Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Potential Ukrainian Trace in Trump’s Attempted Murder – Ukrainian Opposition Politician

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 16.07.2024

Volodymyr Zelensky and his backers in the Biden administration would do whatever it takes to destroy those advocating a peaceful settlement in Ukraine, the Other Ukraine movement’s Council Chair Viktor Medvedchuk warned Trump.

Attacks on politicians advocating negotiations and peace in Ukraine have become a worrisome trend, Viktor Medvedchuk, a Ukrainian opposition politician and chairman of the council of the Other Ukraine movement, wrote in an open letter to Donald Trump, the US Republican frontrunner.

“The terrorist [shooter of Trump], whoever he is, was clearly not a lone wolf,” Medvedchuk noted. “On the campaign trail, you [Trump] have repeatedly stated that you will be able to bring peace to the long-suffering Ukrainian land. But this peace means the loss of power by the [Volodymyr] Zelensky [neo-] Nazi regime and its American handlers in the Biden administration.”

“It is because of this, dear Mr. Trump, that you have become a personal enemy of Ukrainian neo-Nazi Zelensky, this scoundrel would do whatever it takes to prevent you from winning the presidential election. I think that a Ukrainian trace will appear in the attempted murder case.”

Medvedchuk drew attention to the fact that a day before the assassination attempt, the chief of Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence Kyrylo Budanov bragged to the Ukrainian press that there had been several attempts, “albeit unsuccessful so far,” to kill Russian President Vladimir Putin.

In May 2023 in one of his interviews, Budanov acknowledged that the Ukrainian intelligence had been involved in terrorist attacks against a number of Russian public and media figures. However, he did not name the victims and refused to answer clarifying questions.

Prior to that, Russian military blogger Maxim Fomin, known to the public by his nom de guerre Vladlen Tatarsky, was killed in April 2023. In August 2022, a Ukrainian sabotage group used a car bomb to kill Daria Dugina, the daughter of Russian philosopher Alexander Dugin, as per Russia’s National Anti-Terrorism Committee.

Medvedchuk didn’t rule out that the May attempted murder of Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico, who ardently advocated halting the flow of EU weapons to Ukraine, was carried out by “another supporter of the Ukrainian neo-Nazi regime.”

“The struggle for peace in Ukraine is increasingly causing open aggression on the part of war supporters and is becoming more and more dangerous,” Medvedchuk stressed.

“Former President of Ukraine and Supreme Commander-in-Chief Zelensky has lost his legitimacy since May 21, 2024; the power has been usurped by a group of conspirators; fundamental human rights have been violated by the incumbent criminal regime; the rule of law and political pluralism have been completely destroyed,” the Ukrainian politician continued.

Zelensky’s personal interest in prolonging hostilities in Ukraine in order to stay in power could lead to an aggravation of the conflict and create a threat to the entire world, concluded Medvedchuk.

July 16, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

MEPs want Hungary stripped of voting rights

RT | July 16, 2024

Scores of European Parliament members have called on Brussels to punish Hungary after its prime minister, Viktor Orban, allegedly abused the bloc’s rotating presidency by launching his Ukraine “peace mission,” Politico reported on Tuesday.

The outlet published a letter signed by 93 MEPs and addressed to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, European Council President Charles Michel, and European Parliament chief Roberta Metsola.

The signatories accused Orban of causing “significant damage by exploiting and abusing the role of the [EU] Council Presidency,” which Hungary assumed earlier this month. The focus of their ire was Orban’s “peace mission” which involved recent visits to Ukraine, Russia, China, and the US.

“Orban deliberately left the impression that he was acting on behalf of the entire European Union,” the letter claimed, despite the leader stressing that he was acting in his capacity as head of the Hungarian government before flying to Moscow earlier this month. MEPs said their assertion was “clearly evidenced” by the fact that senior EU officials had stressed that Orban did not represent the bloc “in any form” during his trips.

The Hungarian leader “is actively pursuing a policy agenda which is contrary to common EU positions,” and “this cannot be allowed to continue,” the MEPs said. They have urged the EU leadership to launch so-called Article 7 proceedings against Hungary.

Widely considered a “nuclear option,” the article allows suspension of voting rights of a member state. The punishment is necessary “since practice has shown that mere verbal condemnations of this situation have no effect,” the letter said.

Hungary has criticized EU policy since hostilities between Ukraine and Russia broke out in February 2022. According to Budapest, Western economic sanctions imposed against Moscow have seriously damaged European economies, while the supply of weapons to Kiev has led to the continuation of hostilities instead of their end. Orban has urged a ceasefire and a negotiated resolution of the crisis, which his critics call a pro-Russian stance.

Orban has detailed his vision of resolving the conflict in a letter to Michel, the European Council president, his office confirmed on Monday. His plan reportedly includes making concessions to Russia in terms of NATO’s expansion in Europe, which Moscow has called one of the key triggers of the confrontation.

