Famous Pro-Vaccine Doctor Suspects Pfizer Booster Shot Sent His Cancer Into Overdrive

By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | September 28, 2022
Michel Goldman, M.D., Ph.D., professor of immunology and pharmacotherapy at the Université libre de Bruxelles in Belgium, suspects his third dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine may have sent his cancer into overdrive.
Goldman, 67, is one of Europe’s best-known champions of medical research and a lifelong promoter of vaccines.
But he told The Atlantic he wants discussion of the COVID-19 vaccine to be transparent — so he went public about his suspicion that the Pfizer booster shot he received on Sept. 22, 2021, may have induced rapid progression of his angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL), a type of lymphoma he’d been diagnosed with before he got the booster shot.
After his diagnosis, Goldman said he rushed to get the booster shot, believing he would need it more than most people because once he started chemotherapy, his immune system would be compromised.
But after receiving the shot, Goldman’s follow-up CT scan showed something unexpected: Within only a few days, his cancer had grown so fast that cancerous points were lighting up all over his scan.
“It looked like someone had set off fireworks inside Michel’s body,” The Atlantic reported.
Goldman and his brother, Serge Goldman, a fellow scientist and head of nuclear medicine at the teaching hospital of the Université libre de Bruxelles, suspected Goldman’s COVID-19 booster shot may have triggered the rapid proliferation of cancerous growth in his body.
The initial CT scan had been “a bit disturbing,” Serge Goldman told The Atlantic, because it showed an asymmetrical cluster of cancerous nodes around Goldman’s left armpit, where Michel’s first two doses of vaccine had been delivered.
The CT scan done after Michel’s third dose showed the cancer’s asymmetry had flipped and was clustered by his right armpit, where he received the third shot.
The brothers knew it could be a mere coincidence, but they thought it was important to investigate the possibility that the vaccine might be behind the clustering — because it could mean other people with certain forms of cancer might be at risk of a COVID-19 vaccine causing their cancer to progress more rapidly.
So on Nov. 25, 2021, the brothers — who had written prior papers together — and other colleagues published a case report in which they described Michel Goldman’s experience and urged the scientific community to study the phenomenon to see if it occurred in patients diagnosed with AITL.
“Since nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccines strongly activate T follicular helper cells, it is important to explore the possible impact of approved SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines on neoplasms affecting this cell type,” the authors wrote.
The brothers said the case study “suggests that vaccination with the [Pfizer-BioNTech] BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine might induce rapid progression of AITL.”
They noted, however, that it would be “premature” to extrapolate the findings from Michel Goldman’s case to other patients with the same kind of cancer and that “dedicated studies are needed.”
Going public was ‘the right thing to do’
Michel Goldman’s case study added to the scientific literature that aims to understand the relationships between mRNA vaccines and the functioning of helper T-cells.
For instance, previous researchers have noted mRNA vaccines rev up helper T-cells, which may explain why Michel Goldman’s AILT went into overdrive following his third booster shot.
“Perhaps the shots gave such a jolt to his helper T cells that they went berserk,” The Atlantic reported. “If they were prone to forming tumors, or if they were already cancerous, then overstimulation could have made the problem even worse.”
Research involving body scans of some people who get mRNA vaccines — including cancer patients — shows heightened activity in the lymph nodes near the armpit on the side where the shot was received.
In February 2018, a team of researchers at Columbia University’s Institute for Cancer Genetics published a study using mice with a pair of gene mutations — the same two mutations found in Michel Goldman’s tumor — showing that the mutations predispose T-cells to go rogue.
The study also showed that when the mice were injected with red blood cells from sheep — as an experimental stand-in for invading microbes — the mice developed the same subtype of lymphoma Michel Goldman had.
Michel Goldman previously headed a $2 billion European endeavor to accelerate the research of new medicines and in December 2020, he publicly spoke out in support of the safety of mRNA vaccines — the technology used in both the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines.
At that time, he said the highest risk — especially for vulnerable people — is not to be vaccinated and that his main concern about mRNA vaccination was that people might use the possible side effects as an argument against getting the vaccine.
He currently leads the Institute for Interdisciplinary Innovation in Healthcare, or I3h, a university hub aimed at assisting in drug-design projects.
Michel Goldman doesn’t regret going public with his case, even though it presented challenging evidence regarding the safety of mRNA vaccines for individuals such as himself.
“I’m still convinced it was the right thing to do,” he told The Atlantic.
He remains adamant that COVID-19 vaccines are useful for the vast majority of people, but he is unsure whether he himself will get another booster dose.
“I don’t know what I will do,” he said.
Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa. She holds a Ph.D. in Communication Studies from the University of Texas at Austin (2021), and a master’s degree in communication and leadership from Gonzaga University (2015). Her scholarship has been published in Health Communication. She has taught at various academic institutions in the United States and is fluent in Spanish.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
IS RUSSIA REALLY LOSING IN UKRAINE?
By Drago Bosnic | September 29, 2022
After Russia launched its counteroffensive against NATO aggression, the state and corporate-run mainstream media of the political West started spreading multiple false narratives about it. One of the most common themes was that the Russian military supposedly “failed” because the Kiev regime didn’t collapse in a matter of days.
In the following months, especially after the Russian forces withdrew from northern areas of Ukraine, this was used to further reinforce the narrative that the Russian military was somehow “defeated”. However, the truth lies in the Russian military and geopolitical nomenclature regarding the events in Ukraine. While the political West is unanimous in calling it “an unprovoked, brutal invasion”, the Russian side calls it a special military operation.
Although the wording may seem irrelevant, it does have serious implications. The whole operation has been limited from the start. As Russian President Vladimir Putin himself stated, Moscow didn’t really show more than a fraction of its capabilities. And indeed, given the number of Russian troops initially engaged in the special military operation, which was approximately 100-150 thousand, versus more than 200,000 troops of the Kiev regime, it’s clear that Moscow never expected to take control of the entire territory of Ukraine. In addition, the Kiev regime forces exponentially grew in size after the forced mobilization of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian men. And although Western media are trying to downplay it, multiple estimates put the number of conscripted personnel anywhere between several hundred thousand and nearly a million soldiers.
For its part, Russia decided not to increase the number of troops engaged in the special military operation. What’s more, with troop rotation, the true number of Russian soldiers actively engaged in combat operations was much lower, most likely standing between 50 and 100 thousand, stretching for well over a thousand kilometers from the northern areas of the Kharkov, through Donbass, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions all the way to the Black Sea coast. These forces have consistently been outnumbered by the Kiev regime troops for over 7 months now and have stood their ground.
And although this could be attributed to the Russian military’s vast technological and numerical superiority, especially in terms of artillery and air dominance, it can only be considered a remarkable achievement from a purely military standpoint. This also explains the Kiev regime’s reaction to Moscow’s recent low-level mobilization announcement, which will increase the number of Russian troops engaged in the special military operation by 300,000, pushing the total to well over 400,000 soldiers.
As per usual, the mainstream media in the United States and other countries of the political West have been trying to portray this as a sign of Russia’s supposed “weakness”. However, the Pentagon’s and NATO’s reaction speaks volumes of how the political West really feels about the mobilization. With Western Military Industrial Complexes already working at maximum capacity to supply the Kiev regime forces with additional weapons, having a twofold or threefold increase in the number of Russian troops is the last thing they needed (at least in the short term). If the Russian military was able to conduct successful offensive operations for months, while being outnumbered, what could one expect when Moscow decides to exponentially increase the size of its forces engaged in the special military operation?
In the meantime, the Western press and other media are constructing the narrative that millions of Russian men are supposedly trying to flee the country in order to avoid mobilization. Naturally, they are ignoring the fact that the Russian Ministry of Defense registered nearly 900,000 requests for joining the armed forces, with many regions and federal subjects in the country providing several times more troops than they’re required to. The most prominent example of this is Chechnya, which overshot its mobilization quota by over 250%. And yet, the Western media keep insisting that there’s supposed “widespread opposition to Putin’s war”. In reality, the fact that the Russian police arrested several hundred protesters in a country of approximately 150 million shows just how truly “widespread” the opposition to mobilization is.
Expectedly, the propaganda war isn’t only limited to the supposed “failures” of the Russian military, but also its leadership. Recent speculation that Vladimir Putin is ill, on the verge of death or losing power, while ignoring the rapidly deteriorating mental and physical health of Joe Biden serves as a testament to that. To make matters worse, the attempts by the so-called “fact-checkers” to whitewash Biden’s string of dementia-induced gaffes can only be described as comical. And while the political West’s propaganda machine works round the clock to create an alternate reality that doesn’t exist past a TV or smartphone screen, the economic and social unraveling resulting from the failed economic siege of Russia has been affecting hundreds of millions around the world and is only bound to get worse.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
Kamala Harris’ visit to Tokyo aims to destroy Sino-Japanese relations
By Ahmed Adel | September 29, 2022
US Vice President Kamala Harris is on a trip to Japan and South Korea, her first visit to Japan and her second to Asia since taking office early last year. Ahead of the US midterm elections in November, Harris has increased her attacks on China, something she has not stopped doing since arriving in Japan on September 26 for the state funeral of assassinated former leader Shinzo Abe.
