Russian regrouping in Kharkov will speed up Battle of Donbass
BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | SEPTEMBER 12, 2022
The New York Times has disclosed that the US shared vital intelligence with the Ukrainian military and took part in the preparation of the latter’s current “counteroffensive” near Kharkov. No matter the Biden Administration’s motivations in publicising its role in what western media is celebrating as a success story — presumably, with an eye on domestic politics in America — it could be factually correct. The media leak puts the dramatic happenings in the past 3-4 days in proper perspective.
There are two ways of looking at the surge by the Ukrainian military: one, Kiev has inflicted a heavy defeat on the Russians and forced them to retreat, or, the American intelligence finally got wind of the unobtrusive thinning out of the Russian frontline in Kharkov that had been going on in the recent weeks as part of a larger re-deployment of military formations, and shared the intelligence with Kiev, who of course gleefully acted on it.
The New York Times report effectively confirms the latter reading of the situation, which has been the stuff of hearsay and whispers so far.
Indeed, there has been hardly any fighting as such in Kharkov region during this Ukrainian surge, and the Russian focus was, unsurprisingly, to pull out the residual forces in the frontline under the cover of heavy artillery fire. The Russian operation ensured that there was no significant casualty. The new frontline that was being steadily put together in the recent weeks (or months) along the Oskol River has crystallised.
The withdrawal from the Balakleysko-Izyum direction stemmed from the Russian military command’s appraisal that no useful purpose would be served by maintaining such a frontline. In March, when Russian forces gained control of Izyum, the assumption was that it would help mount an operation from the north toward Sloviansk city in the Kramatorsk district of the Donetsk region. But as it turned out through the past 4 months, Russians apparently gave up that idea altogether.
Make no mistake, the battle for Donbass still remains the number one priority for the Russian special military operation. The re-deployment from the Balakleysko-Izyum direction will now significantly strengthen the offensive in Donbass instead of weakening it, as some western journalists are speculating. The confusion arises out of the ancient legend of Izium being the “gateway” to the Donbass and the Black Sea. Whereas, today, with modern communication, Russian supply lines to the Donbass can be sustained even without such a “gateway” from the north.
Second, Izyum itself is in a heavily wooded region — some call it Sherwood Forest — to its west where the Ukrainian forces had fortified themselves and the Russian presence had come under attack even previously also. Simply put, continued occupation of Izyum would only be a drain on manpower.
That said, the optics of the happenings in the Balakleysko-Izyum direction have triggered a wave of criticism within Russia itself about inept mishandling by the military command, and some of it was even directed at President Putin himself. The military command comes under pressure to show “results” in the Donbass campaign. Suffice to say, there might be some rethink too on the Russian strategy so far to depend on militia groups to do the heavy lifting rather than regular troops from its armed forces.
In reality, Kharkov Region has been largely a sideshow so far. The fact that there are no plans to hold any referendum in Kharkov — unlike in Kherson and Zaporozhia in the south in early September (which now stands postponed) — speaks for itself.
To be sure, last week’s happenings in the Balakleysko-Izyum direction will come as a big morale booster for the Ukrainian armed forces. This will have implications for the future. For one thing, Kiev will have no inclination whatsoever for peace talks. The thundering statement by Ukraine’s Minister of Defense Oleksiy Reznikov on Sunday sets the threshold of belligerence: “Kyiv is ready for negotiations after the vacation [by Russia] of all territories of Ukraine — within the limits of December 1, 1991. There are no more options for ‘February 24’ for Ukraine.”
That is to say, the plans of the command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are to completely “liberate” all “occupied” territories, including Donbass and Crimea, and nothing less! Interestingly, Reznikov was reacting to a statement by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to the effect that Moscow does not reject negotiations with Ukraine, but further delay in peace talks by Kiev will complicate the possibility of reaching an agreement.
According to the Secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council Danilov, Kiev is already considering options for accepting the surrender of Russia, as well as dividing it into several nice little states! Such a level of madness and war hysteria will make things extremely difficult for the Biden Administration to carry forward the incipient signs of moderation and realism that were straining to surface in the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s rhetoric during his visit to Kiev last Friday.
Blinken reacted cautiously when asked by the travelling media party about the Ukrainian “counteroffensive.” He said: “yes, we did get a comprehensive update on the counteroffensive… it’s very early but we’re seeing clear and real progress on the ground, particularly in the area around Kherson but also some interesting developments in the Donbass in the east. But again, early days.”
Earlier in Kiev, Blinken did not respond to President Zelensky’s bottom line during their joint media appearance that he regarded the US support to be “a guarantee of the possibility of returning our territories, our lands.”
General Mark Milley, US chairman, Chiefs of Staff, also was noticeably circumspect about the Ukrainian counteroffensive in his remarks on Saturday in an interview with the National Public Radio. The general said it remains to be seen what is happening in the next few weeks. “It is a very, very difficult task that the Ukrainians are undertaking — combining their offence with manoeuver,” the general said.