Michel has said Brussels should “be smart” about its reaction to Orban’s diplomatic activities, claiming that EU unity could otherwise be seriously damaged.

July 16, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Germany secretly sent ‘huge arms package’ to Ukraine – media

RT | July 15, 2024

The German government secretly delivered a new aid package to Ukraine between late June and early July, the Bavarian daily Munchner Merkur reported on Monday. The paper called the shipment “huge,” adding that it was done in a clandestine manner and went “largely unnoticed.”

The package included 39 pieces of various heavy armor from the stocks of Germany’s military and of its defense enterprises, Merkur reported, after analyzing government data. Kiev received ten more Leopard 1A5 main battle tanks and 20 more Marder infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs), among other extra donations, the outlet said.

According to open data published by Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s cabinet, the total number of Leopard 1A5 tanks and Marder IFVs delivered to Ukraine has grown to 50 and 120 respectively.

Other heavy equipment included in the latest delivery involved various engineering and mine-clearing vehicles, according to the report. The package also included 55,000 155mm artillery rounds, according to the government data.

It also showed that Berlin plans to send, by an unspecified date, 85 more Leopard 1A5 tanks to Ukraine, as part of a joint project with Denmark. The future deliveries are also to include 20 additional Marder IFVs. Merkur reported that Berlin had planned to provide Ukraine with up to 80 Leopards by the end of 2023 but fell behind schedule as the nation’s defense industry struggled to find spare parts for the armor pieces.

According to Merkur, Kiev is still hoping to get enough German tanks to form a specialized brigade for offensive operations and has been “holding back” its remaining western tanks for months.

The Russian military has previously published numerous videos showing German tanks being destroyed with kamikaze drones or even captured by Russian soldiers after being abandoned by their crews.

The latest batch of weapons also included two ground-based IRIS-T air defense systems and three US-made HIMARS multiple rocket launchers. In May, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius vowed Berlin would pay for the delivery of the US-made systems to Ukraine.

Germany has emerged as the second largest single military donor to Ukraine throughout the conflict, spending some €10.2 billion ($11.14 billion) on providing arms to Kiev between January 2022 and April 2024, according to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy. Berlin has said some €28 billion ($30.5 billion) has been made available to support Kiev now and in the coming years.

In June, Chancellor Scholz admitted that many Germans were unhappy with the nation’s military support of Ukraine, but he maintained that there was no alternative to arming Kiev. In July, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky stated that his country would “never” have enough weapons.

July 15, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

NATO chief explains why Poland won’t intercept Russian missiles

RT | July 15, 2024

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has ruled out the possibility of Poland intercepting Russian missiles over Ukrainian territory, insisting that the bloc does not want to become directly involved in the conflict with Moscow.

Kiev has urged NATO member Warsaw to use its air defense capabilities to protect western Ukraine without moving the systems away from Polish soil. The idea was floated in the context of a recent Polish-Ukrainian bilateral security agreement, and was reportedly discussed at last week’s NATO summit in Washington.

In an interview given on the sidelines of the event for Ukrainian state television, Stoltenberg said NATO’s position had not changed, and that the best that Kiev can expect is help in targeting Russian warplanes with weapon systems operated by Ukrainian forces.

The idea of NATO intercepting Russian missiles over Ukraine was previously rejected by member states, including Poland. Defense Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz has said that Warsaw won’t engage Russian missiles without the backing of other members.

“If NATO does not make such a decision, Poland will not make it individually,” the minister stressed.

US national security adviser Jake Sullivan claimed that providing air defenses to Kiev is “by far and away the best method of stopping the Russian aerial attacks,” when asked about Poland’s stance last week.

Moscow has described the Ukraine conflict as part of a US-led proxy war, in which NATO nations are involved in every way except by directly fighting Russian forces on the battlefield. Being de facto parties to the hostilities means Western nations share responsibility for Ukrainian war crimes, Russian officials have argued.

July 15, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Orban delivers Ukraine peace proposals to EU – adviser

RT | July 15, 2024

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has sent proposals to EU leaders on ways to resolve the Ukrainian conflict, newspaper Magyar Nemzet reported on Monday, citing the PM’s political adviser Balazs Orban. The proposals are said to be based on the results of the premier’s controversial peace mission earlier this month, during which he visited Ukraine, Russia, and China.

Orban provided EU leaders with a detailed account of his visits, and delivered Budapest’s action plan to their desks, Balazs Orban (no relation) told the newspaper.

The adviser described Budapest’s proposals as being “based on a realistic assessment of the situation” and on setting “realistic goals,” without elaborating further.

Balazs Orban claimed that there are “pro-war” political forces in the EU, and that the bloc is following the lead of the current US administration, which, he said, wants the conflict to continue.

