Israel Orders Demolition of 37 Homes, Commercial Structures in Silwan
IMEMC | September 17, 2024
On Monday, Israeli soldiers and City Council personnel invaded Silwan town, south of the Al-Aqsa Mosque in the occupied capital, Jerusalem, in the West Bank, and handed out demolition orders for 37 homes and commercial structures.
Media sources reported that the soldiers notified the town’s citizens of the demolition orders, and added that the demolitions are part of the municipality’s plans to remove Palestinian buildings to pave a road, dubbed the “American Road,” and infrastructure for the illegal colonizers.
The number of demolitions in the Jerusalem Governorate from the first of September until the eighth has now reached 307.
The Israeli occupation authorities generally justify the demolition of homes on the pretext of building without permits, despite the rarity of granting the necessary permits for building homes for Jerusalemites.
The “American Road” project, constructed over the ruins of Palestinian homes, demolished residences, and confiscated lands, stretches about 12 kilometers, devouring everything in its path to facilitate the lives of illegal colonizers and create segregated roads between the colonies.
While Israel continues to build and expand its illegal colonies, Palestinian communities and towns in occupied Jerusalem and various areas in the occupied West Bank continue to be denied the right to build homes and property under various allegations meant to prevent the expansion of Palestinian towns and neighborhoods.
All of Israel’s colonies in the occupied West Bank, including those in and around occupied East Jerusalem, are illegal under International Law, the Fourth Geneva Convention, in addition to various United Nations and Security Council resolutions. They also constitute war crimes under International Law.
Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states: “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” It also prohibits the “individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory.”
With no coherent war plan, Netanyahu’s regime is using any excuse to derail ceasefire talks
By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | September 17, 2024
At this point, it should be clear that Hamas is not and never has been the obstacle to securing a prisoner swap and ceasefire in Gaza. Yet, it doesn’t matter how willing Hamas truly is with the fact that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is using every tool he can to create excuses as to why the war can’t come to an end, which is important to understand.
When the United States and their Israeli partners talk about the need for Hamas to sit at the table, calling on the Palestinian Resistance to accept a ceasefire deal, it is all nonsense. The analysis pieces, leaked conversations, and update articles that we see regularly published in The New York Times, The Washington Post, Axios, and other outlets are all adding to a work of fiction that has been crafted for domestic US and Israeli consumption.
There are no current negotiations, just discussions between the Israelis and Americans, which then are forwarded to the negotiating teams of Egypt and Qatar, before the conversation ultimately ends the exact same way it began, as useless ramblings that only give cover for further Israeli war crimes. This is the case as Hamas sits by and waits for the circus to end so that it can actually talk business.
The framework for a ceasefire and prisoner exchange has already been proposed by the United States and ratified by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), and Hamas has agreed to it. Meanwhile, the Zionist entity does not speak for itself on what it has or hasn’t exactly accepted; instead, it allows the likes of US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, to tell the world that the UNSC-endorsed Biden proposal was actually an Israeli proposal before later changing his story to that the Israelis had accepted Biden’s proposal. Even at this level, the contradictions prove how unserious the Zionist regime is.
On May 6, when Hamas announced that they had accepted a ceasefire proposal – that was almost identical to the one that Antony Blinken had spent two weeks lauding – the Israeli response was immediate rejection, followed by the invasion of the Rafah crossing.
The Israeli PM has continually argued that the war must continue until Hamas is defeated in Gaza, an objective that even the Israeli army spokesperson Daniel Hagari has said is impossible. Moreover, Netanyahu’s insistence on destroying Hamas is indicative of his outright rejection of a ceasefire. You can either defeat Hamas or do a ceasefire deal with them, you can’t have both, it simply makes no sense.
Another important point to understand is that despite the change in US President Joe Biden’s rhetoric and that of his administration, calling for an “immediate ceasefire”, you will notice that when Israeli officials comment on the issue of a ceasefire, they do so with a focus on the prisoner exchange aspect and often follow this up by stating that they must still retain the right to attack Hamas. In other words, the only ceasefire that the Zionist entity entertains is a temporary one that will ensure the release of their captives, after which they seek the “right” to continue the war. This is exactly what Benjamin Netanyahu argues, which, in essence, means that he’s openly telling Hamas to give up its bargaining chips for no reason.
The issue of Israeli forces remaining in both the Philadelphia and Netzarim corridors is a new addition to the ceasefire talks and directly violates the framework outlined in UNSC Resolution 2735 that was adopted on June 10. The resolution states explicitly that in phase 2 of the ceasefire agreement “upon agreement of the parties, a permanent end to hostilities, in exchange for the release of all other hostages still in Gaza, and a full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza,” adding that it “rejects any attempt at demographic or territorial change in the Gaza Strip, including any actions that reduce the territory of Gaza.”
The evidence that “Israel” outright rejects what is quoted above from the Security Council resolution is not just limited to these new additions to the non-existent ceasefire negotiations. When Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to Congress in July, he swore that his regime was going to secure “total victory” and argued for occupying Gaza internally for a limited period of time instead of permanently. If we look at all the polling data on the opinion of Israelis, the majority of the public also agree with these ideas too.
On top of this, the Israeli military has been creating a “buffer zone” around the perimeter of the Gaza Strip, blowing up and burning every single structure in an area that constitutes 32 percent of the besieged coastal territory. Furthermore, the new addition to the Zionist entity’s war plan which is agreed upon by the majority of the Israeli cabinet is the idea of seizing the entirety of northern Gaza for a “security zone” and expelling the hundreds of thousands of residents who live there.
As occurred in Rafah, where around a million people were completely uprooted and pushed into the ever-changing so-called “safe zone” area of al-Mawasi, the Zionist entity appears to be trying to concentrate the entire Palestinian civilian population into this zone. When the civilians arrive there, they are then repeatedly forced to move on foot and their tents are bombed, burying their bodies beneath mounds of sand.
The Zionist regime is engaged in what is clearly an “endless war”, or a war of attrition, which the United States government is fully backing with tens of billions of dollars worth of weapons. The end goal here is not actually clear, but what is certain is that Benjamin Netanyahu is not about to give up. If we follow the trajectory of the war so far, it is completely dependent upon Israeli domestic politics. The war has worked as follows:
Stage 1: “Israel” launches an unprecedented air attack that decimates civilian infrastructure, while commanding the civilian population to head south, where they are also bombed.
Stage 2: “Israel” invades the Gaza Strip, focusing on the northern part of the territory and claiming that Hamas is operating its HQ out of Al-Shifa Hospital and bases out of other hospitals. It then fails to find any headquarters.
Stage 3: A prisoner exchange is concluded, during which time the Israeli regime is changing its narrative.
Stage 4: “Israel” invades Khan Younis and central Gaza, claiming that the “real Hamas headquarters is in Khan Younis,” ultimately failing to inflict any real blow on the Palestinian Resistance.
Stage 5: “Israel” winds down the clock with more brief military incursions into areas they have already invaded, inflicting countless more civilian massacres and holding off on what they now began arguing was the true headquarters for Hamas in Rafah. During this period, Benjamin Netanyahu argued that the tunnels were being used to transfer weapons and that the war could not be won without a Rafah invasion.
Stage 6: Hamas accepts a ceasefire proposal after the US had been placing pressure on the Israelis to steer clear from a major invasion of Rafah. Netanyahu decides that same day to invade Rafah but not to wage the sort of campaign he was hoping for.
Stage 7: After having invaded every area in Gaza, the Israelis are out of excuses and are throwing out random ideas, hoping they will stick and convince their own population. This has led to reviving the idea of seizing northern Gaza, which was initially proposed at the beginning of the war, yet a large portion of the Israeli public is now demanding the return of the captives, which presents a major issue. So, they are looking for anything new to buy time before the inevitable next steps must be taken.
This brings us to today.
The Zionist regime doesn’t want a ceasefire and the US pressure simply is not there to force it to change its mind. The only thing that is now applying real pressure is the relentless fire from Hezbollah on the northern front, which has grown to the point that it cannot be ignored. In order to stop the Lebanese Resistance, they have two options: End the war on Gaza or start another war with Lebanon. If the Zionist entity will not give up on its genocidal assault on the Gaza Strip, then war with Lebanon is inevitable and will likely end up taking place inside Syrian territory also.
Snowden calls Israeli pager attack ‘Indistinguishable from terrorism’
Al Mayadeen | September 17, 2024
An Israeli cyber attack caused the detonation of hundreds of pagers, resulting in mass casualties across several regions in Lebanon, including Beirut, Bekaa, and the south.
In a series of recent tweets, former US intelligence contractor and whistle-blower Edward Snowden has sharply criticized ‘Israel’ following a series of beeper explosions in Lebanon, describing the actions as “reckless” and comparable to terrorism.
Lebanese Health Minister Firas Abiad has confirmed that 9 martyrs have been killed so far as a result of the explosion of pagers on Tuesday, noting that 2,750 people were injured, including about 200 in critical condition, in 100 hospitals.
An Israeli cyber attack caused the detonation of hundreds of pagers, resulting in mass casualties across several regions in Lebanon, including Beirut, Bekaa, and the south.
Abiad detailed in a press conference that the majority of injuries, in the initial tally he announced, were in the face, eyes, hand, or abdomen.
Snowden’s tweets highlighted the severity of the situation detailing that “What Israel has just done is, via any method, reckless. They blew up countless numbers of people who were driving (meaning cars out of control), shopping (your children are in the stroller standing behind him in the checkout line), et cetera. Indistinguishable from terrorism.”
He also suggested that the pattern of injuries—consistently severe and widespread—points to the use of planted explosives rather than accidental malfunctions. “As information comes in about the exploding beepers in Lebanon, it seems now more likely than not to be implanted explosives, not a hack. Why? Too many consistent, very serious injuries. If it were overheated batteries exploding, you’d expect many more small fires & misfires.”
Hezbollah vows to respond to ‘Israel’ for pager cyber attack
The Islamic Resistance in Lebanon – Hezbollah – held the Israeli occupation fully responsible for the treacherous aggression caused by the cyber attack after obtaining results of its probe, as well as examining available data, regarding the pager detonations earlier today.
In a new statement, Hezbollah confirmed that “Israel” was behind the cyber attack on Lebanon, which left hundreds injured, and caused several fatalities across the country.
The Lebanese Resistance affirmed that the martyrs and injuries inspire the struggle on the path of al-Quds and champion the people of Gaza and the West Bank, as well as extend the continued field support [on the northern front] as a means to back the Palestinian Resistance.
Hezbollah vowed to respond to the Israeli aggression in ways and at times the occupation cannot estimate or anticipate.
“The treacherous and criminal enemy will undoubtedly face its just punishment for this heinous attack, in ways both expected and unforeseen,” the statement read.
Earlier, the Resistance confirmed that a 10-year-old girl and two of its members were killed in the explosions. Lebanon’s Health Minister also announced that eight individuals were killed and 2750 were injured, 200 of whom are in critical condition, across 100 hospitals.
US Restoring Military Infrastructure on Pacific Island to Project Power in Region – Reports
Sputnik – 17.09.2024
WASHINGTON – The United States is refurbishing military infrastructure on the Pacific island of Tinian as part of efforts to bolster power projection in the Indo-Pacific region, Newsweek reported on Tuesday.
The US cleared overgrowth on taxiways and runways previously built on the island during the Second World War, the report said, citing recent satellite imagery and Pacific Air Forces spokesperson Capt. Keith Peden.
The US Defense Department established three projects to develop airfield operations on Tinian as part of its Pacific Deterrence Initiative, which focuses on defense planning for a potential conflict with China.
The Pentagon seeks to add refueling, takeoff, landing and parking operations on Tinian, the report said.
The projects will support a variety of aircraft and enable the US Air Force to “rapidly deploy and sustain forces” in diverse environments for both routine and contingency operations, Peden said.
However, China strongly opposes US efforts to bolster forward deployments in the Indo-Pacific region, Chinese Embassy in the US spokesperson Liu Pengyu reportedly said.
Kim Jong Un ordered the execution of 30 officials? Yet another fake news about North Korea
By Eduardo Vasco | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 17, 2024
Do you remember the terrible death of Kim Jong Un’s ex-girlfriend?
In 2013, the international press reported the story of Hyon Song Wol, singer of the Pochonbo band, who had reportedly met Kim ten years earlier and continued a secret relationship despite being married and having a baby. Then, one day, Hyon and 11 other performers were arrested, accused of recording pornographic videos amongst themselves and selling them. Despite this sin, some of them were carrying Bibles, which, of course, is an even greater sin in the “North Korean dictatorship.” Three days later, all were executed by a firing squad. To make matters worse, their closest relatives were forced to watch the executions, as well as members of other prominent bands. Moreover, the “regime” deemed those who witnessed the executions guilty by association with the sinners and sent them to concentration camps! What a monstrous dictatorship!
The tragic and insane story took a twist the following year when Hyon was interviewed on North Korean TV—and, behold, she was alive! The British newspaper The Independent called Hyon’s appearance “miraculous” (perhaps the singer’s resurrection was linked to the Bible found amid the bacchanalia!).
The explanation for the singer’s miraculous resurrection, however, is not supernatural. The first to report the tragic story of the performers was the South Korean newspaper Chosun Ilbo. The sources cited in the newspaper’s report were all anonymous. The South Korean disinformation service also had a hand in fabricating the story: shortly after the lie was spread, the head of South Korean intelligence, Nam Jae Joon, claimed he was also aware of the execution.
Chosun Ilbo is a major ultraconservative newspaper that acted as a propagandist for the Japanese Empire during the occupation of Korea, as well as for the military dictatorship that ruled the country until the end of the last century. It is distinctly anti-DPRK. But that’s not all: it is known for spreading fake news about Pyongyang. In 2019, both Chosun Ilbo and Chosun TV (owned by the same business group) reported that Kim Hyok Chol had been executed and Kim Yong Chol had been sentenced to hard labor. Both were nuclear negotiators for the DPRK in relations with the United States and were allegedly punished because the rapprochement process between the DPRK and the U.S. had not been successful. The sources cited by South Korean journalists were, again, anonymous. A few days later, however, Kim Yong Chol appeared alongside Kim Jong Un at an event broadcast by state television, a clear demonstration of Yong Chol’s prestige. CNN’s Taipei correspondent, Will Ripley, who had traveled to the DPRK around 20 times, also reported that Kim Hyok Chol was alive.
Despite its history of sensationalism and false news, the Chosun group continues to be a trusted source for major international media outlets. Earlier this month, the group reported that between 20 and 30 government officials had been executed for failing to prevent the deaths of 4,000 people in floods that hit the north of the country during the summer. As always, the Brazilian and international press eagerly spread the news, and O Globo even stated that Chosun TV was a “local broadcaster” from the DPRK. And, as always, the source of the information disseminated by Chosun was anonymous, as The Independent noted—even though it still endorsed the hoax with statements from “experts” on the subject, all of them South Korean and American.
What actually happened was quite different from the internationally orchestrated hoax. In early August, in a speech before flood victims in North Phyongan Province, Kim Jong Un took responsibility, as every leader should be conscious of doing, and announced the measures the government would take.
I felt uneasy because I could not help you much, despite my strong desire to do something. Although the entire country has sincerely mobilized to help, at this moment, I can only feel anxious and impatient because I have been unable to remove all the inconveniences you are experiencing in tents and poorly furnished public facilities.
In the same speech, the Korean leader announced that 130,000 young people and soldiers from the People’s Army were already being mobilized to rebuild infrastructure in North Phyongan. He also assured that all students and children from the areas affected by the heavy rains in North Phyongan, Jagang, and Ryanggang Provinces, which led to the Amnok River overflowing, would be transferred to Pyongyang during the reconstruction to stay safe and continue their studies, all at the expense of the State. In total, he announced that 15,400 people would be temporarily relocated to the country’s capital.
Nursing, edification, and education of students and other children are the most important of all state affairs, never to be abandoned even if the sky may fall in. Therefore, the State will take full responsibility for this work during the rehabilitation campaign. And state-backed care benefits will be offered in Pyongyang to the elderly and sick, honored disabled ex-soldiers, and nursing mothers before new houses are built in the flood-stricken areas.
Kim Jong Un also assured that those who remained in the affected cities during the reconstruction of their homes, in addition to the tents where they were already sheltered, could store their furniture and other belongings in safe places. Moreover, public restrooms with shower stalls and waste disposal systems would be provided to eliminate any possibility of contagious disease outbreaks. He also emphasized the issue of collective voluntary work, a historic characteristic of the Korean Revolution, as a means to solve the problem: “The assistance work must be conducted strictly under voluntary principles, never in a forced or organized manner.”
And so it happened. As the water was receding, the Paektusan Heroic Youth Shock Brigade— which received nearly 300,000 volunteer applications—was dispatched by the Workers’ Party to evacuate people from risky areas and begin the reconstruction process. One of the first measures was restoring water and electricity supplies. The metallurgical, steel, and mining industries increased production to meet the needs of the affected northern regions. Factories in all provinces focused their production on consumer goods for those affected. A special transportation scheme was set up on the railways to supply those regions with consumer and construction materials. Regional regiments of the WPK militias were sent to the affected provinces. Every sector of society was mobilized to aid in reconstruction. In addition to volunteers, who were joined by workers and soldiers to repair and rebuild buildings, roads, and bridges, professionals from various fields, such as doctors, scientists from the Academy of Sciences, and artistic ensembles, were also sent to the affected areas.
In Pyongyang, children and adults temporarily relocated from the northern areas at risk were offered visits to tourist and leisure sites such as circuses, theaters, museums, zoos, water parks, Mangyongdae Children’s Palace and Hill, and the Science and Technology Complex. Collective birthday parties are also being held for these people. The entire process is being closely monitored and reported daily by the Korean press.
The DPRK government estimated that the reconstruction would be completed within three months. Given the incredible mobilization of human and material resources, it is highly likely that this short deadline will indeed be met. Meanwhile, the vile propaganda of the DPRK’s enemies (and of the whole world) continues to spread its lowly lies. The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
Hillary Clinton Advocates for Criminal Charges for Americans Spreading “Propaganda”
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | September 17, 2024
Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has has decided to ignore the First Amendment and has advocated for punitive measures aimed at Americans who contribute to the spread of what she calls “propaganda.” Speaking to MSNBC on Tuesday, Clinton suggested that holding American individuals accountable through civil or criminal charges could serve as a warning to deter the distribution of “disinformation.”
While Clinton acknowledged the importance of indicting foreign actors, namely Russians, directly responsible for meddling in US elections, she argued that Americans who play a role in amplifying “disinformation” should not be overlooked.
“I think it’s important to indict the Russians… who were engaged in direct election interference and boosting [former US President Donald] Trump back in 2016,” Clinton said. “But I also think there are Americans who are engaged in this kind of propaganda, and whether they should be civilly or even in some cases criminally charged is something that would be a better deterrence.”
Clinton, who ran against Trump in the 2016 presidential race, endorsed the ongoing efforts of the State and Justice Departments to reveal the extent of Russian influence in US elections. Clinton has long maintained that her loss in 2016 was due to Russian interference. She described these efforts as merely scratching the surface of a much larger issue, adding, “There is a far distance to go.”
Her comments also touched on the broader issue of foreign influence in American politics, as Clinton warned that adversaries such as Russia, China, and Iran are seeking to sway the US electorate.
She underscored the call for greater vigilance in safeguarding the democratic process, stating: “We are not going to let adversaries, whether it’s Russia, China, Iran, or anybody else, basically try to influence Americans as to how we should vote in picking our leaders.”
Clinton’s call for potential criminal penalties against US citizens who share “disinformation” is a controversial step toward restricting free speech. The idea of penalizing individuals for spreading information, regardless of its origins, raises concerns about the boundaries of government power and the potential for misuse of such laws to suppress dissenting views.
The First Amendment of the US Constitution prohibits Congress from making laws that abridge the freedom of speech. Under this protection, the idea of prosecuting individuals for the mere act of sharing information—regardless of its veracity—presents a potential conflict with these foundational rights.
Meta’s Ban on Sputnik ‘Very Bad’ and Politicized Decision – Analyst
By Oleg Burunov – Sputnik – September 17, 2024
A politically motivated move by Meta to ban Russia’s Rossiya Segodnya and RT news outlets from its apps globally reflects the company’s biased approach, analysts said in separate interviews with Sputnik.
“There is a perception in the United States that the flow of Russian information will always be disinformation and that it will be tipped in favor of Donald Trump, even though [Russian President Vladimir] Putin has said that he could deal with Kamala Harris, too. This [perception] is simply untrue. I mean, the idea is to frighten the American people that they don’t know one idea from another. I mean, that’s the smokescreen,” Professor Joe Siracusa, political scientist and dean of Global Futures, Curtin University, told Sputnik.
As such, the idea that Russia spends all of its time to propagandize the American public, and that “there is a body of information out there that is going to undermine their faith and their freedom is ridiculous”, Siracusa underlines.
Recently, Russia’s Rossiya Segodnya, RT and “other related entities” were banned from Meta apps globally over alleged foreign interference activity.
This is a “very bad decision, particularly coming from an American company,” the political scientist points out.
Meta’s ban on Russian news outlets mean that “they [Meta] are really sort of censoring the news themselves. What they’re saying to the American people is that you’re not mature enough to understand ideas”, per the professor.
“This is the kind of game that the Democratic Party plays. I mean, there’s no excuse or reason for this kind of embargo on foreign information based on the idea that it’s protecting the American people… from whom? From Mark Zuckerberg? It’s ridiculous. Meta was in very close cahoots with the Democratic Party the last time around when it went after Donald Trump. So, in a way, it’s already been politicized,” the professor concludes.
In a separate interview with Sputnik, Facebook whistleblower Ryan Hartwig says that as a former Facebook content moderator, he saw firsthand how the company “influenced elections throughout the world.”
“Facebook is clearly biased and has an agenda with elections. At a whim, it can make newsworthy exceptions to protect certain politicians. They may as well ban their own app and go after themselves for foreign interference activity,” Hartwig, who is the co-author of “Behind the Mask of Facebook: A Whistleblower’s Shocking Story of Big Tech Bias and Censorship”, points out.
When it comes to Facebook’s foreign influence, suffice to mention the elections in Spain, Venezuela, and the US, according to Hartwig.
Given the fact that Facebook was being influenced by the US’s Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) “to suppress major stories” like the Hunter Biden laptop saga, “other countries should consider Meta a government agency,” the whistleblower adds.
As for the Ukraine crisis, “It’s clear that Meta is acting in coordination with the US government and the US State Department as a proxy for a foreign conflict,” Hartwig concludes.
Canadian journalist outs himself as Canadian, Ukrainian intelligence collaborator
By Wyatt Reed · The Grayzone · September 3, 2024
Canada’s National Post is refusing to comment after one of its columnists revealed himself to be a collaborator with Western-aligned intelligence agencies. A Canadian activist is now threatening to sue the paper after the confessed spy smeared him in a front page article.
Adam Zivo, a columnist who covered the war in Ukraine for Canada’s National Post newspaper, has outed himself as an operative of Canadian and Ukrainian intelligence. The admission came as Zivo publicly leapt to the defense of Canada’s Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), in response to a wave of online mockery directed towards a post by the spy agency which asked readers, “Has a stranger ever tried to inflate your ego?,” before warning them that such flattery “could be elicitation.”
“People are dunking on this tweet but this actually happened to me in Odesa in early 2023 with a guy who seemed to be a Chinese spy,” Zivo volunteered. “I ended up organizing a small sting operation with two Ukrainian intelligence officers to figure out what his deal was,” he declared.
In a subsequent post, Zivo expanded on his repeated attempts to entrap a man he had encountered in Odessa, and whom he claimed was a Chinese intelligence agent. “I met the Chinese man and his wife at a restaurant while wearing a wire,” while “SBU officers watched us from a car parked outside, which had tinted windows,” Zivo stated.
He told Canada’s PressProgress that following his meeting with the supposed Chinese agent, “I drafted a detailed report which I quickly provided to the National Post, CSIS [Canadian Security Intelligence Service] and the Ukrainian government. After the recorded dinner, I produced transcripts and a follow-up report which was also shared with these stakeholders.”
The National Post has so far refused to comment on the revelation. As PressProgress reported, “National Post Editor-in-Chief Rob Roberts and Managing Editor Carson Jerema did not respond to several requests for comment.”
In response to questions to that publication, Zivo insisted he kept his bosses at the National Post updated about his intelligence activities.
“I informed them of what was occurring and that I was working with local authorities to address my safety concerns,” Zivo said, though he reportedly insisted later that he “did not run this by my editors for a sign off,” because, since he was a “freelancer, not a staff writer,” he did not “need permission.”
According to Zivo, his working relationship with Canadian and Ukrainian intelligence services began in late 2022. None of his articles published in the National Post have disclosed his ties to foreign or domestic spy agencies.
Since then, Zivo has zealously advocated for rapid deliveries of heavy weapons to Ukraine. He has also used his column as a platform for denigrating those he deemed an impediment to the war effort – including both the Canadian military and the nation of Germany, which he accused of “reckless greed and a callous disregard for eastern European lives” for initially declining to send tanks to Ukraine.
Among Zivo’s targets was Dimitri Lascaris, a Canadian lawyer who narrowly lost the Canadian Green Party’s 2020 leadership election. In early 2023, Zivo made Lascaris the subject of a front-page report entitled, “Former Green party leadership candidate goes to Moscow to whitewash war.” In the column, Zivo accused Lascaris of “pro-Putin sympathies,” “seemingly endorsing pro-Kremlin propaganda,” and “uncritically and reflexively taking Russia’s side.”
Zivo also rang up the co-leader of Canada’s Green Party, Jonathan Pednault, to solicit criticism of Lascaris. In a parenthetical, Zivo stated that he had helped facilitate a solidarity tour of Kiev for Pednault, and “introduced him to some contacts for his trip, such as local Jewish and LGBTQ leaders.”
While hinting at his ties to the Ukrainian government, Zivo neglected once again to disclose his role as an intelligence collaborator.
“No corporate media outlet in Canada has taken an interest in this story”
Following Zivo’s unmasking as a Ukrainian intelligence collaborator, Lascaris took to social media to argue the reporter-turned-spook “perpetrated a fraud by concealing from me and the public his spying activities,” then proceeded to write an “article about me [which] falsely insinuated that I was working in the service of the Russian government.”
“The supreme irony here is that it was Zivo – not me – who was acting as a government agent,” Lascaris explained.
In comments to The Grayzone, Lascaris remarked that “Zivo has also violated the journalistic values of transparency and integrity because he secured an interview with me on false pretences, and when the National Post published Zivo’s many articles about the Ukraine war, neither Zivo nor the Post disclosed to the public that Zivo was a spy.”
Zivo has previously described himself as a “journalist,” “content vendor,” “filmmaker,” “activist” and – apparently ironically – as a “geopolitical analyst via an ecosystem of NATO-affiliated NGOs.”
Lascaris dismissed these labels as window dressing. “There’s now little doubt that Zivo wears only one hat: he is a shill for the Western military industrial complex,” he said.
“There are probably many more ‘journalists’ like Zivo in the Western corporate media. What is unusual about Zivo is that he bragged publicly about being a spy for Western intelligence agencies,” Lascaris added.
It is unknown whether other intelligence operatives are employed by the National Post, or its parent company, Postmedia News, which is owned by a pro-Trump hedge fund in the US known as Chatham Asset Management.
Describing Postmedia as “fanatically pro-Israel,” Lascaris accused the company’s newspapers of “attacking me for the past eight years,” noting that the hit pieces “started around the time that I became a prominent advocate for Palestinian human rights in Canada.”
But for Lascaris, deploying an actual spy to imply he was acting as a Kremlin asset was a step too far. He now says he is considering legal action against the National Post and its parent company, Postmedia News, which is Canada’s largest newspaper publisher.
“Because Zivo misled me… I sent a letter to the National Post’s editor-in-chief in which I threatened to sue the Post for fraud,” Lascaris explained, adding: “I’m awaiting the editor’s response.”
A handful of Canadian journalists have condemned Zivo on an individual basis, with the President of the Canadian Association of Journalists, Brent Jolly, describing Zivo’s intelligence activities as “problematic” and “ethically murky.” Jolly told PressProgress : “I don’t think we can go around and just have people one minute working for CSIS and the next writing a story about what an amazing job CSIS is doing.”
Sonya Fatah, the Associate Chair of Toronto Metropolitan University’s School of Journalism, described Zivo’s actions as a major breach of journalistic ethics, stating: “I imagine most newsrooms would be horrified.”
But so far, Canadian mainstream media has done its best to ignore Zivo’s disturbing double game.
“As far as I know, no corporate media outlet in Canada has taken an interest in this story,” Lascaris said. “Although I am well known to the corporate media, no Canadian corporate media outlet has sought comment from me about this scandal.”
But outside the Western media bubble, Lascaris said he suspects that Zivo’s activities will have dangerous repercussions.
“It’s almost certain that Zivo’s admission will heighten Russian suspicions about Western corporate journalists. And it’s not just Russia. China and other states targeted by Western government belligerence are sure to take these revelations into account in their dealings with Western journalists,” according to Lascaris.
“Zivo said that his employer knew about his activities. As far as I know, Postmedia has not denied this, nor has it taken any action against Zivo. The logical inference to draw is that Canada’s largest newspaper publisher believes that Zivo did nothing wrong.”
Zivo’s admission that he worked with intelligence services “will only heighten the belief in Russia, China and elsewhere that Western media have been coopted by, and have become tools of, hostile Western governments” Lascaris emphasized.
“In essence, the National Post’s response to this scandal will inevitably make it harder for Western journalists to do their jobs in the non-Western world.”
NATO’s Destruction of Ukraine Under the Guise of “Helping”
Propaganda & Proxy Wars
By Glenn Diesen | September 17, 2024
In a recent public event, the heads of the CIA and the MI6 assessed developments in the Ukraine War. The head of the MI6 applauded the invasion of Kursk for having changed the “narrative” of the war, while the head of the CIA also outlined the objective to “put a dent” in the Kremlin’s narrative about the development of the war. There can be no doubt that the invasion of Kursk was an utter disaster for Ukraine and NATO. However, controlling the narrative is imperative as the Western public will support financing the war if they believe they are helping Ukraine and the war can be won.
During the 20-year-long NATO occupation of Afghanistan, public support was also maintained by constructing a narrative of progress and helping the people of Afghanistan. Every week the Western public was reassured by the media that the war effort in Afghanistan was making great progress, until NATO fled in a great hurry as people fell off planes. Much like how the Pentagon Papers exposed the deceit of the Vietnam War, the Afghanistan Papers exposed how the war was an unmitigated disaster. Yet, in both instances, a rosy picture was presented by the media.
A leaked CIA report outlined how they could increase public support for NATO’s occupation of Afghanistan by selling it to the public as helping women. The report revealed that “Afghan women could serve as ideal messengers in humanizing the ISAF role in combating the Taliban”, and framing NATO’s occupation as a crusade for women’s rights could “overcome pervasive scepticism among women in Western Europe towards the ISAF mission”.[1] NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg even co-authored an article with Hollywood star Angelina Jolie with the title: “Why NATO must defend women’s rights”.[2] Appealing to the best in human nature to mobilise public support for doing the worst in human nature is a good description of war propaganda.
Selling the Ukraine War
The Ukraine War is sold to the public as being merely selfless “help” from NATO for Ukraine to defend itself against an expansionist Russia, motivated solely by territorial acquisition and restoring the Soviet Union. Framing the war as a simple struggle between good and evil is why NATO cannot negotiate or even pursue basic diplomacy, and peace depends on good defeating evil. In what is close to a copyright infringement of “war is peace” in George Orwell’s 1984, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg asserts that “weapons are the way to peace”.
In political propaganda, it is common to frame a war through a concept that everyone agrees with, such as the need to “help” Ukraine. We all want to help Ukraine preserve its sovereignty, territory and the lives of its citizens. However, instead of discussing what would help Ukraine, such concepts are given a fixed meaning to shut down debates. Any argument can then be framed as either being pro-Ukrainian or pro-Russian. However, what is bad for Russia is not automatically good for Ukraine. Yet, people who can be taught to speak in clichés can be taught to think in clichés. Commentary on NATO policies toward Russia is similarly framed as being pro-Western or pro-Russian, which circumvents an actual discussion about whether these policies are in the West’s interests or not.
Concepts such as “helping Ukraine” can then be filled with any content that often contradicts what “helping” entails, but corresponds with proxy war. When we unpack what NATO frames as “helping Ukraine”, we find that it rarely has the support from the majority of Ukrainians and it almost always ends up with disastrous consequences. So how does NATO “help Ukraine”?
NATO Expansion
NATO dismisses any accusations of an expansionist agenda by presenting itself as a passive actor that merely responds to Ukraine’s desire to join NATO. This narrative conceals the reality that every poll between 1991 and 2014 demonstrates that only approximately 20% of Ukrainians wanted to join NATO. When NATO promised future membership to Ukraine in 2008, 43 percent of Ukrainians considered NATO a threat to Ukraine and merely 15 percent associated NATO with protection.[3] Forty-six percent of Ukrainians answered it was more important to have close relations with Russia, while only 10 percent of Ukrainians supported close relations with the US over Russia.[4] In 2011, a NATO document acknowledged: “The greatest challenge for Ukrainian-NATO relations lies in the perception of NATO among the Ukrainian people. NATO membership is not widely supported in the country, with some polls suggesting that popular support of it is less than 20%”.[5]
Even after Russia seized Crimea in response to the Western-backed coup in 2014, only a small minority of Ukrainians wanted integration with NATO (10.3% in the South and 13.1% in the East).[6] Nonetheless, Ukraine was still pulled toward NATO even though CIA Director Burns had warned already back in 2008 that it would likely trigger a civil war in Ukraine and “Russia would have to decide whether to intervene; a decision Russia does not want to have to face”.[7] In December 2020, former British ambassador to Russia Roderic Lyne similarly warned that attempting to push Ukraine into NATO “was stupid on every level at that time. If you want to start a war with Russia, that’s the best way of doing it. Moreover, any poll in Ukraine showed that two thirds of the Ukrainian public did not want NATO membership”.[8] If the Ukrainians did not want NATO membership and we knew it would trigger a war, why was it “pro-Ukrainian”?
Regime Change in Kiev
In February 2014, NATO countries toppled the government in Ukraine under the guise of supporting a “democratic revolution”. Yanukovich had been elected in what the OSCE had recognised to be a free and fair election, and there was no evidence that Yanukovich would not have stepped down if he had lost in the next election. The Maidan protests did not enjoy democratic majority support from the Ukrainians and even fewer supported a coup.[9] British Foreign Minister William Hague deceived the public by claiming that the toppling of President Yanukovich had been done in compliance with the constitution, contrary to the clear rules in the Ukrainian constitution that specified procedures for removing the head of state.[10] A phone call leaked two weeks before the coup, exposed how Washington was planning the coup and hand-picked the new government that would be installed.[11] NATO supported the toppling of the democratically elected government that attempted to bridge a divided society, and replaced it with a divisive pro-NATO/anti-Russian government. Yet criticise the Western-backed coup in Kiev and you will be branded to be “anti-Ukrainian” and “pro-Russian”. In contrast, the people who set Ukraine on a path to destruction against their will claim to “stand with Ukraine”.
Asserting Administrative Control over Ukraine
On the first day after the coup, the head of Ukraine’s intelligence services in the new government that the US had hand-picked, called the CIA and MI6 to start a partnership for a covert war against Russia.[12] This partnership was a key reason why Russia decided to intervene militarily eight years later in February 2022.[13] The Washington Post reported: “the CIA has spent tens of millions of dollars to transform Ukraine’s Soviet-formed services into potent allies against Moscow”.[14] The US then also strengthened the far-right fascist groups in Ukraine as they functioned as a veto power on any efforts to seek peace with Russia.
Several Westerners took key positions in the Ukrainian government. In 2014, Natalie Jaresko took the position of Finance Minister of Ukraine and received Ukrainian citizenship on the same day as she took the job. Jaresko was a former US State Department official and former Economic Section Chief of the US Embassy in Ukraine. She transitioned from representing American interests in Ukraine, to representing Ukraine. The general prosecutor of Ukraine, Viktor Shokin, complained that since 2014, “the most shocking thing is that all the [government] appointments were made in agreement with the United States”. According to Shokin, Washington’s behaviour indicated that they “believed that Ukraine was their fiefdom”.[15] Biden would later take credit for having fired Ukraine’s General Prosecutor, who had opened an investigation into the Ukrainian energy company Burisma. Three months after the coup in February 2014, Hunter Biden and a close family friend of US Secretary of State, John Kerry, became board members of Burisma.[16]
After Russia invaded in February 2022, the US further strengthened its grip over Ukraine. In 2023, an American transgender who argued that Russians are not human beings became the new spokesperson for Ukraine’s Territorial Defence Forces. As Ukraine’s situation became more precarious and dependence on the West increased, Kiev largely outsourced the post-war reconstruction process to BlackRock and J.P. Morgan to manage the Ukraine Development Fund. The US asserting administrative control over the Ukrainian government was depicted as helping Ukraine with democratic governance and fighting corruption.
De-Russifying Ukraine
Decoupling Ukraine from Russia was a key objective to permanently place Ukraine in NATO’s orbit. The US-orchestrated Orange Revolution in 2004 installed the Yushchenko government that distanced itself from Russia and pursued NATO membership, however, the public eventually reversed this trajectory by electing Yanukovich. At the end of Yushchenko’s presidential term, Newsweek labelled Yushchenko the world’s most unpopular leader with a 2.7 percent approval rating.[17]
US support for the de-Russification of Ukrainian society entailed purging the political opposition, arresting the main opposition leader, banning independent media, banning the Orthodox Church, and purging the Russian language and culture. The first decree by the new Ukrainian Parliament in 2014 was a call to repeal Russian as a regional language. By 2024, Ukraine even had language inspectors to counter the spread of the Russian language.[18] The BBC reported that after the coup, Kiev’s city council was covered with large neo-Nazi banners, the American confederate flag, and portraits of the fascist ally of Hitler, Stepan Bandera.[19] A new nationalist identity was supported based on the far-right in which street names with the shared Russian or Soviet history were replaced with fascists who collaborated with Hitler. To de-Russify a country that lived in the same state as Russia for centuries and shared language, culture and faith, could not possibly coexist with democracy, stability or basic human rights. Such policies caused a deep rift in the social cohesion of the country and caused misery for millions of Ukrainians who became second-rate citizens in their own country.
Yet, these developments could be supported under the guise of “helping Ukraine” to decouple from Russia as a condition for asserting its distinctive identity and sovereignty.
The War Against Donbas
After the coup in 2014, people in Donbas rejected the new government in Kiev that had seized power with the support of the West, as predicted by CIA Director Burns. The first instinct of the new authorities and their backers in Washington was to send the military to destroy the uprising. Yet, the Ukrainian army was weak and regular soldiers were not comfortable with turning their guns on their own population. This problem was overcome by recruiting fascist militias in Western Ukraine, such as Azov, who were happy to kill. Yevhan Karas, the leader of the fascist group C14, informed his audience that the West did not give weapons to help Ukrainians but did so because “we have started a war” that was fulfilling the goals of the West. The nationalists were supported by the West due to their resilience: “because we have fun, we have fun killing and we have fun fighting”.[20]
Kiev launched an “anti-terrorist operation” against Donbas, which killed more than 14.000 Ukrainians. Ignoring all evidence about the involvement of local Ukrainians in the uprising, the Western media largely denied any agency as all fighting was done by “pro-Russian” militias or Russians themselves. Thus, the war against Ukrainians in Donbas could be sold to the Western public as helping Ukraine fight Russian influence.
Sabotaging the Minsk-2 Peace Agreement
The fighting between Kiev and Donbas came to an end with the Minsk-2 peace agreement. Both Poroshenko and Zelensky attempted to implement the Minsk-2 agreement before being opposed by the US-backed far-right.
The BBC reported in August 2015 that a clear majority of 265 MPs out of 450 had supported the first reading of the decentralisation bill to grant more autonomy to Donbas. This sparked a violent veto by the far right, it then reported: ‘Protesters led by the populist Radical Party and the ultra-nationalist Svoboda (Freedom) party—who oppose any concession to the Russian-backed separatists’ clashed with riots police that resulted in the death of a national guard member and over 100 injured.[21] Poroshenko subsequently began to abandon his efforts to implement the Minsk-2 agreement.
Zelensky was therefore able to win a landslide election victory with 73% of the votes in 2019. He won over the Ukrainian public by running on a platform of peace by promising to implement the Minsk agreement to ensure peace After Zelensky became president, he was threatened by the US-backed far right and a protest was arranged in Kiev in which approximately 10,000 people rallied against President Zelensky’s plan to end the war, which was denounced as “capitulation”.[22] After failing to assert control over the far-right groups in the military, Zelensky had to align himself closer with the nationalists and thus rejected peace with Donbas.[23]
The US assisted its government in Ukraine to ignore the UN-approved Minsk-2 peace agreement by building an increasingly powerful Ukrainian army and tying it closer to NATO. Germany and France had negotiated the Minsk-2 peace agreement in 2015, although they later revealed this had been a deceit. Angela Merkel argued in an interview with both Bild and Spiegel that the Minsk Agreement enabled her to buy time for Ukraine to build itself into a powerful and well-fortified country.[24] When her French counterpart, former president François Hollande, was asked about Merkel’s statement that the Minsk-2 peace agreement was merely intended to buy time, he confirmed: “Yes, Angela Merkel is right on this point” and added that the conflict with Russia would be resolved on the battlefield: “There will only be a way out of the conflict when Russia fails on the ground”.[25] Retired German General Harald Kujat, the former head of the German Bundeswehr and former chairman of the NATO Military Committee, later argued that the West’s sabotage of the Minsk agreement was “a breach of international law… it turns out that we are the ones who do not comply with international agreements”.[26]
NATO countries had confirmed for 7 years that the Minsk-2 peace agreement was the only path to a peaceful settlement of the conflict in Ukraine, while concurrently sabotaging the only path to peace. This path to war was done against the overwhelming will of the Ukrainian population, as evidenced by their consistent voting for a peace platform. Why should NATO efforts to overturn the result of the Ukrainian elections to sabotage the peace agreement be considered “pro-Ukrainian” or “helping Ukraine”?
Refusing Russia’s Demand for Security Guarantees in 2021
Russia demanded in 2021 security guarantees to mitigate the threats from NATO’s growing footprint in Ukraine, otherwise, the escalating threat would be resolved by military means. President Biden warned Ukraine that Russia was preparing its military for an invasion, yet he did not want to offer any security guarantees to prevent an invasion.
Kurt Volker, the former US Ambassador to NATO and former US Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations from 2017 to 2019, even argued that Biden should not make any agreements with Putin as “the best possible outcome is not one of modest agreements and a commitment to ‘predictability,’ but one of a lack of agreements altogether. Success is confrontation”.[27] NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg also acknowledged that halting NATO expansion was required to prevent an invasion: “President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent us. And [it] was a pre-condition for not invad[ing] Ukraine. Of course we didn’t sign that”.[28] Under a fierce security competition in which Russia feared for its security, “helping Ukraine” would certainly have involved mitigating some of Russia’s security concerns.
Sabotaging the Istanbul Peace Negotiations in 2022
After the Minsk agreement had been sabotaged for 7 years and no security guarantees were forthcoming, Russia decided in February 2022 to use military force to impose a political settlement. On the first day after the Russian invasion, Zelensky confirmed “Today we heard from Moscow that they still want to talk. They want to talk about Ukraine’s neutral status… We are not afraid to talk about neutral status”.[29] On the third day after the invasion, Moscow and Kiev announced they would hold peace talks “without preconditions” in Belarus.[30] Zelensky even suggested later a “collective security agreement” to ensure that the security concerns of both Russia and Ukraine would be met.[31]
The US had other objectives. On the first day after the Russian invasion, Washington rejected peace without preconditions as Russia first had to withdraw all its forces from Ukraine.[32] Washington even suggested that it would not support Ukraine’s effort to resolve the conflict through a compromise as “this is a war that is in many ways bigger than Russia, it’s bigger than Ukraine”.[33] In March 2022, Zelensky argued in an interview with the Economist that “There are those in the West who don’t mind a long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives”.[34]
According to the leader of Zelensky’s political party and Zelensky’s advisor, Russia and Ukraine were close to an agreement. Ukrainian Ambassador Oleksandr Chalyi, who participated in peace talks with Russia, confirms Putin “tried everything” to reach a peace agreement and they were able “to find a very real compromise”.[35]
Retired German General Harald Kujat, the former head of the German Bundeswehr and former chairman of the NATO Military Committee, argued that NATO provoked the war and that the US and UK sabotaged the Istanbul peace negotiations as “the West was not ready for an end to the war”.[36] The Turkish mediators confirmed: “I had the impression that there are those within the NATO member states that want the war to continue—let the war continue and Russia gets weaker. They don’t care much about the situation in Ukraine”.[37] The Israeli mediators reached the same conclusion as former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett recognised “both sides very much wanted a ceasefire” but the West “blocked” the peace agreement as a “decision by the West to keep striking Putin” rather than pursuing peace.[38]
After interviews with American and British leaders, Niall Ferguson reported in Bloomberg that a decision had been made for “the conflict to be extended and thereby bleed Putin” as “the only end game now is the end of Putin regime”.[39] Over the next two and a half years, numerous American political and military leaders expressed their support for the war as it was a great opportunity to weaken Russia as a strategic rival without using and losing American troops. The decision to fight Russia with Ukrainians was nonetheless framed consistently in the media as “helping Ukraine”.
Keeping Ukraine in the War
As Zelensky had argued in March 2022, some of its Western partners preferred “long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives”.[40] The Americans were pressuring Ukraine to launch the disastrous counter-offensive of 2023, as a “senior Ukrainian military official recalled, the Americans were nagging about a delayed start”.[41] The New York Times reported that “American officials say they fear that Ukraine has become casualty averse, one reason it has been cautious about pressing ahead with the counteroffensive”.[42]
However, despite the disastrous casualties among the Ukrainians and the failure of the counter-offensive, the Washington Post could report that “for the United States and its NATO allies, these 18 months of war have been a strategic windfall, at relatively low cost (other than for the Ukrainians). The West’s most reckless antagonist has been rocked. NATO has grown much stronger with the additions of Sweden and Finland. Germany has weaned itself from dependence on Russian energy and, in many ways, rediscovered its sense of values. NATO squabbles make headlines, but overall, this has been a triumphal summer for the alliance”.[43] As Ukraine continues to bleed dry in the war of attrition, there are more and more videos on Ukrainian Telegram channels of more aggressive “recruitment” tactics that involve grabbing Ukrainians off the street and throwing them into vans. Yet, the discussions in NATO countries revolve around lowering the conscription age in Ukraine or deporting Ukrainian refugees that can be used to refill the trenches.
If these were our own soldiers dying in the hundreds of thousands, would we not have begun negotiations a long time ago? The incoming EU foreign policy chief has rejected any diplomacy with Russia as Putin is a “war criminal”, while also punishing EU member states such as Hungary for attempting to restore diplomacy and negotiations between Ukraine and Russia. NATO could help Ukraine by using the promise to end expansion as a bargaining chip in negotiations with Russia. Instead, NATO continues to threaten further expansion after the war, which makes any peace agreement impossible. When Ukraine begins to collapse, the US and NATO will likely call for a ceasefire to freeze the frontlines to yet again buy some time to rebuild its Ukrainian army and fight another day.
As we reflect on NATO’s policies toward Ukraine, can we conclude that they have been in the interest of Ukraine or had the support of the Ukrainians? Has it been in the interest of the West? The ability to ask critical questions is prevented by presenting all policies as being either pro-Ukrainian or pro-Russian, in which dissent is effectively criminalised. It is a common phenomenon that when political leaders create propaganda, they often end up deceiving themselves.
…..
– The text includes excerpts from my book “The Ukraine War and the Eurasian World Order” https://www.claritypress.com/product/the-ukraine-war-the-eurasian-world-order/
[1] WIKILEAKS – – CIA Red Cell Special Memorandum; Afghanistan: Sustaining West European Support for the NATO-led Mission-Why Counting on Apathy Might Not Be Enough, March 11, 2010
[2] Why Nato must defend women’s rights | Jens Stoltenberg and Angelina Jolie | The Guardian
[3] J. Ray and N. Esipova, ‘Ukrainians Likely Support Move Away From NATO’, Gallup, 2 April 2010.
[4] C. English, ‘Ukrainians See More Value in Ties With Russia Than U.S.’, Gallup, 15 February 2008.
[5] 2011 – 172 CDSDG 11 E REV1 – UKRAINE – MALAN REPORT | NATO PA (nato-pa.int).
[6] GALLUP® CORP Template (usagm.gov)
[7] W.J. Burns, ‘Nyet means nyet: Russia’s NATO Enlargement Redlines’, Wikileaks, 1 February 2008.
[8] R. Lyne, ‘The UC Interview Series: Sir Roderic Lyne by Nikita Gryazin’, Oxford University Consortium, 18 December 2020.
[9] BBC, ‘Ukraine’s revolution and the far right, BBC, 7 March 2014.
[10] D. Morrison, ‘How William Hague Deceived the House of Commons on Ukraine’, Huffington Post, 10 March 2014.
[11] BBC, ‘Ukraine crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call’, BBC, 7 February 2014.
[12] The Spy War: How the C.I.A. Secretly Helps Ukraine Fight Putin – The New York Times (nytimes.com)
[13] The Spy War: How the C.I.A. Secretly Helps Ukraine Fight Putin – The New York Times (nytimes.com)
[14] G. Miller and I. Khurshudyan, ‘Ukrainian spies with deep ties to CIA wage shadow war against Russia’, The Washington Post’, 23 October 2023.
[15] M.M. Abrahms, ‘Does Ukraine Have Kompromat on Joe Biden?’, Newsweek, 8 August 2023.
[16] P. Sonne and J. Grimaldi, ‘Biden’s Son, Kerry Family Friend Join Ukrainian Gas Producer’s Board’, The Wall Street Journal, 13 May 2014.
[17] O. Matthews, ‘Viktor Yushchenko’s Star Has Fallen’, Newsweek, 13 March 2009.
[18] Language inspectors to start working in Frankivsk | УНН (unn.ua)
[19] BBC, ‘Ukraine’s Revolution and the Far Right’, BBC, 7 March 2014.
[20] A. Rubenstein and M. Blumenthal, ‘How Ukraine’s Jewish president Zelensky made peace with neo-Nazi paramilitaries on front lines of war with Russia’, The Grayzone, 4 March 2022.
[21] BBC, ‘Ukraine crisis: Deadly anti-autonomy protest outside parliament’, BBC, 31 August 2015.
[22] A. Korniienko, ‘Thousands rally in Kyiv against Zelensky’s plan to end war with Russia’, Kyiv Post, 6 October 2019.
[23] J. Melanovski, ‘Ukrainian President Zelensky deepens alliance with far right’, WSWS, 30 April 2021.
[24] A. Osang, ‘You’re Done with Power Politics’, Spiegel, 1 December 2022.
[25] T. Prouvost ‘Hollande: ‘There will only be a way out of the conflict when Russia fails on the ground’’, The Kyiv Independent, 28 December 2022.
[26] Emma, ‘Russland will verhandeln!’ [Russia wants to negotiate!], Emma, 4 March 2023.
[27] K. Volker, ‘What Does a Successful Biden-Putin Summit Look Like? Not What You Think’, CEPA, 2 June 2021.
[28] J. Stoltenberg, ‘Opening remarks’, NATO, 7 September 2023.
[29] V. Zelensky, ‘Address by the President to Ukrainians at the end of the first day of Russia’s attacks’, President of Ukraine: Official website, 25 February 2022.
[30] S. Raskin and L. Brown, ‘Ukraine and Russia to meet for peace talks ‘without preconditions,’ Zelensky says’, New York Post, 27 February 2022.
[31] M. Hirsh, ‘Hints of a Ukraine-Russia Deal?’, Foreign Policy, 8 March 2022.
[32] US Department of State, ‘Department Press Briefing’, US Department of State, 25 February 2022.
[33] US Department of State, ‘Department Press Briefing’, US Department of State, 21 March 2022.
[34] The Economist. ‘Volodymyr Zelensky on why Ukraine must defeat Putin’ The Economist, 27 March 2022.
[35] Breaking the Stalemate to Find Peace: The Russia-Ukraine War – A Geneva Security Debate (youtube.com)
[36] J. Helmer, ‘Whr. Gen. Kujat: Ukraine War is Lost, Germany Now Faces an Angry Russia… Alone’, Veterans Today, 25 January 2023.
[37] R. Semonsen, ‘Former Israeli PM: West Blocked Russo-Ukraine Peace Deal’, The European Conservative, 7 February 2023.
[38] N. Bennett, ‘Bennett speaks out’, YouTube Channel of Naftali Bennett, 4 February 2023.
[39] N. Ferguson, ‘Putin Misunderstands History. So, Unfortunately, Does the U.S.’, Bloomberg, 22 March 2022.
[40] The Economist. ‘Volodymyr Zelensky on why Ukraine must defeat Putin’ The Economist, 27 March 2022.
[41] ‘Miscalculations, divisions marked offensive planning by U.S., Ukraine’, The Washington Post, 4 December 2023.
[42] ‘Troop Deaths and Injuries in Ukraine War Near 500,000, U.S. Officials Say’, The New York Times, 18 August 2023.
[43] D. Ignatius, ‘The West feels gloomy about Ukraine. Here’s why it shouldn’t’, The Washington Post, 18 July 2023.
Russia Hits Energy Infrastructure Supporting Ukraine’s Military-Industrial Complex
Sputnik – 17.09.2024
Russian forces carried out strikes on Ukraine’s energy facilities that supply the military-industrial complex, the Ministry of Defense has reported. Weapons and ammunition depots were also hit.
“Operational-tactical aviation, unmanned aerial vehicles, missile forces, and artillery of the Russian Armed Forces have struck energy facilities that support the activities of Ukraine’s military-industrial complex, as well as weapons, ammunition, and logistics storage sites, along with concentrations of enemy personnel and military equipment in 145 areas,” reads the ministry’s report.
According to the Russian Defense Ministry, air defenses also shot down a US-made HIMARS rocket and 36 drones over the past day.
In June, Volodymyr Zelensky stated that nine gigawatts of energy generation capacity had been destroyed in Ukraine, which amounts to 80% of thermal power generation and a third of hydropower production.
In turn, Ukrainian Energy Minister Herman Galushchenko specified that the country has lost half of its generating capacity, which would not be enough to survive the winter, and that electricity imports would be insufficient to cover the deficit.
In early September, the Center for Countering Disinformation under the National Security and Defense Council published a forecast by Yuriy Korolchuk, an expert from the Ukrainian Institute of Energy Strategies. According to one scenario, Ukrainians could be left without heat and light for up to 20 hours a day during the upcoming winter. This could happen if strikes on energy infrastructure continue, combined with other conditions. In the expert’s optimistic forecast, power outages could last up to 12 hours per day.
Ukraine avoids using Western tanks on the battlefield fearing to lose them
By Ahmed Adel | September 17, 2024
The Wall Street Journal newspaper writes that the Ukrainian Armed Forces avoid using tanks supplied by NATO countries because they fear their destruction or capture. At the same time, the AP reports, citing US officials, that the US will lose the possibility of providing Ukraine with $5.8 billion in military aid at the end of September if Congress does not authorise the Pentagon to use funds from the PDA program.
“Tanks were once the king of the battlefield. But the proliferation of drones in Ukraine means the large, noisy vehicles can be spotted and targeted within minutes. That has seen dozens of cutting-edge Western tanks used only sparingly in the battle they were meant to shape, while others have been damaged, destroyed or captured,” the Wall Street Journal reports.
According to the newspaper, the armoured vehicles supplied to them are in the field many kilometres away from the front line, as there is a high risk of losing them in the Russian Army’s attacks.
Meanwhile, General James Rainey, who heads the US Army Futures Command and is responsible for modernisation projects, called for urgent modernisation of US armoured units.
“In the near term, we absolutely need to urgently make some adjustments to maintain the survivability of our armored formations,” Rainey told the newspaper.
In August, Military Watch magazine reported that Ukraine had lost about 20 M1A1 Abrams tanks out of 31 delivered by the US in the past six months.
“The latest loss brings the total losses of M1A1 Abrams tanks in Ukraine close to 20, out of just 31 of the vehicles delivered, with all losses occurring within the past six months. With unconfirmed reports indicating that the Abrams was destroyed using a handheld anti-tank missile system, likely a Kornet, the destruction of the latest vehicle stands out from all other recent kills which were all achieved by drone strikes or by precision guided artillery,” the magazine revealed.
Forbes magazine reported earlier this month that Kiev lacks modern military equipment to form new brigades to replace front-line units as part of the rotation.
“In practice, these brigades are desperately short of modern weaponry. And that could become a serious problem for the Ukrainians as the new but poorly equipped brigades replace older but better equipped brigades as the latter brigades finally rotate off the line of contact—after 18 months of non-stop fighting, in some cases,” the Forbes article said.
The Kremlin, for its part, has repeatedly said that arms supplies to Ukraine prevent the achievement of a peace agreement and directly involve NATO countries in hostilities. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that the US and NATO are participating in the conflict, including not only supplying weapons but also training Ukrainian military personnel on the territory of the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy and other countries.
However, US supplies could begin drying up since Republicans and Democrats in Congress must agree on a new budget bill before September 30. If not, the federal government could suspend work in early October, meaning there will be a shutdown.
“About $5.8 billion in presidential drawdown authority (PDA) will expire,” the report said. However, officials cited by AP expressed hope that lawmakers would extend powers to fund their programs for a year.
“Delays in passing that $61 billion for Ukraine earlier this year triggered dire battlefield conditions as Ukrainian forces ran low on munitions and Russian forces were able to make gains. Officials have blamed the monthslong deadlocked Congress for Russia’s ability to take more territory,” the report added.
Yet, even if the funding is passed and Ukraine receives a new stream of weapons, they will make little difference to the outcome of the war. The Abrams was heralded as a game-changer that would overcome the power of Russia’s T-90M tanks, but this proved to be a false dawn, just like the F-16 fighter jets and Stryker armoured vehicles, among many other weapons that have failed to stop Russian forces from capturing more territory.
Due to these weapons, including Western tanks, failing to have the expected effect against Russian forces, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on September 11 that he held talks with his Ukrainian counterparts Andrii Sybiha and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky about launching long-range missiles into Russian territory. Several experts have warned that a direct clash between Russia and NATO, both of which have nuclear arsenals, would have unpredictable consequences for the world.
Russian President Vladimir Putin warned NATO the very next day that Ukrainian attacks with NATO weapons on Russian territory would mean that NATO countries were at war with Russia. Direct NATO involvement, Putin stressed, changes the very essence of the conflict.
Although Ukraine launching Western long-range missiles will certainly change the nature of the war, as already stressed, it just points to the utterly desperate situation the Kiev regime finds itself in. Yet, despite this evident desperation, there are still no legitimate signs that Zelensky is prepared to begin peace negotiations with Russia.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
Featured Video
Panama Ransacked in 1989
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Hands off ‘our hemisphere’ or Venezuela pays the price: US Senator warns Russia
RT | February 13, 2019
The US staked a claim on half the world, as Senate Armed Services Committee chair Jim Inhofe said Washington might have to intervene in Venezuela if Russia dares set up a military base not just there, but “in our hemisphere.”
“I think that it could happen,” Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) told a group of reporters on Tuesday. “You’ve got a guy down there that is killing everybody. You could have him put together a base that Russia would have on our hemisphere. And if those things happen, it may be to the point where we’ll have to intervene with troops and respond.”
Should Russia dare encroach on the US’ neck of the woods, Inhofe said: “we have to take whatever action necessary to stop them from doing that.” … continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
seversonebcfb985d9 on Somaliland and the ‘Grea… John Edward Kendrick on Kidnapped By the Washington… aletho on Somaliland and the ‘Grea… John Edward Kendrick on Somaliland and the ‘Grea… aletho on Donald Trump, and Most America… John Edward Kendrick on Donald Trump, and Most America… aletho on The US Has Invaded Venezuela t… John Edward Kendrick on The US Has Invaded Venezuela t… papasha408 on The US Has Invaded Venezuela t… loongtip on Palestine advocates praise NYC… Bill Francis on Did Netanyahu just ask Trump f… Rod on How Intelligence, Politics, an…
Aletho News- 2016: The Year American Democracy Became “Post-Truth”
- Somaliland: Longtime Zionist colonisation target
- US hijacks fifth oil tanker in Caribbean waters as Washington tightens blockade on Venezuela
- From Industrial Power to Military Keynesianism: Germany’s Engineered Collapse
- Offshore wind turbines steal each other’s wind: yields greatly overestimated
- UK Expands Online Safety Act to Mandate Preemptive Scanning of Digital Communications
- Trump Pulls Plug on Ukraine’s Pentagon-Linked Bioweapons Web
- One Hundred People Killed in US Attack on Venezuela – Interior Minister
- The Year Ahead in Sino-American Relations
- Venezuela to Buy Only US-Made Products Under New ‘Oil Deal’ – Trump
- If Americans Knew
- Israel says education in Gaza is not a critical activity – Not a ceasefire Day 91
- Israel is starving Gaza, ‘asphyxiating’ West Bank – Not a ceasefire Day 90
- Israel Targeted Churches, Mosques, and Markets during the Genocide.
- ‘We Saved the Child From Drowning’: In Gaza, Winter Storm Makes Displacement Even Deadlier
- Palestinian church committee urges churches worldwide to protect aid work in Gaza
- BlackNest: Inside Canary Mission’s Secret Web of Unlisted Sites
- Gaza staggers under 80% unemployment rate – Not a ceasefire Day 89
- Israel has detained Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya without charges for a year. Why has the New York Times refused to cover his case?
- Israel’s role in Trump’s attacks on Venezuela
- Shrinking Gaza: Israel moves Yellow Line again – Not a ceasefire Day 88
- No Tricks Zone
- Berlin Blackout Shows Germany’s $5 Trillion Green Scheme Is “Left-Green Ideological Pipe Dream”
- Modeling Error In Estimating How Clouds Affect Climate Is 8700% Larger Than Alleged CO2 Forcing
- Berlin’s Terror-Blackout Enters 4th Day As Tens Of Thousands Suffer In Cold Without Heat!
- Expect Soon Another PIK Paper Claiming Warming Leads To Cold Snaps Over Europe
- New Study: Human CO2 Emissions Responsible For 1.57% Of Global Temperature Change Since 1750
- Welcome To 2026: Europe Laying Groundwork For Climate Science Censorship!
- New Study Finds A Higher Rate Of Global Warming From 1899-1940 Than From 1983-2024
- Meteorologist Dr. Ryan Maue Warns “Germany Won’t Make It” If Winter Turns Severe
- Merry Christmas Everybody!
- Two More New Studies Show The Southern Ocean And Antarctica Were Warmer In The 1970s
Aletho News 