While the regrouping of troops in the Kharkov region will enable the Russian forces to concentrate their attention on establishing full control over the territory of the Donetsk, it is not as if the military command has turned its back on Kharkov.
The Russian Ministry of Defence on Monday stated that Russian Aerospace Forces, missile troops and artillery “continued to launch high-precision attacks” at the Ukrainian units and reserve forces in Kharkov region. The Ukrainian forces that used to be in well-fortified positions in that heavily wooded region have now stepped out into the open and are being targeted for intense air, missile and artillery strikes.
The Russian MOD stated on Saturday that more than 2,000 Ukrainian fighters were killed near Balakleya and Izyum in the previous three days alone. For sure, a few thousand more troops would have suffered injuries too. Considering that a 15000-strong Ukrainian force is estimated to be involved in the entire Kharkov operation, that is a very heavy loss. Over time, Kiev may have little to celebrate about.
US military renewing interest in artillery as Russia dominates the battlefield
By Drago Bosnic | September 7, 2022
Artillery has been an integral part of warfare for centuries, but its impact has become exponentially more prominent in the last two centuries, with the advent of the Industrial Revolution and the resulting mass-production economies. The majority of combat deaths in the Napoleonic, First and Second World Wars were fought for the main part with artillery. Napoleon himself said that “God is on the side with the best artillery,” while Joseph Stalin stated that “Artillery is the God of war.”
Although the Napoleonic Wars and even the Second World War might seem too distant for us to even contemplate any similarities with modern 21st-century warfare, the truth is that little has changed in this regard. Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine has proven this to be true. While air power, drones, long-range missiles and other modern weapons play a significant part in shaping the battlefield, the truth is that artillery is still doing most of the work.
Both the Russian Armed Forces and the Kiev regime’s troops have inherited enormous quantities of artillery from the former Soviet military and both have deployed it en masse. Artillery is playing an indispensable role in determining the balance of power on the ground, with the Kiev regime asking the political West for as many towed and self-propelled guns as possible in order to counter Russia’s dominance.
The problem is that NATO and other US-aligned countries have put a lot more emphasis on air power, especially as Western combat experience in the last two to three decades indicates that air power alone should be enough to win wars. While this might be true against numerous opponents with no ways to counter the US and NATO air dominance, nothing could be further from the truth when it comes to countries like Russia, which has been a world leader in air defense for over half a century now and is also fielding the second most powerful air force on the planet.
Questioned before the House Armed Services Committee on May 12, Secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth and Army Chief of Staff General James McConville both concluded when asked “What are the systems that are going to put you into position to win that fight like the fight that’s playing out in Ukraine?” that long-range artillery and tactical missiles would be essential. General McConville stated that these systems have been key priorities for Army modernization. In addition to tactical missiles, the US Military Industrial Complex is having trouble replacing artillery munitions for the US Army, which is creating problems for both the US itself and the Kiev regime, which cannot hope to match the Russian military’s artillery volume. Back in mid-June, retired US Colonel and former Virginia State Senator Richard H. Black stated:
“Yes, the war is not over, but it is lost. Let me tell you why. This has become an artillery duel: Russia fires 50,000 shells a day, 10 times more than Ukraine. Washington Post says that Ukraine is almost completely without weapons and there were no analogs left from the Soviet era. On June 10, the same Washington Post said that Ukraine was suffering thousands of casualties, including at least 200 killed per day. Casualties doubled in just three weeks. With a population much smaller than the US, Ukraine loses 6,000 soldiers every month, 12 times more than America lost in Vietnam. The Ukrainians fought with courage, but no nation can sustain such huge casualties for long. Ukraine is finished.”
According to Task & Purpose, back in February 2018, the US Army asked Congress for money to buy approximately 150,000 shells for 155mm howitzers. Although this represented an 825% increase in the number of shells the US Army wanted to acquire, the very fact that the Russian military fired as many shells in just three days is a testament to the massive discrepancy in doctrine between the two superpower militaries.
Since February, the US has provided 806,000 shells for 155mm howitzers and another 108,000 shells for 105mm guns to the Kiev regime, according to the US Department of Defense. That’s close to 1 million shells in approximately six months, and the figure doesn’t even include the precision-guided rockets for the M142 HIMARS that the US military has also handed over to the Neo-Nazi junta forces.
“The use of artillery in warfare has always involved huge expenditures of ammunition,” retired Marine Col. Mark Cancian, with the Center for International Studies think tank in Washington DC, told Task & Purpose. “Artillery expenditures increase substantially when front lines stabilize as has happened in Ukraine,” Cancian added. “When there’s a lot of battlefield movement, artillery expenditures ease off because batteries on the move can’t fire and transportation of ammunition becomes harder. The stabilized front lines and consequent large increases in artillery firing often lead to a ‘shell shortage.'”