”If Europe wants peace and wants to have a decisive say in the settlement of the war [in Ukraine] and the end of the bloodshed, then the change of course must be worked out and implemented now,” the adviser said.

Hungary is one of the few member states to criticize the bloc’s stance on the conflict. Budapest has refused to go along with Brussels and send weapons to Kiev. It has also stalled financial aid to Ukraine. Viktor Orban’s recent visit to Moscow was condemned by senior EU figures, with Brussels seeking to distance itself from Orban’s efforts.

According to the prime minister’s adviser, external mediators, such as China and Türkiye, could be vital to helping negotiate peace.

Hungary plans to use the six months of its rotating presidency of the, which began in July, to create conditions for peace talks. “If the union does not act now, it may not be able to act later,” Balazs Orban warned.

During his visit to Kiev, the Hungarian leader called on Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky to agree to a ceasefire with Russia, a proposal the latter rejected.

President Putin has repeatedly insisted that the hostilities can only end if Ukraine fulfills several of Russia’s demands – including legally binding guarantees that Kiev will not seek NATO membership, and the withdrawal of troops from the whole of Donbass, as well as the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions.

Kiev, along with its Western backers, have rejected the proposal, calling it an unacceptable ultimatum.

July 15, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Mainstream Media Downplays Tremendous Losses of Western Military Equipment in Ukraine

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 15.07.2024

The Western public has little, if any, knowledge of the scale of losses in troops and equipment sustained by Ukraine since the beginning of the special military operation, international observers say.

The Western press is concealing information about the real state of affairs on the ground in Ukraine, including the mass destruction of NATO weapons provided to the Ukrainian military, and the loss of Ukrainian soldiers, Irish journalist and entrepreneur Chey Bowes wrote on X on July 15.

“Here, yesterday, another €150 million [$163.4 million] of German taxpayers’ money was vaporized in Dictator Zelensky’s Ukraine,” Bowes continued, attaching a video showing the elimination of the German-made IRIS-T anti-aircraft missile system (SAM).

“Russian Iskander missiles completely destroyed the entire complex consisting of an IRIS-T SAM launcher and its TRML-4D radar station – these are the high-tech systems Zelensky is so desperately begging the EUSA for,” the journalist pointed out.

According to Bowes, the reason “the Western media doesn’t want” the public to see this, is “to maintain your ignorance and, therefore, your complicity in the ‘Ukraine can win’ fantasy.”

“After all, you’re paying for it all,” the journalist remarked.

Ukraine has received almost 108 billion euro ($115.9 billion), including 39 billion euro ($41.8 billion) of military aid from the EU since February 2022. The US’ Ukraine expenditures have so far reached $175 billion, of which $107 billion directly aided the Kiev regime, with $34.2 billion being disbursed for budget needs, and another $69.8 billion spent on arms and military assistance.

On Sunday, the Russian Ministry of Defense released footage of the destruction of an IRIS-T launcher in the Dnepropetrovsk region. The air defense missile launcher, the TRML-4D radar station, and the crew operating the system were eliminated, per the ministry.

As of July 14, 551 air defense missile systems, including those supplied by NATO, have been destroyed since the beginning of the special military operation.

July 15, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Will the US-Japan military alliance make any difference?

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – 15.07.2024

The ongoing upgrades to the US-Japan military cooperation signals new regional developments. In reality, however, this upgrade is a continuation of the US strategy in the Pacific to build military outposts so that China can be deterred and tackled. On the one hand, it is militarizing Japan. On the other hand, the sale of weapons keeps bringing money to the US military-industrial complex. Ultimately, this alliance will do little to serve the purpose of ‘containing’ China. Most of the equipment the US is providing is outdated, basically getting rid of the scrap. The modern equipment, on the other hand, is unreliable. Still, Trump’s arrival in the White House could change the dynamics of military cooperation, making things worse.

The Upgrades:

Following the announcements made during the Biden-Kishida summit in April regarding big upgrades to the US-Japan alliance, the upgrade has finally arrived. On the 3rd of July, the Pentagon announced that the US was going to upgrade “tactical aircraft laydown across multiple military installations in Japan”. This so-called “modernization plan” is worth US$ 10 billion that will “bolster regional deterrence, and strengthen peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region”. According to the announcement, the US will replace 48 F-15C/D with 36 F-15EX fighters at Kadena Air Base. The US Air Force will also replace 36 F-16 aircraft with 48 F-35A aircraft at Misawa Air Base. Overall, the plan to “station the Joint Force’s most advanced tactical aircraft in Japan demonstrates the ironclad U.S. commitment to the defence of Japan and both countries’ shared vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific region”. In addition to these new deployments, NATO is also in the middle of releasing its new policy documents outlining its new lines of cooperation with countries like Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and South Korea. There seems to be momentum, but it will soon run into problems that it may not be able to recover from.

Can US-Japan-NATO Counter China?

While the F-15EX seems like a significant upgrade from the outdated F-15C/Ds, they are still no match against China’s growing fleet of stealth fighter jets. It means that were Japan to use these fighters in an offensive against China, they would prove useless since they lack stealth features and would be unable to penetrate a heavily guarded airspace.

While the deployment of F-35 jets does mark a significant upgrade, there are serious questions about its operational and logistic utility, compromising its ability to tackle China’s J-20s. In 2023, according to one estimate, China produced 100 J-20. If China can maintain the same rate, it will have 1,000 J-20s by 2035. The US has less than F-22s, and its F-35 programme continues to run into problems.

The 2023 Annual Report by the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation made some startling observations, saying,

“The F-35 program development cycle continues to experience delays due to immature and deficient Block 4 mission systems software and avionics stability problems with the new Technology Refresh 3 (TR-3) hardware going into Lot 15 production aircraft. As a result, deliveries of production Lot 15 aircraft in the TR-3 configuration are on hold until more testing can be completed and the avionics issues resolved. Additionally, these delays prevented the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) from adequately planning and programming for hardware modifications for OT of the upgraded hardware configuration”.

As a result of these delays and difficulties, only 32 out of 205 baseline DT flights were conducted. The US is now stationing the F-35s in Japan, which basically relies on the assumption that these delays will ultimately be resolved and that Washington will not have to move these F-35s to a different location to meet the recurring shortages. But the reality is that, as the report concludes, “The operational suitability of the F-35 fleet remains below Service expectations and requirements”, which means that, according to the report, out of 628 aircraft produced until now, a majority of them remain “unavailable” for active service throughout most of the year.  In fact, 2023 had fewer available aircraft than 2022. What this ‘upgrade’ will do to Japan’s security is, therefore, not hard to imagine. In the end, other than creating a false sense of security, it might not add any value to Japan’s offensive and defensive capabilities, compromising the politics of ‘China containment’.

The Trump Factor

Former US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House next year is already making Washington’s European allies extremely uneasy. Whereas Trump has thus far signalled that his administration will ideally continue to follow the Biden administration’s policy towards Japan and China, Trump has also assured his voters of the continuation of his “America First” and “Make America Great Again” policies, which also involve, among other things, military disengagements.

Therefore, the existing rhetoric of reassurance notwithstanding, Trump’s politics and/or his geopolitical vision has not seen any change in the recent past. Reports in the US media indicate that “a second Trump administration is likely to be far more disruptive for Asia than the first one was”. What it implies is that, with Trump forcing the US military footprint to reduce worldwide, countries like Japan will need to find ways to become self-reliant. So, instead of depending upon the actual supply and availability of otherwise “unavailable” fifth-generation jets, Tokyo will need to develop an alternative, more reliable strategy – a strategy that should not exclude the possibility of dialogue with China to sort out any existing issues without any external interference.

In fact, since Trump is likely to target China and push the US away from Japan’s military build-up, he is likely to antagonise both states. There is, therefore, an incentive for both Asian giants to collaborate and find peace.

Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.

July 15, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Russia could challenge NATO’s historical air dominance – media

By Ahmed Adel | July 15, 2024

Business Insider reported that NATO had never faced an adversary of Russia’s calibre after World War II, and it would have been difficult for the alliance to establish air superiority over Russian forces. The warning comes as experts have explained the sombre reality that the F-16 fighter jets, a key aircraft in many NATO air force fleets, provided to Kiev will not be a “magic bullet” that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and his Western allies expect them to be.

“Russia could challenge NATO’s historical air dominance,” reported the media on July 13 after explaining that this is a change from the scenario that emerged after the Cold War when the West had a clear advantage. “Russia would be a very different opponent. It has the territory and industry to build and field massive and sophisticated air defenses that an opponent may struggle to destroy.”

“The US and its allies, even with fleets of fifth-generation stealth fighter jets, likely would find it difficult to establish the same level of air dominance they’ve largely had since the end of World War II,” the New York-based outlet said.

According to experts cited by the portal, Western aviation has never had the experience of combating air defence systems at a level similar to that of Russia’s. During the conflict in Ukraine, the Russian military proved that it could establish extremely difficult air defence areas for the enemy with powerful radars, electronic warfare systems and missiles.

“The Russians could attempt a surprising and impactful opening attack,” the article warned. “For example, the Russians could target vulnerabilities like satellites to try to disrupt the space-based communications and navigation NATO airpower depends upon.”

The worry that Russia could establish air superiority over NATO, particularly over the bloc’s 30 European members, became a more serious consideration after Russian forces methodically obliterated Ukraine’s air force. Russia so impressively dismantled the Ukrainian air force that the Kiev regime is desperately seeking F-16 fighter jets from Western allies to replenish its fleet, even though experts are saying that the aircraft is now obsolete and unlikely to survive the conflict.

“As soon as the Ukrainians encountered Russian-controlled air space, the F-16’s value would diminish markedly, as would its likelihood of survival,” Harrison Kass wrote for the National Interest. “In a conflict with a great power, China for example, the F-16 would remain on the backbench.”

This is a telling revelation considering the US still uses over 900 F-16s, NATO members, including Turkey, Greece, Poland, and Romania, use hundreds more, as well as US non-NATO allies Israel, Taiwan and South Korea. In effect, the F-16 would be rendered almost useless against Russia given that the Eastern European country’s military is ranked second, one above China, according to the 2024 PowerIndex.

Kass warns Kiev that the good performance of the F-16 fighter jets in Iraq and Afghanistan does not say anything about their capabilities against Russian air defences.

After stressing that “the F-16 fighting falcon era is coming to a rapid end,” Kass concludes that the US-made fighter jet “will not offer a magic bullet for Zelensky” and will merely “buy a little more time.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned that the F-16s supplied to Kiev will be destroyed just like other Western military equipment. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov also warned that their appearance in Ukraine will not change anything on the front and that they will be destroyed in the same way as other types of weapons.

Nonetheless, in 2023, several NATO states agreed to supply the Ukrainian armed forces with the fighter jets and launched training programs for Ukrainian pilots. On July 10, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that the US and its allies are “underway” in sending the promised F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine.

As Europe and the US are not interested in a viable, pragmatic, and lasting peace agreement in Ukraine which recognises Russian interests in the region and establishes a lasting solution, they are actively prolonging the fighting despite not only the humanitarian consequences but even the weakening of their own military. Whilst NATO members are distracted with training Ukrainian pilots to use fighter jets that are effectively obsolete in any combat with a great power, Russia, as Business Insider has acknowledged, has successfully challenged the air dominance NATO largely enjoyed since the start of the Cold War despite the introduction of fifth-generation fighter jets.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

July 15, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Possible consequences and prospects of Vladimir Putin’s visit to DPRK

By Konstantin Asmolov – New Eastern Outlook – 12.07.2024 

The consequences of the visit of the Russian leader to North Korea and the documents signed there are so significant that they can propel the trend of global turbulence. How have Seoul, Beijing and Washington reacted to such a rapprochement between Moscow and Pyongyang and what will be Moscow’s response to the steps taken by Seoul and its allies?

Seoul’s response 

Until a certain point, Seoul was ‘the friendliest of the unfriendly countries’ – the Russian president recently noted in a positive way. As Vladimir Putin said on June 5, 2024, within the framework of the International Economic Forum in St Petersburg, “Russia highly appreciates the refusal of ROK to directly supply lethal weapons to Ukraine”.

However, such a demonstrative rapprochement between Pyongyang and Moscow cannot be ignored by Seoul, especially since the content of the Treaty (which contains a military component along the lines of the Soviet-North Korean treaty of 1961) has turned out to match the worst expectations of South Korean analysts.

Even before the visit, South Korean diplomats hinted to the author that Seoul would definitely respond to such a level of cooperation between Moscow and Pyongyang, at least for domestic political and reputation reasons. This response would most likely entail boosting Seoul-NATO cooperation to a similar level. The United States, along with its allies and systemic right-wing politicians, are putting pressure on President Yoon Suk Yeol to take a more anti-Russian stance, especially on the Ukrainian track; Seoul is constantly being convinced that since Pyongyang has been ‘proven’ to be aiding Russia, South Korea has the right to provide similar support to Ukraine, despite all possible risks of retaliatory measures and a significant cooling of relations with Moscow.

In a statement on June 20, 2024, former Ambassador to Russia and current National Security Adviser to the President Chang Ho-jin noted: “Four ships, five organisations and eight individuals from third countries, as well as Russian and North Korean organisations involved in the supply of weapons and oil transshipment between Russia and North Korea, are on the list of independent sanctions… We have also included 243 new items to the list of sanctioned goods exported to Russia, bringing the total number to 1,402 items…We plan on reconsidering the issue of military support for Ukraine, as the government has so far maintained the position that it will not supply lethal weapons to this country”.

Chang’s statement, on the other hand, could not but evoke a threatening reply from Moscow. Vladimir Putin almost immediately declared that the supply of lethal weapons to Ukraine would be a “very big mistake” and that Moscow would in this case make “the appropriate decisions, which the current leadership of South Korea will most likely not appreciate”. However, the Russian president expressed hope that such a thing would not happen.

There was also a natural exchange of reprimands. On June 21, 2024, First Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs of ROK Kim Hong Kyung summoned Russian Ambassador Georgy Zinoviev to convey Seoul’s official position on the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Agreement between Russia and DPRK from June 19.  The vice minister called on Russia to “immediately cease military cooperation with North Korea and comply with UN Security Council resolutions”. He made it clear that ROK, along with the international community, will “resolutely resist any actions that threaten its security”.

