Free Speech on Trial
By Jeffrey Tucker | Brownstone Institute | March 1, 2024
In a lifetime of observing policy controversies and court cases, we’ve never witnessed anything as crucial to the future of the idea of freedom itself compared with what will transpire on March 18, 2024. On that day, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Murthy v. Missouri concerning whether the government can force or nudge private companies to censor users on behalf of regime priorities.
The evidence that they have been doing so is overwhelming. That’s why the 5th Circuit issued an emergency injunction to stop the practice on grounds that it is inconsistent with the First Amendment of the US Constitution. The censorship industrial complex is working right now and hourly to delete free speech in America. That injunction was stayed pending a review by the highest court.
The case itself hasn’t even gone to court. This decision is only about the injunction itself, which was issued based on the alarming results of discovery alone. Essentially, the lower court is screaming “This must stop.” The Supreme Court is trying to assess whether the violations of liberty are extreme enough to justify a pre-trial intervention now.
A positive ruling for the plaintiffs doesn’t solve every problem but at least it will mean that freedom still stands a chance in this country. A ruling for the defense, which is essentially the government itself, will give license to every federal agency – including those that operate in secret like the FBI and CIA – to threaten every social media and media company in this country to delete any and all content that runs contrary to the approved narrative.
There will be celebration in Washington if this happens. On the other hand, there will be tears if the court decides for the defense. It could be that the court will take an in-between position, refusing to let the injunction go ahead and promising some possible decision at a later date pending trial. That would be a disaster because it could mean three or more years of full censorship pending an appeal of whatever the outcome of the trial is.
Free speech is everything. If we don’t have that, we have nothing and freedom is toast. All other problems pale in comparison. There are plenty of them, from healthcare to immigration but if we don’t have free speech, we cannot get the truth out about any of them. The censorship industrial complex is wholly dedicated to making sure that we have no debates at all and that dissident voices are not even heard.
As it is, Google, Microsoft, and Facebook – and many more besides – already heavily restrict speech. They work in cooperation with government and those tasked by government to do elite bidding. We know this for a fact.
When Elon Musk took over Twitter, he discovered a vast censorship machine operating on behalf of the FBI and other agencies. Millions of posts were being taken down along with users. He has done his best to rip out the guts of this borg. Doing so entirely changed the character of the site. It became useful again.
Not even the scale of the problem is widely understood. Usually people say that free speech is necessary to protect minority opinions. In this case, the numbers don’t matter to the censors. You could have 90% of users trying to advance an idea and still have it censored. This is what the old Twitter did. It was daily and hourly attacking the company’s user base. This was their job, no matter how much it contradicts the whole point of social media.
Brownstone is predictably throttled by all these companies but it is not just about us. It is about everyone who disagrees with the Davos “Great Reset” agenda. This could pertain to EVs, gender transitions, lockdowns, immigration, or anything else. Even now, the Google Artificial Intelligence engine extols the glories of lockdowns, masking, and mass injections while completely ignoring contrary science. This is how they want things to be. Google’s search engine is no better. It might as well be a federal agency.
The Justices hearing the case will be in an awkward position. My guess is that none of them even know that this was going on to the extent it is. They will likely be shocked when they look at the evidence proving that there is a trillion-dollar industry in full operation that has massively distorted the public mind. Every federal agency is involved, deeply embedded in the operations of all media companies and digital technology, which in turn requires universal surveillance and persecution of contrary voices.
Until just a few years ago, this entire industry – which involves federal agencies, universities, nonprofits, shadow companies, bogus fact-checks, and every manner of spook-operated front companies – was not known to exist. Now that we know, we are shocked by the extent of it. It has invaded the whole of our lives to the point that we cannot tell the real news from that which is fed to us by intelligence agencies. Even worse, we’ve come to expect that most of what passes for approved opinion is flat-out false.
The Justices will discover this truth. They will likely be astonished. But they will also be taken aback by how integral to our lives it has become. As it turns out, the federal government for nearly a decade has placed a very high priority on curating the public mind, lying at every turn for its own benefit and that of its industrial partners.
Everyone in the old Soviet Union knew for sure that Pravda spoke for the Communist Party. But do people understand that their Google search results and Facebook timelines are no better? It’s not clear whether and to what extent people do understand this but it is our reality.
Will the Justices really be willing to pull the plug on the entire machinery? Doing that would be more disruptive of an established interest group than anything the court has done in many years or even ever. It would fundamentally change the way our technologies work. It would be devastating to federal agencies. Policing such a new system called free speech would be another matter entirely. It would mean that thousands of people would suddenly have nothing to do. That would be wonderful, but would it happen?
As I say, censorship is now an entire global industry. It involves the world’s most powerful foundations, governments, universities, and influencers. It seems like everyone wants a part in crushing what they called “disinformation,” “misinformation,” and “malinformation,” which is true information that they don’t want out. We are surrounded by this machinery of control and yet most people have no clue.
Every federal agency at this point has taken it upon themselves to cajole every information provider into rigging the system so that only one perspective gets out. This has a massive impact on public opinions.
As an example, four years ago, I wrote an article that accidentally made it through the censors and I watched as millions read my piece. Even now, I hear about it at cocktail parties coming from total strangers who don’t know that I’m the author. Nothing like that has happened since that magical day. Most of my writing goes into a dark hole, and this is despite writing daily for the 4th largest newspaper and having access to a huge public forum at Brownstone. People without such access do not stand a chance. Their posts on Facebook are disappeared the instant they post, while YouTube slams their content as contrary to community standards, with no other explanation.
Self-censorship has become the habitual practice of the intellectual class. Otherwise you only beat your head up against the wall and make yourself a target. Minute-by-minute in real time, public opinion is being shaped by this wicked industry, which dramatically distorts political outcomes.
As I say, this is surely the most important issue we face. A decision by the Supreme Court to let this go on – seeing no real issue here – will lead straight to our doom and the death of freedom itself.
There’s an additional problem that is very serious. These days, there is a massive race on to program censorship into the algorithms themselves so that no one is actually doing it, so that there cannot be any real defendants in a case against them. AI will soon be running everything so that Google and Facebook etc can simply say that their machine learning is doing the dirty work.
Perhaps one of the reasons AI has hit us with such a rush is precisely because of this case before the court. The deep state and its industrial partners are not going to give up easily. Everything depends on their victory over free speech, so far as they are concerned.
This is very worrisome, which is why one should hope for a sweeping statement by the Supreme Court that reaffirms the fundamental American commitment to have government completely out of the business of manipulating public opinion through curating what information you see and read and what you do not see and read.
It’s tragic that such a fundamental human right should so heavily depend on the majority decision of this one body. It’s not supposed to work this way. The First Amendment is supposed to be law but these days, the government has built an entire empire around the idea that it simply does not matter. The job of the Supreme Court is to remind our overlords that the people are not merely putty in the hands of deep state agents. We have fundamental rights that cannot be abridged.
There is a rally scheduled outside the court on March 18th, with many speakers making themselves available to the press. Note the sponsoring organizations: these are the freedom fighters in America today. You are welcome to join us.
It won’t sway the court, of course. And the crowds will surely be thinner than they otherwise would be given how much success the censorship industry already enjoys. Still, it is worth a shot.
Truly, we should all shudder to think of the future of American freedom in absence of a decisive statement by the court on behalf of the basic liberty the Framers intended be protected for everyone.
Jeffrey Tucker is Founder, Author, and President at Brownstone Institute.
Pennsylvania Collaborates With DHS and CISA To Monitor Online Election-Related Speech
By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | March 4, 2024
Pennsylvania’s Democratic Governor, Josh Shapiro, announced last week that, in an effort to address perceived “threats” to electoral procedures, the state is launching an initiative in partnership with various state and federal agencies.
These partners include the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and, notably, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), an organization long accused of aiding online censorship to impede freewheeling online speech.
The revelation about Pennsylvania’s collaboration with DHS and CISA surfaced after The Federalist pressed the Pennsylvania State Department for more information about the new initiative.
This program, named the Pennsylvania Election Threats Task Force, is expected to bring forth measures for the protection of the electoral system, safeguard voters from any form of intimidation, and provide accessible and trustworthy information about the election.
Al Schmidt, Secretary of the Commonwealth, stated that the task force would focus on addressing lies and baseless “conspiracy theories” aiming to delegitimize the electoral process.
Accusations have been levied against CISA for serving as the epicenter of the federal government’s efforts to censor speech, which is seen as an assault on civil liberties and First Amendment rights.
Documents acquired by America First Legal uncovered that CISA, despite being aware of the risks associated with unsupervised mail-in voting in the 2020 election, dismissed social media posts voicing similar concerns as “disinformation.”
The conflict in the Red Sea and the reaction of the world community
By Viktor Mikhin – New Eastern Outlook – 04.03.2024
During the discussion that took place on 14 February 2024 at the UN Security Council meeting, questions were raised about the unlawful shelling by the US and UK in Yemen in violation of all international laws and regulations. This serious issue was discussed in detail due to the violations of international law and human rights that accompany these shellings. The UNSC participants condemned these actions by the US and the UK as illegal and unacceptable. Despite demagogic statements about the fight against terrorism and alleged support for international security, such shelling by Western powers located tens of thousands of kilometres away from the Red Sea basin only exacerbates the humanitarian situation in Yemen and causes irreparable harm to the lives of civilians, including primarily children and women. At the meeting, the panellists rightly raised the need to put an urgent end to this shelling and to return to negotiations for a peaceful resolution of the conflict. It was noted that another wave of violence by Western countries would only exacerbate the situation in that poor Arab country and hinder the achievement of sustainable peace in the region.
Russia’s and China’s opinion
Russia and China have deemed the US and UK bombing of Yemeni territory illegal and contrary to the United Nations Charter, accusing them of illegally attacking Yemen, whose residents support the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip in the face of the Israeli regime’s bloodbath. Russia’s Deputy Ambassador to the UN Dmitry Polyansky and China’s representative to the UN Zhang Jun stressed that the UN Security Council has never authorised military action against Yemen. For his part, the UN special envoy for Yemen, Western representative Hans Grundberg, said that the US and UK attacks and the American declaration of the Ansar Allah resistance movement in Yemen as a “specially designated terrorist group” were merely “of concern.” And what exactly could this so-called envoy, who is entirely on Washington’s payroll and receives all instructions from White House officials, have said.
Mr Polansky correctly emphasised that the root cause of the current situation is Israel’s war crimes in Gaza, which have provoked angry reactions in West Asia, including from Yemenis. “An immediate ceasefire in Gaza will help stabilise the situation in the Red Sea, and de-escalation will in turn unblock the efforts of Special Envoy Grundberg,” he said. The Chinese envoy also expressed concern over the escalation of tensions in the Red Sea region, in particular “the continuation of military operations by certain countries” against Yemen. He called for an immediate halt to the Yemeni hostilities against merchant shipping and stressed the fact that the UN Security Council has not authorised the use of force against Yemen.
“At this critical moment, China hopes that all parties in Yemen will put the interests of the people first, show determination and resolutely push the political process forward to achieve final results,” Zhang Jun added. He also emphasised that “the most urgent task is to immediately promote a ceasefire in Gaza and take responsible measures to prevent further escalation in the region.”
Aggressive actions of the US and UK
For weeks, the United States and Britain have been waging a fierce bombing campaign on Yemeni territory. The reason is well known – this Arab country has boldly declared its open support for the Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip against the Israeli carnage since 7 October last year, in which some 30,000 civilians, especially the elderly, women and children, have already been killed. The US, being one of the leading superpowers and a global factor, has stated its brazen stance on the issue of shelling Yemen. They deny their direct involvement in the conflict, claiming that they are only supporting military assistance and supplies to Saudi Arabia, which in turn is conducting operations to defeat the Houthis. However, human rights advocates and humanitarian organisations have raised accusations of US involvement in human rights and civilian violations during these operations.
Despite strong condemnation of its brutal and aggressive actions, the United States has again “conducted five strikes in self-defence” against areas of Yemen controlled by the Houthi militia, the US Central Command said. It struck three mobile anti-ship cruise missiles, one unmanned underwater vessel and one unmanned surface vessel on 17 February, the statement said. “This is the first observed use of an unmanned aerial vehicle by the Houthis since the attacks began on 23 October,” CENTCOM said in a statement on its X website. Central Command said it had determined the missiles and ships posed “an immediate threat to U.S. Navy ships.” The Houthi attacks in the Red Sea area have been one of the signs of spreading conflict in the Middle East since war broke out between Israel and Hamas after 7 October.
Unlike the US, the UK, its closest ally and most likely a country once with a solid international reputation, chooses not to explicitly support Saudi Arabia, but also does not actively oppose it. Instead, London claims to be providing military assistance centred on training and advice to prepare the Saudi army for its tasks. In these statements, the British demagogically point to the importance of maintaining the stability of the region and fighting terrorism. However, in doing so, they forget to recall that it is they, together with their overseas partners, who are the main disturbers of peace and tranquillity and the main “creators” of the atmosphere of terrorism in the region.
Alongside these states, some delegates from US satellite countries expressed support for the US and UK, arguing that the shelling was in response to acts of terrorism and extremism that threaten world security. They emphasise the need for action to ensure the safety of their citizens and partners. The UN Security Council meeting was by all accounts very tense and controversial, reflecting the complexity of the situation in Yemen and the multifaceted challenges faced by the parties to the conflict. But it was nevertheless called for further discussion and for finding ways to end the violence and restore peace. In conclusion, the UN Security Council meeting emphasised that violators of international law and human rights, including the systematic shelling of Yemen, must be brought to justice and those responsible must be punished accordingly. The decision on further steps and investigations was postponed until all the arguments made during the discussion are recorded, and a relevant document is prepared for further voting.
Ways and means of resolving the conflict in the Red Sea
Human rights advocates and humanitarian organisations object to this position and allege US and UK complicity in human rights and civilian violations in Yemen. Critics also point out that US and UK military aid could be used to commit crimes against humanity and military operations could be disproportionate and indifferent to civilians. The need to resolve the conflict in Yemen is integral to upholding international law and protecting human rights. The world community must continue dialogue, find a political solution and provide humanitarian assistance to end the exclusively military approach and eliminate civilian suffering. So, the position of the US and UK on the shelling of Yemen is causing disagreement and concern among human rights supporters and humanitarian organisations. It is necessary to continue the international discussion in order to achieve peace and stability in the region, calling for respect for international law and the protection of human rights.
Yemen continues to actively target American and other ships that deliver supplies to Israel. The Yemenis’ main argument in favour of shelling ships delivering supplies to Israel is the destruction of Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip. In their view, the situation in Palestine remains tense due to Israeli occupation and state policies, leading to regular conflict and violence. In turn, by supporting trade with Israel, American and other ships become indirect contributors to Palestinian suffering. Yemen’s weakened economy and infrastructure put the country in a difficult position. Regular new sanctions and the blockade of the country by international allies make Yemen’s economy extremely vulnerable. For Yemen, the shelling of ships delivering supplies to Israel may be an attempt to gain international attention and launch a dialogue on the Palestinian issue.
In today’s world, the Red Sea remains a key region of geopolitical importance. Along with issues of security and economic stability, emerging conflicts between states and factors in the region regularly attract international attention. However, there are different ways and factors that can play an important role in resolving and preventing conflicts in order to achieve peace and tranquility in the Red Sea.
Above all, the States in which the Red Sea is located must take an active part in finding a way to resolve conflicts peacefully. They should seek dialogue and international cooperation rather than the use of force and military action. Instead of creating tension and threatening security, states should seek common interests and co-operation in the fields of economy, trade, transport and combating international terrorism.
However, in addition to the active role of states, international organisations and forums can play an important role in resolving conflicts in the Red Sea. For example, the United Nations can mediate negotiations and facilitate agreements between states in the region. It can propose mechanisms and strategies to resolve disputes and support dialogue between parties. Also, regional international organisations such as the Arab League or the African Union can contribute to conflict resolution and stability in the Red Sea.
In addition, the role of civil society and non-governmental organisations should not be forgotten. They can play an important role in planting peace and tranquility in the region through engaging in diplomatic efforts, supporting dialogue between the parties and publicly highlighting conflicts. Civil society can give a voice to peace and help to shape public opinion in favour of the peaceful resolution of conflicts.
It is quite clear that conflicts in the Red Sea can and must be resolved in the interests of peace and tranquillity in the region. To that end, the active participation of States, international organisations, civil society and non-governmental organisations is essential. Only through cooperation and dialogue can sustainable peace and tranquillity in the Red Sea be achieved, which will benefit all States and peoples living in the region.
Victor MIKHIN is a Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences.
Gaza ‘flour massacre’ textbook case of Israel’s war crimes and cover-ups
By Alireza Hashemi | Press TV | March 4, 2024
In the early hours of Thursday, in line with its genocidal war against Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip, Israeli troops opened indiscriminate fire on people waiting for food aid in the southwest of Gaza City.
At least 116 people were killed and more than 760 others injured in what rights groups described as a textbook case of cold-blooded massacre on the Al Rashid street that stretches along the coast of Gaza.
The regime denied involvement in the massacre that came nearly five months into the Israeli genocide in the besieged territory, which has so far claimed the lives of more than 30,400 Palestinians.
The flawed Israeli narrative kept changing and evolving throughout the day, designed to shift the blame on victims, the desperate aid-seekers who were there to get some flour.
The Israeli army claimed they had nothing to do with the incident and blamed a stampede for it. Later, they said trucks carrying aid had run over civilians. Finally, they admitted to having fired at the crowd, but “only targeting the militants trying to sabotage the aid delivery.”
A report by Yediout Aharonot said, “Dozens of Gazans died during a stampede as large crowds descended on humanitarian aid trucks entering northern Gaza, attempting to loot supplies and sparking violent clashes, the IDF reported on Thursday.”
“An initial IDF probe into the incident found that Palestinian gunmen fired at the aid trucks, with most fatalities resulting from trampling and crowding,” the report noted.
Another report by the Times of Israel said it “acknowledged that troops opened fire on several Gazans who moved toward soldiers and a tank at an IDF checkpoint, endangering soldiers, after they had rushed the last truck in the convoy further south.”
Reuters quoted an Israeli official as saying “there had been two incidents”, in one of which “dozens” were “trampled or run over” and in the second “some people” approached troops including a tank who “felt under threat and opened fire” in a “limited response”.
“The soldiers fired warning shots in the air and then fired towards those who posed a threat and did not move away,” Reuters quoted the official as saying.
“This is what we understand. We’re continuing to review the circumstances.”
In the broadest account, the Jerusalem Post, quoting Israeli army sources, said three incidents occurred.
The first one was the stampede that left most of the casualties, the second when the armed Palestinians fired on the trucks and stole supplies, and the third when a large group of Palestinians approached the Israeli forces nearby, who responded with live fire.
The Israeli newspaper, quoting its sources, claimed that “it was unclear if they had aggressive intentions or were civilians caught up in a chaotic moment.”
Later on Thursday, Israeli army spokesman Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari said the military had fired “a few warning shots” to try to disperse a “mob” who had “ambushed” the aid trucks.
“As these vital humanitarian supplies made their way toward Gazans in need, thousands of Gazans [rushed] the trucks, some began violently pushing and trampling other Gazans to death, looting the humanitarian supplies,” he said.
Some accounts identified those targeted as ordinary people and others identified them as a “mob”.
For example, Israel’s far-right minister Itamar Ben Gvir said Israeli soldiers “acted excellently against a Gazan mob that tried to harm them”.
In some versions, the victims were said to have trampled each other and in others, the trucks were believed to have mowed down people.
Israeli regime spokesman Eylon Levy blamed “Gaza truck drivers” for the massacre.
In this age of technology, it is interesting that Israeli accounts are never consistent and the regime officials are always “reviewing” things and struggling to find simple answers.
The regime offered no evidence to back its claims. It released a 100-second, heavily edited drone video as proof, which showed aid seekers surrounding trucks, but no trampling or trucks running over people.
If the Israeli drones recorded the situation, why did the regime not publish the scenes showing the moment when people were “trampled” or “run over”?
Holes in Israeli story
However, the strategy of ‘cover-up’ didn’t work this time. There are several glaring holes in the Israeli version of the incident that demand unraveling.
How did Gazan truck drivers start to kill their own people? Why hasn’t this ever happened before?
Or, why did Israeli troops kill 10 unarmed, starved Palestinians who had approached them? What kind of threat did these people pose to armed-to-the-teeth soldiers and tanks?
And, how scores of people were trampled? In any case, who is to blame for the desperate humanitarian situation that this regime claims was the cause of the incident?
These holes are filled by the Palestinian witness accounts that present a different chain of events.
Palestinians say most of the people present at the scene fell victim to Israeli gunfire, and the stampede occurred only after the Israeli troops started indiscriminately firing at them.
Local journalist Khadeer Al Za’anoun, a reporter for the Palestinian news agency Wafa, who witnessed the incident, said the chaos and confusion were sparked after Israeli forces opened fire, which led to people being hit by aid trucks.
Al-Jazeera journalist Ismail al-Ghoul reported that Israeli tanks “advanced and ran over many of the dead and injured people.”
The acting director of the Al-Awda Hospital said they received 161 wounded patients, most of whom appeared to have been shot.
Also, an initial probe by the Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor showed that the Israeli army gunfire was responsible for most deaths in a massacre of Palestinian civilians.
In a follow-up report, the rights group confirmed the regime’s “full involvement” in the massacre at the Nabulsi roundabout, calling for an “effective international investigation to hold Israeli officials accountable.”
Its field team – present at the time of the incident – “documented Israeli tanks firing heavily towards Palestinian civilians while trying to receive humanitarian aid,” the report noted.
Trying to get away with another massacre
The incident has been widely condemned by governments and organizations. The United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for an independent probe into the killing of civilians.
Iran slammed “the barbaric attack by the Zionist regime”. Iranian foreign ministry in a statement said “The wound of Gaza will not be erased from the memory of the free people of the world.”
China said it was “shocked” while Colombia said, “This is called genocide and recalls The Holocaust.”
Even European allies of Israel, including France and Italy, denounced the massacre. Josep Borrell, the EU’s top diplomat, described the incident as a “totally unacceptable carnage”.
It wasn’t the first massacre of Palestinians though. There have been massacres every day in the Gaza Strip since October 7.
On January 26, Gaza’s Health Ministry said Israeli fire struck a crowd of people waiting for humanitarian aid at a roundabout in Gaza City on Thursday, killing at least 20 and wounding 150.
The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs said on February 4, “a group of people a group of people waiting for humanitarian aid trucks near Al Kuwaiti roundabout in southern Gaza City were reportedly fired at.”
Another report referred to the February 5 attack on an aid convoy at the same place, Al-Rashid Street. That attack forced the UN Agency for Palestinian Refugees to warn it could not carry out its mission and provide humanitarian relief if safety conditions were not met.
A day before the latest attack, on Wednesday, Wafa news agency reported that three Palestinians, who were waiting for aid near Gaza City, were killed after being hit by Israeli artillery fire on al-Rashid Street.
Israel has a long record of massacring Palestinians in cold blood and then trying to cover up their crimes and avoid accountability, say observers. A notable example is the Deir Yassin massacre in 1948 when at least 107 Palestinians were slaughtered by Zionists.
The bloodthirst of the child-murdering regime has only increased over the years.
What’s the Truth About Russian ‘Meat Assaults’ Against Ukrainian Forces?
By Robert Bridge | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 3, 2024
Lately, there has been much talk in the Western media about desperate waves of Russian troops hurling themselves recklessly at Ukrainian fortifications, while suffering huge losses. What is the truth?
human wave attack: is an offensive infantry tactic in which an attacker conducts an unprotected frontal assault with densely concentrated infantry formations against the enemy lines, intended to overrun and overwhelm the defenders by engaging in melee combat.
Here are some of the mainstream media armchair generals as they pontificate, hundreds of miles away, on Russia’s military operation in Ukraine:
On January 24, The New York Post (“Moscow’s ‘meat wave’ tactic litters Ukraine battlefield with frozen corpses of Russian troops”) reported that “Russia is using a ‘meat wave’ strategy that sends scores of poorly trained soldiers to die on the front lines against Ukraine to clear a path for the Kremlin’s more valuable elite units — then abandons their frozen corpses on the battlefield.”
The image that the Post article wishes to convey is that the Russian military is some sort of technologically inferior fighting force that must rely on brute force if it hopes to make any battlefield gains. The ultimate goal here is to portray the Russians as cold-blooded barbarians; an effort to dehumanize the Russians as, to quote one twitter user, “zombies, like meat without fear and self-preservation instincts” that leaves its dead and wounded on the battlefield unattended.
Earlier, Business Insider (“Russia is bringing back its bloody ‘human wave’ tactics, throwing poorly trained troops into a massive new assault in eastern Ukraine, White House says”) quoted John Kirby, the spokesperson for the National Security Council, as saying that “the Russian military appears to be using human wave tactics, where they throw masses of poorly trained soldiers right into the battlefield without proper equipment, and… without proper training and preparation.”
Is Kirby projecting here? After all, it has been the Ukrainians who have been sweeping military age males off the street in broad daylight, sending them off to fight on the front lines with very little combat training.
Not to be outdone, on January 24, CNN (“Russia’s relentless ‘meat assaults’ are wearing down outmanned and outgunned Ukrainian forces”) quoted a Ukrainian sniper with the callsign ‘Bess’ who said “Nobody evacuates [the Russian corpses], nobody takes them away,” he said. “It feels like people don’t have a specific task, they just go and die.”
Is there any truth to these allegations? Are the Russians really carrying out zombie-style frontal assaults that are “unprotected, exposed and concentrated” in a desperate effort to overrun Ukrainian positions? How do the facts stand up to this latest batch of mainstream media hype?
Aside from the lack of any video evidence, consider basic military tactics. Only in the case of superior numerical troop strength – for example, as during the Battle of Normandy (June 6 – August 30, 1944) in World War II when the Allied forces launched a successful attack on German positions in northern France with over 2 million troops – would one side commit itself to carrying out massive frontal assaults on enemy positions.
In a recent interview with Germany’s ARD broadcaster, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky said the Ukrainian army currently has a force level numbering about 880,000 troops.
“We have 880,000 troops; that’s an army of almost a million,” he said, when asked about the army’s force strength.
Meanwhile, President Vladimir Putin has said that Russia had deployed more than 600,000 military personnel in Ukraine.
“The front line is over 2,000 kilometers (1,242 miles) long. There are 617,000 people in the conflict zone,” the Russian leader said during his first end-of-year press conference since sending his army into Ukraine in February 2022.
Meanwhile, even the Western mainstream media admits that Russia enjoys a 10-to-1 advantage in the number of artillery supplies, aircraft, drones and armored assault vehicles. With such an overwhelming advantage, why would the Russians need to resort to the desperate tactic of exposing its infantry to “human wave” attacks? If anything, it would be the numerically superior Ukrainian forces – now being systematically crushed by the Russians across the entire field of contact – who would be expected to throw themselves against their enemy in open fields.
The fact is, however, there has never been any video evidence of huge waves of Russian forces – nor Ukrainian, for that matter – running across open fields in some kind of mad dash to storm enemy defenses. Such a spectacle simply does not exist except in the imagination of the mainstream media, which would also have its readers believe that Russian troops in Artyomovsk (known in Ukraine as Bakhmut) were forced to fight with shovels against their opponent, while also being forced to cannibalize components from foreign appliances to facilitate its defense production.
In the words of an old sage: “hogwash.”
Washington’s Wars Eroding its Global Clout
By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – 04.03.2024
If war is politics by other means, Washington’s ongoing wars in the Middle East and Eastern Europe are meant to buttress its global influence on the one hand and undermine its competitors on the other. But the question is: how is this politics by other means working out for Washington? Not so good. Russia’s recent military victories in Ukraine and China’s expansive inroads into the Middle East alongside the growing anti-Americanism in the region (due to Washington’s support for Israel and its inability to prevent a genocide of the Palestinians) indicate an overall American inability to shape global geopolitics in unilateral ways to the exclusive advantage of Washington and its allies in Europe and elsewhere.
Russia’s recent military gains in Ukraine, for example, have very clearly established its military credentials as a power that has been able to withstand the combined military strength of the US and its European allies assembled in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). What does this mean for Washington’s policies in Central Asia? Most certainly, Washington cannot simply present Russia as a ‘weak’ military power that can be simply ‘isolated’. But more than that, Russia is utilising its victories over NATO in various ways.
For instance, when the NATO-backed Russia-Ukraine military conflict began, most reports in the mainstream US media began to spread false messaging about Central Asia potentially moving itself out of the so-called ‘Russian clout’. The US saw in it an opportunity to push itself into the region. But this has turned out to be a fiasco. When the US imposed sanctions on Russia, many Russian companies began to relocate their businesses to Central Asia, directly contributing to Central Asia’s impressive 4.8 percent growth rate in 2023. According to the findings of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the region is forecast to register an even more impressive level of growth at almost 5.7 percent in 2024-25.
In other words, thanks to Washington’s sanctions, the Russian political economy is now more deeply connected with Central Asia than it was before February 2022, which is also strengthening the Eurasian Economic Union. Now that this integration is working for the advantage of Central Asia means that the latter have little to no incentive to pay too much attention to Washington and/or the imperatives of moving decisively to Washington. It means that not only has the Biden administration’s policy of NATO expansion via Ukraine failed so far in Ukraine itself, but the ‘new’ Central Asia policy it inaugurated in the wake of the Russia-Ukraine conflict has also failed to make any impact on the ground. Russia defeated US design also by approaching relations with the Central Asian States in ways that gave them enough space to stay neutral in the conflict. While the West saw this neutrality as a sign of Russian weakness in the region and the Central Asian States’ growing assertiveness, it failed to read how this was part of Russia’s strategy to cultivate its ties in a more balanced way. This balance is also pretty evident in the ways Russia has not objected to, or even resisted, China’s growing footprint in the region, although reports in the Western media often see China’s role in Central Asia at the expense of Russia. But the West seems to have been misreading this region.
As far as Washington’s war in the Middle East is concerned, its military support for Israel plus its inability to stop genocide has eroded its credibility. Suppose Washington has been supporting Israel to maintain its dominance in the Middle East. In that case, Washington’s excessive support is now derailing its objectives, since the Middle East is now exercising a lot more strategic autonomy vis-à-vis Washington than was the case until a few years ago.
In the past few months, a flurry of Chinese activity indicates it much more clearly than anything else. China has convened leadership summits, met with Arab delegates, supported their stance vis-à-vis Israel, and held joint military exercises with one of the US’ most important allies in the region (Saudi Arabia). The UAE, otherwise a close US ally and one of the first states to sign the Abraham Accords to recognise Israel and establish diplomatic ties with it, actually withdrew from the US-led naval task force in May 2023, indicating policy and interest-based differences.
The UAE is also a country in the Middle East that has over 100,000 Chinese living there and involved in many businesses. But when it comes to the Middle East itself, and the fact that many countries in the region are involved in China’s Belt & Road Initiative (BRI), we see the region’s trade with China registering an overall growth of almost 45 percent in 2021 and 27 percent in 2022.
Given the economic integration, the Middle East is turning out to be a region where Washington’s clout is receding fast, without any signs of recovery in the immediate future at least. Although US strikes in the Red Sea on the Houthis are meant to indicate Washington’s willingness to offer a security umbrella to the Gulf states (against Iran-backed groups), the region appears to be past the point where it must have the US on its side to ensure security. Gulf states’ perceptions of Iran as an enemy are changing, thanks to Beijing’s mediation.
As far as Washington’s support for Israel is concerned and as far as the threat of a wider war in the region it is posing, Gulf states are on the edge of a conflict that might directly undermine their modernization programmes – development projects that mainly involve China in various capacities.
Therefore, if Washington’s involvement in the Israel war was meant to bring back the era of US dominance, the exact opposite is happening, both in the Middle East and Central Asia, which happen to be two of the world’s most energy-rich regions.
Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.
The Stories You’re Not Hearing About the Russo-Ukrainian War…
By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | March 4, 2024
Several, seemingly small events in the Russo-Ukrainian War went largely unnoticed in western media recently. But each of them, in their own way, may be significant.
The Fall of Avdiivka
On February 25, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that 31,000 Ukrainian soldiers had been killed since Russia invaded his country two years ago. It was the first time he had released a number of dead. He wouldn’t provide the number of wounded.
On February 4, he said, “About 26% of the national territory is still under occupation,” before adding that “the Russian army cannot make much progress. We have stopped them.”
Both statements are absurd. As The New York Times remarks on Zelensky’s battlefield accounting, “It differs sharply from estimates by U.S. officials, who, this past summer, put the losses much higher, saying that close to 70,000 Ukrainians had been killed and 100,000 to 120,000 had been wounded.”
The 31,000 number may be closer to the number of dead and wounded in the past several disastrous weeks than in the past two years. Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu recently said that over 383,000 Ukrainian soldiers had been killed or wounded since the war began. Yuriy Lutsenko, the former prosecutor general and ex-head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine, says that 500,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed or seriously wounded. A number of 400,000-500,000 is consistent with internal Ukrainian communications and reports from the battlefield that 20,000 soldiers a month would be necessary to replace the dead and wounded. That number also accords with the 450,000-500,000 number Zelensky has requested in a new mobilization.
Being absurd was appropriate when Zelensky was a comedian; it may have made Ukrainians laugh. But being absurd when Zelensky is president is not appropriate; it may make more Ukrainians die.
The second statement, that Russia is incapable of further significant advances because the Ukrainian Armed Forces has stopped them is no less absurd. Less than two weeks after making the statement, on February 17, after exhausting every capability it had, the Ukrainian Armed Forces retreated in disarray from the heavily fortified town of Avdiivka as it fell to the Russians. That was a very significant advance. Taking Avdiivka is not just a symbolic victory, as reported in the West, but a strategic victory that could open the door to the Donbas for Russian forces, allowing Russia to solidify the borders of its newly annexed territories.
Following the retreat from Avdiivka, Ukrainian statements about stopping Russia retreated one more step, now claiming that Russia won’t be able to advance. General Kyrylo Budanov, Ukraine’s military-intelligence chief, acknowledged that the loss of Avdiivka was tough, but insisted that Russia has its problems too, and that “they don’t have the strength” to advance significantly and capture all of the Donbas.
American officials echoed Budanov’s assessment, saying that “Russian gains in eastern Ukraine will not necessarily lead to any collapse of Ukrainian lines and that Moscow is unlikely to be able to follow up with another major offensive.”
Kiev said that their armed forces had withdrawn from Avdiivka and established new defensive lines around Lastochkyne and other nearby villages. But on February 26, Lastochkyne fell, and Ukrainian troops retreated to villages further west.
Western officials now say that Russia is “attacking in strength along four parallel axes in the northeast” and that they are “driving forward around Lyman and Kupiansk, in the Kharkiv region.” Newsweek says there are reports that Russian troops have now “advanced west of the village of Lastochkyne.” And military spokesperson Dmytro Lykhoviy now says that Ukrainian troops have withdrawn from Stepove and Severne, two villages near Avdiivka and north of Lastochkyne.
What Killed Alexei Navalny?
It is still not known what killed Alexei Navalny in a Russian prison on February 16. U.S. President Joe Biden says that “Putin is responsible for Navalny’s death.” Zelensky agrees, saying Navalny “was obviously killed by Putin.”
But Ukraine’s military-intelligence chief disagrees. On February 25, General Kyrylo Budanov told reporters that he was sorry to disappoint them, “but what we know is that he really died from a blood clot. And this is more or less confirmed. This was not taken from the Internet, but, unfortunately, a natural [death].” Russia has claimed that a blood clot was the cause of death.
An unexpected claim made by aides to Navalny on February 26 created another wrinkle. Navalny, they say, was about to be released in a prisoner swap. “Navalny was supposed to be free in the coming days,” Maria Pevchikh, the chairwoman of Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation, said. “I received confirmation that negotiations were at the final stage on the evening of Feb. 15.”
Navalny’s aides advance this claim as new evidence that Putin killed Navalny. Pevchikh says that Putin ordered Navalny’s murder to take “the possibility of his release off the table.”
But it seems inconceivable that Navalny’s release could be negotiated by Moscow without Putin’s consent. He wouldn’t have to kill him; he would just have to take his release off the table. Though there is still insufficient evidence to pass judgement on the cause of his death, if it is true that Navalny’s freedom was on the table, that seems to lean towards that Putin did not feel threatened by him or feel the need to eliminate him.
The Firing of Zaluzhny
On February 8, the headlines were dominated by Zelensky’s firing of the Commander in Chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Valerii Zaluzhny. But overshadowed by those headlines was that Zaluzhny was not the only general to go. Zelensky fired his entire general staff and replaced them with a new Chief of General Staff for Ukraine’s Armed Forces and new deputy chiefs.
Though the change over could just reflect a new Commander in Chief choosing his own staff, it might also point to Zelensky ensuring a military command that is loyal to him at a time when the military is angry over the firing of Zaluzhny, and, as The Guardian recently put it, Zelensky “is no longer seen as untouchable, and political competition is returning to Ukraine,” and “Ukrainian society is exhausted by the war.”
Putin’s nuclear warning is direct and explicit
BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | MARCH 4, 2024
The spectre of Armageddon has been raised often enough during the 2-year old war in Ukraine that the reference to it in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s state of the union address on Thursday had a familiar ring about it. Therein lies the risk of misjudgement on the part of the western audience that Putin was only “crying wolf”.
Three things must be noted at the outset. First, Putin has been explicit and direct. He is giving advance notice that he is obliged to respond with nuclear capability if the Russian statehood is threatened. Eschewing innuendos or dark hints, Putin actually made a sombre declaration of epochal significance.
Second, Putin was addressing the Federal Assembly in front of the crème de la crème of the Russian elite and took the entire nation into confidence that the country may be pushed into a nuclear war for its self-preservation.
Third, a specific context is sailing into view precipitated by foolhardy, impetuous western statesmen who are desperate to stave off an impending defeat in the war, which they began in the first instance, with the stated intention to destroy Russia’s economy, create social and political instability that would lead to a regime change in the Kremlin.
In reality, the US Secretary Lloyd Austin’s prognosis on Thursday at a Congressional hearing in Washington that “NATO will be in a fight with Russia” if Ukraine was defeated is the manifestation of a predicament that the Biden Administration faces after having led Europe to the brink of an abysmal defeat in Ukraine engendering grave uncertainties regarding its economic recovery and de-industrialisation due to the blowback of sanctions against Russia.
Plainly put, what Austin meant was that if Ukraine loses, NATO will have to go against Russia, as otherwise the future credibility of the western alliance system will be in jeopardy. It’s a call to Europe to rally for a continental war.
What French President Emmanuel Macron stated earlier last week on Monday was also an articulation of that same mindset, when he caused a storm by hinting that sending ground troops to help Kyiv was a possibility.
To quote Macron, “There is no consensus today to send ground troops officially but … nothing is ruled out. We will do whatever it takes to ensure that Russia cannot win this war. The defeat of Russia is indispensable to the security and stability of Europe.”
Macron was speaking after a summit of 20 European countries in Paris where a “restricted document” under discussion had implied “that a number of NATO and EU member states were considering sending troops to Ukraine on a bilateral basis,” according to Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico.
Fico said the document “sends shivers down your spine.”
Fico’s disclosure would not have come as surprise for Moscow, which has now put on the public domain the transcript of a confidential conversation between two German generals back on February 19 discussing the scenario of a potential attack on the Crimean Bridge with Taurus missiles and possible combat deployment by Berlin in Ukraine belying all public denials by Chancellor Olaf Scholz.
Aptly enough, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called the transcript “a screaming revelation.” Interestingly, the transcript reveals that American and British servicemen are already deployed in Ukraine — something Moscow has been alleging for months — and such other details too.
This is a moment of truth for Russia. After learning to live with the steady upgrade of western weaponry supplied to Ukraine, which now includes Patriot missiles and F-16 fighter jets, after having signalled vainly that any attack on Crimea or any attack on Russian territory would be regarded as a red line; after gingerly sidestepping the US-UK participation in operations to bring the war home to Russian territory — Macron’s belligerent statement last week has been the proverbial last straw for the Kremlin. It envisages western combat deployment to fight and kill Russian soldiers and conquer territories on behalf of Kiev.
At the speech on Thursday, which was almost entirely devoted to a hugely ambitious and forward-looking road map to address social and economic issues under the new normalcy Russia has achieved even under conditions of western sanctions, Putin held out a warning to the entire West by placing nuclear weapons on the table.
Putin underscored that any (further) crossing of the unwritten ground rules will be unacceptable — that while the US and its NATO allies provide military assistance to Ukraine but do not attack Russia’s soil and do not directly engage in combat, Russia would confine itself to using conventional weapons.
Quintessentially, the thrust of Putin’s remarks lies in his refusal to accept a fate for Russia in existential terms arranged by the West. The thinking behind it is not hard to comprehend. Simply put, Russia will not allow any attempt by the US and its allies to reshape the ground situation by impacting the front lines with NATO military personnel backed by advanced weaponry and satellite capabilities.
Putin has put the ball firmly in the Western court to decide whether NATO will risk a nuclear confrontation, which of course is not Russia’s choice.
The context in which all this is unfolding has been pithily framed by the leader of a NATO country, Hungary’s prime minister Viktor Orban, while addressing a forum of top diplomats in Antalya in the Turkish Riviera in the weekend when he stressed that “Europeans, along with the Ukrainians are losing the war and have no idea of how to find a way out of this situation.”
Orban said, “We, Europeans, are now in a difficult position,” adding that European countries took the conflict in Ukraine “as their own war” and realise belatedly that time is not on Ukraine’s side. “Time is on Russia’s side. That is why it is necessary to stop hostilities immediately.”
As he put it, “If you think that this is your war, but the enemy is stronger than you and has advantages on the battlefield, in this case, you are in the losers’ camp and it will not be an easy task to find a way out of this situation. Now, we Europeans, along with the Ukrainians, are losing the war and have no idea of how to find a way out of this situation, a way out of this conflict. This is a very serious problem.”
This is the crux of the matter. In the circumstances, the bottom line is that it will be catastrophic speciousness on the part of the western leadership and public opinion not to grasp the full import of Putin’s stark warning that Moscow means what it has been saying, namely, that it will regard any western combat deployment in Ukraine by NATO countries as an act of war.
To be sure, if Russia faces the risk of military defeat in Ukraine at the hands of NATO forces on combat deployment and Donbass and Novorossiya regions are at risk of being subjugated once again, that would threaten the stability and integrity of Russian statehood — and challenge the legitimacy of the Kremlin leadership itself — wherein the question of using nuclear weapons may become more open.
To drive home the point, Putin glanced through the Russian inventory that buttresses its nuclear superiority today, which the US cannot possibly match. And he further de-classified some top-secret information: “Efforts to develop several other new weapons systems continue, and we are expecting to hear even more about the achievements of our researchers and weapons manufacturers.”
Secrets and Lies. NATO’s Role in Ukraine Is as Sleazy as the EU’s
By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 4, 2024
Did Jens Stoltenberg really say that he had recently given “permission” to Ukraine to use F-16 fighter jets there in the war against Russia? If so, we can add it to the list of bumbling, buffoonish Freudian slips that he has chalked up himself while in office. But it does at least give us a glimpse of how western elites are no longer bothering to even cover up the fact that the war in Ukraine has, in reality, very little to do with Ukraine but rather is a much bigger war fought by the West against Russia.
Yet the whole issue about F-16s in Ukraine will be shrouded in lies, doublespeak and fake news. The real story of these outdated fighter jets from the Netherlands – some might call a bribe to Biden to secure the Dutch prime minister as next NATO boss – will probably never be known. Journalists who even want to ask who will really fly these planes – Ukrainians or U.S. pilots – will never get a straight answer but be fobbed off with the normal NATO ‘secrets and lies’ which are what we have all come to understand is the normal modus operandi for this so-called defence organisation. Timing is critical. Does Ukraine have the 6 months minimum time that Ukrainian pilots will need just to fly them, following intensive training? It’s a good bet that we will see them operational by the end of the summer with contracted, retired U.S. air force pilots flying them though – probably not in dogfight scenarios as they are no match for the newer Su-35s which Russia has – used in air to ground attacks. Of course, such a shift in strategy will lead Russia to target Ukrainian airfields, which some analysts are reporting is already happening but in reality, like so many decisions taken by NATO, this is just the latest in a long line of miscalculations. These 20-year old planes are going to be a real prize for Russia to shoot out of the skies like ducks on a Sunday afternoon. Pity the pilots who will be in their cockpits as they are on a suicide mission.
The truth though will be very hard to get to with the F-16s. NATO will already have its fake news ready for the suppliant journalists ready to oblige.
It’s a similar story with a recent statement by Zelensky himself who claimed that something like 30,000 Ukrainians so far had died in battle. Did he forget a zero there reading from his notes? Did too much cocaine affect his vision? Was it a joke?
No, it was no joke. Just more fake news dutifully processed by corrupt western media who don’t have journalists among them even capable of questioning the statement.
However, the reason why the numbers of dead Ukrainian soldiers is such a polemic is interesting. You might be forgiven for thinking that if the real figure of at least 300,000 dead Ukrainians were to be admitted, that this would have a political consequence for Zelensky himself. And this would be true within a democratic context. But Zelensky has shut down all media that doesn’t replicate his propaganda, eliminated all opposition parties so it’s hardly likely anyone is going to question this ludicrous figure of 30,000 or so. In reality there is a much more salacious, if not mercurial reason why he needs to stick to this work of fiction: graft.
What is not at all reported, even alluded to, is the racket being run by senior army officers close to him who are drawing the salaries of dead soldiers – and how the West turns a blind eye, once again, to this particular scam involving millions of dollars of western aid. Recently the EU agreed to send to Kiev 12.5 billion euros a year in cash for public sector salaries. Given the racket going on over dead soldiers salaries, this makes Brussels complicit in money laundering. Would it be far fetched to assume that senior EU officials are receiving kickbacks, in return? Given Ursula von der Leyen’s murky dealings with Pfizer and the recent news that she is to evade any scrutiny for another 5 years in office, assuming her corrupt friends in the EU support her second term, it becomes clear what the EU and NATO’s objectives are in Ukraine of late: just keep the machine turning over and Zelensky in power. The Ukraine war is not a charitable case, as some western leaders would like you to believe. It is not even about protecting the so-called values of the west, as no one really believes the bullshit that Putin is going to invade other EU countries once his tanks reach Kiev after the country inevitably collapses when the army surrenders or occupies itself with a civil war. Ukraine war is a racket and NATO is part of it, as is the EU elite. No one works for nothing and we should be very suspicious about Boris Johnson turning up in Kiev to lend his support to Zelensky. Is he on the latter’s payroll for PR services? Probably. Will any journalists ask this or file ‘freedom of information’ requests to even clarify who paid for the trip (as anyone who knows Boris, knows he has no cash)? Of course not.
Germany willing to boost its participation in Ukrainian conflict
By Lucas Leiroz | March 4, 2024
The evidence points out that the West is preparing provocations of war against Russia. A new scandal involving a German attack plan against Russian civilian infrastructure is generating fear about the possibility of an open conflict between Russians and Germans in the near future.
Russian media recently published a leaked audio of a conversation between high-ranking German officials. The participants in the discussion were Brigadier General and head of the Air Force’s military operations and exercises department, Frank Grafe; the Air Force inspector, Ingo Gerhartz; and two officers from the German Space Command, Fenske and Frostedt. The topic of conversation was the development of a strategy for the supply and use of Taurus missiles in Ukraine.
Officers discussed the best way to use this equipment on the Ukrainian battlefield. According to them, the Kerch Bridge in Crimea would be an interesting target, although “difficult to hit”. They concluded in the conversation that Russian ammunition depots should be targeted and that if the French Dassault Rafale fighter is used together with the Taurus there will be more chances of a successful attack on Crimea.
In other words, high-ranking German military personnel were discussing how to attack demilitarized Russian territory and destroy civilian infrastructure. The case is therefore proof that Western agents participate directly in the planning and operation of terrorist attacks on peaceful Russian territory, confirming reports that had already been made previously on the topic.
Interestingly, while German officials were discussing a plan to attack Russia, Berlin’s Prime Minister Olaf Scholz publicly stated that the possibility of sending NATO troops to Ukraine was ruled out, suggesting there was no risk of direct war. Amid fears about a possible all-out conflict, Scholz appears to have tried to “relieve” tensions or simply “mislead” Russia and public opinion regarding the real plans of the Western alliance. However, the audio leakage made any attempt to control collective fear useless.
In response to the audio scandal, the German government was only concerned with increasing accusations against Russia, failing to provide any plausible explanation for the content. Defense Minister Boris Pistorius accused Moscow of waging “information warfare” against Germany and the West. He described the Russian media’s work in publishing the officers’ conversation as a “hybrid attack” and “disinformation” – and did not comment on the topic of the conversation, tacitly admitting that the German officials did discuss the possibility of an attack on Crimea.
In fact, the scandal occurs at a time when several Western leaders claim to be “preparing” their countries for direct war with Russia. Faced with the evident Ukrainian failure, Western European countries, deceived by the American narrative that Kiev is a “shield” against “Russian invasions”, begin to impose a regime of military preparation, believing that a conflict is inevitable.
Obviously, there is no Russian interest in engaging in a conflict with Europe. The special military operation in Ukraine is motivated by specific reasons related to Russia’s security concerns. Moscow for now has no such concerns with European countries. However, as Europe militarizes and increases its anti-Russian hostility, new concerns may arise, forcing Moscow to take self-defense measures. And in this sense, European countries could, through their own anti-Russian paranoia, foment a conflict in the future – creating a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy.
The German case is particularly curious because Berlin’s subservience to the US and NATO is notorious, while anti-Russian hostility grows more and more. Moscow never showed aggressiveness against Germany, always willing to peacefully negotiate the reestablishment of diplomatic and economic ties. On the other hand, the US, UK and other NATO powers have always tried to coerce Germany to serve their interests – as, for example, through the terrorist attack against the Nord Stream.
Even in the face of successive humiliations imposed by its Western “partners”, Germany remains obedient to NATO, preserving an irrational anti-Russian hatred. Some experts believe that this is somehow related to a type of historical revanchism against Russia due to the Soviet victory against Nazism in the Second World War. As well known, Russophobia has always been a central aspect of Nazi ideology, which explains why Berlin, with its anti-Russian revanchist mentality, is willing to side with Ukrainian neo-Nazism against Moscow.
For their part, Russian authorities have already made it clear that they understand current European policies as preparation for a war. Moscow does not want the conflict to happen but subservience to NATO, anti-Russian hate and irrationality seem to be the main aspects of current European – especially German – foreign policy.
Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.
Featured Video
STEVE KIRSCH: THE COVID JAB AND VACCINES IN GENERAL
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Interview
Interview with Jennifer Bilek
On The Transgender Agenda
Lies are Unbekoming | May 12, 2016
I’ve been following Jennifer Bilek’s reporting on the Transgender Agenda for the last year.
In my opinion, she is doing the best investigative journalism, in the world, on the top-down nature of this society deforming “input” and “normalization”.
What we don’t understand is the scale of money behind this push, and the individuals controlling this weaponized capital. These are questions that go to the heart of Jennifer’s work. … continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
roberthstiver on Pentagon orders withdrawal of… Unome on How hawks in US are trying to… Unome on Pentagon orders withdrawal of… Unome on 15 nations have made their pos… Kayleen on UK has flown 200 spy missions… poisonedwater on Hamas slams Biden for linking… poisonedwater on 15 nations have made their pos… Bill Francis on Britain At War-The Final … roberthstiver on Pro-Palestinian protests grow… roberthstiver on UK has flown 200 spy missions… Bill Francis on Pro-Palestinian protests grow… nancy hollander on How Britain Sabotaged Ukraine…
Aletho News- STEVE KIRSCH: THE COVID JAB AND VACCINES IN GENERAL
- Dr. Peter McCullough Reveals How Much Doctors Were BRIBED to Push COVID Shots
- Green Blob Tells Government to Spend £30 Billion on Machine to Remove CO2 From the Air
- Western Media Ignites War on China in Sports
- 15 nations have made their position on the WHO sovereignty grab public before the WHA meeting commences
- Pentagon orders withdrawal of all US combat troops from Niger
- Hamas slams Biden for linking Gaza cease-fire to hostage release
- Gideon Falter, Campaign Against Antisemitism instruments of the Zionist entity
- How hawks in US are trying to demonize students protesting Israeli genocide
- Calling out UK for its brazen protection of pro-occupation forces
- If Americans Knew
- Israeli airstrikes in southern Gaza, invasion in central Gaza, carpet bombing in north – Day 217
- Strapped down, blindfolded, held in diapers: Israeli whistleblowers detail abuse of Palestinians in shadowy detention center
- Fighter jets, attack drones hammer Rafah; catastrophe looms – Day 217
- What it’s like to be used as a human shield by the Israeli army
- Detailed study finds 99% of pro-Palestine protests at US universities are peaceful
- VIDEO: Armenian Christians under siege by Israel
- Ex-Israeli special forces agent says he went ‘undercover’ at UCLA protest encampment
- The mainstream media distorted our anti-Vietnam War protests 50 years ago. They’re following the same strategy today
- Pete McCloskey, longtime supporter of Palestinians and USS Liberty veterans, has passed away
- Israel will kill Palestinians just fine without US heavy payload weapons; humanitarian crisis spirals – Day 216
- International Solidarity Movement
- The Right to Resist Genocide by Land and By Sea
- Women Support Center in Nablus empowers women and girls, resists gendered violence and the Occupation
- Palestinian Family at Um Darit Harassed and Isolated
- Occupation Forces Targeted Series of Strikes Kills 7 Aid Workers in Gaza
- Israeli army and police escalate repression of human rights volunteers following Knesset hearing.
- Illegal Israeli Settlers Continue Attacks on Shepherds in Masafer Yatta
- Second Friday of Ramadan at Qalandia Checkpoint
- Deceptively “quiet” first week of Ramadan in Jerusalem: a result of restrictions at Qalandia checkpoint
- Masafer Yatta: Israeli Settlers Burn a Family Car in Um Dhorit
- Violent arrest of Palestinian women in Susiya, Masafer Yatta
- Richie Allen
- The Richie Allen Show Returns Tomorrow Wednesday April 24th
- Call Richie Today Monday March 11th From 4.30pm
- Connect To The Richie Allen Show WhatsApp Today
- NHS Asks Patients To Choose From 12 Genders, 10 sexual Preferences & 159 Religions
- The Richie Allen Show Moves To A New Time Slot From Monday Nov 20th
- Starmer Will Sack Shadow Ministers Who Vote For Gaza Ceasefire
- AI Tool Can Predict Heart Attacks Years In Advance
- Nepal Bans TikTok To Preserve Social Harmony
- Bloke Appointed Boss Of Womb Health Charity
- WHO – “Gaza’s Biggest Hospital Becoming A Cemetery”
- No Tricks Zone
- New Paper: Global Warming Leading To HIMALAYAN COOLING, Preventing Glacial Melt!
- DNA Evidence Reveals Domestic Cats, Dogs, African Wildcats, Frogs Lived In The Arctic 9000 Years Ago
- -80°C: Antarctic Vostok Station Records “Extreme Winter Cold”…Not Even Winter Yet!
- The German E-Vehicle Nightmare, 2024 Q1 Sales Plummet 14%… “Graveyard” For Unsold Cars
- Newly Discovered 90,000-Year-Old Human Footprints Reveal How Much Higher Sea Levels Used To Be
- Germany’s Economic Bloodbath Worsens As Green Revolution Causes Economy To Bleed To Death
- Water Vapor Absorbs 84 Times More Radiation Than CO2 … Clouds Drove 89% Of 1982-2018 Warming
- The 97% Consensus Claim Is In Fact 97% Bogus
- Post-1980s Increases In Shortwave Radiation Explains Europe’s Warming Trends Far Better Than CO2
- “A Thing Where Every Part Of Your Life Just Confirms What It Is That You Want To Believe”
Aletho News 