“One problem facing the United States now is that much of its industrial capacity to produce artillery shells went away after the end of the [First] Cold War more than 30 years ago, and 155mm shells have a life expectancy of 20 years,” retired Col. said.
The Wall Street Journal has also revealed that defense officials are concerned that the US military’s stockpile of 155mm shells has become “uncomfortably low.” This might soon become a problem for the Kiev regime, as its forces, although already outgunned at 10:1, are burning through artillery munitions much faster than the current Western production capacity can cover.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
IAEA chief contradicts Kiev’s politicisation of visit to Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant
By Ahmed Adel | September 6, 2022
The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Grossi, contradicted Ukrainian authorities on August 31 by stressing that his visit to the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant was a “technical mission” that aimed to prevent a nuclear accident. His comments came as Kiev claimed his visit was a step towards “de-occupying” the power plant from Russian control.
Grossi, who led the mission, arrived on August 31 to the Ukrainian city of Zaporizhzhia, near the powerplant. Asked about whether the plant could become a demilitarised zone, he said that “this is a matter of political will”, adding: “But my mission – I think it’s very important to establish (this) with all clarity – my mission is a technical mission.”
“It’s a mission that seeks to prevent a nuclear accident. And to preserve this important (nuclear power plant),” he said.
On August 31, Ukrainian Energy Minister German Galushchenko told Reuters that the IAEA mission to the Russian-held Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant was a step towards “deoccupying and demilitarising” the site, prompting Grossi to stress that it was just purely a “technical mission”.
The nuclear power plant, the largest in Europe, was captured by Russian forces in March but is still operated by Ukrainian staff. The site is less than 10 km away from Ukrainian positions across the Dnipro River and has come under repeated shelling over the past month, with Ukraine and Russia accusing each other of being responsible.
Many are finding it hard to believe that Russia is responsible for the shelling as it has nothing to gain by destroying vital infrastructure that it already controls. Meanwhile, Ukraine could be motivated to shell the plant as it can continue manipulating Western audiences via its intense media campaign by denying such attacks and claiming that Russia will soon be responsible for a nuclear catastrophe.
Arriving at the site, Grossi said “The difference between having the IAEA at the site and not having us there is like day and night. I remain gravely concerned about the situation at the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant – this hasn’t changed – but the continued presence of the IAEA will be of paramount importance in helping to stabilise the situation. I’m immensely proud of the critically important and courageous work the IAEA team is now able to perform at the ZNPP.”
Although Kiev attempted to manipulate such statements to mean that Russia will soon abandon the site, it also means that there will be neutral observers to any future attack against the power plant. Despite it not being the IAEA’s mission to hold anyone accountable for attacks as their focus is purely technical, they will be eyewitnesses to any strikes, and Kiev might want to avoid another fiasco like the uncovering of the “Ghost of Kiev” and “Snake Island” myths.
Explaining the nature of his trip, Grossi said: “Our team on the ground received direct, fast and reliable information about the latest significant development affecting the plant’s external power situation, as well as the operational status of the reactors. We already have a better understanding of the functionality of the reserve power line in connecting the facility to the grid. This is crucial information in assessing the overall situation there.”
With Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant working at limited capacity, it also means that Ukraine misses out on potential new opportunities for revenue, especially at a time when Europe hopes nuclear energy can help offset the loss of oil and natural gas imports from Russia that were imposed through self-destructive sanctions, which are now massively backfiring.
Although Germany planned to close all of its nuclear reactors by the end of the year, there is debate on whether to keep them open as the country faces an economic crisis not seen since last century’s two world wars. Neighbouring Belgium, which was planning to close two reactors by 2025, has decided to keep them operating until at least the 2030’s. France, going in the complete opposite direction to Germany and Belgium, is looking to build an additional 14 reactors over the coming decades, as are the United Kingdom, Czech Republic, Poland and others.
None-the-less, Kiev’s attempt to politicise the IAEA mission completely failed as the agency made it clear that its only intentions are technical in nature. This will not deter Kiev from continuing such attempts of politicising the agency, and it remains to be seen whether the IAEA will go down the path of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which was humiliatingly caught-out covering up a damning report regarding Syria and lost its credibility.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
Biden regime asks for more money for Ukraine
Samizdat | September 3, 2022
The White House asked Congress on Friday to approve another $11.7 billion in military aid for Ukraine amid its conflict with Russia.
The sum was included in an emergency funding request for $47.1 billion, which the Biden administration said was also required for its response to Covid-19 and monkeypox, as well as disaster relief efforts.
The $11.7 billion package includes $4.5 billion for military equipment and the replenishment of Pentagon stockpiles, $2.7 billion on defense and intelligence aid for Ukraine, and $4.5 billion on budgetary support for the government in Kiev.