Zinoviev said that cooperation between Russia and DPRK is not directed against third countries, complies with the principles and norms of international law and is aimed at strengthening peace and stability on the Korean peninsula. Russia is ready to continue to make political and diplomatic efforts to form an architecture of long-term peace and stability based on the principle of indivisible security”, the ambassador stressed.

Meanwhile Seoul slowly began to backtrack. On June 23, 2024, in a speech on the KBS channels, Chang Ho-jin made it clear that the question of whether South Korea will supply lethal weapons to Ukraine will depend on Russia; if it starts sending high-precision modern weapons to North Korea, then nothing will stop South Korea from helping Ukraine. Among the options under consideration are 155 mm artillery shells and air defence systems.

In essence, the parties formally voiced to each other the long-known, informal red lines: South Korea is not to be engaged in direct supplies of weapons and military equipment to Ukraine and Russia is not to be engaged in the development of the North Korean military potential. It is important for Seoul to prevent the supply of dangerous modern weapons and technologies to the North, and North Korean shells (which are allegedly provided to the Special Military Operation) are a nuisance, but not yet a disaster.

It is worth remembering that, despite his high position, Chang still does not have the right to speak on behalf of the state unlike the president, the prime minister and the foreign minister. If such statements were to come from them as well, then it would indeed be a cause for concern. For now, though, one should wait and see, considering how, on the eve of his visit to the United States, Yoon Suk Yeol stated that the Republic of Korea could start supplying weapons to Ukraine if the Russian Armed Forces were to commit an atrocity.

Thus, the point of no return in relations between Moscow and Seoul has not yet been passed, but we are close. The author hopes for the best, as Moscow and Seoul understand that when crossing the ‘red’ line, Russia will also have to take action in response and South Korea may lose its status as ‘the friendliest of the unfriendly’.

China’s position 

The reaction to the visit by the Chinese media and government agencies was between neutral and positive; they did [not] provide any statements of judgement and simply noted that this was an important and serious event. The Chinese Foreign Ministry called the DPRK’s desire to develop relations with Russia normal, and the Global Times noted that this cooperation could perhaps even make the United States afraid.

Western media actively wrote that China was not happy with the rapprochement between Russia and the DPRK that Putin’s visit to North Korea and Vietnam was actually anti-Chinese in nature and that having a parallel 2+2 dialogue shows China’s desire to be friends with Seoul, showing its tough stance to Pyongyang.

This is not exactly true. Firstly, coordination between Moscow and Beijing on the Korean issue has always been and is very close. A look at the joint statements on the Korean issue made during Putin’s visit to China is enough to prove this. This means that the essence of Moscow and Pyongyang’s agreements with Beijing was probably discussed in advance.

Secondly, on June 18 negotiations did indeed take place in Seoul. They were attended by senior officials from the foreign and defence ministries of ROK and China in a 2+2 format.

Before the start of the talks, the official representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Korea, Lim Soo-suk, believed that “issues of cooperation between Russia and North Korea will be discussed, since dialogue is taking place simultaneously with the scheduled visit of the Russian president to North Korea”. Professor of the Hankuk University of Foreign Affairs Kang Jung-young said that “having this dialogue is in itself is a clear signal to North Korea that China will not support Pyongyang’s attempts to create a trilateral bloc with Beijing and Moscow”.

The Korean approach to the 2+2 format is as follows: representatives of Seoul expressed deep concern to their Chinese colleagues about the visit of the Russian president to DPRK and the deepening of ties between Moscow and Pyongyang amid rising tensions on the Korean peninsula. They stressed that the Russian leader’s visit to North Korea should not undermine peace and stability in the region or lead to the strengthening of military cooperation between the two countries. Additionally, ROK called on China to play a constructive role in ensuring peace, stability and security on the Korean peninsula, emphasising that the deepening of Russian-North Korean military cooperation and its consequences run in contradiction to Beijing’s interests. In turn, China confirmed its unchanged position on the Korean peninsula, expressing its readiness to take an active part in solving the problems of the region.

A ‘bloc’ as a limiting factor 

Almost immediately after the signing of the comprehensive strategic partnership agreement between the Russian Federation and North Korea, the Russian president noted that there were no fundamentally new points in it and that the document was similar to the 1961 treaty, including Article 4 on ‘automatic military intervention’. According to Putin, the provisions of the new Agreement stipulate that military assistance is provided only in case of aggression, and therefore ROK has nothing to worry about, since there are no known plans of the South to attack the North. The Russian president also expressed the opinion that the Agreement would to some extent limit the threat of the crisis on the Korean peninsula entering a ‘hot phase’.

The author supposes that the cooperation between Moscow and Pyongyang within the framework of a possible military bloc reduces the likelihood of conflict on the Korean peninsula rather than increases it. The fact that the opposing sides are two serious military blocs reduces the likelihood of an escalation of the conflict, as it could too easily escalate to become nuclear, and neither Moscow nor Pyongyang are suicidal.

One more detail: on the one hand, article 4 of the Agreement is harsher than article 5 of the NATO treaty. On the other, it clearly indicates that a state of war is required for comprehensive assistance, and if we recall the 1961 treaty, then it is worth paying attention to the events of 1968 when Moscow clarified to Pyongyang in which situations military assistance would be cancelled.

We should likely expect a confrontation similar to the Cold War. There will be an arms race, muscles will be flexed, loud statements and minor incidents will take place, but the parties are well aware of the red lines and do not intend to cross them. Being prepared for war, including the development of preemptive strike plans as a way of self-defence in a critical situation, is not the same as the desire to initiate a conflict.

The fate of UNSC sanctions 

The demonstrative liquidation of UN Security Council sanctions, which was expected in the West, has still not taken place. Both Putin’s article and the additional decree emphasise cooperation in the fields of education, healthcare and science and maintain that the unjust sanctions should be lifted.

For now, though, Moscow says it will comply with the sanctions it previously voted for.

It is likely that the lifting of sanctions may occur following the next round of escalation because regardless of whether there were actually arms deals or not, the West will still blame Moscow and Pyongyang for colluding and take retaliatory measures.

The appearance of a North Korean labour force in Russia is a sign that a de jure or de facto decision to ignore a part of the sanctions has been made. Price, quality, safety and keeping a low profile are the strengths of North Korean builders, and talks of their employment have been going on for a long time.

Summa summarum, there is a lot of uncertainty in the future and the situation is similar to that described in the book ‘The Guns of August’ by Barbara Tuchman: nobody wanted war, so war was inevitable. However, it cannot be said that the visit of the President of the Russian Federation to the DPRK has significantly aggravated the situation.

Konstantin Asmolov, PhD in History, Leading Research Fellow at the Korean Studies Center of the Institute of China and Contemporary Asia of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

July 12, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Kremlin comments on Türkiye’s SCO bid

Türkiye’s obligations to the US-led military bloc are not consistent with the Eurasian organization’s values, Moscow has said.

RT | July 12, 2024

Türkiye’s bid to become a full member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is not compatible with its membership in NATO, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday.

Last week, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan attended a summit of the Eurasian mutual defense group, in which his nation has observer status. While returning home from Kazakhstan, he told journalists that Ankara wants to “further develop” ties with the SCO and its founding members Russia and China. During the NATO leaders’ summit in the US this week, he said Türkiye wants to join the SCO as a permanent member.

Asked by journalists when Turkish accession could be expected, Peskov said there was a problem with such a proposal.

“There are certain contradictions between Turkish commitments and [its] position on fundamental issues as a NATO member and the worldview formulated in the founding documents of the SCO,” he explained.

The expansion of the SCO is of interest to many nations and remains on its agenda, but there is no specific timeline for accepting new members, he added. Commenting later during a press call on bilateral relations with Türkiye, Peskov said Russia was “open for attempts to reach agreements based on a certain worldview.”

Moscow perceives NATO as a hostile, aggressive military organization, which serves US geopolitical interests and is currently conducting a proxy war against Russia in Ukraine.

Despite being a NATO member state, Türkiye has maintained a neutral stance on the Ukraine conflict, refusing to impose economic sanctions on Russia and serving as an intermediary between Moscow and Kiev on several occasions. Ankara helped to mediate a nascent peace deal in the early months of the hostilities, which Kiev eventually ditched in favor of continued fighting. The Russian government believes that the US and its allies, particularly the UK, forced Ukraine to reject the proposal.

The SCO was founded in 2001 and currently has ten full members: Russia, China, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Belarus. Kazakhstan holds the rotating presidency this year and hosted the leaders of member states on July 3 and 4 in Astana.

One of the key pledges to which SCO members subscribe is not to seek the improvement of their own national security at the expense of the national security of other parties. NATO policy does exactly that, according to its critics, including Russia.

July 12, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Pro-Pentagon Media Calls on DoD to Step Up Anti-Houthi Info War Amid Blows to US Navy’s Reputation

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 11.07.2024

The Houthis resumed their attacks on suspected Israel and US-affiliated merchant ships Tuesday after a ten-day pause. Armed with mostly older missile designs and cheap drones and possessing no blue water navy to speak of, the militants have managed to effectively shut down the Red Sea to Western interests, humiliating the Pentagon in the process.

The US Navy’s inability to lift the Houthis’ self-imposed partial blockade of the Red and Arabian Seas or to meaningfully degrade the militia’s missile and drone capabilities in six months of air and missile strikes has given rise to embarrassing questions from allies and adversaries alike about whether the US military is a mere “paper tiger,” and not the “all powerful,” global and “omnipotent force” it’s cracked up to be.

In testimony by senior Pentagon officials on the state of America’s air and missile defenses earlier this year, Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces chairman Angus King complained that the US has proved not only unable to defend against peer competitors like Russia and China, but ineffective against smaller adversaries, including Iran and the Houthis, as well.

His concerns were echoed by media reports that the US has already spent over a billion dollars fighting the Houthis, with the USS Eisenhower supercarrier’s Super Hornet jets racking up tens of thousands of flight hours, and US warships firing hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of interceptor missiles to target the militia’s simple missiles, UAVs and maritime drones.

Amid the Houthis’ successes in humbling the American goliath, panicky voices have emerged in Washington and US military-affiliated media calling for something to be done to stop the Yemeni militia’s humiliation of the US Empire in the Middle East from spreading online.

The “Navy should hit back harder against Houthi online disinformation,” Max Lesser, a senior analyst with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a DC neoconservative think tank, wrote in an op-ed that appeared in the Navy Times on Wednesday.

“While the US military and allies regularly hit back with airstrikes against Houthi missile launchers and other assets in Yemen, the Pentagon is less prepared to defend against the online lies and disinformation that the Houthis are spreading,” Lesser complained.

The think tank analyst pointed to a series of social media posts from late May shared by “Houthi supporters” of digitally altered images and videos of damage purportedly done to the USS Eisenhower in one of the militia’s attempts to retaliate to US-UK strikes into Yemen.

The manipulated images apparently proved prolific enough for the carrier’s captain, Captain Christopher Hill, to invite journalists to inspect the warship’s flight deck to show it had not in fact suffered any damage in Houthi attacks.

Lesser suggests that the “deluge of deceptively labeled images” spread by “pro-Houthi accounts” has generally not been sufficiently challenged or debunked by the Pentagon, despite the operation of a DoD Joint Maritime Information Center stood up specifically to report on the situation in the Red Sea region. The analyst urged the military to include any “Houthi disinformation” it finds into its weekly updates, noting that for now, “debunking” the false images is falling to lone “independent” OSINT analysts.

“The challenge is not limited to the Red Sea or the Middle East,” Lesser stressed. “Military forces in every command should have public affairs and open-source intelligence personnel working together to debunk false and exaggerated claims of enemy success on the battlefield.”

Lesser’s calls for the US to step up its game in online disinformation warfare are the latest in a long-running effort by Western officials, media and corporations to rein in the free-flow of information, whether through outright broad brush censorship like the scrubbing of entire websites, comments and social media posts, or ‘softer’ means, like private ‘fact checking’ organizations set up explicitly and exclusively to challenge anti-establishment narratives.

Given the US military’s proven track record of covering up information the Pentagon finds inconvenient, there’s no guarantee that any DoD-led campaign to combat Houthi “disinformation” online won’t result in the creation of new falsehoods spread by the Defense Department.

July 11, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Fake News, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Militarism | | Leave a comment

Second NATO country publicly opposes Ukrainian membership

RT | July 11, 2024

Ukraine joining NATO would guarantee a third world war, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has said, publicly expressing opposition to the idea.

Fico released a short video message on Thursday while the leaders of NATO countries were meeting in Washington. The draft of the annual summit’s final communique reportedly includes references to Ukraine’s “irreversible path” towards joining the US-led bloc.

“I understand Ukraine’s wishes,” Fico said in the video. “But its membership in NATO guarantees World War Three.”

“Although to be fair, we are not too far from it even without Ukraine’s membership, seeing as how some advanced democracies are stoking the pot,” he added.

Slovakia’s representatives in Washington have been instructed to insist on two conditions for Ukrainian membership, Fico said. Kiev must meet every condition set by the bloc, and every member state has to give its blessing.

“However, as I’ve said many times, Smer and its lawmakers in the National Assembly of Slovakia will not agree to Ukraine’s membership in NATO,” he said, in reference to his ruling party.

Fico campaigned last year on a platform of opposing Ukrainian membership in NATO and further Slovak military support to Kiev. He won the election in a landslide.

In mid-May, a liberal activist reportedly upset with Bratislava’s new policy shot Fico several times and almost killed him. The prime minister underwent a series of surgeries and spent weeks recovering from the assassination attempt, returning to work in person just last week.

On Wednesday, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto told reporters in Washington that Ukraine’s membership in the bloc “is clearly out of the question,” as it would “foreshadow direct conflict between Russia and NATO.”

The US-led bloc is expected to pledge at least €40 billion ($43.3 billion) in military aid to Ukraine over the next year and endorse its “full Euro-Atlantic integration,” but an invitation to NATO would only be extended “when allies agree and conditions are met,” according to a draft seen by Reuters. The same language was used at last year’s summit in Lithuania.

July 11, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »