronald Reagan happened, and that had a huge impact on the US political scene.

Before Reagan, you had paleo-liberals and paleo-conservatives, the former would be inclined to get degrees in stuff like “peace studies” while the latter would study get more “geostrategic” degrees or even military academies.  Then Jimmy Carter became president and his many failures and weaknesses secured the triumphant election of Reagan.  At that time, there already was a small and nasty group of ideologues which, over time, became known as the Neocons.  These Neocons, while not bright by any measure, were clever enough to understand that the Democratic Party was crushed by Reagan and that the power now was with the GOP.  So here is what they did:

The (proto-)Neocons began financing (paleo-)conservative think tanks like, say, the Heritage Foundation.  Then, as major sponsors of the many think tanks around DC, they would get their own people elected to the board of directors of these think tanks.  Pretty soon, the typically (paleo-)conservative Presidents/Chairmen/CEOs of these think tanks would be replaced by real, hardcore, Neocons.  After that, it was RIP for any form of real, traditional, US conservatism.

Needless to say, the “old guard” (mostly Anglos) only had disgust and contempt for these ideological freaks, if only because the latter were amazingly ignorant.  But money talks, and over the years, expertise was replaced with “hardliner loyalty” and a very strong ideological alignment on the worst of the worst of what used to be called “the crazies in the basement” (which referred to both the Pentagon’s basement and the White House basement).

Now it is crucial to understand how much the Neocons hate Russia, which is rather difficult and very counter-intuitive for normal people.  The Neocon level of hatred for Russia very much qualifies as crass racism of the worst kind.

[Sidebar: I have been warning about that since at least 2008, see here: “How a medieval concept of ethnicity makes NATO commit yet another a dangerous blunder“.  And now, FIFTEEN years later, I am quite horrified that my predictions are now coming true before our eyes.  I really, sincerely, wish I had been wrong…]

That kind of rabid mindset is something which might have existed amongst some paleo-conservatives, but I personally never met such people (at least in the USA; in the UK the entire British ruling class has been viscerally racist and russophobic for centuries!).  It is thus not surprising at all that in lieu of competence, these Neocons would instead “compete” on “who could be the most anti-Russian” and to achieve this status ANY argument – no matter how self evidently stupid – was uncritically considered as valid and legitimate.

You might wonder why the “old guard” did nothing to stop that infections rot.  And, in fact, some tried, I personally know of two think tank directors who tried, but they were betrayed by the Reagan Administration which seemed quite happen to have rabid russophobic racists even in very high positions.  Finally, this is the US of A, the “best democracy money can buy” and where the dollar is king.  Simply put, the Neocons had A LOT of financial resources, much more than the paleo-conservatives, and they simply “bought their way in” into the US ruling elites.

Then the inevitable happened: when the professionally competent paleo-conservatives saw their institutions and organizations overrun with incompetent ideological freaks, they either kept a low profile and waited to retire or simply resigned.

This triggered a precipitous decline in the competence of the US ruling class.

In the meantime, the liberals began to realize that the Neocons were ridiculing them as “weak on defense” and, basically, as losers.  So they tried to show that they too could be as “hardline” as the next guy.  This is something which affected liberals not only in the USA, but also in all of Zone A (including all of Europe).  Simply put: the liberals did not have the courage, fortitude and honor to fight for their values, so they simply caved in to the trend set by the Neocons and the ugly phenomenon known as “Neolib” increasingly completely replaced old style liberals.

This is why today we see the ugly sight of pseudo-liberals trying to out-Neocon the Neocons.

And, again, just like their paleo-conservative counterparts, the paleo-liberals either kept a low profile and waited for their retirement or resigned.

Some, like the late Professor Stephen Cohen did resist and refused to go with the flow, but he was vilified, ostracized and, eventually, completely ignored.  Yet, to his last breath, Professor Cohen remained a world-class historian and analyst, true to his ideals, and a sincere friend of Russia.

But in the public discourse, the few “Stephen Cohens” were replaced by the many “Eliot Cohens”.

After that, is was all downhill for the US polity.

George H.W. Bush was probably the last “old style” President, then one freak replaced another.  Clinton was a total puppet of the Neocons.  As was Dubya.  Obama, apparently, did not come out of the Neocon camp, but he was so quickly co-opted that it made zero difference.  And, as we all know, while Trump promised to “drain the swamp”, the Neocons got him to heel in less than 1 month (when they made him betray Gen Flynn and got the latter’s head “served on a platter” to them by Trump and Pence).  As for Biden, his administration is pure, genuine, 100% certified Neocons with Neolibs and assorted woke freaks thrown in for “diversity” purposes.

Why does that matter?  Because he who controls the White House controls the money flows which, in the reality of US politics, is the one thing that matters most.

By the way, 9/11 played a crucial role here.

It is quite obvious that 9/11 was a Neocon “inside job” and that is served as a pretext to start the GWOT.  However, it also had another very important role: it forced each public figure in the USA to chose one of two camps:

  • Be obedient and accept the (terminally idiotic) conspiracy theory of the White House or
  • Lose your job, position, reputation and means of income.

Most, unsurprisingly, caved in and 9/11 ended “binding up together” the entire US ruling class.  That type of bond is the type criminal accomplices have: if one goes down, everybody goes down, hence the omertà around the topic of 9/11 even though it was proven by a preponderance of evidence and even beyond reasonable doubt that 9/11 was, indeed, an inside job.  After 9/11, true dissent was completely removed from the US political discourse.

By the way, something similar happened to Europe, except that the categories were somewhat different.  In Europe (I am talking about the real Europe, not the “enlarged” EU with eastern Europe included) there were real patriots in most countries.  Yes, the USA was the senior partner, but there were enough political leaders which were capable of saying “no” to the US and care for their national interests first (I think of Mitterrand and even Chirac here).  That generation of politicians and decision-makers gradually was replaced by a new generation of actors whose entire career plan was to unconditionally and fervently serve US interests, even at the expense of their own countries (Macron, Scholz).  And while I would not call EU politicians “Neocons”, I will say that they are the faithful, loyal, servants and slaves of the Neocons.

And, just as in the USA, the competent and patriotic decision-makers were replaced with ideological stooges who has zero expertise or honor, but whom the USA would support as “loyal servants”.  Opposition to US imperialism in Europe was relegated to a distant margins of public discourse.

I would argue that the 90s were the years of the absolute triumph of the Neocons who took total control of both the USA and the EU.

So what are Neocons really like?  First and foremost, they are extreme narcissists and, as is often the case with narcissists, their obnoxious self-worship, sense of entitlement and hatred of the “other” all come from a deep seated inferiority complex (believe me, they *knew* the contempt they were held in by the old generation of US decision makers, and they *knew* that they were seen as the “crazies in the basement”).  So besides being self-worshiping racist narcissists, they were also filled with resentment, a desire for revenge and a unbreakable “us vs them” mentality..

Also, and contrary to popular belief, they were not very smart (if only because being truly smart requires both humility and expertise, something the Neocons are totally devoid from).  In reality, the big competitive advantage of the Neocons over the “old guard” was not brains, but drive.  This is something we often observe in history: the folks who actually seize power are rarely the smartest ones, much more often you see folks with a tremendous ideological drive.  A perfect example?  The German Nazis.  Please name me one truly educated and smart Nazi!  Hitler?  Nope.  Himmler?  Nope.  Goering?  Nope. Speer, better, but he was not much of a Nazi to being with.  Hess?  Nope.  Karl Haushofer, Dietrich Eckart or Alfred Rosenberg?  Pheuleeze!  And I won’t even go into the true morons à la Streicher or Strasser.

Yet the Nazis not only took power in Germany, they managed to convert most of Europe (with shamefully little resistance!) to their idiotic ideology or their genocidal policies.  It is quite a testimony to the power of evil stupidity to see how eighty years later(!), the united West is now openly following the exact same policies as the Nazis did in their very short rule (the promised “thousand year Reich” turned out to last 12 years only!).

Finally, I have to mention one more thing: for the US Neocons the election of Trump was quite literally a slave revolt and a slap in the face.  While Trump proved to be sub-pathetic by any measure, the fact that a majority of US citizens were willing to prefer him to the “Neocon & Woke diva” Clinton was absolutely traumatic.  Having the total control of the three branches of government, AND the media, AND academia AND the financial sector gave the Neocons the illusion that they had finally “made it” and then suddenly, and pardon my French, the people of the USA send them a loud and heartfelt “f*ck you!” and voted for the one candidate which the Neocons had absolutely demonized.

This was perceived by the Neocons and their cohorts as a blasphemy, a sacrilege, an absolutely unacceptable “revolt of the serfs” and that is why the Neocons decided never EVER to allow such a thing to happen again (and we all know what they did next).

The bottom line is this: the USA faced a perfect storm:

  • A social model in which the Almighty Dollar decides of everything
  • The most formidable propaganda machine in history
  • A “old guard” ruling class too weak, cowardly, confused and (comparatively) poor to resist
  • A terminally corrupt Uniparty system which is easy to suborn
  • A society which does not instill the kind of demonic ideological fervor which Neocons are raised in, which makes non-Neocons easy prey for the Neocons.
  • A country and society in which the concepts “right” and “wrong” have become meaningless and have been fully replaced by “might makes right”, not just de facto, which already had been the case for centuries, but also de jure.

Add to this the (mistaken) notion that the US had won the Cold War and even the (even more mistaken) notion that the US had won WWII, and you have the narcissistic explosion we witnessed in the 90s.  And here is the irony: the flag-waving “patriots” which “support out troops” never realized that they were (and still are) being used by the Neocons which, in reality, are the *least* patriotic of any political force in the USA.

Again, 9/11 and the subsequent GWOT are a direct consequence of the pseudo-patriotic fervor which overcame the US society like a tsunami (the USA before 9/11 was a very, dramatically different, country form the post 9/11 USA).

This is all relevant to understand the current Neocon stance: while they have been successful in putting down the “revolt of the MAGA serfs”, Russia, which used to be run by arguably the most corrupt ruling class on the planet for decades (imho: from Krushchev on and including Eltsin) suddenly also revolted!

That was categorically unacceptable to the Neocons.

By the way, it is interesting to note that while now we have irrefutable evidence that Russia did not interfere with US electionsthe Neocons almost instinctively make a connection between the “revolting MAGA serfs” inside the USA and the “revolting Russian serfs” outside.  And, truth be told, I would argue that the people of the USA and the people of Russia have the exact same enemy.  The difference is that the US political system, a truly totalitarian system, cannot be subverted from the inside, but it can very much be defeated externally (if only because this system is BOTH non-viable – it is based on exploitation and imperialism – AND non-reformable – because it is absolutist in nature).

Fundamentally, the Neocon contempt, hatred and fear of Russia is no different than their contempt, hatred and fear of the “deporables”.  For those who view the world through an “us vs them” ideological prism all the “non-us” are dangerous “thems” which need crushing.

Conclusion: we have what we have

Andrei Martyanov is absolutely correct – the US is run by absolutely ignorant, incompetent and outright evil narcissists.  For such people, expertise is not at all a desirable trait, if anything, it is potentially very dangerous.  Loyalty, which in the Neocon context means “corruptibility”, is much more desirable.  One example to illustrate the point:

It was not enough for the Neocons to take control of US think tanks and academia.  Even RAND, AEI, CSIS & Co. was “too scary” for them, hence their own creation of the so-called “Institute for the Study of War” which is not an institute and which does not study anything, least of all, wars (Neocons have zero military expertise).  And now even Russian (!!!) sources refer to the “studies” of this “institute” as something credible.  Such is the power of the media.

Which is hardly surprising if we think of what kind of expertise modern does a journos have? At best, they are only actors.  At worst, clueless presstitutes.

Again, Martyanov is right, the overwhelming majority of the political commentators and talking heads out there get their “understanding” of war from Tom Clancy books, Hollywood propaganda movies and clever marketing by the US MIC and Pentagon.  At best, these journos can write summaries, find “angles”, including the obligatory “human interest” bull, and they have *access*.  But what  they don’t know, or even care, is that that access is granted only to the doublepluspoliticallycorrect journos.  Mostly, they have no morals at all and they don’t care.  They are in for the money, nothing else.  My only objection to the term “presstitute” is that is is very unfair to prostitutes (who, after all, usually DO deliver what they get paid for!).  Sadly, I can only agree with the French philosopher Alain Soral (who is being viciously persecuted for his views, but not “human rights” organization would ever dare to defend, if anything, they want him lynched!) who said that there are only two type of journos left: prostitutes and unemployed.

That is true of all of Zone A.

So no, as somebody who has seen all this from the inside (I had plenty of journalist friends, by the way, I know that world too), I can only fully confirm what Martyanov repeats over and over again: all of Zone A of 2023 is run by either the Neocons or their loyal servants, and the past 30 years or more have seen an absolutely epic, historical, cataclysmic brain drain form the western ruling classes.

One last thing: it gives me no joy to write the above.  Frankly, if it was just a purely internal US issue, I would not care very much (their country, their problem, their choice).  But that reality is the single biggest threat to our entire planet right now.  And it absolutely terrifies me when I see how few people out there understand and realize that Martyanov is quite correct.  And, for the record, there are plenty of topics in which Martyanov and I disagree, so I am not siding with him because I consider him a friend (which I do) or because he is my “maître à penser” (which I don’t).  No, I fully back him on this issue because for as long as the USA will be the proverbial “monkey with a (nuclear) hand grenade” the Neocons will continue to represent an existential threat to our planet.  And with the Neocons in total control of Zone A, that risk will remain with us until these crazies are sent back to some basement or they blow up the entire northern hemisphere.

Andrei

***

Okay, it still if Friday, so some music is in order (if only to lighten the mood!).  Today I want to share with you what I think was the best rock singer plus best rock guitarist in history, bar none.  I am talking about Ronnie James Dio and Richie Blackmore, of course, who both reached the peak of their creativity when the joined forces in the (alas short-lived) “Rainbow” group.  But, rather than post a few videos as usual, I will post three links:

The first two to their best best albums:

Rainbow Risinghttps://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6ogdCG3tAWjZkXZvDRPOfgOLgYU18MaC (playlist)

and

Rainbow On Stagehttps://youtu.be/O75GMtgl1l4 (single video)

And, finally, a rare but absolutely amazing concert of Rainbow in 1977https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLYFAAfhX89-cwT7ejpxzy3AaTgoBS_8uR (playlist)

And, just as there can be no “Pink Floyd” without Roger Waters and there cannot be any “Deep Purple” without Richie Blackmore, there cannot be any real “Rainbow” without Ronnie James Dio.  It is too bad that Blackmore’s ego simply could not stand sharing the stage with a (actually small!) giant like Dio (who was also a very kind and gentle person, quite unlike Blackmore).  Their collaboration was short, but I do believe that it was the talented duo ever seen on a rock stage.  Enjoy!

Recommended

Going, Going, Gone: Fiddling While the West Burns

January 19, 2023

Source

By Batiushka

So when is the Russian winter offensive going to begin? Some thought it would be in December, when the ground had frozen. Now we are nearing February.

However, just remember that the so-called Russian winter offensive was thought up by armchair generals. Of course, it may well exist as one of a number of scenarios among the Russian General Staff and may still happen and soon, but a winter offensive could also turn into a spring offensive, or even into a summer offensive. Planning needs to be flexible, given ever new ingredients in the mix. As long as the Kiev forces, unexpectedly, keep destroying themselves by throwing themselves into the artillery, missile and drone meat-grinder in the south-east of the Ukraine, between Soledar and Artemovsk, with minimal Russian losses, why hurry? There is no hurry. The only ones in a hurry are in the West. They need this conflict to finish and soon, because the West is on the verge of social, economic and political chaos.