During a meeting in Tokyo on September 26, the American Vice President and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida condemned China’s actions in the Taiwan Strait. A White House statement described Beijing’s actions in the Taiwan Strait as “aggressive and irresponsible provocations.”
Meanwhile, a series of visits to Taiwan by senior US officials and the increased US supply of weapons to the island have heightened tension in the region. It is evident that China’s actions are only a response against US-instigated provocations.
With these statements, the US has increased propaganda and support for actions against China. There is growing Western desire to erode the “One China” principle and Japan is increasingly participating in these actions. For Beijing, it is not just a matter of military exercises, warships passing through the Taiwan Strait and arms shipments to Taiwan, but an intensification of Western propaganda to put psychological pressure on China and normalise the idea of an independent Taiwan.
The gradual erosion of the “One China” principle is evident. Most of Asia is well aware of the American falsehoods, but this is influencing its partners in the West and Japan to the idea of an independent Taiwan.
At the meeting with the Japanese Prime Minister, Kamala Harris reaffirmed the US commitment to Japan’s security, but in return, Washington wants Tokyo to be more active in containing China. Washington’s main aim is to disrupt the process of improving Sino-Japanese relations. The US is counting on Japan’s help to incite tensions with China.
It is recalled that the provocative actions against China by former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who visited Taiwan for the second time this year on September 26, also failed to bring the desired results, according to Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin. On his first trip in early March, Pompeo was awarded Taiwan’s highest award for his contributions in promoting Taiwan-US relations. To express his “deep gratitude”, the American politician described Taiwan as a “great nation” with a developed democracy.
However, his second visit was even more provocative as he announced that Taiwan “doesn’t need to declare independence because it already is an independent country.” This statement prompted the Chinese Foreign Ministry to say in a statement that Pompeo’s calculations will not materialise, describing him as “a former politician of diminished credibility who staged these stunts for personal political gains.”
Adding to insult, Pompeo said in Taiwan: “China’s aggressive conduct, diplomatically, militarily, economically … have changed this region. And it brought those who prefer peace and commerce even more closely together. If we want a free 21st century, and not the Chinese century, the century which Xi Jinping dreams of, the old paradigm of blind engagement must end.”
It has not been unnoticed that the 50th anniversary of Sino-Japanese relations, marked on September 29, has been darkened due to differences over Taiwan. Beijing is becoming increasingly wary of Tokyo as it forges closer ties with Taiwan amid growing tensions, which Harris’ visit only provokes further.
According to Japan Times, an official from a Chinese group for bilateral friendship, who was also involved in commemorative events in 2012 for the 40th anniversary of bilateral relations, pointed to the absence of momentum in celebrating the 50th anniversary. The official said that Chinese people feel betrayed by Japan over Taiwan.
When Beijing and Tokyo normalised ties in 1972, Japan said that it understood and respected the notion that Taiwan is an integral part of Chinese territory. The Global Times, the English mouthpiece of the Chinese government, said this month that Japan “tends to turn its back” on the promise it made 50 years ago.
Japan will be “able to create favourable conditions for the bilateral relations” only by keeping its promise, the Global Times also said.
However, there is little indication that Tokyo wants to deescalate tense relations with Beijing, and rather, it is more likely that things will become worse before they become better, especially following Harris’ visit to Japan and Pompeo emboldening Taiwan towards independence rather than unification with mainland China.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
Russia Backs India’s Bid to Become Permanent Member of United Nations Security Council
Samizdat – 25.09.2022
Russia has come out in support of India’s bid to become one of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) – the all-powerful global body which is responsible for taking key decisions about maintaining peace and security in the world.
At present, it comprises the United States, France, Russia, China, and Great Britain.
During his speech at the UNGA, Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov called for wider representation of Asian, African, and Latin American countries in the Security Council, making particular mention of New Delhi and Brazil.
“We see an opportunity to make the Security Council more democratic by having representation from African, Asian and Latin American countries. India and Brazil, in particular, are major international players and should be included as permanent members of the council,” Lavrov said in his address to the 77th United Nations General Assembly.
Earlier, in a joint statement, India and 31 other nations urged the UN to expand both the permanent and non-permanent membership of the UNSC.
Besides, New Delhi said that reforms in the UN were necessary to make it more effective and representative.
At another meeting in which foreign ministers from India, Japan, Germany, and Brazil took part, reforms of the Security Council were discussed at length.
The four nations together are known as the G4 and after the meeting they released a joint statement, saying that “today’s conflicts around the globe and the interconnected global challenges have brought to the fore the urgency to carry out reforms in the Security Council as well as expand the membership of other decision-making groups so that they are more representative of the interests of the developing nations.”
At present, India is a non-permanent member of the UNSC.
New Delhi’s two-year term on the Council ends on 31 December this year.
Only 1.3% of Americans Got Bivalent Boosters
What a failure! Nobody wants the “8-mice boosters”
By Igor Chudov | September 23, 2022
An incredibly uplifting WSJ article. Apparently, the hyped bivalent boosters tested on 8 mice, are not finding as much reception as the vaccine promoters were hoping for. Out of 330,000,000 Americans, only 4.4 million people got the bivalent booster. This works out to be only 1.3% of the US population.
The Journal gives a bunch of reasons why nobody is taking the boosters. Such as “people are tired of them”, “most had Covid despite boosters” etc.
The article does not mention “8 mice” on which the boosters were tested.
Health authorities are trying to “get more information out”, but it is not working well. They paid for 171 million doses, but only 4.4 million took the shots!
Health authorities had looked to the new round of doses as an opportunity to improve boosting rates, saying people who were open to vaccinations but hadn’t gotten a booster may want a retooled shot.
“If we do a good job with getting information out, it might help people make a more realistic risk assessment,” said Jennifer Dillaha, the director of the Arkansas Department of Health.
“Maybe call it Omicron Plus”
Maybe Ms. Dillaha should instead admit that the vaccine is a scam and does not work.
Iran: What is the Future of the Nuclear Deal?
By Viktor Mikhin – New Eastern Outlook – 22.09.2022
While many around the world hoped for a positive reaction from the United States to Iran’s latest response, the European trio at the talks in Vienna (E3 – the UK, Germany, France) have separately issued a statement that could undo all the positive results of a year of painstaking negotiations. After Tehran responded to an American text submitted through the European Union’s coordinator for the Vienna talks, Josep Borrell, the latter passed it on to Washington. The Biden administration called the latest Iranian response “unconstructive” but refrained from responding formally, prompting speculation about the impact of the US midterm elections on negotiations in Vienna over the resumption of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, officially called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
Still, after days of guesswork and speculation, a response was given, but not from the American side, which had intended to do so. E3 released a joint statement that seems only to have delighted opponents of the JCPOA and caused bewilderment around the world. “As we move closer to an agreement, Iran has reopened separate issues, related to its legally binding international obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and its safeguards agreement under the NPT concluded with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). This latest demand raises serious doubts as to Iran’s intentions and commitment to a successful outcome on the JCPOA. Iran’s position contradicts its legally binding obligations and jeopardizes prospects of restoring the JCPOA,” the E3 statement said demagogically and with no good reason.
This is despite the fact that Iran has long claimed that the IAEA has lost all credibility by making unfounded accusations that are politically motivated and emanate from the anti-JCPOA camp. In other words, and this fact has now become clear, the IAEA is simply a tool in the hands of the West, not an independent UN body. The E3 countries also seemed keen to make a poorly veiled threat against Iran, stating, “Given Iran’s failure to conclude the deal on the table, we will consult, alongside international partners, on how best to address Iran’s continued nuclear escalation and lack of cooperation with the IAEA regarding its NPT (non-proliferation treaty) safeguards agreement.”
The E3 joint statement was seen by experts around the world as an irresponsible move and a servile, obsequious submission to its master, the US. Reading this statement, one gets the impression that it is the E3 that is the aggrieved party that has lost over 300 billion dollars and 1,000 lives in the last 3 years because Iran withdrew from the JCPOA. Apparently, Brussels wants everyone to believe that Iran, not the US, has blatantly violated and completely reneged on all its obligations, subsequently violating all 11 commitments it had made to rectify the situation. After all, it is both well known and not disputed by anyone in the world that it was the US that unreasonably withdrew from the JCPOA and imposed further brutal sanctions on Iran, causing the Iranian people to suffer.
In addition to the separatist actions disregarding the views of Russia and China and the utter irresponsibility, the statement also undermined the ongoing and subsequent negotiations, deepening the atmosphere of distrust. Moreover, and quite obviously, the E3 countries have only strengthened the position of the opponents of the JCPOA, which is apparently what they were aiming for. “It is regrettable that by [issuing] such an ill-considered statement, the three European countries have followed in the footsteps of the Zionist regime down a path that will lead to the failure of negotiations. It is obvious that if such an approach continues, the E3 should also accept responsibility for its consequences,” Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Nasser Kanaani said bluntly.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, trying to justify his loyalist position to the US, demagogically signaled a lack of expectation on his part that an agreement with Iran would in the near future restore Tehran’s shattered nuclear deal with world powers. Then, realizing that the best defense is a good offense, he unceremoniously declared that Iran had no reason not to sign and that European countries would remain “patient.” And what else could the 9th Federal Chancellor say after meeting in Berlin with Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid, who insisted that restoring the 2015 agreement would be a “critical mistake”? Incidentally, Germany still pays reparations to those Jews who were forced by Nazi Germany to leave as evacuees.
It appears that provocative pressure from Israel as well as other factors have managed to halt or delay Washington’s progress towards a return to a nuclear deal with Iran. This is clear from statements by senior Israeli officials, analysis by Israeli research centers and the media. There was a real celebration in Israel, as officials could not hide their joy at the E3 statement. “Following the Americans, yesterday the E3 countries announced that a nuclear agreement with Iran will not be signed in the near future, that the IAEA’s files opened on Iran will not be closed,” Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid cheerfully told a cabinet meeting. He thanked the leaders of France, Britain and Germany for their “strong position” on the issue. Then a wave of boasting and bravado swept over the Prime Minister and he took all credit for the collapse of the nuclear deal, saying, “In recent months, we held a discreet and intensive dialogue with them, and presented them with up-to-date intelligence information about Iranian activity at nuclear sites.” And further: “Israel is conducting a successful diplomatic campaign to stop the nuclear agreement and prevent the lifting of sanctions on Iran.”
It may be recalled that as the negotiations approached a crucial milestone, Israel began to take active steps to counter this, including visits to Washington by Mossad director David Barney, Israeli National Security Advisor Eyal Hulata and Minister of Defense Benny Gantz. Israel said the diplomatic onslaught was aimed at preventing the renewal of the nuclear agreement, which Tel Aviv sees as a threat to its security. Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid said he would visit the US this month to meet US President Joe Biden ahead of the UN General Assembly meetings to discuss the Iranian issue. “Israel is conducting a successful diplomatic campaign to stop the nuclear agreement and prevent the lifting of sanctions on Iran,” World Israel News stressed. Apparently, Israel and its leadership have decided that they are above the UN, and only they should solve the world’s problems and only in their own interests. That is why now more than ever, the challenge of transforming our world from a unipolar to a multipolar one, where all countries have equal rights and resolve issues in the common interest, is relevant.
Lapid, who visited Germany to discuss his country’s concerns about the agreement, said that “it is not over yet – there is still a long way to go, but there are encouraging signs.” He was referring to Israel’s success in dissuading the US administration from returning to the agreement. The Times of Israel quoted an unnamed senior Israeli official as saying that during recent talks with Biden, the Israeli Prime Minister was told that the nuclear deal was not being discussed and would not be signed anytime soon. According to the website, Lapid has recently become increasingly convinced that Washington’s return to the nuclear deal is unlikely. Iran’s 2015 nuclear deal with world powers is “in the ER room” and unlikely to be extended any time soon, if at all, Israeli Minister of Defense Benny Gantz said after European leaders expressed doubts about Tehran’s willingness to revive the pact.
“We cannot predict when the deal will be signed by major world powers and Iran,” Aleef Sabbagh, a political analyst, told Al-Ahram Weekly. “Right now, it’s not even close.” He noted that pressure from Tel Aviv appears to have delayed the signing of the agreement, and Israel’s diplomatic war against the deal has so far achieved some of its goals. However, several Israeli analysts point out that the delay in finalizing the agreement is linked to some of its details, in particular the IAEA’s investigation into traces of uranium at three sites that Tehran has not previously disclosed. Iran at the same time is demanding the cessation of this investigation as a precondition for a deal, and is apparently not about to back down. Israel, for its part, will continue to apply pressure until the last minute to prevent the signing of the agreement, focusing its attention on organizing a tough international stance in support of the IAEA investigations. This would require the establishment of a mechanism to control the funds Iran gains access to in order to ensure that they do not fall to Tehran’s allies in the region.
The Israeli opposition, led by former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, claims that the US administration has decided to return to the agreement, but insists on more favorable terms. He also accuses the incumbent Lapid government of failing to convince Washington of Tel Aviv’s security demands, which would be harmed by the agreement. However, the current Prime Minister argues that his cabinet is working quietly and diligently and has so far succeeded in blocking the agreement. Israel often repeats that it will not be bound by the agreement if it is signed, and reserves the right not to allow Iran to become a nuclear power. Tel Aviv has also frequently threatened to resort to the military option to achieve this goal if “Israel’s security needs” demand it, despite all the peace treaty efforts of many countries around the world.
Why Ukraine referendum is a big deal
BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | SEPTEMBER 22, 2022
The referendum on September 23-27 in the Donbass and southern Kherson and Zaporozhye regions of Ukraine on their accession to Russian Federation is, prima facie, an exercise of the right of self-determination by the native population who reject the western-backed regime change in Kiev in 2014 and the ascendancy of extreme nationalist forces with neo-Nazi leanings in the power structure.
But it has other dimensions, too. In all probability, the referendum will overwhelmingly opt for accession to Russian Federation. In Donbass, it is a straightforward question: “Do you support the entry of the DPR into the Russian Federation as a subject of the Russian Federation?” For Kherson and the Zaporozhye Cossacks, the referendum ascertains three sequential decisions: secession of these territories from Ukraine; formation of an independent state; and its entry into the Russian Federation as a subject.
In 2014, all legal procedures for the admission of Crimea and Sevastopol to the Russian Federation were completed in four days. An expeditious process can be expected this time around too. There is huge mass support within Russia for reunification with the ethnic Russian populations in the eastern and souther regions of Ukraine who suffered severe persecution during the past 8-year period, including brutal violence, at the hands of extremist Ukrainian nationalist elements in control of the state apparatus. This is a highly emotive issue.
In the post-cold war era, the genie of self-determination was first let out of the bottle by the West during the dismemberment of the former Yugoslavia. Although the US midwifed the secession of Kosovo from Serbia as far back as in 2008, the entity is yet to be accorded recognition by the UN. Serbia rejects the secession despite sustained western pressure.
That said, the Kosovo precedent will not stop the western powers from condemning the accession of regions of Ukraine to the Russian Federation.
The big question today is about the Russian calculus. President Vladimir Putin has surely factored in that the accession of the “Russian regions” of eastern and southern Ukraine is an immensely popular decision in the domestic opinion. The most revealing comments on the topic have come from the former President Dmitry Medvedev.
Medvedev wrote in his Telegram channel: “Referendums in Donbass are of great importance not only for the systemic protection of the inhabitants of the LNR, DNR (Donbass) and other liberated territories, but also for the restoration of historical justice.”
In Medvedev’s opinion, these plebiscites “completely change the vector of Russia’s development for decades.” He adds, “And not only our country. Because after they (referendums) are held and the new territories are accepted into Russia, the geopolitical transformation in the world will become irreversible.”
Most important, Medvedev forewarns, “An encroachment on the territory of Russia is a crime, the commission of which allows you to use all the forces of self-defence.”
Furthermore, he says, once the process of annexation of the new territories is completed, “not a single future leader of Russia, not a single official will be able to reverse these decisions. That is why these referendums are so feared in Kiev and in the West. That is why they need to be carried out.”
What emerges is that Russia has given up hopes of any negotiated settlement. Moscow was initially optimistic that Kiev would negotiate, but the bitter experience turned out to be that President Zelensky was not a free agent. It is the Biden Administration that holds the stop watch for the proxy war. And Washington’s timeline is linked to the weakening and destruction of the Russian state, which has been the ultimate US objective. Lest we forget, Joe Biden played a seminal role in installing the new regime in Kiev in 2014 and in moulding Ukraine as an anti-Russian state.
Suffice to say, the referendum on Wednesday is Russia’s only available course of action under the circumstances, while Kiev maintains a maximalist position as advised by the US, UK and Poland.
The accession of Donbass, Kherson and Zaporozhye creates a new political reality and Russia’s partial mobilisation on a parallel track is intended to provide the military underpinning for it. The accession signifies a paradigm shift insofar as any further attacks on these regions that are part of Russia can be construed by Moscow as attacks on Russia’s territorial integrity and sovereignty.
Certainly, Kiev’s wanton attacks in future on civilians and civilian infrastructure in Donbass, Kherson and Zaporozhye will trigger Russian reaction. Any attack on them will be considered aggression and will give Moscow the right to respond “adequately.” The fact the Russian deployment in these territories will be significantly augmented and upgraded signals a willingness to use force.
Meanwhile, Russia’s special military operations will also continue until its set objectives are met. Which means, even more territories may come under Russian control, creating ever newer facts on the ground. Kiev needs to factor all this carefully.
The Pentagon spokesman Patrick Ryder has reacted as follows: “No one will take such bogus referendums seriously, and the US will certainly not recognise their results. How will this affect our and international support for Ukraine? This will not affect in any way, we will continue to work with Ukraine and our international partners to provide them with the necessary assistance to protect their territory.”
It is a sufficiently evasive statement. Neither Pentagon nor the Russian military command will risk brinkmanship. The likelihood, therefore, is that the accession of the new territories to the Russian Federation may not be militarily challenged by the US or NATO. That said, Russia is already at war with the NATO, as Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu said, albeit not in terms of weapons supplies, which “we find ways to counter,” but in the Western systems that exist — “communication systems, information processing systems, reconnaissance systems and satellite intelligence systems.”
The point is, the accession of Donbass, Kherson and Zaporozhye regions to the Russian Federation will require the NATO and the US to reset the proxy-war algorithm. The CIA’s analogy of the Afghan jihad of the 1980s no longer holds good. Russia has avoided a quagmire in Ukraine and probably is turning the table on the NATO. To make things doubly sure, Moscow lifted the veil today on its newest ICBM, Sarmat.
In Putin’s national address on Wednesday, he had said: “In the event of a threat to the territorial integrity of our country and to defend Russia and our people, we will certainly make use of all weapon systems available to us. This is not a bluff.”
The results of the referendum must be determined not later than 5 days after the last voting day (Sept. 27), and the issue of accession to Russia is considered approved if more than 50% of the plebiscite participants vote for it. Significantly, the Russian State Duma is scheduled to hold plenary sessions in Moscow on September 27 and 28.
Serbia accuses West of double standards
Samizdat – September 22, 2022
Western countries have failed to explain why they have different points of view on Ukraine and Serbia’s territorial integrity, given that they support Kiev in its fight against Russia, but endorsed Kosovo’s independence, President Aleksandar Vucic said on Tuesday.
In an address to the UN General Assembly in New York, the Serbian leader stated that his state respects the territorial integrity of all countries, including Ukraine, and that many describe the hostilities between Moscow and Kiev as “the first conflict on European soil since WWII.”
He said, however, that the truth about the violation of Serbia’s territorial integrity “is constantly unspoken.”
“We ask for a clear answer to the question I’ve been asking… for years – what is the difference between the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine and the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Serbia, which was grossly violated,” Vucic said, referring to the 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia.
According to Vucic, Serbia “has never [set] foot” on anybody’s territory, but this “did not prevent the 19 richest NATO countries from attacking a sovereign country without a decision by the UN Security Council.”
He also said that while NATO pledged to respect the full territorial integrity of Serbia, it did not stop many Western countries from unilaterally recognizing the breakaway province of Kosovo in 2008.
Earlier on Tuesday, the Serbian president warned that the world is moving closer to a global war, adding that “the UN has been weakened,” given that the great powers “practically destroyed the UN order over the past several decades.”
NATO occupied Kosovo in 1999, after a 78-day bombing campaign against what was then Yugoslavia. The province declared independence in 2008 with Western support. While the US and most of its allies have recognized it, many other countries, including Russia and China, have not.
US blocked Russian diplomats from UN – Russia
Samizdat – September 21, 2022
The United States did not grant visas to several members of the Russian delegation, preventing the officials from taking part in the United Nations General Assembly in New York, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Wednesday.
Speaking to Sputnik, she noted that two of ten diplomats comprising “the official delegation” had not received the necessary stamp.
Zakharova explained that Russia’s overall delegation consists of several groups. The first one, she said, is referred to as “the official delegation.” This group is headed by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and has been formed with the approval of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“Out of ten members of the official delegation, two did not receive visas. This tactic has already become an ominous tradition on the part of the US, but the point stands,” Zakharova stated, also offering a reminder that Moscow has already voiced concerns on this matter.
The Foreign Ministry spokeswoman went on to say that Washington had not granted visas to several delegation members from the second group, which includes various experts and diplomats who support the official delegation. She said, however, that she does not know the exact number, due to late notice.
“You would not believe… but the messages on the issuance or non-issuance of the visa were coming in just overnight. So we had to contact our colleagues at night to tell them to get ready for tomorrow’s flight [to the US],” she noted.
Of a third group, which incorporates journalists, one person failed to get a US visa, Zakharova said.
The 77th session of the UN General Assembly opened on September 13. However, the main event of this session is supposed to be the ‘High-Level week’ from September 20 to 26, which will be attended by many world leaders and foreign ministers.
Moscow has repeatedly accused Washington of violating its obligations under the 1947 agreement on the hosting of the UN headquarters in New York City, which requires the US to grant access to foreign representatives without charge and “as promptly as possible.”
Following Moscow’s and the UN’s calls to issue visas to members of the Russian delegation, the US allowed entry to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and a number of high-level diplomats, enabling them to attend the assembly.
US ‘Trampled Upon’ Iran Nuclear Deal, Can’t Tolerate Independent States, Raisi Tells UNGA
Samizdat – 21.09.2022
The United States “trampled upon” the Iran nuclear deal, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi said during his Wednesday address to the United Nations General Assembly. The Iranian president stressed that the Islamic Republic is not striving to obtain nuclear weapons.
“The American government [has] trampled upon the JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action a.k.a. Iran nuclear deal]. Some time ago, the former US president announced that Daesh was created by the US. To us, it makes no difference who created [it]. What matters is that a government outside this region decided to bring havoc to the region,” Raisi said.
He further condemned Washington’s meddling in the region’s affairs and refusal to take the interests of other countries into account. Raisi noted that the US can’t tolerate countries that act independently and puts its own priorities over those of other states.
Raisi also declared that the existing world order, where international organizations had become “instruments of repression” and economic sanctions are used as leverage to pressure other countries, no longer enjoys widespread support. He stated that a new world order is starting to take shape in its place and stressed the necessity to create a more “fair” world.
The Iranian president said that late IRGC General Qasem Soleimani, who was killed in the US strike in January 2020, “fought against oppression” of the current world order. Raisi condemned his killing by the US as a crime and said that Iran will insist on holding a fair trial for those responsible.
“The government on the other side of the planet decides to create chaos in our region through the bloodshed of women and children. But the Islamic Republic opposed this destructive dynamic, and Qassem Soleimani became the leader who opposed terrorism,” Raisi said.
Raisi’s speech to the UNGA came amid a pause in negotiations on reviving the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, which effectively collapsed following the unilateral US withdrawal from it in 2018. The sides have since exchanged a new draft agreements, but there has been no suggestion of an imminent signing. Western parties to the accord accused Iran, which demands guaranties the deal won’t collapse again, of unreasonable demands, while Tehran slammed the unconstructive approach of certain countries.
Iran to buy, swap 15 mcm per day of Russia’s gas via Azerbaijan
Press TV – September 19, 2022
Iran will import Russian gas through pipelines from Azerbaijan under arrangements agreed in a major deal between Tehran and Moscow two months ago, according to a report published in the local media.
The semi-official Fars news agency said in a Monday report that Iran will buy some 9 million cubic meters (mcm) per day of gas from Russia and will take delivery of another 6 mcm per day under a swap deal for the purpose of delivery to Russian gas customers to the south of Iran.
The report cited data from an internal report of the Iranian Oil Ministry and said the purchase and swap arrangements are related to a $40 billion deal signed in July between Iran’s state oil company the NIOC and Russia’s Gazprom.
Earlier reports had indicated that Iran could take delivery of Russian gas from Turkmenistan for the purpose of swap delivery to Turkey and Iraq.
However, the new data suggest Iran will use the 15 mcm per day of gas supply from Russia to strengthen its domestic supply network in the densely populated regions in the northwest while being able to export increased amounts of natural gas to Turkey and Iraq through pipelines in the west of the country.
Iran is already in a gas swap arrangement with Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan under which it consumes gas received from Turkmenistan in its northeastern regions and delivers the same amount of gas to Azerbaijan.
The Fars report said Iran will deliver the equivalent of 6 mcm per day of gas to Russian customers in the south in the form of liquefied natural gas (LNG). It added that Gazprom will be a partner in the liquefaction process.
‘LPR Referendum Will Turn Ukrainian Strikes Into Attacks Against Russia’
Samizdat – 19.09.2022
Sputnik’s Chief Editor Margarita Simonyan has commented on the Lugansk People’s Republic (LPR) Civic Chamber’s call to hold a referendum to join Russia, calling it an “all-in move” and a Crimean scenario. She noted that should the republic vote affirmatively, it will drastically change the nature of the conflict in Ukraine.
“Today it’s referendum, tomorrow – it’s recognition of LPR as a part of Russia. The day after that, the strikes on the Russian territory become an all-out war of Ukraine and NATO with Russia, which will untie Moscow’s hands in so many aspects,” Simonyan wrote in her Telegram channel.
Simonyan expressed the opinion that the LPR might soon be not the only ones to announce referendums to join Russia.
The head of the LPR Civic Chamber commented in the wake of the address to the republic’s authorities that the referendum on joining Russia is a “matter of more than one day”. He, however, expressed hope that the answer will be given soon.
The LPR declared its independence in 2014 in response to the West-backed coup in Kiev that brought nationalist politicians to power. Russia agreed to recognize the LPR’s statehood in February 2022, signing a treaty of friendship with the republic. Soon after, Moscow answered the call of LPR authorities to protect it against the attacks of the Ukrainian military, which have been going on with varying intensity over the past eight years.