“We have rallied the world to support the people of Ukraine to defend their democracy and we simply cannot allow that support to Ukraine to run dry,” White House Office of Management and Budget Director Shalanda Young wrote in a blog post.
The administration also requested $2 billion to alleviate the negative effects of the conflict in Ukraine, as well as Western sanctions imposed on Russia affecting energy supplies in the US.
The US has been the main backer of Kiev in its conflict with Moscow, providing the Ukrainian forces with billions of dollars in military and financial aid, as well as intelligence data. Washington’s deliveries to the Zelensky government have included such sophisticated hardware as HIMARS multiple rocket launchers, M777 howitzers, and combat drones.
Congress approved a $40 billion military and humanitarian support package for Ukraine in May. According to Young, around three-quarters of the aid that lawmakers provided to Kiev has already been disbursed or committed. “As we said at the time, those resources were intended to last through September,” she explained.
Russia has repeatedly criticized the deliveries of weapons to Kiev from Washington and its allies, saying they won’t change the outcome of the conflict, but will prolong the fighting and increase the risk of a direct confrontation between Moscow and NATO.
Washington’s “ever more obvious and deeper involvement in Ukraine in terms of countering our military operation, in fact, puts… the US on the verge of turning into a party to the conflict,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov warned last month.
‘Ukrainian troops captured during raid on nuclear plant’
Samizdat – September 1, 2022
Three Ukrainian soldiers, who participated in a botched attempt to capture the Russian-controlled Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant on Thursday morning, have been taken alive, Vladimir Rogov, a council member in the Moscow-allied administration of Ukraine’s Zaporozhye Region, has claimed.
Of the three, two have been injured and are in serious condition, the official said in an interview with Russian television. Doctors are fighting to save them, he added. An estimated 12 Ukrainian troops are still fighting against Russian forces, he claimed.
The Russian Defense Ministry previously claimed that early in the morning, Kiev launched an operation apparently aimed at taking the nuclear site ahead of an inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Some of the Ukrainian troops failed to reach the southern bank of the Dnepr when their vessels were hit and sank, the ministry stated. Up to 60 commandos used speedboats to make a landing, before Russian forces engaged them, the report said.
The power plant and the surrounding city of Energodar have been under Russian control since March. Throughout August, it came under regular fire, which Kiev and Moscow blamed on each other. Ukrainian officials also accused Russia of stationing heavy weapons at the nuclear facility.
The IAEA’s fact-finding mission is expected to arrive in Energodar later in the day, though there were reports that their progress was interrupted by military activity. Russia and Ukraine have accused each other of attempting to derail the inspection.
Macron Reportedly Asks Iran to Mediate in Ukraine War
Al-Manar | August 31, 2022
An Iranian news source on Wednesday reported that French President Emmanuel Macron wants Iran to mediate in Ukraine’s crisis.
Mohammad Jamshidi, the director of the Iranian president’s office for political affairs, early Wednesday in a tweet announced that one of the senior leaders of Western Europe had requested the Iranian President to help mediate the war in Europe.
After a series of consultations, a peace initiative was sent to Moscow along with an important message by the Iranian Foreign Minister Hussein Amir-Abdollahian, Jamshidi added.
After Jamshidi posted the tweet, ISNA News Agency reported that the senior European official who requested the mediation of the President of Iran is Emmanuel Macron, the President of France.
Amir-Abdollahian, who left for Moscow on Tuesday night to meet with Lavrov, held a meeting with the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs on Wednesday.
Iranian Foreign Minister before his departure to Moscow said that trying to solve the crisis in Ukraine is the main purpose of his visit.
The main purpose of the trip to Moscow is to try to solve the crisis in Ukraine based on the request made from the Islamic Republic of Iran, he said, adding that some Western parties want Tehran to play an active role in this regard.
7 nations ready to revoke recognition of Kosovo – Belgrade
Samizdat – August 28, 2022
Belgrade has managed to convince seven nations to withdraw their recognition of Kosovo, Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic said on Saturday, addressing the nation. The president did not name specific countries that had told Belgrade they would do so but still praised the development as an achievement of Serbian diplomacy, demonstrating that Serbia enjoys the support of the majority of the world.
“At this moment, in my drawer and in the drawer of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, there are seven documents confirming Kosovo’s derecognition,” Vucic said during his address. He then said that Pristina in particular seeks recognition from Vietnam and Kenya, adding that Belgrade “also worked” with these nations. It remained unclear, however, if the positions of these two nations on Kosovo had changed in any way.
Instead, Vucic said that his nation’s diplomats “did not sit idly by” in the face of Kosovo’s “constant” attempts to win over the international community for its cause. “Now, the number of countries that have withdrawn their recognition has increased from four to seven,” he added.
Serbia’s foreign minister, Nikola Selakovic, said in May that four nations had withdrawn their recognition of Kosovo but did not name them either. These nations would be named when necessary, he said at that time.
Vucic made his remarks as Serbia and Kosovo reached a deal on freedom of movement. Belgrade agreed to allow holders of Kosovo IDs to freely travel to Serbia and Pristina said it would grant the same rights to the holders of Serbian IDs, including the Kosovo Serbs living in the northern part of the breakaway region. Vucic maintained that the measure was taken solely “for practical reasons” and does not constitute a step towards Pristina’s recognition by Belgrade.
The deal mediated by the EU followed weeks of tensions between Serbia and Kosovo. Certain issues straining relations between Pristina and Belgrade, including license plates, remain unresolved.
Less than a half of the UN member states have recognized Kosovo since the breakaway region unilaterally declared its independence from Belgrade back in 2008. Not all EU members recognize Kosovo either: Greece, Romania, Slovakia and Spain have not done this so far.
Out of the G20, 11 nations recognize it and eight do not. Those not recognizing the breakaway region’s independence include Russia, China, India, Brazil, South Africa, Argentina, Indonesia and Mexico.
Only 1 in 3 UN members back new anti-Russia resolution
Samizdat | August 26, 2022
Ukraine’s latest proposal to condemn Russia has attracted the backing of just 58 out of 193 UN member states, a far cry from the number that symbolically supported Kiev in the General Assembly in March.
Kiev’s envoy to the UN Sergey Kislitsa heralded the proposed resolution on Wednesday, following the Security Council meeting convened on Ukraine’s independence day. The session featured a video address by President Vladimir Zelensky, for which the council had to override protocol requiring in-person appearances, and a series of statements by Western governments denouncing Russia.
Moscow’s envoy Vassily Nebenzia provided the counterpoint by introducing evidence of Ukrainian atrocities into the record and even naming Kiev’s western backers as accomplices in specific instances.
Kislitsa’s resolution also fell short of the support Kiev had back in March, right after the start of the Russian military operation. At the March 2 General Assembly session,141 member countries – or 73% of the UN – voted for a nonbinding resolution to condemn Moscow.
This week, however, that support stood at 30%, with no African, Persian Gulf or BRICS countries on board – and only two Latin American governments, Colombia and Guatemala, standing with Ukraine.
Solomon Islands snub US request to dock ship
The US Coast Guard vessel was diverted to Papua New Guinea after its call for access to a Solomon Islands’ port was ignored
Samizdat | August 26, 2022
A vessel of the US Coast Guard was prevented from entering the Solomon Islands for a routine refueling stop, because the Pacific nation’s government did not respond to its request for port access, Reuters has reported, citing an American official.
The USCGC Oliver Henry was out patrolling for illegal fishing in the region when it attempted and failed to gain access to Honiara port for refueling, the news agency wrote on Friday.
The Solomons’ government “did not respond” to the US request for diplomatic clearance, Kristin Kam, public affairs officer for the US Coast Guard in Hawaii, told Reuters. Kam said the US Department of State was “in contact” with Honiara and expects “all future clearances will be provided to US ships.”
The US vessel was instead diverted to Papua New Guinea, another official told the news agency.
Reports on social media suggested that a British navy ship had also been refused port access this week. The HMS Spey was also taking part in monitoring waters for illegal fishing for the Pacific Islands Forum, which holds annual surveillance operations with help from the US, Australia, New Zealand and France.
A Royal Navy spokesperson told Reuters that its ships’ programmes are “under constant review” and it is not unusual for them to change. “For reasons of operational security we do not discuss details,” the spokesperson said, adding that the UK navy “looks forward to visiting the Solomon Islands at a later date”.
Honiara did not answer Reuters’ request for comment.
The apparent refusal to grant entry to the Western ships comes amid heightened tensions with the US and Australia following the Solomons’ signing of a security pact with China earlier this year.
Beijing has already begun training local troops on the islands, prompting alarm in Australia, where there are fears China will use the agreement to establish a military base there. Australia has since promised to “step up” its military presence in the Pacific, with China responding by accusing Australia of encouraging an “arms race” in the region.
CIA Threatens Turkish Businessmen Over Trade With Russia
Samizdat – 26.08.2022
ANKARA – The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) used intimidation against Turkish businessmen involved in trade with Russia, prying into their real estate contracts with Russians, Turkish daily Yeni Safak reported on Friday.
According to the newspaper, the CIA Turkey chief called and “openly threatened” the officials of construction companies with links to housing purchases made by Russian entities and individuals. The CIA official reportedly interviewed Turkish businessmen, asking them about the number of houses sold to Russians, the currency used in transactions and other confidential details.
Another instance of “meddling” in Turkish internal affairs includes a letter which, according to Yeni Safak, US Deputy Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo sent to Turkish Industry and Business Association (TUSIAD). The letter, reportedly dated this Monday, threatened to impose sanctions on TUSIAD members that were doing business with Russia.
Adeyemo also held a phone call with Turkish Deputy Finance Minister Yunus Elitas last Friday, in which he raised concerns that Russian entities and individuals are attempting to use Turkey to circumvent sanctions imposed by the West.
The US and a number of aligned countries began imposing sanctions on Russian individuals and entities in response to the launch of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine in late February. So far, Turkey has not joined the sanctions regime against Moscow.
Senators demand NIH, HHS preserve all related documents, communications, promise ‘full-throated investigation’ of Fauci
By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | August 24, 2022
Two U.S. senators on Tuesday — the day after Dr. Anthony Fauci announced plans to leave his government posts in December — formally requested the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) preserve all documents and communications related to Fauci.
Fauci on Monday said he will retire as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and as chief medical adviser to President Joe Biden in December to pursue “the next chapter” of his career.
In a letter to HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) demanded Becerra “immediately confirm” that HHS is preserving all records related to Fauci and Dr. Francis Collins, who was director of the NIH from August 2009 to December 2021.
“This request applies to all documents, records, memoranda, research, correspondence, or other communication or any portion thereof relevant to any involvement of Dr. Fauci or Dr. Collins,” the letter stated.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), in a letter to Lawrence Tabak, D.D.S., Ph.D., acting director of the NIH, asked Tabak to “ensure the preservation of all documents and communications within Dr. Fauci’s possession related to his tenure at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).”
Marshall stressed that it is “imperative” that all HHS workers are made aware of their “legal responsibilities to collect, retain, and preserve all documents, communications, and other records in accordance with federal law.”
He also reminded Tabak of his obligation, as the head of HHS, to ensure the preservation of all records and that any employee “who conceals, destroys, or attempts to conceal or destroy a federal record may be subject to fine and imprisonment for up to three years.”
Marshall pointed out that HHS previously refused to provide information to Congress:
“HHS and component agencies, including NIH in particular, continue to obstruct numerous congressional investigations through refusal to provide responsive information.
“In addition to withholding information from Congress, private parties note that NIH refuses to comply with Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests until forced to do so by court order.”
Marshall went on to list “recent egregious examples” of NIH’s failure to meet record-keeping requirements and said that “even one” such example “should instigate immediate oversight action by HHS.”
Marshall’s letter outlined four “notable recent concerns” with NIH’s record-keeping, including past accusations that NIH destroyed records, potential conflicts of interest within the HHS Office of Inspector General, NIH’s practice of “self-policing” and NIH’s failure to ensure required reporting of clinical trial results.
‘Fauci’s resignation will not prevent full-throated investigation into origins of pandemic’ — Rand Paul
Paul, in his letter to Tabak, also emphasized the need to preserve NIH documents for investigation purposes.
Paul wrote:
“This information is critical to ensure that Congress has access to information necessary to conduct proper oversight regarding events that took place during Dr. Fauci’s tenure with the agency.
“Specifically, I request you preserve all records, e-mail, electronic documents, and data created by or shared with Dr. Fauci during his tenure at NIH that relate to COVID-19 including, but not limited to, NIAID-funded coronavirus research.”
In an email today, Paul told The Defender :
“Dr. Fauci misled the American people on public health guidance throughout the pandemic, lied to Congress under oath, and funneled tax dollars to fund dangerous research in communist China.
“The American people deserve transparency and accountability from the NIH regarding the COVID-19 pandemic regardless of Dr. Fauci’s future employment plans.”
On Monday, Paul tweeted, “Fauci’s resignation will not prevent a full-throated investigation into the origins of the pandemic. He will be asked to testify under oath regarding any discussions he participated in concerning the lab leak.”
For more than a year, Paul has advocated for a thorough investigation into the origins of COVID-19 and pushed for a criminal investigation of Fauci, whose NIAID research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China Paul suggested may have been involved in creating the virus.
Following up on a threat he made in mid-July of 2021, Rand sent an official criminal referral on Fauci to the U.S. Department of Justice on July 26, 2021.
Paul asked Attorney General Merrick Garland to investigate Fauci for allegedly lying to Congress when he said the NIH “has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology.”
The week before he sent the official criminal referral, Paul asked Fauci if he wanted to retract the statement he made to Congress during a May 11 hearing. Paul said, “Dr. Fauci, knowing that it is a crime to lie to Congress, do you wish to retract your statement of May 11, where you claimed the NIH never funded gain-of-function research and move on?”
Fauci replied he would not retract the statement and was adamant he never lied before Congress.
However, Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson said on June 2, 2021, that evidence showed Fauci was “implicated in the very pandemic he had been charged with fighting.”
Emails obtained by BuzzFeed via the Freedom of Information Act show “Fauci supported the grotesque and dangerous experiments that appeared to have made COVID possible,” Carlson said.
The emails, which date back to the early winter of 2020, show Fauci was worried the public would think COVID-19 originated at the Wuhan lab. Why?
“Possibly because Tony Fauci knew perfectly well he had funded gain-of-function experiments at that very same laboratory,” Carlson said.
The emails showed Fauci and other top virologists shared an article from ZeroHedge suggesting COVID-19 was a man-made bioweapon. Despite it being a “plausible explanation,” said Carlson, ZeroHedge was banned from social media.
Carlson said:
“Until recently, you were not allowed to suggest that COVID might be man-made. Why couldn’t you suggest that? The fact checkers wouldn’t allow it. Why wouldn’t they? Because Tony Fauci assured the tech monopolies that the coronavirus could not have been manmade. And so the tech monopolies shut down the topic.”
NIAID has, for years, provided grants to the EcoHealth Alliance and others to conduct gain-of-function research on coronaviruses, as The Defender previously reported.
In March 2021, the Wuhan lab deleted mentions of its collaboration with the NIAID/NIH and other American research partners from its website. It also deleted descriptions of gain-of-function experiments on the SARS virus, according to Dr. Joseph Mercola.
“The NIH/NIAID has funded GOF [gain-of-function] research to the tune of at least $41.7 million,” Mercola said. “Up until 2014, this research was conducted by Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina.”
After 2014, when federal funding of gain-of-function research was banned, the research was funneled to the Wuhan lab via the EcoHealth Alliance.
Mercola added:
“In August 2020, the NIAID announced a five-year, $82-million investment in a new global network of Centers for Research in Emerging Infectious Diseases that will conduct GOF experiments to ‘determine what genetic or other changes make [animal] pathogens capable of infecting humans.’”
Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is an independent journalist and researcher based in Fairfield, Iowa.
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.
Download for Free: Robert F. Kennedy’s New Book — ‘A Letter to Liberals’
Washington Is Gaslighting Us About Taiwan
By Patrick Macfarlane | The Libertarian Institute | August 25, 2022
Since Nancy Pelosi’s purposeless diplomatic visit to Taipei on August 2, cross-strait tensions have soared between China and Taiwan. Pelosi’s envoy has effectively reduced U.S.-China relations to its lowest point since at least 1995—when diplomatic efforts between Washington and Taipei instigated a tit-for-tat military standoff between Washington and Beijing.
In response to Pelosi’s visit, China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) launched an unprecedented series of military drills in six marine sectors around Taiwan. The drills included anti-submarine and sea assault operations and a simulated blockade of the island. Chinese fighters and warships crossed the Taiwan Strait’s median line every day that the drills took place.
The high point of Beijing’s response occurred immediately after Pelosi’s departure from Taiwan when it launched a rocket barrage over the island.
After the trip, U.S. officials and pundits redoubled their attempts to cast Beijing’s response as an unprovoked overreaction as they had done in the days preceding it. Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s August 1 pre-visit statement is emblematic of the war party’s post-trip spin:
What I can say is this: this is very much precedent in the sense that a previous speaker has visited Taiwan, many members of congress go to Taiwan, including this year and so if the Speaker does decide to visit and China decides to create some kind of crisis or otherwise escalate tensions, that would be entirely on Beijing. We are looking for them, in the event she decides to visit, to act responsibly and not to engage in any escalation going forward.
Blinken’s statement, and the cacophony of hawkishness that echoes it, are classic examples of gaslighting.
In modern parlance the term “gaslighting” broadly denotes a pattern of manipulation that victims experience in abusive relationships.
Psychology Today defines it thusly:
Gaslighting is an insidious form of manipulation and psychological control. Victims of gaslighting are deliberately and systematically fed false information that leads them to question what they know to be true, often about themselves. They may end up doubting their memory, their perception, and even their sanity. Over time, a gaslighter’s manipulations can grow more complex and potent, making it increasingly difficult for the victim to see the truth.
The phenomenon was professionally documented, perhaps for the first time, in a 1969 article published in The Lancet. Entitled “The Gas-Light Phenomenon,” the article examines three case studies in which families attempt to rid themselves of an unwanted member by convincing said member, and the target institution, that the member qualifies for admittance due to a mental condition the family manufactured.
The 1969 article named the phenomenon after the 1938 play “Gas Light,” in which a husband attempts to rid himself of his wife by “driving her into a mental asylum.” The story was later popularized by the 1944 film of the same name staring Charles Boyer, Ingrid Bergman, and Joseph Cotten.
The specific gaslit arguments that the hawks employ against China are as follows:
1. Beijing is overreacting.
On August 4, the National Security Council’s strategic communications coordinator John Kirby told reporters:
China has chosen to overreact and use the Speaker’s visit as a pretext to increase provocative military activity in and around the Taiwan Strait. We anticipated that China might take steps like this. (Emphasis Added)
Kirby’s statement itself betrays his desired narrative. He implies that Pelosi’s visit was a convenient pretext for Beijing to justify an increase in its military activity in the strait. This framing does not comport with reality. On the contrary, Beijing repeatedly warned against the visit. Even if Beijing was insincere in its warnings and was looking for such a pretext, Pelosi provided it.
Furthermore, Kirby himself admits that Washington anticipated Beijing’s reaction. Despite this, the White House took no action—formal or otherwise—to prevent Pelosi from going.
2. Pelosi’s visit has precedent.
The war party line, that Pelosi’s trip has precedent, is true—but only to the extent that former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich did indeed fly to Taiwan in 1997 to meet with the then-president of Taiwan, Lee Teng-hui. That is where the similarity ends.
In truth, the 1997 trip occurred under very different circumstances.
For one, Gingrich visited Beijing and Shanghai before flying to Taiwan. Second, Beijing also opposed Gingrich’s visit to Taiwan. Chinese officials begrudgingly approved of the Taiwan stop only after Gingrich threatened to cancel the Chinese leg of his tour. Third, Gringrich’s visit occurred shortly after the Third Taiwan Strait Crisis–an event that began when President Clinton issued a visa to Lee Teng-hui to speak at Cornell University. After having just deescalated from the brink of war, it is likely that Beijing desired normal relations with the United States. Fourth, in 1997, the United States did not have the regular military presence in the Indo-Pacific that it now has. Fifth, Pelosi’s 2022 trip expressly considered “mutual security,” which in the Indo-Pacific can only mean confronting China. Finally, in 1997 the Chinese military only possessed a fraction of the strength it now does.
In his August 1 statement, Blinken stated “many members of Congress go to Taiwan.” This is also true, however, China always objects to these delegations and normally responds to them with military exercises.
3. Beijing’s military drills are a reckless and unprovoked provocation
The undeniable truth is that before learning of Pelosi’s visit, Beijing was not planning military exercises anywhere near the size and scope of those performed after her visit. Beijing repeatedly warned Washington of the dire consequences of the visit. Pelosi went anyway. Washington did nothing to stop her. Beijing directly cited the drills as a consequence for the visit.
This observation is not to say that Beijing is a completely innocent victim. It should not be conducting the drills, but there is no evidence to suggest that the drills would have happened absent Pelosi’s visit. Actions have reactions.
4. Pelosi’s visit does not contradict longstanding U.S. policy.
The Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 expressly “terminate[s] governmental relations between the United States and the governing authorities on Taiwan.” The United States does not and should not have formal or informal diplomatic relations with Taiwan.
What is it called when the sitting Speaker of the House, the third in line to the presidency, has a meeting with the sitting president of Taiwan?
5. Pelosi’s visit is not a danger to China.
According to the One-China policy, Taiwan is China. This is official United States policy—at least on paper.
Through the decades, especially since the beginning of the Trump administration, the United States has been moving away from the One-China policy and its “strategic ambiguity” regarding the actions it will take to defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion.
Pelosi’s visit is a late stage step toward a formal American repudiation of the One-China policy. Indeed, her delegation has likely ushered in a new era of militarization in the region, all of it likely foreseen—and perhaps desired—by the U.S.
Since Pelosi’s visit, two additional congressional delegations have visited the island. The first delegation arrived August 14 and was composed of Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass) and four other members. The delegation reportedly asked Taiwanese lawmakers how they felt about “strategic ambiguity” and if they would like the policy changed to “strategic clarity.” The delegation discussed regional security and increasing economic ties between Washington and Taipei.
The second delegation arrived in Taiwan on August 21 and met with Taiwanese officials about formalizing economic ties, mainly the production of superconductors. The delegation came in after the White House announced formal trade talks to occur this fall.
Increasing cooperation between the U.S. and Taiwan will further economic decoupling between both the U.S. and China and Taiwan and China. Economic ties between each are a major impediment to war. Furthermore, close military ties between the U.S. and Taiwan could give the U.S. a permanent military presence within China, as was the case before 1979. China will not allow this to happen.
American China hawks have used the above arguments to manufacture consent for increasing confrontation over Taiwan, including forthcoming “‘air and maritime transits’ in the Taiwan Strait” that could lead to war. Much like the Lancet’s case study, these hawks must convince the American public to distrust their own perceptions of reality to do so.
How else could anyone believe that Beijing’s actions came out of the clear blue sky?
Patrick MacFarlane is the Justin Raimondo Fellow at the Libertarian Institute where he advocates a noninterventionist foreign policy. He is a Wisconsin attorney in private practice. He is the host of the Liberty Weekly Podcast at http://www.libertyweekly.net, where he seeks to expose establishment narratives with well researched documentary-style content and insightful guest interviews.