Going, going, gone. In Moscow there are those who can fiddle while the West burns.

So a delay has occurred. Why take risks when Kiev wants to commit suicide? Just let them do it. Moreover, the latest events suggest more reasons for delay – internal splits.

First of all, on 17 January there was the resignation of Arestovich as advisor to the President’s Office, ostensibly because he told the truth, that the shattered apartment block in Dnipro was directly or indirectly destroyed by a badly-aimed Ukrainian missile (not for the first time…).

Then, the very next day, on 18 January, came the crash of the French Super Puma helicopter in Brovary (not Kiev). This killed several important figures, not least the Interior Minister and his deputy, as well as innocent children in a nursery school. A friend who lives nearby was able to provide me with facts and pictures soon later. Putting aside the suggestion that the Eurocopter was brought down by another misaimed Ukrainian missile, the crash seems to have occurred because the pilot was flying low in fog and hit a 14-storey apartment building. My friend says the skies above them are full of State helicopters every day, it is how the Zelensky regime travels. Too frightened to do it any other way. Sooner or later an accident was inevitable. Whatever the reason for the crash, it does mean that there are now convenient vacancies at the top. A power struggle is probably under way. And this is to be expected, because the Kiev forces have been chased out of the strategic town of Soledar, Artemovsk (Bakhmut) is about to fall and with it the rest of the Donbass. It is a rout because Ukrainian losses there are monumental, not to say suicidal.

As a result, the Kiev regime is pleading with certain countries in the West for more tanks. At best it may receive about 200 (in reality, probably fewer than 100) assorted obsolete tanks and armoured vehicles from various Western countries, and probably only in a few months’ time. Whereas it needs 2,000 tanks and armoured vehicles yesterday. But for the moment the divided West is reluctant to give the Ukraine anything, apart from sweet words. Promises, promises…they are so cheap, especially when you are so short of cash and you know the Russians will probably destroy most of your donated equipment before it even gets to the front. Moreover, all this comes against the background of a Ukrainian economy on short-term (no-one will give it anything long-term), monthly Western life support (otherwise no salaries or pensions can be paid). And this is from a West which is on the verge of social, economic and political chaos and against the background of a Ukrainian energy system which, for the moment, has been 50% destroyed and a military logistics system which has been severely disrupted, by Russian missiles.

Little wonder that the Kiev regime distrusts the West. The latter does not have bottomless pockets. Zelensky is probably coming to an end. He already got the cold shoulder in Washington before Christmas. Now he appears to be opposed by the Kiev Armed Forces commander, Zaluzhny, who seems to have had conversations with his US counterpart in Poland behind Zelensky’s back. Generally, speaking, military men hate wars; they are the work only of politicians. After all, politicians do not face the risk of freezing, getting maimed or dying in agony. Maybe we are coming to a reshuffle in Kiev. Whatever the American puppeteers order. But the problem here is do the American puppeteers know what they want to order? They seem to be divided among themselves.

While Washington and its NATO allies have no strategy to win the war in the Ukraine, let alone an exit strategy, the Russians do. In the four months since Russia ordered partial mobilisation, 300,000 additional reservists have joined their units in the east or along Ukraine’s northern border. Meanwhile in the south the Russian Black Sea Fleet patrols. So far Russian infantry have not really taken part in this war. So far most of the work has been done by local anti-Kiev Ukrainian (Donbass) freedom-fighters and the Wagner contract group. The stage is set for a ground war, either from the east, or from the north, or from the south, or maybe all together. Washington’s nightmare. For nobody in Washington, used to fighting ill-trained, suicidal fanatics armed only with kalashnikovs, ever foresaw this. 500,000 + armed Russians are waiting on the borders of Kiev-held territory to liberate their Ukrainian brothers and sisters from the US puppet regime in Kiev. And the only ill-trained, suicidal fanatics here are the Kiev forces.

Going, going, gone. In Moscow there are those who can fiddle while the West burns.

Let us not forget that the conflict in the Ukraine is about the struggle of the United States to maintain its dinosaur’s status as the world’s last superpower. More exactly, it is about America’s attempt to destroy China as a rival. For since China, allied with Russia, is unbeatable, China has to be attacked through Eurasian Russia. In this crazed neocon video-game fantasy, the USA has overlooked Western Europe. In one sense that is understandable, since its leaders are just a pack of mindless Pavlovian dogs, intent on copying their master in Washington – and a pile of dollars greatly helps their salivating capacity for imitation. However, the US mistake is as usual to look only at its puppets. This was the same mistake as in Baghdad and Kabul, or for that matter in Tehran and Saigon, not to mention in Manila and a host of capitals in Latin America. Appoint an English-speaking yes-man, give him a Swiss bank account full of dollars and a US passport, ensure he has control over the capital and its TV and radio station and then you will control the whole country. Only Hamid Karzai didn’t and you won’t either.

Western Europe, the EU and the UK, with a few other bits and pieces, is also inhabited by 500 million people (the other 50 odd million belong to the elite). Some, especially from the elites, live in the capitals. The vast majority do not live there and generally despise those who do live in the capitals. Ask a Frenchman what he thinks of ‘les sales parisiens’ (filthy Parisians), ask a Romanian what he thinks of the elite in Bucharest, a Pole what he thinks of those in Warsaw or an Englishman what he thinks of Londoners. If you don’t believe me, ask Macron in France. Alternatively, ask any Frenchman what he thinks of France’s real rulers – the grossly overpaid super-elite in Brussels. The English hated them so much, they had Brexit. A lot of Germans, who by a huge majority never wanted to give up the Deutschmark, got quite jealous of that, even though the incompetent and perfidious British elite totally mishandled the Brexit negotiation process.

If in Western Europe, the vast majority don’t like their leaders, they will eventually – even the passive British – get rid of them and they will appoint leaders whom Washington does not like, Le Pen, Farage etc. Remember Orban? He is already in power, as is Erdogan (though he is in Turkey). The Ukrainian conflict is already reshaping Europe’s totally outdated (1945) security architecture and forcing a reconfiguration. The realignment will not be in Washington’s favour. Demonstrations against NATO are already starting in various European countries. But what is more likely to topple the US puppet elite is strikes and protests. Europeans hate their elites. The spoilt elites may tell their peoples: ‘Let them eat cake’. But they have forgotten that what the people want is bread.

Once Western Europe, including even the UK, has gone, the end of the short unipolar era will be here. The domino effect, from Kiev to Dublin, is surely only a matter of time. Remember the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989? Within twenty-five months the whole of the Soviet Eastern European Empire fell, one country after another, until in December 1991, the Soviet Union itself fell. Berlin to Vladivostok. Well, the time is now up for the American Empire in its turn. It will also fall, and for the same reasons. The SU (Soviet Union) went. So will its reverse, the US (United States). Red stars, white stars, they have both had their time. Keep your eyes on Western Europe.

Going, going, gone. In Moscow there are those who can fiddle while the West burns.

19 January 2023

‘Fragmented world’ sleepwalks into World War III

Wednesday, 18 January 2023 10:31 AM  [ Last Update: Wednesday, 18 January 2023 10:31 AM ]

By Pepe Escobar

The self-appointed Davos “elites” are afraid. So afraid. At this week’s World Economic Forum meetings, mastermind Klaus Schwab – displaying his trademark Bond villain act – carped over and over again about a categorical imperative: we need “Cooperation in a Fragmented World”.

While his diagnosis of “the most critical fragmentation” the world is now mired in is predictably somber, Herr Schwab maintains that “the spirit of Davos is positive” and in the end we may all live happily in a “green sustainable economy.”

What Davos has been good at this week is showering public opinion with new mantras. There’s “The New System” which, considering the abject failure of the much ballyhooed Great Reset, now looks like a matter of hastily updating the current – rattled – operating system.

Davos needs new hardware, new programming skills, even a new virus. Yet for the moment all that’s available is a “polycrisis”: or, in Davos speak, a “cluster of related global risks with compounding effects.”

In plain English: a perfect storm.

Insufferable bores from that Divide and Rule island in northern Europe have just found out that “geopolitics”, alas, never really entered the tawdry “end of history” tunnel: much to their amazement it’s now centered – again – across the Heartland, as it’s been for most of recorded history.

They complain about “threatening” geopolitics, which is code for Russia-China, with Iran attached.

But the icing on the Alpine cake is arrogance/stupidity actually giving away the game: the City of London and its vassals are  livid because the “world Davos made” is fast collapsing.

Davos did not “make” any world apart from its own simulacrum.

Davos never got anything right, because these “elites” were always busy eulogizing the Empire of Chaos and its lethal “adventures” across the Global South.

Davos not only failed to foresee all recent, major economic crises but most of all the current “perfect storm”, linked to the neoliberalism-spawned deindustrialization of the Collective West.

And, of course, Davos is clueless about the real Reset taking place towards multipolarity.

Self-described opinion leaders are busy “re-discovering” that Thomas Mann’s The Magic Mountain was set in Davos – “against the backdrop of a deadly disease and an impeding world war” – nearly a century ago.

Well, nowadays the “disease” – fully bioweaponized – is not exactly deadly per se. And the “impending World War” is in fact being actively encouraged by a cabal of US Straussian neo-cons and neoliberal-cons: an unelected, unaccountable, bipartisan Deep State not even subject to ideology. Centennary war criminal Henry Kissinger still does not get it.

A Davos panel on de-globalization was rife on non-sequiturs, but at least a dose of reality was provided by Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto.

As for China’s vice-premier Liu He, with his vast knowledge of finance, science and technology, at least he was very helpful to lay down Beijing’s five top guidelines for the foreseeable future – beyond the customary imperial Sinophobia.

China will focus on expanding domestic demand; keeping industrial and supply chains “smooth”; go for the “healthy development of the private sector”; deepen state enterprise reform; and aim for “attractive foreign investment.”

Russian resistance, American precipice

Emmanuel Todd was not at Davos. But it was the French anthropologist, historian, demographer and geopolitical analyst who ended up ruffling all the appropriate feathers across the collective West these past few days with a fascinating anthropological object: a reality-based interview.

Todd spoke to Le Figaro – the newspaper of choice of the French establishment and haute bourgeoisie. The interview was published last Friday on page 22, sandwiched between proverbial Russophobic screeds and with an extremely brief mention on the bottom of the front page. So people really had to work hard to find it.   

Todd joked that he has the – absurd – reputation of a “rebel destroy” in France, while in Japan he’s respected, featured in mainstream media, and his books are published with great success, including the latest (over 100,000 copies sold): “The Third World War Has Already Started”.

Significantly, this Japanese best seller does not exist in French, considering the whole Paris-based publishing industry toes the EU/NATO line on Ukraine.

The fact that Todd gets several things right is a minor miracle in the current, abysmally myopic European intellectual landscape (there are other analysts especially in Italy and Germany, but they carry much less weight than Todd).

So here’s Todd’s concise Greatest Hits.

– A new World War is on: By “switching from a limited territorial war to a global economic clash, between the collective West on one side and Russia linked to China on the other side, this became a World War”.

– The Kremlin, says Todd, made a mistake, calculating that a decomposed Ukraine society would collapse right away. Of course he does not get into detail on how Ukraine had been weaponized to the hilt by the NATO military alliance.

– Todd is spot on when he stresses how Germany and France had become minor partners at NATO and were not aware of what was being plotted in Ukraine militarily: “They did not know that the Americans, British and Poles could allow Ukraine to fight an extended  war. NATO’s fundamental axis now is Washington-London-Warsaw-Kiev.”

– Todd’s major give away is a killer: “The resistance of Russia’s economy is leading the imperial American system to the precipice. Nobody had foreseen that the Russian economy would hold facing NATO’s ‘economic power’”.

– Consequently, “monetary and financial American controls over the world may collapse, and with them the possibility for the US of financing for nothing their enormous trade deficit”.

– And that’s why “we are in an endless war, in a clash where the conclusion is the collapse of one or the other.”

– On China, Todd might sound like a more pugnacious version of Liu He at Davos: “That’s the fundamental dilemma of the American economy: it cannot face Chinese competition without importing qualified Chinese work force.”

– As for the Russian economy, “it does accept market rules, but with an important role for the state, and it keeps the flexibility of forming engineers that allow adaptations, industrial and military.”

– And that bring us, once again, to globalization, in a manner that Davos roundtables were incapable of understanding: “We have delocalized so much of our industrial activity that we don’t know whether our war production may be sustained”.

– On a more erudite interpretation of that “clash of civilizations” fallacy, Todd goes for soft power and comes up with a startling conclusion: “On 75 percent of the planet, the organization of parenthood  was patrilineal, and that’s why we may identify a strong understanding of the Russian position. For the collective non-West, Russia affirms a reassuring moral conservatism.”

– So what Moscow has been able to pull off is to “reposition itself as the archetype of a big power, not only “anti-colonialist” but also patrilineal and conservative in terms of traditional mores.”

Based on all of the above, Todd smashes the myth sold by EU/NATO “elites” – Davos included – that Russia is “isolated”, stressing how votes in the UN and the overall sentiment across the Global South characterizes the war, “described by mainstream media as a conflict over political values, in fact, on a deeper level, as a conflict of anthropological values.”      

Between light and darkness

Could it be that Russia – alongside the real Quad, as I defined them (with China, India and Iran) – are prevailing in the anthropological stakes?  

The real Quad has all it takes to blossom into a new cross-cultural focus of hope in a “fragmented world”.

Mix Confucian China (non-dualistic, no transcendental deity, but with the Tao flowing through everything) with Russia (Orthodox Christian, reverencing the divine Sophia); polytheistic India (wheel of rebirth, law of karma); and Shi’ite Iran (Islam preceded by Zoroastrianism, the eternal cosmic battle between Light and Darkness).

This unity in diversity is certainly more appealing, and uplifting, than the Forever War axis.

Will the world learn from it? Or, to quote Hegel – “what we learn from history is that nobody learns from history” – are we hopelessly doomed?

Pepe Escobar is a veteran journalist, author and independent geopolitical analyst focused on Eurasia.

(The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of Press TV.)


Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.ir

www.presstv.co.uk

Help! The Beatles to Save America?

January 14, 2023

I need somebody,
Not just anybody,
You know I need someone, help!

So much younger than today,
I never needed anybody’s help in any way,
but now these days are gone,
I’m not so self-assured.
And now I find I’ve changed my mind
And opened up the doors.

In, oh, so many ways
My independence seems to vanish in the haze.
But every now and then
I feel so insecure.
I know that I just need you like
I’ve never done before.

Help me if you can, I’m feeling down,
And I do appreciate you being ’round.
Help me get my feet back on the ground,
Won’t you please, please help me, help me, help me?

The Beatles

The West has lost the Battle of Soledar. 25,000 Ukrainian and western mercenaries lie dead. Artemovsk is about to fall with all its fortifications. Where next?

A limited policing operation all started with the Russian wish to protect its people in two Russian provinces in the far east of the Ukraine. This soon had to be extended to four Russian provinces, two more added from the south-east of the Ukraine, so linking up with the much-persecuted Crimea. That had been Russian until 1954, just as all the east of the Ukraine was Russian until 1922 and the far west Polish, Hungarian and Romanian until 1939 – the Ukraine is a uniquely Communist creation. And then there was the Russian wish to prevent the Ukraine from becoming an American base, specifically for its ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons, and also to protect the many Russian speakers elsewhere in the Ukraine from hate-filled Nazi persecution of them. The project and the aim were all relatively modest. Then it all changed:

If the West continues to pump the Ukraine full of weaponry out of impotent rage, or a desire to exacerbate the situation…then that means our geographical tasks will move even further from the current line.

Sergey Lavrov, Foreign Minister of Russia

So it all became an operation, forced on Russia by the aggressiveness of Washington, to take back, directly or indirectly, more or less the whole of the Ukraine. This was not because Russia is fighting against the Ukraine, or against the EU, or against NATO, or against ‘the West’, or even against the USA, but against the neocons, who pull the money-strings, in Washington. And so now Russia has to demilitarise all NATO ground forces (cowardly NATO naval and air forces are hiding) and ultimately to denazify the whole Western world. It is actually on its way to doing that. Certain types of NATO equipment are in short supply. And despite strict Western censorship, more and more Western people are realising that the Ukraine, the most corrupt country on earth, is simply not worth a penny of their taxes, let alone billions, let alone living in hunger or cold: ‘Eat or heat’, as they say in the strikebound UK.

What the Western world, which is ruled over by a bunch of neocons in Washington, has never understood, is that this is an existential war for Russia and therefore Russia will fight to the end, if the neocons force it too. And although the neocon elite likes to consider that this is an existential war for the US, it is not, let alone for the peoples of Western Europe. Find a single ordinary Western person who is voluntarily willing to die for the Ukraine. You will not find a single one. (Western mercenaries die only for money, not for the Ukraine). This Western crusade is existential only for the neocon fantasy ideology, that ‘The West is Best’ and that ‘History Has Ended’ (with our triumph). And here there is a problem.

This problem is that the only way the Ukraine can survive is through Western (mainly US) subsidies of over $300 million a day (so it has been week in, week out, for the last eleven months so far). The Ukraine is on life support. This is killing the West, or rather the West is killing itself because this money will never be paid back and every day that passes is another $300 million that will never be paid back.

As we have said, it is only elitist neocon supporters who back the Western war of terror in the Ukraine. They are the sort of wealthier Western people who belong to, or want to belong to out of self-importance, who last March began flying Ukrainian flags. They saw in the neocon operation an anti-Russian crusade to extend Western power, that is, to increase their personal wealth by helping to steal the wealth of the Ukraine and Russia. What some are realising, Geoffrey Sachs and Condoleezza Rice among them, together with Heinrich Kissinger on the fringes, is that you cannot do it. This is a bridge too far. You can only spread the Western mentality among those with a Western mentality.

Just as Western religion never had any profound or long-lasting success in China, India, the Muslim world, Japan, Russia, the Ukraine, Serbia or a whole bunch of Eastern European countries which have always been Orthodox Christian (see Toynbee or Huntingdon), so today’s neocon religion is not supported by seven-eighths of the world. The seven-eighths, the Global South, East and North, have a different mentality because they have different cultures, indeed, different Civilisations. Even in Latin America and Black Africa, Western religion has been transformed by the local people. Their values no longer resemble the original template, indeed, the original template hardly exists any longer in Western countries, which are today renowned for their atheism. Thus, in Kiev, an atheist Jewish ‘President’, appointed by the USA, no doubt for his ability to play the piano with his penis, has banned Christianity. Expect blowback.

‘These days are gone’ for the neocons, they are not so ‘self-assured’, and now they find they’ve ‘changed their minds’, for their ‘independence seems to vanish in the haze’, and ‘they feel so insecure’. We will have to help them ‘get their feet back on the ground’. Once you have realised that the nuclear option is unreal, that you cannot afford to pay out £300 million a day for ever, your only option is retreat. But, practically, how can we help the neocons ‘get their feet back on the ground’, that is, help them to evacuate the Ukraine without their losing face?

Here there is the option of ‘withdrawal’ to your vassals in Western Europe, building a wall across Eastern Europe on the pretext that you are protecting the ‘free’ ‘civilised’ world from the ‘aggressive Muscovite barbarians’. ‘Not an inch back’, can be your slogan. ‘It was that or nuclear war’, you can (falsely) claim. Of course, you may have to accept the loss of the Baltics and/or Moldova and/or Georgia (but they were never really yours anyway), but such is the price of maintaining your ‘purity’ for another generation. That is, until the whole Western house of cards and its ridiculous fake ‘left-right’ Uniparty system, collapses anyway but you can deny that for the moment – that will be someone else’s problem. (As the short-termist Keynes said: ‘In the long term we are all dead anyway).

The more radical option, already suggested by Trump, is to retreat back to the US, in renewed isolationism. ‘Make America Great Again’. ‘America First’. This would be very popular with the much-tried American people, who are faced with an avalanche of problems and neocon debt. ‘We are leaving the European parasites’, to paraphrase Victoria Nuland, ‘to build up our great country, from sea to shining sea’. This time all that stuff about ‘draining the swamp’ could become real. Especially since the swamp was never drained the first time round – in fact it was deepened and extended then. As for the neocons, they could be sent away to Israel, where many of them come from anyway, or at the very least, where they all belong anyway. As for the rest of us, we could all live (relatively) happily ever after. Help!

Orthodox New Year’s Day, 14 January 2023

Industrial Warfare Thinking (Andrei Martyanov)

January 11, 2023

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

The most important question

December 27, 2022

Looks like we will make it to Dec 31, 2022. Will we make it to December 31, 2023?

This question is not hyperbole.  I would even argue that this is the single most important question for at least the entire northern hemisphere.

I have been warning that Russia is preparing for a fullscale war since at least 2014.  Putin basically said just that in his recent speech before the Russian Defense Ministry Board.  If you have not seen this video, you really should watch it, it it will give you a direct insight into how the Kremlin thinks and what it is preparing for.  Here is that video again:

I will assume that you have watched that video and that I don’t need to prove to you that Russia is gearing out for a massive war, including a nuclear one.

Foreign Minister Lavrov has publicly declared that “unnamed officials from the Pentagon actually threatened to conduct a ‘decapitation strike’ on the Kremlin…What we are talking about is the threat of the physical elimination of the head of the Russian state, (…)  If such ideas are actually being nourished by someone, this someone should think very carefully about the possible consequences of such plans.

So, we have the following situation:

  • For Russia this war is clearly, undeniably and officially an existential one.  To dismiss this reality would be the height of folly.  When the strongest nuclear power on the planet declares, repeatedly, that this is an existential war everybody ought to really take it seriously and not go into deep denial.
  • For the US Neocons this is also an existential war: if Russia wins, then NATO loses and, therefore, the US loses too.  Which means that all those SOBs who for months fed everybody nonsense about Russia loosing the war to the general public will be held responsible for the inevitable disaster.

So much will depend on whether US Americans, especially those in power, are willing to die in solidarity with the “crazies in the basement” or not.  Right now it sure looks like they are.  Don’t count on the EU, they have long given up any agency.  Talking to them simply makes no sense.

Which might explain Medvedev’s recent words “Alas, there is nobody in the West we could deal with about anything for any reason (..) is the last warning to all nations: there can be no business with the Anglo-Saxon world because it is a thief, a swindler, a card-sharp that could do anything.”

Russia can do many things, but it cannot liberate the USA from the grip of the Neocons.  That is something which only US Americans can do.

And here we hit a vicious circle:

The US political system is most unlikely to be effectively challenged from within, big money runs everything, including the most advanced propaganda system in history (aka the “free media”) and the population is kept uninformed and brainwashed.  And yes, of course, a major defeat in a war against Russia would shake this system so hard that it would be impossible to conceal the magnitude of the disaster (think “Kabul on steroids”).  And that is precisely why the Neocons cannot allow that to happen because this defeat would trigger a domino effect which would quickly involve the truth about 9/11 and, after that, all the myths and lies the US society has been based on for decades (JFK anybody?).

There are, of course, plenty of US Americans who fully understand that.   But how many of them are in a real position of power to influence US decision-making and outcomes? The real question is whether there still are enough patriotic forces in the Pentagon, or the letter soup agencies, to send the Neocons back down into the basement they crawled out of after the 9/11 false flag or not?

Right now it sure looks like all the positions of power in the US are held by Neolibs, Neocons, RINOs and other ugly creatures, yet it is also undeniable that people like, say, Tucker Carlson and Tulsi Gabbard are reaching a lot of people who “get it”.  This *has* to include REAL liberals and REAL conservatives whose loyalty is not to a gang of international thugs but to their own country and their own people.

I am also pretty sure that there are many US military commanders who listen to what Col. Macgregor has to say.

Will that be that enough to break through the wall of lies and propaganda?

I hope so, but I am not very optimistic.

First, Andrei Martyanov is absolutely spot on when he constantly decries the crass incompetence and ignorance of the US ruling class.  And I very much share his frustration.  We both see where this is all headed and all we can do is warn, warn and warn again.  I realize that is is hard to believe in the idea that a nuclear superpower like the US is run by a gang of incompetent and ignorant thugs, but that IS the reality and simply denying it won’t make it go away.

Second, at least so far, the US general public has not (yet) felt the full effects of the collapse of the US-controlled financial and economic system.  So flag-waving “morans” can still hope that a war against Russia will look like the turkey shoot “Desert Storm” was.

It won’t.

The real question here is whether the only way to wake up the brainwashed flag-waving “morans” is by means of a nuclear explosion over their heads or not?

“Go USA” is a mental condition which has been injected into the minds of millions of US Americans for many decades and it will take either a lot of time, or some truly dramatic events, to bring these folks back to reality.

Third, the US ruling elites are clearly going into deep denial.  All this silly talk about US Patriot missiles or F-16s changing the course of the war in infantile and naive.  Frankly this would all be rather comical if it was not so dangerous in its potential consequences.  What will happen once the single Patriot missile battery is destroyed and the F-16s shot down?

How soon will the West run out of Wunderwaffen?

On a conceptual “escalation scale” what would be the next step up from Patriots and F-16s?

Tactical nukes?

Considering the rather idiotic notion that a “tactical” nuke is somehow fundamentally different from a “strategic” nuke irrespective of how it is used and where it is used is extremely dangerous.

I submit that the fact that the US ruling class is seriously contemplating both a “limited” use of “tactical” nukes and “decapitating strikes” is a very good indicator of the fact that the US is running out of Wunderwaffen and that the Neocons are desperate.

And to those who might be tempted to accuse me of hyperbole or paranoid delusions I will say the following:

This war is NOT, repeat, NOT about the Ukraine (or Poland or the three Baltic statelets).  At its absolute minimum this is a war about the future of Europe.  Fundamentally it is a war about the complete reorganization of our planet’s international order.  I would even argue that the outcome of this war will have a bigger impact that either WWI or WWII.  The Russians clearly understand this (see video above if you doubt that).

And so do the Neocons, even if they don’t speak about it.

The current situation is much more dangerous than even the Cuban missile crisis or the standoff in Berlin.  At least then both sides openly admitted that the situation was really dangerous.  This time around, however, the ruling elites of the West are using their formidable PSYOP/propaganda capability to conceal the true scope what is really going on.  If every citizen of the US (and EU) understood that there is a nuclear and conventional cross-hairs painted on his/her head things might be different.  Alas, this is clearly not the case, hence the non-existent peace movement and the quasi consensus about pouring tens of BILLIONS of dollars into the Ukrainian black hole.

Right now, the crazies are playing around with all sorts of silly ideas, including booting Russia off the UNSC (not gonna happen, since both Russia and China have veto power) or even creating a “peace conference” about the Ukraine without Russia’s participation (in a remake of the “friends of Syria” and “friends of Venezuela” thingie).  Well, good luck with that!  Apparently Guaido and Tikhanovskaia are not enough to discourage the Neocons and they are now repeating the exact same nonsense with “Ze”.

So, will we make it to December 31, 2023?

Maybe, but this is by no means sure.  Clearly, this is not an assumption the Kremlin makes, hence the truly immense strengthening of all of Russia’s strategic deterrence capabilities (both nuclear and conventional).

God willing, the old adage “si vis pacem, para bellum” will save the day, as Russia is very clearly prepared for any time of conflict, including a nuclear one.  China will also get there soon, but it is likely that 2023 will see some kind of end to the Ukrainian war: either a Russian victory in the Ukraine or a full-scale continental war which Russia will also win, (albeit at a much higher cost!).  So by the time the Chinese will be truly ready (they probably need another 2-5 years) the world will be a very different place.

For all these reasons I submit that 2023 might well be one of the most important years in human history.  How many of us will actually survive it is an open question.

Andrei

How (and Why) Neocons Miscalculated (Andrei Martyanov)

December 26, 2022

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

What should we make of the latest Muppet show in DC?

December 23, 2022

There’s a mad dog pulling at his chain
A hint of danger in his eye
Alarm bells raging ’round his brain
Roger Waters

So “Ze” aka “Zelia” came to DC and was given a massive welcome by the US Congress.  The last time a foreign leader was treated as if he was the US President was was Bibi Netanyahu spoke to Congress.  The fact that war criminals and crooks Zelia and Bibi got such a treatment tells you everything you need to know about who really runs the US Congress.

Congress, by the way, decided to act like the gang highway robbers it is and declared that it will “confiscate” (which implies a legal authority, if not it is called “steal”) Russian assets, thereby fulfilling Putin’s “prophecy” made in 2013 when he warned the Russian business community that its assets in the West would be stolen and that they would spend years trying to get them back.

It makes me wonder if the imbeciles in Congress understands what fulfilling this prophecy will mean for the USA as a jurisdiction to keep your assets in?

Then there is this: the Hyena of Europe is preparing for a mobilization which further indicates that it is about to try to bite off some piece of the Ukraine under the guise of some kind of (pseudo) “peacekeeping” or even “protection” mission which would not officially be a NATO operation, but which will be run out of Mons just like the entire Ukrainian military has been for a long while now.

Just as I was writing this, Gonzalo Lira just posted a (very good) video about this, check it out:

Now for a small piece of (possibly) good news, Biden has declared that US “partners” are “are not looking for a Third World War.  I would not make too much of this, since Biden is mostly unaware of the reality around him, and he is probably not privy to the decision-making of the real powers, the “collective Biden” which run the USA.  Next, Biden, like all US Presidents, is a professional liar, so again, let’s not celebrate quite yet.  Finally, this might be a feint (but if so, it won’t impress anybody in Russia).

So what is “the plan”?

Frankly, I don’t believe that there is one.

Since Dubya and Obama the White House has been occupied by weak and frankly clueless leaders, hence the various interests groups which control DC run “their own foreign policy”.  So, like vectors, the various goals and means of the key actors add up to create a “sum vector” which can *look* like “a policy” or “a plan”, but it is no such thing.  What is true of the US is even MORE true for NATO.  Hence the Poles pulling at their chain like rabid dogs to the horror of the comparatively sane(er) Europeans.

I fully agree with Andrei Martyanov – the folks in charge in the West are totally clueless and they have absolutely no idea how to walk away from the mess they created.  The Neocons probably would prefer a worldwide nuclear war to a Russian victory, but non-Neocon actors might not want to die for a sick, narcissistic, gang of ignorant yet self-worshiping thugs.

Who will prevail?

I have absolutely no idea.  I am not sure anybody else knows either.

What I do know is that Russia has been preparing non-stop for a full-scale continental war since at least 2014 (see here for details).  Defense Minister Shoigu has declared that next year Russia will add five new artillery divisions, eight bomber aviation regiments, one fighter regiment, three motor-rifle divisions, two air-assault divisions, and six army aviation brigades to the Russian armed forces!  And, by the way, these “artillery divisions” will be what is called “high power” brigade/division in Russia, that is to say that they get the very heavy weapons, like 203mm and 240mm self-propelled mortars.  Something which the newly recreated First Guards Tank Army (a “Shock Army” in Russian military terminology) would need to further increase its huge firepower power.

And did I mention that Russia has fully modernized her nuclear triad and that key weapons factories in Russia are now working for 6 days weeks with 3 shifts working non-stop?

And those of you who follow Andrei Martyano’v blog also know how ubiquitous (true) hypersonic weapons are becoming the Russian armed forces.

Let’s just say that such firepower is total overkill for the Ukraine, so we can safely conclude that the Russian force planners did not have Banderastan but NATO in mind when they decided what type of forces Russia should develop next…

So far NATO has done a lot of tough talking, but it is pretty clear that (besides the rabid Poles) few Europeans have the stomach for a full-scale continental war in Europe which will leave their country in ruins.  Yet, they are terrified of the US Neocons and therefore only can try to silently drag their feet while they are being dragged by the Neocons to the precipice.

***

And now, for some week-end music, I want to share with you the beautiful song “Wide River to Cross” (composed by Buddy & Julie Mille) in two versions:

Diana Krall with Jerry Douglas on the dobro:

and a very moving version by Roger Waters and US veterans (to whom, Roger, in his typical kindness, shows compassion and love, as he – correctly – identifies them as victims of the evil US imperialism he so often denounces.  Enjoy!

Lyrics:

There’s a sorrow in the wind
Blowing down the road I’ve been
I can hear it cry while shadows steal the sun

But I cannot look back now
I’ve come too far to turn around
And there’s still a race ahead that I must run

I’m only halfway home, I’ve gotta journey on
To where I’ll find, find the things I have lost
I’ve come a long long road but still I’ve got some miles to go
I’ve got a wide, a wide river to cross

I have stumbled, I have strayed
You can trace the tracks I made
All across the memories my heart recalls
But I’m still a refugee, won’t you say a prayer for me?
‘Cause sometimes even the strongest soldier falls

I’m only halfway home, I’ve gotta journey on
To where I’ll find, I’ll find the things I have lost
I’ve come a long long road but still I’ve got some miles to go
I’ve got a wide, a wide river to cross

I’m only halfway home, I’ve gotta journey on
To where I’ll find, I’ll find the things that I have lost
I’ve come a long long road but still I’ve got some miles to go
I’ve got a wide, a wide river to cross
I’ve got a wide, a wide river to cross

The Harder They Come …

DECEMBER 21, 2022

Source

by Naresh Jotwani

Alastair Crooke is a sage whose thoughtful writings pack vast breadth and depth of understanding of history and geopolitics. His analysis is free of the slightest hint of bias or narrow partisanship – a fact which seems almost incredible given that he worked for the UK Government for a couple of decades. In fact, the sage and his writings testify to a constant and priceless element of western tradition – namely, independent thought.

It was therefore as a surprising and rare slip of the pen, that one read the following paragraph in an article written very recently by him:

But … can the West, which has been so deep in denial about both the incredible economic and military transformation that has occurred in Russia since 1998, and in such vehement denial too, of the capacities of the Russian military, simply slide effortlessly into another narrative? Yes, easily. The neocons never look back; they never apologise. They move to the next project …

Reference in the first sentence is made to “the West”. One has to assume that the reference is to the ruling dispensation – or shall we say regime? – in certain countries, because clearly not every human being in these countries has been in denial about events in Russia since 1998.

Later in the paragraph, however, the phrase used in place of “the West” – rather unconsciously, one must assume – is “the neocons”. Is that substitution not hugely surprising? The two phrases do not – cannot! – represent the same slice of human life! Equation of the two was surely unintentional.

William Shakespeare, James Clerk Maxwell, Mark Twain, William James – these are just a few illustrious references from the English speaking regions of “the West”. These and many others – including of course Alastair Crooke himself – have not the remotest connection to “the neocons” view of life.

Possibly, “the neocons” are the newest version of the crazies who have always attempted to lord it over “the West” – as indeed over much of the world. Such people are always at the game of deceptively and cruelly acquiring raw power; but surely such wannabe power grabbers do not equate to “the West”.

Indeed, that the two were thus equated – even if unintentionally – also proves that “the West” is no longer a meaningful phrase, if indeed it ever was. Of course “the East” and “the South” have already figured that out – as we sense clearly in the winds of change blowing through global political alignments.

Crooke also writes that the neocons do not look back or apologize. No power hungry crazies ever do that. Never. It is as if they drive a vehicle with faulty brakes, no reverse gear and a cracked and dirty windshield. Their judgement clouded by limitless greed for power, they lack understanding of the progress which in fact happens not only in Russia, but all over the world. Their every “next project” is therefore doomed to end worse than the one before.

A crash is therefore inevitable, even though it will be denied by ideologues during – and even after – it occurs. What the rest of mankind see clearly as a crash will be written up as a victory, or a major engineered paradigm shift, or some such nonsense. Words are cheap. Narratives may attempt to displace reality, but they cannot fool the world for long. The rest of us need to remain alert and be able to see through empty words.

The internet is a major revolution in world affairs, and its full impact on our lives is yet to unfold. Social media cannot be controlled – not that crazies will not try to do that! Exchange of honest, truthful assessments among people around the world – for the first time in human history – is invaluable.

One ventures therefore to guess that many of the older models of “lording it over the masses” will rapidly lose their effectiveness. Based on what we have seen so far, there is no shortage of clear-sighted people around the world, and their viewpoints are available for all to share.

There will be life after the crash – not only in “the West”, but also in the rest of the world. Perhaps older labels such “the West”, “the East”, “the South” et cetera will disappear, and “the world” will be the only meaningful label. Since there will no longer be one salient “pole” dominating the scene, the world will by default, and naturally, be “multipolar” – with poles which shift over time. One is reminded of football leagues, in which teams keep rising and falling depending on performance.

When we speak about “the world”, we need to also recognize that migrants from the all over the world are today living and working legally in the US – which we may dub the sanctum sanctotum of “the West”. By all accounts, these migrants constitute law-abiding, hard-working and successful segments of the US population. They have learned how to come wisely to terms with – and participate in – relevant aspects of US domestic politics.

But the scene back in their respective home countries is different. These countries need to look after their own well-being amidst major changes in geo-political environment. Relationships of the home countries with “the West” do not mimic the domestic political relationships of their ex-citizens living in the US. This is a point which so-called “ruling elites” in the US miss when they send a US-based migrant to his or her home country to “set things right”.

In any case, after one generation, children of the migrants will have far, far weaker links with their parents’ home countries. One only wishes that the proverbial melting pot works out well for them in the coming years.

Regarding “the neocons” – the present wannabe “lords of the West” – it is worth noting that, not too long ago, the phrase “crazies in the basement” was used by an American president for their ilk.

A beautiful, famous song by Jimmy Cliff goes: The harder they come, the harder they fall … One and all.

The wheels of karma grind on, inexorably. But the thing about crazies is that they remain in denial even after they fall. Maybe it is time for us to laugh at their self-serving ideologies and their crazy antics – after ensuring that we are not harmed too badly by the consequences of their ill-conceived projects.

As someone said, the tragedy is so huge that laughter is needed to deal with it.

Do the Europeans deserve what is coming to them next?

December 15, 2022

Dear friends

I was born in Switzerland, arguably the heart of Europe, and as a European by birth, if not by culture, I feel that I should address the issue of the regular European’s responsibility for what is going on in both the Ukraine and Serbia.

I don’t believe in collective guilt, so the short answer is “no”.

But I do believe in consequences and I do believe in God’s justice (and love, of course!).  In other words, I don’t think you can commit evil deeds and get away with it: sooner or later you will have to pay, especially if you fail to repent for your evil actions.

Furthermore, I do realize that the EU is a US colony/protectorate, but so was much of the world.

Why can there be real resistance to the Empire in Latin America or Africa and none in the EU?  Should Cuba begin sending soldiers, doctors and engineers to the EU (just kidding!)?

[As a kid I remember all the various protest and resistance movements we had in Europe, they ranged from the (mostly) peaceful anti-nuclear ecologists, to striking unions, to the RAF in Germany, to the IRA in Ulster, ETA in Spain and even the various Kurdish, Armenian, Palestinian and other ethnic groups engaging various degrees of violent resistance against the state.  Even in tiny Switzerland we had the Jura autonomists with some creative resistance methods!  That is not to say that I approve of all of these, only that I remember a time when there was real resistance in Europe.  Are modern Europeans capable of meaningfully resisting *anything* nowadays?  I very much doubt it]

I think that we can safely say that the EU is the most docile, cowardly and loyal colony to the Empire.  Why?  Probably because all the other colonies *knew* that their colonial status will never change under the AngloZionist rule, whereas the Europeans hoped to somehow “elevate” themselves by being Uncle Shmuel’s “poodles”.  And, after all, imperialism was born in Europe (the Crusades) and not in the New World.

You would think that by now, even the dumbest EU politician would realize that anti-Russians sanctions almost exclusively hurt Europe.  Yet, what do we see?  They are STILL at it and they are STILL doubling down, check out this headline: “EU set to freeze assets of RT’s parent company – media“.  Please read it, you will see that this is a direct and absolutely unapologetic crackdown on free speech.  And while doubleplusgoodthinking and politically correct Europeans love to (mis-)quote Voltaire and proudly proclaim that they too “I don’t agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it” in reality they absolutely don’t give a damn.

This is nothing new.

When the AngloZionist launched a TOTALLY ILLEGAL war of aggression against the Serbian nation and a country, Yugoslavia, which was a founding member of the Non Aligned movement the proud Europeans did this (see image).

At best!

Many actively participated in the martyrdom of the Serbian nation.  Again.  The same way the Europeans betrayed Serbians during WWII.  And now, they are STILL at it (see EU threats about Kosovo).

And, make no mistake, all these years KLA terrorism in Kosovo has been fully supported and even aided by KFOR and EULEX (that latter entity modestly called “European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo“(emphasis added).

And, now again, all we hear from the Old Continent is a deafening silence.  Either that, or threats.

Long forgotten is Yehuda Bauer’s wise admonition:

Thou shalt not be a victim.
Thou shalt not be a perpetrator.
And above all,
Thou shalt not be a bystander.

By making the EU the accomplice of the US aggression on Serbia, the US has basically secured the European’s loyalty forever, since now they are not only bound by cultural or colonial ties, they are also accomplices in the rape of Serbia, the Maghreb and Mashreq, Afghanistan and all the other countries which suffer(ed) under the Hegemony’s yoke.

The AngloZionist attack on Yugoslavia was the Kristallnacht of international law, it was the event from which all of the horrors we see today sprang.  And yet, far from understanding (and nevermind admitting!) the crime of aggression (the worst crime in international law, above even genocide or crimes against humanity!) and showing some remorse, the European leaders stayed the course while the “regular” people of Europe simply ignored it all like the good little poodles they became.

And please don’t give me the argument that “we faced too pwoerful an enemy” or “we could do nothing”.  At the very least, every single European could follow Solzhenitsyn’s appeal and “live not by the lie“.  But they could not even do that.  1000 years of anti-Christian propaganda and heresy has resulted in a society which does not even believe in the very notion of “truth”.  No wonder they can’t stop lying anymore…

I think that it is a truism that if you have no self-respect you will also get no respect from others.  I also think that it is fair to say that the EU has become the most despised society on the planet.  And it is not just Putin who calls the EU a “doormat for the US” – the same opinion is held in much of Zone B.

Here is, I think, the correct answer to the question I asked above: do the Europeans deserve what is coming to them next?  Considering that what is coming to them next is entirely self-inflicted, I think that irrefutable answer is a resounding “YES!”.

If not, then who is to blame?  Russia?  The USA?  Putin?  “The Jews”?  Immigration?  Muslims?

Speaking of the USA – at least the US Americans voted for Trump (twice).  The fact that this made (almost) no difference is irrelevant, at least the people of the USA tried to resist!  In fact, even under the current crackdown against dissent, I still think that there is a much higher proportion of US Americans capable and willing to resist than Europeans.

And so today I want to do something I never did before.  I will re-post once more something I have already posted once: the interview of Col. Douglas Macgregor by Dr Michael Vlahos.  I judge this conversation to be so important that it deserves a second posting.  Before I leave you with these two men, I want to just add the following:

These two man are from the generation which I had as professors during my years in US colleges (1986-1991) and for whom I still have the utmost respect.  That does not mean that I necessarily agree with everything they did, said or wrote, not at all.  But such men I can respect not only for their formidable intellect, but also for being men of honor and truth, and real (as opposed to flagwaving) patriots of their country.

This is the generation of men like David Glantz or Lester W. Grau – US officers who truly studied, carefully, Soviet military doctrine (authors like Reznichenko, Gareev or Ogarkov) and who, through their studies, did not come to hate Russia or Russians at all, but saw them as fellow professionals and patriots.   Having had the privilege to spent some time with the folks who taught at the Frunze Military Academy (I even ended up co-authoring a small book with one of them) I can attest that the Russian top strategists had a great deal of respect for their US colleagues too.

The contrast with the Neocon freaks “from the basement” could not be bigger.

I sincerely think that in the following conversation every topic and every sentence is important because it shows what that generation of competent and honorable US Americans think of the (many) abomination(s) which we are witnessing today.  I can sincerely say that I wish them, and their cause, full success.

As far as I am concerned, we have the same enemy.

May their example of resistance (because that is *exactly* what this is) inspire more (there are already a few) Europeans to follow their example.

Andrei

Finally, and in the spirit of my post today, I leave you with one superb music video from France: “Indignez-vous” by HK et les Saltimbanks (see translated lyrics below).

Who knows, maybe this video will wake-up a few more Europeans?

Machine translated lyrics:

I got up one morning, dark day of existence
I raised my voice and my fist, when the rule was silence
I’ve seen some get on trains, leave in a huge fog

I could be neither accomplice nor witness, I entered into resistance
A voice paved with hope, populated by women and men from everywhere
A choice as a matter of course, between gallows and neck rope
I came back from so far away, I give thanks to my star
Death forgot me on the way, to Dora and Buchenwald
93 years old I can believe, that my end is not very far away
93 years old here is my memory, take the greatest care of it
Indignation stubbornly, in a world on guard of you
Be one of those who walk against the wind my friends, be indignant
Be indignant!
Be indignant!
This is an old gentleman talking to you
Brandishing his star, do you hear?
So do you think that today we are missing the reasons for the uprising
When our own lives are on credit, under the dictatorship of the banks
Money commands the shareholders, they themselves command the president
Who orders ordinary people to execute well kindly
All this unsold food, so throw it in the trash
And on top of the pile of junk, pour me 10 liters of bleach
This is the world that is ours, absurd, cruel and merciless
Until that damned poverty line comes through our door
Human rights set aside, sold in individual portions
When the food crisis lingers in front of the eternal
But miracles when billions are found in the second
To save the king dollars and all the bankers of this world
Be indignant!
Be indignant!
This is an old gentleman talking to you
Brandishing his star, do you hear?
Be indignant!
Be indignant!
This is an old gentleman talking to you
Brandishing his star, do you hear?
Our chains are certainly less visible, than in the dark days of slavery
But our minds are being targeted, what have they done with our heritage
Excessive competition, generalized amnesia
Mass consumption products for an anesthetized youth
It’s high time, my friends, to finally turn on the stars again
Who have guided his whole life, this old gentleman who speaks to you
Yes I was that Armenian, I am still that German Jew
I am the Palestinian people, justice is my only side
Be citizens without borders, of those peoples who rise up
Contaminate the whole earth, with your revolts and your dreams
Be indignant it is your right, and in memory of all those
Who are still dying not to have it, this right is in fact a duty
Be indignant!
Be indignant!
It’s an old man who’s talking to you
Brandishing his star, do you hear?
Be indignant!
Be indignant!
This is an old gentleman talking to you
Brandishing the starry sky, do you stand up?
Be indignant!
Be indignant!
This is an old gentleman talking to you
Brandishing his star, do you hear?
Be indignant!
Be indignant!
He is an old gentleman, a great gentleman
Who’s talking to you, who’s talking to you

Are Ukrainians Russians?

December 06, 2022

Are Ukrainians Russians?

Seems like a simple question, but in reality it is immensely complex.  I will try to outline a few of the issues, assumptions and implications this question involves.

Well, for starters, we might want to ask “what is a Ukrainian?”  After all, no such nation or country can be found in history books.  But we should not stop here, and we also need to ask “what is a Russian?”.  Yes, there was a Russian nation and a Russian country recorded in history books, but does that really help us?

French history books used to begin with the sentence “our ancestors the Gauls” which even kids on the French colonies had to learn.  Some ridiculed the fact that sub-Saharan Africans or the children of Guadeloupe had to learn that and that was self-evidently ridiculous.

But what about metropolis French, those who lived in France proper?

Where their ancestors really Gauls and, if so, how much continuity, if any, is there between Vercingetorix and Macron or the people from ancient Gallic tribes to the modern French?

What we often overlook is that nationality is a very modern concept born out of the post 1789 ideology of nationalism.  In the more distant past, people built their identity around 1) their place of birth/residence 2) their religion and 3) their ruler.    Keeping all that in mind, let’s begin by asking the question “what is a Russian?”. But before we go there, I need to mention another pesky issue: the English word “Russian” can mean one of two things: a member of the Russian ethnic/cultural group, in which case the Russian term is русский (roosskii) or a citizen of the Russian Federation, in which case the Russian term would be россиянин (rossiianin).

[Sidebar: before 1917 you could be a “Russian Chechen” or “Russian German” because the distinction between rossiianin and roosskii did not exist then or, should we say, it was less common and used differently.  Russia being the cultural, political and spiritial heir to the East Roman Empire, it had multi-ethnicity built into her from the moment Russia appeared]

For the time being, let’s ignore the second meaning and focus on the ethnic/cultural русский (roosskii).  What is a русский (roosskii)?

To try to find a good definition, let’s being by spelling out what a Russian is not.

  • This is not somebody who speaks Russian.  There are plenty of folks out there who speak Russian and who are not Russian.
  • This is not somebody born in Russia, because there are plenty of non-Russians born in Russia.

How about somebody born from Russian parents?

Here we run into a logical problem: if we define as Russian somebody born of Russian parents without defining what Russian means in the first place, this is a completely circular definition.

Also, is Shoigu Russian?  This father is an ethnic Tuvan.  So 50% Russian max?

How about Czar Nicholas II?  His ancestry was mostly German and Danish.

How about Lenin? He had only 1/4 “Russian” blood (whatever that means)

Here we need to keep three crucial elements in mind:

  • Russia was always multi ethnic, even in the 10th century!
  • Russia has no natural borders
  • Russia was invaded by innumerable ethnic and religions groups and many of these groups acculturated into the Russian society adding their heritage to the common Russian one

Thus the “ethnic definition” does not work at all.

For countries like Japan or native people like the Mapuche ethnic categories might make sense, but for a country with a history and geography like Russia it is utterly meaningless (hence the reason why patriotism is a very positive force in Russia and nationalism a very toxic one).

But it only get even more complicated.

Just like, say, France or Italy, Russia went through very different moments in history and the Russia or, say, the 15th century and the Russia or the 19th century had very little in common.

Now this is highly subjective, but I would submit that at the very least, we can roughly break up the historical Russia into the following periods:

  • Russia before Peter I
  • Russia between Peter I and 1917
  • Soviet Russia between 1917 and 1991
  • US colonized Russia between 1991 and 2000
  • Putin’s Russia 2000-2021
  • Russia after 2022

And even this is a much simplified categorization, each period should also be further subdivided, but that would take too much space here.

Next I would also argue that how Russians defined themselves over these periods also changed, and this why pre-1917 Dostoevsky thought that one cannot be Russian unless one is Orthodox first (which might have make sense before 1917, but sure makes no sense at all in 2022).  My point here is not to discuss the best possible definition of “who/what is a Russian” but to show that this apparently simple question is also very complex and, at best, a moving target!

Now in the case of the Ukraine, it gets even more complex than that.

When I wrote above that there was no “Ukrainian nation” or “Ukrainian state” in history I did not mean to say that BECAUSE there were no such phenomena in history there is no such thing as a Ukrainian today.

To be clear, I do NOT believe that in order to consider yourself as belonging to an ethnic or cultural group you MUST have a historical basis for your claim.  Nations can be created, in fact, I would argue that all of them are created at some point in time.  Ethnogenesis is something we can observe on all continents, nations and ethnic groups: this is the emergence of a NEW and DISTINCT identity, usually followed by the creation of “founding myths” which might or might not have any real basis in history.

In the case of the Ukraine (I mean this term geographically here, the southwestern frontier/border lands of Russia), it is simply undeniable that these lands lived under Polish/Latin yoke for many centuries and that this occupation had two direct results:

  1. The people of the Ukraine had experiences with the rest of the Russian nation did not (such as being under Latin occupation or having Orthodox communities submitted the Greek and not the Russian Orthodox Church)
  2. The people of the Ukraine did not experience some of the most crucial events in Russian history (such as the Old Rite vs New Rite crisis which deeply shattered Russian society in the 17th century and after).

Such differences in experience left deep marks on the identity of the people it affected.  It would be foolish to deny this and it would be dangerous to deliberately ignore it!

So, to sum up what I have tried to show so far we could say that:

  1. History is not a useful tool to measure some supposed “legitimacy” of any one group’s claim of identity.
  2. Ethnic/cultural identities can arise both spontaneously and even artificially.

In the case of the Ukraine, it is a mix of both.  Primarily, the “Ukraine” is a creation of the Latin Papacy (see here for a discussion).  But, like it or not, the Latins did eventually trigger a Ukrainian ethnogenesis, albeit with varying degrees of success (roughly the further West, the longer the Polish yoke, the stronger that Ukrainian identity).

But even if none of that had happened, it would make no difference.

Even if we assume that there was absolutely NOTHING on our planet which could be called “Ukraine” or “Ukrainian”, and even if the people of the post-1991 Ukraine had ZERO historical basis for their claims, it is still a fundamental human right to choose your identity (or, more accurately, identities, plural).

If tomorrow the people of Japan decide that from now on their identity will not be Japanese but, say, Martian, we could laugh all we want, but we could not deny them that right or force them to give up their newly adopted “Martian” identity.

Furthermore, is it not silly to tell a person who absolutely hates Russia and all things Russian and who sincerely believes that he is from a totally different ethnic and cultural group, that this person has no right to his opinion that this person must accept that he is Russian?

That would create a “Russian russophobe”.

Actually, there are PLENTY of Russians russophobes out there.  Even if by any imaginable definition you are Russian (or any other nationality), you still have the free will to reject that heritage and choose another one (even a fictional one).

There is even a special term for these folks: вырусь (vyroos‘).  In my experience, most (but not all!) folks who voluntarily emigrated from Russia fall into this category.

This is why my first thesis here is this: those Ukrainians who chose to identify as Ukrainians and who reject any Russian heritage (whatever we may mean by that) have the moral right to do so and nobody has the moral right to deny them this choice.  And while historical arguments can be used to debunk the founding myths of the Ukronazi ideology, they still cannot be used to deny anybody what is a deeply personal choice.

[Sidebar: it is my personal belief that identities can be cumulative and that they don’t have to exclude each other.  While I personally consider myself culturally a “pre-1917 Russian”, I am 50% Dutch by DNA, I was born in German speaking Switzerland and lived most of my life in French speaking Geneva, and I also feel even more cultural identities inside me, including an Argentinian one.  I speak 5 languages well (albeit with many typos when I write, as you all know!) and another 2 reasonably.  I currently live in the USA (click here for an explanation why)  And just to add yet another element, I am a member of a Greek Orthodox Church, not a Russian one.  I also think of myself as a Jazz guitarist and freediver.  So even my hobbies form part of my identity.  Why should I have to limit myself to only one, “pure”, identity when I am so clearly a mongrel?  In fact, I embrace and enjoy all this diversity of influences which all have contributed to shape the person I am today.  And if I claim that right to cumulative identities, how could I deny it to anybody else?]

And then there is this undeniable fact: while about 80% of россиянин (rossiianin) are русский (roosskii), 20% are not.  In fact there are 193 ethnic groups in Russia and 35 languages which are considered official languages in various regions of Russia, along with Russian, plus are over 100 minority languages.  And while Chechens are not русский (roosskii) they are most definitely россиянин (rossiianin), that is to say that while Chechens are a distinct ethnic group, they are also part of what I call the “Russian civilizational realm”. One could reasonably argue that the Chechens of 2022 are the most patriotic of all Russians!

This makes a lot more sense to me that to dig into past clades, tribes or local native groups and seek some “biological identity”.

This is, by the way, one of the most striking and profound differences between the Russian and Ukronazi cultural models: Russians want and enjoy the immense diversity of their nations.  Ukronazi want a racially pure, russenrein, Ukraine (hence their constant talk about “subhumans”, “cockroaches” and “biomass”).

Let’s leave the idiotic concept of “pure race” to the Nazis, Zionists and their likes.

The first thing which I would immediately point out if that historically the lands which we now call the Ukraine were very much exposed to, or even part of, the Russian civilizational realm.  But that is absolutely NOT true of the current, Ukronazi/Banderista cultural identity which, in fact, was created as an anti-Orthodoxy and which nowadays sees itself as an anti-Russia.  I personally know that identity very, very well: not only have I met plenty of Ukronazis in my life, I also monitored the Ukronazi propaganda on VOA and RFE/RL for years and I know that Ukronazi nationalism has no positive content whatsoever, it is only a pure and total negation of everything Russian with a few truly ridiculous (and comical) claims about some “Ukrainian antiquity”.

In other words, even if you live in Odessa or Kharkov and you are (let’s simply assume that) from 100% pure ethnic Russian stock (no such thing, but bear with me), you STILL get to reject that identity and adopt any identity you want, including the Ukronazi/Banderistsa one.

At this point, I want to list all the criteria which are plainly not helpful to discuss identities:

  • Genetic makeup
  • Place of birth
  • Mother-tongue (or languages)
  • Religion
  • History in general and historical borders (which constantly shifted) specifically
  • Whether we personally approve of an ideology or cultural claim or not
  • Political ideologies
  • Identities embraced in the past
  • The difference between a language and a dialect
  • Similarities and differences with other identities

And yet, every time I hear people discuss whether the Russian are liberators or occupiers of the Ukraine, I see these criteria used, and by both sides!

This makes absolutely no sense to me.

In fact, I strongly believe that the choice of being Ukrainian, Russian or both (yes, that is a choice!) depends on each individual person.  Period.

But here I want to add something crucial: having to make such a personal choice is not specific or unique to the Ukrainians, all Russians also face the same question too!

I submit that, objectively, the “Russian” 5th column and the Atlantic Integrationists are, de facto, not Russians.  Why do I say that? Because 1) they serve foreign masters and 2) they seek to harm Russia.  And I don’t care how their actions are packaged (heck, Navalnyi tried really hard to impersonate a nationalist!).

Thus, to “be Russian” means, in my opinion, that you have made a deliberate choice by identify with, and become part of, the Russian civilizational realm.

Put simply: you cannot be Russia and hate Russia.

How many people in what is left of the Ukraine today consider themselves Russian?

I don’t know, and I don’t think anybody else knows either.

But I think that it is fair to say that most people in Russia were shocked by the number of Ukrainians who chose to not only adopt a Ukrainian identity, but even fight and die for it! Many did, sincerely, think of Ukrainians are “brothers”.

Today this “brotherhood” looks increasingly like the “brotherhood” of Cain…

Even more amazingly, most of these Ukronazis don’t even speak Ukrainian properly and mostly speak to each other in Russian.  Some even consider themselves as Orthodox Christians.  Yup, these Russian speakers, many from the central and eastern Ukraine still sing “Батько наш — Бандера, Україна — мати, ми за Україну будем воювати!” (Our Father is Bandera, our mother the Ukraine, we are ready to wage war for the Ukraine).

I would note with some glee that if Bandera is their father, then the Ukraine was born no earlier than the mid-1920s (since Bandera was born in 1909!).  And I won’t even go into the Ukie hallucinations about being “pure Aryans” (as opposed to the Moskals whom they see as Finno-Ugric-Mongols), which is an ideology developed even later 🙂

So, 2163 words later, did we even being to answer the question of whether the Ukrainians are Russians?

No, not really.  And here is why:

Taken by themselves, the terms “Ukrainian” and “Russian” are highly ambiguous.

We know that in the past, many of those whom we call “Ukrainians” today had ancestors who lived and were part of the Russian civilizational realm.  But that does not AT ALL mean that modern Ukrainians want (or even could!) join the Russian civilizational realm, especially since what this realm was, is and will become is also highly complex and even controversial.

Furthermore, I think that we need to pay special attention to what is happening in Russia today: the SMO has had a HUGE impact on the Russian society and that society is quickly and profoundly changing.

That by itself begs the question of what kind of civilizational realm Russia is offering to the peoples of the Ukraine today?

One thing is certain, the Russia of, say 2023-2025 will be profoundly different from the Russia of 2000-2022.  First, the Russian ultimatum to the West of 2021 then the 2022 SMO have truly revolutionized (in a literal sense) Russia:  5th columnists and assorted liberals have fled by the thousands (mostly to Poland, Israel and the three Baltic statelets), the Atlantic Integrationist have either given up or are keeping a very low profile. Foreign agents (folks paid by foreign interest) must now register, are listed as such, and can be fined or even imprisoned for breaking Russian laws (finally!).

Russia has also completely and categorically rejected the entire Woke ideology promoted by the Hegemony worldwide.

Most importantly, the reality of a AngloZionist Empire which wants to subjugate, colonize, enslave and break-up Russia has now become pretty hard to ignore.  In fact, this war (against the collective West, not just a few Ukronazis!) is as much an existential war for Russia as WWII, so those Russians who complain about the lack of Spanish jamon serrano in Russia stores need to wake up and compare their current “hardships” with what their parents and grandparents suffered during WWII (besides, you can still find Spanish jamon serrano in Russia, just at a higher price than before; there are also superb local substitutes!).

Here I want to express my deepest thanks to the US Neocons, EU lemmings, NATO Nazis, the Latin Papists and all the other Russia-haters who have generated one of the biggest hate-wave in human history and who have now FORCED all Russians into a basic, yet vital, choice: resist or perish.

Unlike the folks in the West (until recently) and unlike the folks in the Ukraine (again, until recently), many Russian people have gradually switched their mode thinking from “peacetime” to “wartime”.  In fact, I would even argue that the so-called “Russian defeats” in Bucha, Kharkov or Kherson have only poured more fuel onto the raging fire of Russian anger: in February of this year very few Russians would have supported to switch off the lights in the entire Ukraine.  But by late summer, they were DEMANDING it!

So, the next time you hear about “Russian defeats” consider the following:

  1. the massive wake-up effect these “defeats” have had on a (rather spoiled) Russian society
  2. the comparatively minuscule price paid by Russia for these tactical retreats (economy of force maneuvers really)  and
  3. the huge costs of these “victories” for the NATO side

and decide for yourself if Putin is weak and indecisive or very smart and cunning 🙂

Nobody really knows what Russia will look like in 2023-2024-2025 etc.  So nobody really know what kind of “Russian civilizational realm” the SMO is “offering” to the people of the Ukraine.  It is therefore impossible to ascertain whether Ukrainians (which Ukrainians anyway, they are still a diverse group!) will ever become Russians again or not. Some probably will.  Many will probably won’t.

One thing for me is axiomatic: Russia should not occupy even a single square meter of “Ukrainian” land if that land is mostly populated by Ukronazis.  In fact, I see no need to “go to the Polish border” or any other such grand plans.  Yes, NATO might well not give Russia any choice (just as NATO forced the SMO upon Russia!), but then I hope for a swift “in and out”.  Russia should only free those who want to be freed.  Period.  The rest she can either ignore (if they leave Russia alone), or kill (if they threaten Russia).

Does Russia want/need millions of Ukronazis inside her borders?  Nope!

Can Russia afford to pay for the destruction of country 404?  Nope!

Do Russian authorities really want to be in charge of not only pensions and social programs, but also law and order in a land populated by (armed!) people who hate Russia with a passion?  Nope!

But I do agree, fully, that Banderastan needs to be fully demilitarized and denazified.

The former can be achieved without having to put forces on every square meter of the Ukraine while the latter will happen as a natural consequence of the former: if all you got if police and SWAT forces, what is the point of playing Nazi or talking about “liberating Crimea next year”?  And if some residual Ukronazis want to read Mein Kampf, and can stay awake while reading it, then let them.  Who cares?

And then there are population movements.  MILLIONS have left for the EU and MILLIONS have left for Russia.  MILLIONS have also “left” when Crimea and the LDNR joined Russia.  And now that the lights are out, MILLIONS more are leaving (and only 20% plan to return according to Ukrainian estimates).  Add to this the 100’000 KIA of Ursula von der Lugen, multiply it by a safe factor 2 and we probably already have 200’000 KIA and, therefore, about 300’000-400’000 wounded in action.  True, “Ze” & Co. can continue to mobilize wave after wave after wave of civilians, and NATO can even get most of them through some sort of basic training (including advanced training for some), but that is not a sustainable strategy: Russia has many more artillery shells than bodies the Ukrainians, Poles, Brits and all the other crazies can throw into the Russian meat grinder.

[Sidebar: you might wonder what the current US Neocon plan is.  Simple: to get as many Ukrainians killed as possible and then accused Russia of genocide and to ruin the EU economies to remove a competitor.  BTW – Plan A was to attack the LDNR, trigger an overthrow of Putin, place a puppet in power and dismember Russia.  That plan failed.  So what we see today is the USA’s Plan B, executed by NATO and a few megalomaniacal idiots with imperial phantom pains (UK+PL not to mention them).]

One more point: this all also applies to Belarus, Kazakhstan and all the other Russian limitrophes.  So far, not single one of them has shown the capability of being a viable, stable state.  ALL of them have chosen what some call “multi-vectorness”, that is: you beg Russia for protection and the USA for money.

Does Russia needs such “friends” or “allies”?

Are Iran, China or even Algeria not infinitely better friends and allies by any measure?

I say that they all these limitrophes get their act together and make a basic choice because if there is one thing which the Euromaidan has proven beyond reasonable doubt that is that the West will never allow any country to be a good neighbor or partner to both the West and Russia.

Now, especially following the wave of total hatred against all things Russian in the West, this obligation to chose one side or another has become a fact of life for at least as long as the (already dead) AngloZionist Empire maintains its (still very real) momentum and its ability to suborn the comprador elites ruling over countries with no sovereignty or agency (the entire EU for starters).  This is why both Russia and China seek a multi-polar world in which all countries are truly sovereign and the relations between these countries determined by the rule of international law.

Conclusion:

This is not about the Ukraine and Russia.  This is about a full reorganization of our entire planet, including the international trade and finance, political alliances and cultural/spiritual values.

The following two images sum it all up nicely I think.

Right now, both Russia and the Ukraine are moving targets undergoing tremendous changes.  And I am not saying that Russians and Ukrainians cannot be brothers or even be one nation again.  All I am saying is that making such an assumptions would be extremely dangerous and costly.

Somewhere, further down the road, there could be a Ukraine and a Russia living in a not too comfy relationship like, say, Pakistan and India today, but with a fully demilitarized Ukraine (nevermind one threatening Russia with nukes, which both Pakistan and India have, so that parallel only goes so far).  I am pretty sure that the Poles will bite off a chunk of the rump-Banderastan, and maybe the Hungarians too.  Finally, I consider it very likely that by one way or another, Russia will liberate the Ukrainian coast and lift the current blockade of the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic (PMR) were about half a million Russian citizens live.  So you can pretty much visualize what the Ukraine will look like when then Russian decide to stop.

But, when all is said and done, it will be for the people of the Ukraine to decide which civilizational realm they want to embrace.  Russia should not liberate those who embrace their slavery.

Andrei

‘Holy Land Foundation 5’ are Victims of America’s Unjust Persecution of Palestinians

November 27, 2022

A Holy Land Foundation press conference. (Photo: via Twitter)
– Iqbal Jassat is an Executive Member of the South Africa-based Media Review Network. He contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle. Visit: www.mediareviewnet.com

By Iqbal Jassat

America’s destructive wars on Muslim countries launched in the wake of 9/11 under the misplaced rubric known notoriously as “War On Terror” (WoT), spawned mindless death and bloodshed on an unprecedented scale.

The George W Bush administration, heavily infested with neoconservatives and Likudniks, contemptuously ignored and willfully disregarded the sovereign status of Muslim lands by unleashing invasions, bombings, massacres and ultimately occupying them.

In a gross display of raw power, America shamelessly sought to demonstrate its unchallenged position as a military superpower to refashion the world in its image.

Since the unmistakable target of US belligerence was Islam and Muslims, it adopted a well-worn Israeli strategy by dehumanizing victims as “terrorists”. The tactic was designed to fool the world by claiming that the war was not on “good Muslims” but only the “bad ones” depicted as “terrorists”.

Against this background, one is reminded of the extent of maliciousness associated with the WoT paradigm and the abuse of justice flowing therefrom.

A classic example in this regard is the case of what became known as the “Holy Land Foundation 5”.

Fourteen years ago, five highly respected US-based Palestinian academics were unfairly targeted and jailed for providing humanitarian aid to orphans and widows in Palestine.

They have been described as the “Holy Land 5” who were actively involved in the Holy Land Foundation (HLF)based in Texas.

The HLF was at the time, the largest Muslim welfare and charity organization in the US until it was singled out and hounded by the Bush administration and Israeli forces.

Using the cover of the WoT, and fuelled by hostile Zionist agencies who profiled the HLF as a “nest of terror”, it was shut down in December 2001 by US authorities.

The case against the “Holy Land 5” led to the wrongful conviction and unjust long-term imprisonment of five highly respected Palestinian men. Three of them, Mufid Abdulqader, Ghassan Elashi, and Shukri Abu Baker, remain imprisoned today.

The two others, Abdulrahman Odeh and Mohammed El-Mezain, sentenced to 15 years each, were released in 2020 and 2022 respectively.

An intriguing yet deplorable aspect of the highly politically-charged case is the fact that these men were convicted on false charges of “providing material support to terrorism,” despite the fact that they were never even accused of funding the legitimate armed resistance to Israeli occupation and colonization.

According to various reports including by Samidoun, interestingly the same charities funded by the Holy Land Foundation were also funded by the International Red Cross and even USAID, the US Agency for International Development.

In other words, the criteria for aiding or funding “terrorism” ought to have been applicable to the International Red Cross and USAID, rendering them “guilty” as well.

However, as is known, the Holy Land Foundation was selectively targeted and borne out by the fact that after failing to convict the HLF5 in their first attempt, the US. judiciary allowed untested “evidence” by an anonymous Israeli intelligence agent.

The “War on Terror” has and remains a playbook on how to subvert justice to gain political goals. The dubious, torture-produced “evidence” by a faceless Israeli spook against the HLF5 was typical sensationalism and anti-Palestinian bigotry.

Though the subversion of American politics by Israel is a well-known documented fact, it cannot remain unchallenged. By the same token, the ill-conceived path of destruction known as the WoT needs to be derailed and its perpetrators brought to justice.

And the case of the three men who remain behind bars, deserve a global campaign to secure their freedom.

The Ukraine is committing “suicide by cop”

NOVEMBER 25, 2022

Yesterday I received an email from a Ukrainian friend of mine.  By “Ukrainian” I mean that his culture and self-identity is Ukrainian, he loves his heritage, speaks the language and loves his country.  In fact, he is what I would call a “real Ukrainian” as opposed to the Ukronazis in power in Kiev.  We correspond regularly and exchange opinions on what is taking place.  Here is and excerpt of what I wrote to him yesterday:

“I am also heartbroken with the evolution of the war to liberate the Ukraine from NATO: while I have no doubts about the outcome, I am horrified at the thought of what this does to the civilian population.  My sadness is even made deeper by the realization that to a large degree the people of the Ukraine did it to themselves.  Russia tried REALLY HARD to not have a war, then she tried REALLY HARD to save the civilians and the civilian infrastructure.  But the people under Nazi occupation believed all the propaganda coming out of the regime in Kiev and the West and now there will be hell to pay.  For 6 months these naive people thought the Ukraine was winning because they could not even fathom that Russia was only using about 10% of her forces and trying really hard to save as many Ukrainians.  But no, they were celebrating the murder of Dugina, the attack on the Crimean Bridge, the attacks on the ZNPP and now they are going to pay a horrible price for these delusions and, frankly, lack of decency/morality.
As Douglas MacGregor said “the Russians are about to bring a sledge-hammer” to vaporize the NATO forces in the Ukraine.
We did not want that.
It was imposed on us.
What else can I say?
The Nazis will be crushed, but the costs of doing so will be needlessly high.
Millions of refugees will be added to the millions who already fled.
I feel utterly disgusted, sad and angry about this outcome
As one Rock song I know (“Gates of Babylon” by Rainbow – see below) says: “sleep with the devil, and then you must pay, sleep with the devil and the devil will take you away“.
I am sad to say that I believe that the people of the Ukraine did “sleep with the devil” (the West) and now comes the inevitable.

After sending my email, I kept thinking about utter insanity of the Ukrainian actions.  An outside observer could be forgiven for thinking that the Ukrainian people have some kind of death wish, and if maybe not most people, then at least the leaders of the Ukraine.  And then it hit me.

The Ukraine is doing what is known in the USA as “suicide by cop” which Wikipedia defines as “Suicide by cop or suicide by police is a suicide method in which a suicidal individual deliberately behaves in a threatening manner, with intent to provoke a lethal response from a public safety or law enforcement officer“.

This is what the FBI’s Law Enforcement Bulletin has to say about such a situation: (emphasis added)

Suicide by cop situations are more intense than other suicide calls. All parties are armed, or the victim appears to be armed. The individual is active, rather than passive, and aggressive toward police or others. Despite its unique features, SBC fits the template of suicidal behavior as a planned outcome to an unfolding psychological process. Prevention and intervention are possible at the same points as in suicide by other means. Theoretically, suicides are preventable; however, realistically they may not be avoidable because of the nature of the plan or the point where first responders encounter the suicidal individual. SBC often is unpreventable. This must be considered in the aftermath regarding the officers who were coerced to be the unwilling means.

And, just to clarify, I do NOT consider that Russia is some kind of “cop” who has to enforce the law on anybody else.  Not at all.  But I do see a moral parallel between the cop who does not want to kill the suicidal person with a gun, but might have no choice, and the fact that Russia simply had no other choice other than to take action when the Donbass was threatened with imminent invasion and Russia was threatened by Ukronazi plans to acquire a nuclear weapon.

Sometimes the only way to disarm a person is to use your own gun.  That is exactly what happened here.

What makes this all even worse is that the dark forces in the West which created the Ukraine in the first place joined with the Nazis and Neocons (the two ugly twins who fight each other but look so much alike!) to push the Ukrainian people into a war which they never had any chance to win.  The Ukrainian military was defeated by mid-March but that was not enough for the Hegemony, so they ordered waves of mobilizations and sent in THOUSANDS of “advisors” and “volunteers”.  By mid-summer what had been a Ukronazi military was basically replaced by a de facto NATO force which is now also being “demilitarized”.

The AngloZionist Empire promised the Ukrainian people peace, prosperity and all the riches of the western propaganda (which is quite different from the West’s reality) and the ignorant people of the Ukraine (brainwashed first by Soviet, then Western propaganda) bought it all, “hook, line and sinker”.   This is similar to two vicious adults promising a 5 year old some super tasty candy and telling that 5 year old that “all he has to do” in exchange for the candy was to throw a few stones at a sleeping bear and “don’t worry, if the bear wakes up we will protect you!“.

Now that bear is awake, and mighty angry at that: the 5 year old is getting eviscerated while the vicious adults who promised him “a land flowing with milk and honey” are watching (from what they – mistakenly – believe is safe distance) and laughing at it all.

This is truly demonic evil.

There are still those out there who cannot, or don’t want, to understand what is taking place.

So here I will share a video with you which has been circulating on the Internet which shows you exactly what this all looks like in reality.

See for yourself: (no need for translation other than “ВСУ” meaning “armed forces of the Ukraine”).

https://www.bitchute.com/embed/0aBRbNJnZfOX

What this video shows are two attempts by the Ukrainian forces to attack: first LDNR forces and then the Wagner PMCs.  What happens next is predictable: first, you see a small-arms exchange of fire, then the Russians use mortars.  Russian very precise artillery strikes come next.  Then full-scale MLRS attacks followed by even more strikes by a pair of Su-25 and one single Su-34.  According to Russian sources, in this (very small) attack, all (most?) Ukrainians were killed while the Russians did not suffer any casualties.  Notice that the Ukrainian soldiers, while definitely brave, have absolutely no support.  Notice also the tiny size of the attacking force: the Ukrainians used to attack with several “brigades” (well, kind of), now they are down to squad/platoon level engagements!

And that kind of needless butchery happens every day, day after day after day after day.

My Ukrainian friend also asked me why Russia does not take out “Ze” and his gang.

I think that this is the crux of the problem: I believe that it should be the Ukrainian people themselves who should overthrow “Ze”, not the Russians.  Just as it was infantile to believe that the EU would turn the Ukraine into a new Germany overnight, it is equally infantile to believe that “Putin will come and restore order”.  Putin is the President of Russia, not the Ukraine, and it is not his job to rescue the Ukraine from the pit it fell into.

There are also three practical for not decapitating the Kiev regime (yet):

  1. The regime has no agency anyway, do all which such a decapitating strike would achieve is cutting off an already quite dead head.
  2. The Hegemony could quickly replace the old gang with a new one.
  3. “Ze” & Co. are so fantastically incompetent that Russia could not hope to have a weaker, dumber and more incompetent adversary anyway.

It is, however, Putin’s job to protect Russia and the people of Russia.  By pushing the Ukrainians towards more and more dangerous provocations the Neocons were fully aware that they were pushing the Ukrainians into a type of “suicide by bear” folly.

The sad truth is that Russia was given no other option than to do that which the Ukrainian people could not (or would not) do: denazify the Ukraine.  And since the Ukraine could not be denazified, it had to be disarmed.

[Sidebar: oh and please don’t give me “but the Ukrainians could not do anything to resist” argument.  Resistance is always possible, even under the harshest and most evil regimes.  And when that resistance appears to be futile, then it remains a question of honor, of personal choice, of a moral obligation to resist as best one can.  Resistance to evil is what defines our humanity.  And if one really cannot, then, at the very least, every person has the option to “live not by lies“! Again, resistance, however humble and small, is always possible, and the people of the Donbass have proven it!]

This latest Neocon-originated bloodbath is already well into the hundred of thousands of people needlessly killed, maimed or displaced.  This winter it will only get worse.

And what do you think the Ukronazis do to somehow mitigate this catastrophe?

Negotiate?  Nope!

They want to dismantle the statue to the founder of the city of Odessa!  Yes, like the other degenerate freaks in Eastern Europe, the Ukronazis are still “fighting statues” and, by extension, their own historical past.  How lame…

This would all be quite hilarious if this was not also so horrible and if millions did not have to suffer from the actions of the shaitans ruling the West!

The FBI is quite correct.  Suicide by cop is mostly unpreventable.

Was it right for Russia to try so hard to avoid a fullscale war?  Yes.

Was it right for Russian to try to minimize the damage to the civilians and the Ukraine’s infrastructure?  Yes again, absolutely!

Think about it: if Russia had attacked the Ukraine à la “shock and awe” from Day 1 and turned Kiev, Kharkov or Lvov into “Ukrainian Fallujahs” then it would have been much more credible to blame Russia for the massive “collateral damage” such an attack would inevitably entail.

Does anybody blame the cop for a “suicide by cop” death?

Of course not!

Yes, that policy of trying to spare the Ukraine did cost Russia a lot, not only in political terms but also in lost Russia lives.

But, at least, we tried.

Maybe that is the biggest difference between Russians and Ukrainians?

Andrei

***

The week-end is coming up and I normally share a few musical videos with you.  Today I am going to post only one: the video of Rainbow I mentioned above.  I would just note that according to the guitarist, Richie Blackmore, his solo on “Gates of Babylon” is his best solo ever.  I very much agree.  In terms of structure, the beginning of the song is based on a double harmonic major scale/mode, but then the solo switches to a sequence of chords/harmonies which are much more reminiscent of baroque music, specifically J.S. Bach (something which Richie Blackmore had already explored with Deep Purple, but which he truly mastered with this superb song).  The singer is the late Ronnie James Dio, the best voice in all of Rock music in my humble opinion.  Enjoy!

What would a Russian defeat mean for the people of the West?

November 15, 2022

Regular readers of the blog know that I separate our poor and long-suffering planet into two basic parts: Zone A, aka the AngloZionist Empire, aka the World Hegemony aka the “Axis of Kindness” and what I call Zone B, or the Free World.  Very approximately, we need to separate the ruling elites and the people they rule over separately.  Here is, very roughly, what we get:

Zone AZone B
Ruling elitesHate Russia/PutinSome fear the Hegemony, but others don’t
Peoplemostly indifferent or hostilemostly support Russia/Putin

Next, I propose to make a simple though experiment.  Let’s assume that Russia loses the war against NATO.  We do *not* need to spell out how exactly such a defeat could/would happen, we simply assume that Russia is unable to achieve her goals of denazification and demilitarization of the Ukraine (and, really, all of NATO), that NATO forces are successful in defeating the Russian military machine (again, it does not matter how, with or without amazing Wunderwaffen) and that Russia very clearly loses.

We don’t even need to define what “defeat” would mean?  Maybe we can imagine that Russia gets keeps Crimea, but loses all her recently liberated regions from the former Ukraine, or maybe NATO manages to even occupy Crimea. I don’t see NATO tanks in downtown Moscow, but we can even imagine a purely psychological defeat in which both sides believe that Russia has lost and NATO won.

Again, details, no matter how improbable and far removed from reality, do not matter.  What matters is only this: once all the four groups above realize that NATO has defeated Russia, how would they react?

For the leaders of the Hegemony, this would be a dream come true.  In fact, the Neocons running the Hegemony will most likely decide that they need to “finish the job” which they did not finish in the 90s, and that Russia needs to be broken up into several parts.  This would be the West’s latest “final solution” for the “Russian problem”.

For the leaders of the Free World, a Russian defeat would signal that there are no alternatives to the Hegemony and that like it or not, the AngloZionists will rule the planet.  Like the Borg in Star Trek like to proclaim: “We are the Hegemony.  Resistance is futile.  You will be assimilated“.

For most people in the Free world, a Russian defeat would be a crushing disappointment for the simple reason that most people would see the AngloZionist plan for what it is: get Russia first, then take on and bring down China and then, eventually, Iran and any other nation daring to disobey the rulers of the Hegemony.

Clearly, this is not about the Ukraine, this is about the future of mankind as a whole.

But what about the people in Zone A who currently already live under the AngloZionist yoke?

[Quick reminder: I have decided, for various reasons, not to discuss internal US politics on the Saker blog and I will try hard to stick to this rule.  Still, I will state the obvious: we all now know the outcome of the latest elections in the USA and the adults in the room understand what happened, no need to list various truisms here.  If there is anybody reading this who would sincerely believe that some variation of the Neocon Uniparty in power will change things for the better or even slow down the inevitable collapse I would recommend that this person stop reading here.  Now for the rest of us:]

I think that the initial reaction of most people in Zone A will be a mix of relief (“Of course I knew that the West would win!“) and indifference (transgender issues are SO much more important!): their valiant “finest fighting force in the history of the world” kicked some rooskie commie ass which most definitely deserved some ass-kicking.  Some of the most sanguine defenders of the “western civilization” will even drop by our comments section and gloat “ha! ha! told you! your Putin and his clueless generals got their asses kicked by the most bestest US and NATO generals!“.  And for a while, they will feel really good.  Vindicated:  finally the dumbshit stupid Russians will pay the price for electing and supporting such a weak, indecisive, naive, corrupt, incompetent (and possibly even dying of cancer) leader!

And if only the Kremlin had had the wisdom to listen to its “western friends”!

But no, the Kremlin did not, and now there is going to be hell to pay.  Of course, if Russia’s “western friends” had been in charge, they would have executed a lightening fast blitzkrieg a long time ago, smashed Banderastan into smithereens (à la Fallujah if you wish) and quickly an decisively defeated NATO.  But those clueless idiots in the Kremlin did not listen, and so they deserve what is coming next.

Okay, fair enough.

But what about the regular people in Zone A?  The ones whose “side” supposedly “won”?

Once the initial bliss and celebrations are over, what will happen to them next?

Anybody want to take a guess?  If so, please post your thoughts in the comments section below.

My personal take is that after the defeat of Russia, the defeat of China (by whatever means) would be next.  Once that happens, all of the following will become decapitated and irrelevant: BRICS, SCO, CSTO.  The next country on the Hegemony’s kill list is Iran which, having lost the backing of both Russia and China will not be able to successfully challenge the Hegemony.  That, in turn will have major consequences for the entire Middle-East.  Wannabe Pasha Erdogan would be very quickly brought to heel.  Ditto for MBS.

The Israelis will feel like they “fixed the universe” well enough and that their Moshiach must be next 🙂

With Russia and China out of the way, Central Asia would be frankly easy picking for the Hegemony. In fact, all the Russian limitrophes would quickly be absorbed into the Hegemony.

The same goes for Pakistan and India, who would quickly lose most (or even all) of their sovereignty.  Afghanistan will be handed over to the (US-baked and run) ISIS.  Eventually, both Latin America and African will be fully recolonized (to the immense relief and joy of the local comprador class).

Now I submit that anybody with a modicum of information and intelligence will agree that the gang of woke freaks currently running the USA and almost every EU country out there doesn’t give a damn about the people they rule over: they see them only as means of production, in other words, as slaves who need to be given sufficient amounts of (bad) food and immense amounts of (truly demonic) “entertainment” to keep them nice, and happy and, above all, obedient and ignorant.  So here comes my question:

With Zone B gone, what hope for a better future, if any, could the slaves of the AngloZionist Hegemony keep in their hearts if our entire planet turns into Zone A?

The current repressive apparatus available to the US ruling class which includes 17 “intelligence” agencies,  the biggest military aggression budget on the planet, the highest number of prisoners kept in jails, the total informational control provided by Google, Amazon, Netflix, Facebook, Twitter, etc. etc. etc. militarized police forces and other agencies ready to deal with “internal terrorists” (sometimes defined as any MAGA person), and a school and college system designed to create obedient office plankton (white collar) and fast food employees (blue collar) with almost no awareness, nevermind any understanding, of the outside world.  EU states are not quite there (yet) but they are catching up fast.

This is not a system which will simply collapse by itself or, even less so, be overthrown by its “deplorables”.

I have mentioned this many times in the past: the US political system is neither viable nor reformable.

The EU political system is basically an extension of the US political system, just with a more strongly pronounced colonial mindset (“fuck the EU” right?).

So will the Hegemony turn our entire planet into a giant and “woke” Disney World run by Neocons?

Not as long as Russia, China, Iran and others are standing firm.  But if these “resisting nations” are crushed, then its show over for the people of Zone A whose slavery will not only last even much longer, but whose living conditions will further rapidly deteriorate

And once the “bread and games” thingie fails, you can bet that violent repression is next.

ANY regime which seriously aims at colonizing the entire planet (which the Hegemony undoubtedly does!) will ALWAYS keep its own population in slave-like conditions, materially, culturally and spiritually.

So, to paraphrase Malcolm Xthe only hope for the House Negros still remains the Field Negro.  Whether the House Negros themselves understand that or not is immaterial.

Let me rephrase this in an even more shocking way: the last and only hope for the people of the USA and the EU would be a total Russian victory against NATO.  A NATO defeat will bring down not only NATO itself, but also the EU and that, in turn, would force the US to (finally!) become a normal, civilized, country.

As for the EU, a NATO defeat would mean the end of one thousand years of imperialism.

I get it.  For a civilization built upon the assumption of racial superiority (whether officially proclaimed or not) the notion that the only possible salvation could come from “inferior Asiatic barbarians” is shocking and can only be considered as an extreme form of doubleplusbadcrimethink.  Such a thought is, quite literally, unthinkable for most.

Yet, as I mentioned above, what the House Negros understand or not is entirely irrelevant.  Not only do they have no agency, they want none (Poland anybody?).

Conclusion:

Russia won’t lose this war, most of us understand that.  But to those who don’t, I will offer one simple conclusion: a Russian defeat would be a disaster for Russia.  And China.  And the rest of the planet.  But it will also be a true calamity for the oppressed people of the West.  They, of all people, should be very careful what they wish for. And the next time they want to hallucinate and gloat about a “strategic Russian retreat/defeat” they should ask themselves a simple question: what might this mean for *me* and *my own* future?  Do I really have a reason to rejoice?

Maybe they simply got used to being slaves and the idea of *real* freedom and diversity simply terrifies them?

Andrei

A few headlines about civilizational values and some week-end music

October 28, 2022

Source

As I now often do, I like to open the discussion with a few headlines:

  1. German man fined over letter ‘Z’
  2. Romanian defense minister resigns after Ukraine comments
  3. RT suspends host after ‘disgusting’ remarks about Ukrainian children

Let’s take a closer look.

In the first case, we have the “western value” what is usually known as “freedom of speech” which is something which only exists in the AngloZionist Hegemony (at least according to President Brandon and his summit for democracies).

In the second case, we have another “western value” usually known as “we stand for peace”.  It is also known as “a bad peace is preferable to a good war” and even “diplomacy is always better than war”.

In the third case, we have a clear example of how the “Pioootin regime” cracks down on dissent and free speech.  That in this case this speech was shockingly stupid and hateful makes no difference.  Why?  Because “it is only good when we do it”.  Besides, Anton Krasovsky was suspended for doing that which both the Ukronazi and the AngloZionist propaganda does 24/7: spew hateful idiocies.  Maybe he is “one of us” after all?

Seriously, what we see here are the clear contours of two different civilizational realms which have nothing in common with each other and whose values are mutually exclusive.

In the meantime, the “warriors of light” (aka the Ukronazis, that is how they refer to themselves) are busy shooting almost exclusively at (ex-Ukrainian, now Russian) civilians pretty much along the entire frontline.  The logic here is purely Anglo tactics: “we had to destroy the village in order to save it”.  Makes sense!  At least to them…

In the meantime, the clocks are ticking.  The political clock for the US elections, the economic clock for the EU’s social and economic collapse and, of course, the winter coming closer with each passing day.  If the Neocons want to pull off some of their usual tricks, chances are that at least some of them might decide that “it is now or never”.

Let’s do two more headline.  How about this:

What a combo, no?  Western “logic” at work I suppose.

Is that any wonder that, in our last headline for today, Putin has now declared that:

By the way, Putin is wrong, the US very much still has two things it can offer the world: a nuclear holocaust and the LGBTQ+++++ ideology.  You know, real “western values”!

So, here is the choice for our poor planet:

In spite of it all, I wish you all an excellent week-end!

Andrei

***

I have a confession to make: I don’t like Blues and I never liked this type of music.  Sorry!  To each his own, Blues is really not my thing.  However, there are always exceptions.  In my case, only two, and they are not quite typical of Blues, I would call that “Blues plus” :-).  Anyway, I leave you with my two absolute favorite Blues in the hope that you will enjoy them too!

Gary Moore – “Still Got the Blues” (I often tear up when I hear this songs, it really touches me)

Led Zeppelin – “Since I Have Been Loving You”

A few thoughts about the “dirty bomb” thesis and the role of hatred

October 25, 2022

First, is it even possible?

The answer is yes, absolutely.  There is enough (non-weapons grade) spent civilian nuclear reactor fuel to get enough radioactive materials.  Much more importantly, there is plenty of “know how” amongst Ukrainian scientists and engineers.  Besides, bringing in radioactive materials or specialists is something the AngloZionist Hegemony could do.  Did I mention plenty of starry-eyed Ukronazi politicians daydreaming on camera about how to nuke Russia and kill as many Russians as possible?

Quick reminder: a “dirty bomb” does not set-off a nuclear detonation but, instead, uses a conventional explosive to spread radioactive materials.

How big does such a bomb have to be?  The bigger the better since the bigger the more materials will spread.  That is also a problem, however, since that means delivering a large payload to the place you want it to go off.  Here I see three basic options:

  • Set off the dirty bomb behind Russian lines
  • Set off the dirty bomb near the line of contact
  • Set off the dirty bomb in Ukronazi occupied territory

Each of these options have serious drawbacks.

If the first case, how do you get, say, a truck similar to the one blown up on the Crimean Bridge, to somewhere near Kherson or elsewhere?  Putin has passed a set of decrees which now gives the Russian security organs a solid legal foundation to conduct extensive security operations and take many actions they could not before.  So would it be possible?  Maybe yes, but not easy.

Setting off the bomb somewhere near/along the line of contact risks having the delivery vehicle (truck, APCs, etc.) detected by the Russian C4ISR and blown up.  Of course, the US/NATO would blame Russia, but this begs the question of why Russia would ever use a dirty bomb considering that 1) Russians have plenty of regular tactical nuclear weapons and 2) such an attack would make no military sense.  Also, an attack near the front my result in a MH-17 like screw-up where the crime scene is under Russian control and not, as hoped for, Ukronazi.

Which leaves option three.  Blow up that nuclear bomb in a Ukronazi occupied city or town and declare that this is part of a “ethnic cleansing of the proud Ukrainian nation by the Rooski hordes” and then switch into a Srebrenica-like mantra and chant “genocide! genocide! genocide!” until the hatred of Russia reaches the needed intensity.

Of course, this begs the question of why, if the Russians wanted to genocide the Ukrainians, they would use a rather ineffective device (a dirty bomb’s main “quality” is the panic it induces) when they have everything they need to obliterate not only the Ukraine, but the entire West?

But then, the target audience for such a dirty bomb would be the doubleplusgoodshiteaters (to paraphrase Orwell) in the West who “bought” 9/11, MH17, Skripal, Ghouta, Viagra in Libya, Racak, Srebrenica and the list goes on and on and on.

So the answer is definitely “yes, it is possible”.

The second question is why? what would be the purpose of such a dirty bomb explosion?

Here we need to understand that the Hegemony and Russia have been fighting two completely different wars.  For the Hegemony the war against Russia, started in 2013, has always been about optics, PYSOPS, PR and propaganda.  Hence the constant flow of idiotic, mostly self-evidently false, “information” fed to the doubleplusgoodshitheaters which swallowed that nonsense because it 1) comforted them in their mental representation of the world and 2) made them feel good about still being part the Master Race.  In sharp contrast, Russia was conducting a SMO trying really hard to minimize civilian casualties or touching the Ukraine’s infrastructure which she will now has no choice but expand into something much more akin to a regular combined arms operation.  But even that is not crucial, the crucial thing is this:

==>>NATO is losing, and they know it, so they are freaking out<<==

Until you can wrap your mind against this reality you will never understand the actions of the classes ruling the Hegemony!

[Sidebar: right now, NATO simply does not have the forces needed to attack Russia with any hope of success.  One single Airborne Brigade Combat Team won’t make *any* difference here.  And even if the US decides to go to a full mobilization (which is really impossible, good luck with that!), it would have to bring those forces to Europe.  And even if the US can bring in, say, 1’000’000 million men, it will be far easier for Russia to mobilize, say, 3’000’000 men in response.  Then what?  And did I mention that as soon as the US ships set sail, Russia will obliterate any ports and facilities expecting to receive the US forces.  Try this: take the full Polish, 3B, Romanian and Ukronazi armed forces, then add the FULL 101st and 82nd and what do you get?  A multinational (“combined”) force which was never designed to operate in such a convoluted way, especially against the better-than-peer united military under a single command! And I won’t even go into such thorny issues as assembly points, maneuver, logistics, air defenses, etc.  As I have said, this is all optics, optics and more optics, nothing more]

While zombies like Brandon and his “genius” VP are clueless about any of that, there must be at least a few folks in the Pentagon or the letter soup agencies who understand the simple fact that the way things look now, the Hegemony has three options:

  • Be defeated
  • Declare victory and leave (same deal, just with a tiny fig leaf for modesty)
  • Commit suicide by attacking Russia directly

Not very good perspectives.  So here is one more: how about creating total chaos and hope that something advantageous comes out of it?  In other words, while setting off a dirty bomb will do nothing in purely military terms (it sure won’t stop the Russian military), it will create such a huge political reaction that the current situation will turn into total chaos, panic, rumors, lies, etc.

To the demented minds of the Neocons, total chaos would look better than total defeat, right?

Yes, I know, nobody with half a brain will ever sincerely believe that the Russians did it.  But if past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior, I would submit that there will always be enough doubleplusgoodshitheaters in the Hegemony to believe literally *anything* no matter how self-evidently stupid and preposterous that *anything* is.

We do, after all, live in a society were nobody teaches how to think anymore (schools just make kids dumber and dumber) and the vast majority of people still reply on legacy corporate propaganda machine to get what they think is “information”.  Not to mention that on a psychological and spiritual level, we live not only in a post-Christian society, but even a post-Truth society in which true and false have simply lost any objective meaning other than “like it” or “I don’t like it”.  We could even call this a “post-reality” society!

The bottom line is this: at this point in time, NATO needs any distraction or, even better, as much chaos as possible to change the narrative and hope to use that distraction to regroup and try to find an out from the abject defeat NATO is facing in the Ukraine.

So don’t seek a military rationale for a dirty bomb attack, look ONLY for optics.

What else could the Hegemony try to do to delay the inevitable?

The most often mentioned options are:

  • Blow up a damn and put thousands of people into a flood-zone
  • Rain a huge number of missiles at Kherson or any other liberated major city
  • More diversionary/terrorist attacks inside Russia

Again, the goal here would not be any real military advantage, but the only two things NATO is really interested in now:

  • Optics (the Ukrainians are winning! the Ukrainians are winning!  The Ukrainians are winning!)
  • Chaos (both as a means and as a goal in itself)

By the way, there are plenty of folks in Russia who fully realize that the Hegemony is “losing it”.  For example, there are discussions on the Russian media about whether Putin should fly to Indonesia for the G20 summit.  Why?  Because some are saying that attacks on the NS1/NS2 and Crimea Bridge have shown that Neocons which run the Hegemony are capable of anything, including trying to assassinate Putin.  This would be an especially attractive option if it could be done with some (even thin) “plausible deniability”.

Truth be told, Russia is still, alas, a “one man system”, meaning that as of today, Putin is still totally irreplaceable.  Just for that one reason, I would recommend he stay in Moscow for the foreseeable future.

Do I hear somebody saying “oh come on! they are not that crazy!” (whomever the “they ” refers to).  So we need to conclude and ask this question:

Are they really that crazy? or the role of hatred in this war

I think that this the wrong question to ask.  The real question is are “they” that hate-filled and evil?

And here the absolutely YES, no doubts about it.  None.

Here I have to explain something which most non-Russians or non-Ukrainians will find very hard to believe: the modern (as opposed to the historical) Ukrainian self-identity is entirely built around hatred.  First and foremost, the modern Ukronazis hate Russia and everything Russian.  Which makes sense, since the Ukrainian national identity currently has no positive contents/value, it the more anti-Russian you are, the more Ukrainian that makes you.  Your ethnicity, mother tongue, place of residence, etc. make absolutely no difference.  And this is why even former “heroes of the Ukraine” (such as Nadezhda Savchenko or Vyacheslav Boguslaev) have been arrested for “treason” (along of many THOUSANDS all over the country!).

Traditionally, Ukronazis also hate Jews, Poles and pretty much everybody else (hence their saying about “drowning Poles and Jews in Moskal blood”).

To repeat: the modern Ukronazi identity is based on hatred.  Hatred is not a feature of that identity, it is its core component (see here and here for a historical discussion of this).  Just see how the Ukrainian and Nazi ideologies are brought together and fused in this very famous Ukrainian song:

Original UkrainianEnglish translation
Батько наш — Бандера, Україна — мати,Ми за Україну пiдем воювати!Bandera is our father, the Ukraine our mother, we will fight for the Ukraine

While hated is a very bad advisor in most cases, it is very energizing.  It also give you the kind of blind courage which can make you volunteer for suicide missions.  European Imperialism, born of the Crusades, was also born of hated.  And, of course, the Judaic/Zionist supremacist and terminally narcissistic worldviews are also born from the hatred of the “other”.  Do I need to mention that rabbinical “Judaism” (pharisaic talmudism) is nothing but an anti-Christianity while the Latin heresy is nothing but an anti-Orthodoxy?

I would argue that hatred is the glue which holds together the entire AngloZionist Hegemony.  And the most hated target of this Hegemony is, of course, the Orthodox and never-conquered Russia and what she represents in the modern world.

I won’t tell you here what I think Russia stands for or, even more interestingly, what she might stand for in the future, that will be for a future analysis, but what I can tell you right now is that there is (almost) no anti-Ukrainian hatred in Russia.  And I don’t just mean from public figures.  For example, I recently watched a pretty well made Russian movie about the war in the Donbass entitled “The Best in Hell”.  The movie basically shows a 2 hour assault by Russian forces (called “white” in the movie) against 4 Ukrainian (called “yellow” in the movie) held buildings.  What is amazing is that both sides are shown as courageous, determined, soldiers.  None of the Hollywood tricks to “show the bad guy” (ugly faces, evil grins, vicious inclinations, etc.) are used.  In fact, I am personally very much bothered by what looks like an “equal” sign this movie places between both sides whom I see as morally as different as can be!  But the point here is this: in spite of two hours of nonstop boom! boom! and bang! bang! (as action movies go, this is a pretty good one) hatred is conspicuously absent from this movie.  And that is just one example.  Did you know that in Crimea Ukrainian is still an official language?  Most amazingly, the Russians never produce the kind of collective orgasm which the Ukronazis (and their Western patrons) engage in as soon as any terrorist act (be it destroying the water supply to Crimea or the murder of Dugina) hits Russians.

The following few are just examples of the kind of rabid hated the Ukronazi identity is shaped around:

Logo of the Ukrainian military intelligence service: notice where the dagger points.

This (ISIS-inspired) charming pastoral scene is the Ukronazi idea of a bright future for the Kharkov region

Two “proud” Ukronazis take selfies before a planned Ukronazi stamp to commemorate the (failed) attack on the Crimea Bridge. Welcome to Banderastan!

Banderastan is a completely hatred-saturated society.

So is most the entire collective West (aka “Zone A”)

So is every Neocon out there.

In sharp contrast, hatred plays almost no role at all in Russian society.

Disgust with the Ukronazis?  Sure! Contempt for the West?  Yes, absolutely.  But rejoicing in Ukrainian suffering or losses?  Hatred for the (real, historical) Ukrainian culture and language?  Nope, hardly ever (there are, as always, a few nasty nutcases everywhere, including Russia, though most Russian nutcases hate Russia more than the West anyway).

In fact, I would argue that they all hate Russia even more because Russia does not hate them back.

Conclusion: yes, they are capable of absolutely everything

There is no doubt in mind mind that if the Ukronazis could use real nukes against Russia they would.  Zelenskii himself said so much.  As did others.  In fact, there is absolutely nothing I would put past the satanic souls of the classes which run the Hegemony or the Nazi freaks in Kiev.  That is really bad news on two levels:

  1. They are capable of the worst imaginable atrocity
  2. They are also capable of the dumbest imaginable action

The first is obvious.  But the second one needs a quick expanding upon.  While hatred does give you energy, determination and even courage, it never contributes to a sober and realistic assessment of the situation.  I would even argue that hatred and stupidity go hand in hand.  So we should never use the “oh no, they can’t possibly be THAT stupid” argument because yes, they most definitely CAN be that stupid (just look at the self-defeating sanctions they passed!).

So are we about to see a dirty bomb go off somewhere in the Ukraine or Russia?

My best guess is that no, not after Shoigu and Gerasimov called their western counterparts and spelled out to them what the consequences of such an action might be (the Russians know exactly where this dirty bomb is being designed and manufactured, they know who is doing this work, and they know what the current stage of the project it.  Of course, they could bomb/strike these locations, but that would risk releasing the nuclear material into the air, thus exactly creating the dirty bomb the Nazis are working on.

Now that the Russians have warned the entire planet (via this intervention at the UNSC) nobody besides the doubleplusgoodshiteaters in Zone A will believe that “Russia done it”.  And since the said (and sad) doubleplusgoodshiteaters in Zone A are ALREADY convince that “Pioootin” is the “New Hitler” and Russia is Mordor, convincing them even more is not much of a success.  And while the many comprador colonial administrations in “Zone B” will say exactly what their AngloZionist masters will tell them to, the people in Zone B will quickly realize the idiocy of the entire notion.

So will “they” do it?  I don’t know.  I hope not.  I think not.  But I know that they are capable of anything, including a dirty bomb or any other conceivable atrocity (including biowarfare, by the way).

Nothing can be built on hatred, at least nothing sustainable.  But hatred is a fantastic source of destruction, capable of inflicting colossal damage in too many forms to count.  Russia wants to build a stable and safe Eurasian continent as part of a multi-polar world.  The Hegemony just wants to destroy anything standing in its way.  In this sense, it has a huge advantage as destroying is always much easier than building or even preserving something.

So I will simply end with one of my favorite quotes from the Quran: “And the unbelievers schemed [against Jesus]; but God brought their scheming to nought: for God is above all schemers.” (Sura Al-Imran – 3:54).

Amin!

Andrei

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Realization Sets In (Andrei Martyanov)

October 17, 2022

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

Strategic Psychobabble (Andrei Martyanov)

OCTOBER 14, 2022

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

Tulsi Gabbard’s ditches the Dem party in an open video address

October 12, 2022

A few comments first.  For starters, I lost any trust I might have had for Tulsi Gabbard when she endorsed that ultra-fake liberal Bernie Sanders.  Second, I have taken the decision not to comment on US internal politics on this blog, but in this case I think that rather than seeing Gabbard’s video as an internal US politics phenomenon, I see it as a sign of the amazing state of decay of the USA as a nation: when a (supposed) left liberal takes on the talking points of (supposed) conservatives, something major is happening, especially when you have a (supposed) liberal President in the White House.  Finally, Gabbard is way, waaaaaaaay too smart not to see that the Dem Party is a political Titanic and no matter how loud the “propaganda orchestra” plays, that ship is sinking very, very fast.  Time to leave it!

One more thing: I am willing to bet that Gabbard is planning to run for President in 2024 and considering the freak show on the Dem party side, her real opponent will be either Trump or Desantis.  But look at her talking points – they are conservative through and through, which means that her running can takes votes away from the GOP candidates.  Thus it is possible that while ostentatiously breaking away from the Dem party and the freaks running it, she will end up taking just enough votes on the right to give the victory to the Neocons running the Dem party (the GOP is also run by Neocons known as RINOs – Republican In Name Only).

These are just possibilities, and only time will show if Gabbard has had a real change of heart.  She did not apologize for being a loyal Sanders/Biden supporter, but at least she did accurately describe the Dem party for what it is: an profoundly evil gang of freaks run by warmongering, racist, Neocon puppeteers.

Again, I am not interested in internal US politics which I describe as a useless fistfight between pilots for the control of a flight deck in an aircraft with no engines or even wings!  However, the fact that the pilots are fighting shows that they realize that their situation is desperate.  Can you recall another instance of a well-known politicians slamming the door on his/her party while that party controls both Congress and the White House?

Please think about this while listening to Tulsi Gabbard.  And yes, it would be wonderful if she was for real.  I have my (big) doubts but there is plenty of time before 2024 to get a better feel for what this is all about.

Andrei

%d bloggers like this: