Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

INTERVIEW: Basil Valentine & Prof. Glenn Diesen – EU Childishly Boycotts Budapest

21Wire | July 26, 2024

TNT Radio guest host Basil Valentine speaks with Professor and political scientist Glenn Diesen, to discuss the EU’s unprecedented efforts to punish Hungary, one of its members, for entertaining diplomatic talks with the Russian Federation. They talk about Western diplomacy and how it is no longer about appeasement but about schooling peers and near-peer enemies on compliance. They touch upon the Prime Minister of Hungary, Viktor Orban’s strong relationship with former U.S. President Trump who if elected, will favour negotiation with the Russians to bring an end to the Russo-Ukrainian conflict to avoid WWIII and a possible nuclear holocaust.

More from Glenn:
X/Twitter
YouTube

July 29, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Video | , , , , | Leave a comment

US Navy Drops Details on Pricey Missiles and Bombs It’s Using Against Yemen’s Warriors

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 27.07.2024

The US and Britain have been bombing Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen since January, killing and maiming scores of civilians and targeting hundreds of militia sites but failing to “degrade” the Houthis missile and drone capabilities, or to stop their months-long partial blockade of the Red Sea in support of Palestine.

The US Navy has revealed new details about the weapons systems it has been using in the ongoing US-UK bombing campaign against the Houthis.

According to information shared with the Navy Times, F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter jets aboard the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, which left the Middle East and steamed home last month after a nine-month long deployment in the Red Sea area, used the AIM-9X infrared-guided heat-seeking missile to target Houthi kamikaze drones.

The AIM-9X is a variant of Raytheon’s widely used AIM-9 Sidewinder short-range air-to-air missile. The weapon has a per unit price of between $430,800 and $472,000, making it between 215 and 236 times the cost of the estimated $2,000-each price of a Houthi attack drone.

The Navy also confirmed the deployment of its Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile, or AARGM, also launched from Super Hornets aircraft, against Houthi air defenses. Produced by Northrup Grumman, these ground attack weapons have a per missile price of $874,000.

The Navy did not provide any details on the Houthi systems targeted by these weapons, The militia’s arsenal is thought to consist mostly of older Soviet-era SAMs and anti-aircraft guns, similarly dated radars, and Yemeni-built copies of Iranian missile and MANPADS designs.

Another weapon used by the Super Hornets in their campaign is the AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon – a glide bomb possessed by the US Navy and Air Force and by the air forces of more than half a dozen of Washington’s allies. The Navy said the Raytheon-made missiles being used against the Houthis are the latest, AGM-154C variant, which cost roughly $719,000 each. The Navy did not specify what kinds of targets the munition was used to attack, but the inertial and GPS-guided, terminal infrared homing-equipped weapons are designed for use against both stationary ground targets and moving targets at sea.

Apart from their machinegun-armed speedboats, the Houthis don’t have a navy to speak of, and their naval drones aren’t the fancy, $250,000 apiece, custom-built unmanned vehicles possessed by NATO countries. Instead, the militia has improvised by fitting ordinary speedboats with remote controls, packing them with explosives and launching them toward their enemies, with the total cost of such weapons not exceeding $30,000 (or about 24 times less than the US munitions deployed to dispatch them).

The imbalance in pricing between the Houthis’ guerilla warfare-purposed weapons and the US’s sleek, arms expo showroom-class air-launched missiles and bombs parallels the chasm between the surface-to-air missiles the US Navy has been using and the Yemeni militia’s drones.

In explosive testimony by US air and missile defense officials to Congress in May, Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces Angus King lambasted the state of affairs in which the US military has been forced to use $4.3 million SM-6 interceptor missiles to take down $20,000 Houthi UAVs.

“In the Red Sea, the Houthis are sending $20,000 drones and we’re shooting them down with missiles that cost $4.3 million. The math doesn’t work on that, gentlemen. It just doesn’t work. What are we thinking?” King asked. The lawmaker urged the Pentagon to urgently ramp up the development of directed energy weapons instead.

US Navy expenditures on their policing mission in the Middle East beginning after October 7 and the start of the Israel-Gaza war have surpassed $1 billion, Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro told the Senate Appropriations Committee in April.

The US-led operation against the Houthis shows no sign of slowing down, but neither does the militia’s resolve against Washington and its allies. US Central Command announced on Friday that American forces had destroyed six Houthi aerial drones, and three uncrewed surface vessels, off the Yemeni coast. Also Friday, hundreds of thousands Yemenis gathered in the streets of Sanaa and other cities in solidarity with the Houthis’ operations against the US and Israel.

France’s Le Monde newspaper wrote in a piece Friday that Western powers had proven “powerless to halt Houthi attacks,” with Western warships’ presence in the Red Sea and strikes on the militia said to have “failed to deter the rebel militia.”

The glum attitude comes in the wake of reports in US business media last week that CENTCOM chief General Michael Erik Kurilla had written a letter to his boss, Lloyd Austin, and urged Washington to ramp up its economic, diplomatic and military pressure on the Houthis, admitting that the Western coalition’s operations to date had “failed” to stop the militia.

July 27, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

‘Americans, Please, Go Home’ – German Politician on US Deploying Missiles in Germany

Sputnik – 27.07.2024

The Pentagon’s decision to begin rotating deployments of long-range missiles in Germany starting from 2026 has caused a stir in the media and in the public, prompting Germans to doubt the necessity of such a step and question US motives.

Chairman of the German Council for Constitution and Sovereignty Ralph Thomas Niemeyer has called for shutting down US military facilities in Germany, noting that Washington is using them to carry out its own conflicts.

“We saw the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and now Ukraine being fought from German territory,” Niemeyer told Sputnik. “From the Ramstein Air Base and from other places such as Wiesbaden, Grafenwöhr and Stuttgart [locations with US military sites]. It would be impossible if they were not present there. So I am all for saying, ‘Please go home’.”

The German politician believes that Donald Trump taking office for a second term would be a good opportunity for Germany to gain more independence from Washington, since Trump “does not want to spend too much on the troop deployment either.”

“Trump voiced all this during his last presidential term… He could have gone as far as shutting them [US military bases in Germany] down. That is what we are interested in. We would say: ‘Sure, Americans, please, go home. Be our friends, but do not occupy us anymore,” he emphasized.

Without its own constitution, the country cannot have a genuine sovereignty, Niemeyer also stated, indicating this need for Germany.

The German Council for Constitution and Sovereignty has advocated for replacing the 1949 Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany. This law was viewed as a temporary substitute for a full-fledged constitution, but is still in act.

July 27, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Scholz’s views on Ukraine ‘simple-minded’ – Lavrov

RT | July 27, 2024

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz “is known for his simple-minded ideas,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said at a press conference in Vientiane, Laos.

He was commenting on a statement by Scholz earlier in the week about the possibility of abandoning the deployment of US missiles in Germany if Russia ends its military operation against Kiev.

Berlin and Washington announced earlier in July that US cruise missiles will be stationed in Germany from 2026. The deployment of these weapons had been banned under the Cold War-era Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, but Washington withdrew from the agreement in 2019. Russia abided by the treaty for several years after the US withdrawal. In June, President Vladimir Putin warned that Moscow might resume production of previously banned missile systems in response to the “hostile actions” of the US.

At a press conference in Berlin earlier this week, Scholz dismissed concerns that the plans could further escalate tensions with Russia. He argued that Moscow must first end its military operation against Kiev to prevent the deployment of US long-range missiles in Germany.

Lavrov said, “no one asked Scholz whether the Germans want this deployment or not.” “He again, simple-mindedly, when the news came out, said: ‘I welcome the US decision to deploy the missiles in Germany’… he did not hide the fact that the decision was American,” the minister stated.

Lavrov stressed that the problem is not the deployment of the missiles, explaining that Moscow’s military operation aims “to eliminate threats to Russia’s security that were created in Ukraine, [where] NATO military bases were planned to be deployed, including in the Sea of Azov.”

He went on to say that the operation also has the goal of protecting the population of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, which have since joined Russia following referendums in 2022.

Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov previously said that Moscow reserves the right to deploy missiles with nuclear warheads if the US goes ahead with plans to station longer-range missiles in Germany.

July 27, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Pentagon reacts to Russia-China bomber patrols near Alaska

RT | July 26, 2024

Russian and Chinese bombers jointly operating in international airspace near the coast of Alaska is a sign of their expanding military cooperation, US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has said, adding that Washington is “concerned” by the development.

On Wednesday, two Russian Tupolev TU-95 long-range bombers and two Chinese H-6 bombers were tracked and intercepted by US and Canadian fighter jets. The aircrafts were carrying out joint air patrols over the waters of the Chukchi and Bering Seas, as well as the North Pacific.

According to the Pentagon chief, it was the first time that Chinese bomber aircraft have flown within the Alaskan Air Defense Identification Zone, and the first time Chinese and Russian jets have taken off from the same base in northeast Russia.

“This is the first time that we’ve seen these two countries fly together,” Austin told a press conference on Thursday. “This is a relationship that we have been concerned about throughout – mostly because we’re concerned about China providing support to Russia’s illegal and unnecessary war in Ukraine,” he stated.

Both Moscow and Beijing have rejected Western allegations that Beijing has been supplying Russia with dual-use components that can be utilized to produce weapons for the Ukraine conflict.

Austin said the flight on Wednesday was “not a surprise,” adding that Moscow and Beijing had likely planned it for some time.

The aircraft came only within about 200 miles (320km) of the US coast and did not enter either US or Canadian airspace, according to the Pentagon chief.

The Russian Defense Ministry reported on Thursday that the crews “worked out issues of interaction at all stages of air patrol in the new area of joint operations.” It stressed that the patrols, which lasted over five hours, were conducted in accordance with international law.

Chinese Defense Ministry spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang told reporters that the flight was the eighth “joint air strategic patrol” carried out by the two nations since 2019. The exercise was “not directed at any third party” and is “unrelated to the current international and regional situation,” it said.

Russia often conducts flights near US airspace and also monitors US and NATO flights near its own airspace too, and has sent its jets to escort American fighters and bombers away from its borders on numerous occasions in recent years.

July 27, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

UK Plans to Build New Missiles to Target Russia Linked to Pentagon’s Mad Conventional Strike Scheme

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 26.07.2024

Sources told UK media this week that Britain has partnered up with Germany to develop and deploy a new intermediate-range missile designed to target Russia’s nuclear arsenal. Veteran Russian military observer Alexei Leonkov says the plan is inextricably linked to the Pentagon’s highly dangerous Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) initiative.

UK Defense Secretary John Healey spoke to his German counterpart in Berlin on Wednesday about a plan to jointly develop a new strategic missile with a 3,200 km range, The Times reported on Thursday, citing sources said to be familiar with the idea.

Once developed and fielded, the new missiles would be deployed in Germany, according to the publication, replacing the American ground-based long-range fires that Washington recently announced would be stationed in the Central European country beginning in 2026.

Both the American missiles and the proposed new British-German missile would have been prohibited under the 1988 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, which banned the development, production and deployment of ground-based missiles in the 500-5,500 km range. Washington violated the treaty for years, according to Moscow, and unilaterally scrapped the agreement in 2019 and immediately began testing of new long-range weapons after falsely accusing Russia of possessing a ground-based missile system with a range beyond 500 km.

One of The Times’ sources said the US weapons expected to deploy in Europe in two years’ time are meant to “bridge” a gap in European NATO allies’ own capabilities. The source did not clarify what motivated the US to ask its allies to create an entirely new missile instead buying or agreeing to permanently field existing American ones.

A joint declaration from Healey’s talks with his German counterpart, Boris Pistorius, mentioned a commitment to “undertake a long-term, comprehensive cooperation in the field of long-range capabilities” to provide “deep precision strike” potential. The details are reportedly still being worked out, with no additional information made available, besides the new missile’s expected role as a conventional fire designed to destroy enemy tactical nuclear delivery systems.

The Storm Shadow is currently the furthest-reaching conventional missile in Britain’s arsenal. It has a range of about 240 km, and has been deployed extensively by Ukraine in the NATO-Russia proxy war. The Taurus KEPD 350 is Germany’s longest-range missile system, and has a range of up to 500 km. Berlin has refused to send the air-launched weapon to Ukraine, expressing concerns that doing so would make Germany a “party to the war” because German troops would be on the ground training Ukrainians to use the missiles.

A British Defense Ministry spokesperson told The Times that the deepening UK-German defense relationship is currently “in early stages” and that work on “any new programs” has “not yet commenced.”

Europe Joins US’s Dangerous Conventional Prompt Strike Scheme

“The deployment of these missiles, both American and British, is connected to two things,” Alexei Leonkov, editor of Russia’s Arsenal of the Fatherland military affairs and technology magazine, told Sputnik, commenting on The Times piece.

“The first is the global concept, the strategy under which NATO has been restructuring toward since 2002, which is the Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) concept, whose essence centers around the need to destroy the nuclear potentials of an adversary like Russia or China,” Leonkov said.

Thought up by the Bush administration, CPS envisions the mass deployment of thousands of conventional long-range missiles fired simultaneously in a massive surprise attack to destroy as much of an enemy’s strategic arsenal as possible, decapitate its leadership, and destroy remaining fired nuclear missiles using missile defenses.

The primary danger of the idea stems from the concern that it will make the prospect of a ‘limited’ nuclear war seem more palatable for Pentagon planners, and hence increasing the temptation to launch aggression.

The second reason for the British-German plan to develop a new missile centers around the fact that the Americans “are running late, or perhaps have lost the technologies used to create intercontinental missiles with a range beyond that of the Minuteman-3,” Leonkov argues.

“Why do the Americans want to switch up some of their missiles for European ones? I think that most likely, the missiles they have developed may not have proven entirely successful. Hence they’ve decided to attract a European consortium led by the UK.”

On top of that, as Washington’s strategic competition with China in the Asia-Pacific heats up, the number of missiles available for deployment in Europe may be limited, Leonkov believes.

The defense observer can’t rule out that the new British-German missile project may be focused on the creation of a maneuverable hypersonic vehicle, with Britain’s BAE Systems already working on a number of projects in this direction, and cooperating with US defense companies on their hypersonic projects.

In fact, these new European weapons may be the mystery “developmental hypersonic weapons” that the White House mentioned in its press statement earlier this month when it announced the deployment of new long-range strike systems to Germany from 2026 onward, Leonkov said.

Leonkov is confident that these new missiles’ mission will be to overwhelm Russian air and missile defense capabilities, and that if they are developed and fielded, Europe will become the first priority for a Russian strategic attack.

Recalling the European NATO missile threat which faced Moscow in the 1980s, Leonkov characterized the alliance’s present plans as an attempt to give rise to a Cold War 2.0, only this time far more dangerous.

“Russia today is not in a position where it has a vast security belt in the form of the Warsaw Pact countries that it did during the Cold War. Therefore, decisions will need to be changed radically. It’s clear that it will be necessary to strengthen the country’s anti-missile and anti-aircraft defense, but also take steps so that these missiles never appear on the European continent in the first place, while there is still an opportunity to do so,” the observer stressed.

Specifically, Russia will need to make clear in its nuclear doctrine that the deployment of such missiles in Europe will pose a direct threat, and give itself the right to launch a preemptive strike to eliminate this threat, Leonkov suggested.

Under its existing nuclear doctrine, Russia reserves itself the right to use nuclear weapons only in retaliation to an enemy attack using nuclear arms or other weapons of mass destruction, or in the event of conventional aggression so severe that it puts the existence of the Russian state in jeopardy. In June, President Putin hinted that Russia might revise its nuclear doctrine in response to existing threats.

What the US needs more than anything is “a quick solution that would close the issue for a while,” Leonkov said, referring to the constraints Washington will face in deploying vast numbers of long-range strike systems both to Europe and Asia. Russia’s main goal at this stage will be to “act proactively” to respond to this new threat, the analyst concluded.

July 26, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Only ‘Brute Force’ Can Force Draft-Age Ukrainians in Europe to Go Home to Face Near-Certain Death

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 26.07.2024

Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski has urged Warsaw’s European allies to create the right conditions to “encourage” Ukrainians who fled their country after 2022 to return home to fight Russia. There’s nothing short of violence that will force these people to comply, says veteran international affairs observer Dr. Gilbert Doctorow.

“We, as European countries, also need to help” Ukraine as the country faces weapons shortages, war fatigue and dwindling troop numbers, Sikorski said in an interview with Polish radio on Thursday.

“There are hundreds of thousands of potential recruits obliged to defend their motherland living in EU countries, and Poland is in the vanguard of helping Ukraine prepare these people for military service,” the foreign minister said. It’s possible to “impose such conditions” on Ukrainian nationals living in Europe that “will encourage them to fulfill their obligation to defend their homeland,” Sikorski stressed.

“The only ‘encouragement’ that could induce military age Ukrainians to return to their country to fight would be brute force,” Dr. Gilbert Doctorow, a veteran Russia and Eastern European politics expert, told Sputnik, when asked to comment on Sikorski’s remarks.

“These potential conscripts are not vacationing in our resorts. They are here precisely because they fled conscription, which means nearly certain death on the battlefield, given the way that day after day the Russians are killing or gravely injuring more than 2,000 Ukrainian troops, including… some of the country’s best trained and equipped military units,” Doctorow emphasized.

Sikorski’s proposal is illustrative of a modern Polish political class “as delusional as their forefathers” in its fanatical hatred of Russia, according to the observer.

Fortunately, other European countries will hopefully “have some residual commitment to due process, not to mention a certain pacifist leaning,” which should prevent them from following “the despicable recommendations of Mr. Sikorski,” Doctorow believes.

Europe’s political institutions in general are staffed by “followers, not leaders,” Doctorow stressed. Accordingly, their main weathervane on what policy to pursue comes from across the Atlantic, not the EU’s Eastern flank.

“They look to Washington and what they see today is the possibility of a Trump victory which will mean that the USA throws Ukraine under the bus, as it is fashionable to say today. With their nose to the wind, they will not expose themselves to ridicule and protest by following the Polish example,” the observer said.

Poland is currently home to about one million of the estimated 4.25 million Ukrainians who fled Ukraine for European Union countries following the escalation of the Donbass crisis into a full-blown Russia-NATO proxy war. Another 5.5 million have gone to Russia.

The present conflict has thrust Ukraine into an acute, unprecedented and perhaps terminal demographic crisis, with the state’s efforts to forcibly mobilize men aged 18-60 (with those age 25 and above eligible to be sent to the front) threatening to wipe out the country’s working and fighting-age male population. The crisis has become so serious in recent months that Kiev has resorted to recruiting women.

Media, even in the West, have increasingly reported on instances of recruiters drafting the mentally and physically handicapped, grabbing draft-age men off the streets and authorities handing out lengthy prison sentences to conscientious objectors. This heavy-handed approach, a general sense of war weariness and the constant scandals surrounding Volodymyr Zelensky and his allies have given rise to a fledgling resistance movement, including a wave of arson attacks across Ukraine targeting recruitment centers and vehicles.

July 26, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

War of Attrition & the Dishonest War Propaganda

Ukrainian FM Tells Beijing Kiev is Ready for Peace Talks, As Russian Troops Advance

By Glenn Diesen | July 26, 2024

In a war of attrition, the army of the adversary is destroyed before seizing territory. Storming well-fortified positions creates high levels of casualties, which undermines the main objective of favourable attrition rates vis-a-vis the adversary.

The narrative-driven media have called the conflict “stagnant” as the frontlines have moved very slowly, and pretended that Ukrainian casualties have been very low. This deception has been deliberate to sell the illusion that Ukraine can win as a requirement for maintaining public support in the West for keeping the war going.

Much like in Afghanistan, the obedient media committed themselves to the narrative. The unreported reality was that the Ukrainian army was being destroyed, while Russia built a powerful army. Now that Ukraine’s army is at breaking point, Russia has begun taking territory with much less resistance.

How can we end the war? There is overwhelming evidence that Russia considers NATO’s incursion into Ukraine to be an existential threat. As NATO refuses to negotiate about restoring Ukraine’s neutrality, which was lost in February 2014, territorial conquest is perceived by Moscow to be the only solution.

Yet, the media shames anyone who recognises this reality by denouncing them as carrying water for Putin as they are “legitimising” or “supporting” Russia’s invasion. Those calling for peace negotiations are smeared as traitors, while the war propagandists can claim to “stand with Ukraine” as their Ukrainian proxies fight and die in a war that cannot be won.

Calls for negotiations are dismissed as it is unacceptable to surrender Ukrainian territory, which would embolden Russia to pursue similar conquests. In reality, this only became a conflict about territory after negotiations about restoring Ukraine’s neutrality were rejected. NATO refused to accept a neutral Ukraine between 1991 and 2014 when approximately only 20% of Ukrainians wanted NATO membership, and they knew it was a red line for Russia. NATO undermined the Minsk agreement for 7 years despite announcing it was the only peaceful path to resolve the conflict. Negotiations with Russia were then rejected in 2021 even as the US and NATO acknowledged Russia would invade if NATO did not end its bid to expand. In the Istanbul peace agreement in April 2022, Russia agreed to withdraw all its troops from Donbas if Ukraine restored its neutrality, although the US and UK sabotaged the agreement. Yet, the political-media elites insist that the territorial dispute is the source rather than the consequence of the NATO-Russia conflict.

The result? Ukraine loses territory and a horrific amount of men every single day. The war is also entering a new stage as casualties increase dramatically when frontlines collapse and an army must pull back. Russia is now breaking through all the frontlines and Ukraine is about to be hit by a powerful Russian fist. Yet, the political-media elites who purportedly “support Ukraine” have criminalised diplomacy and negotiations. Hungary, who holds the rotating presidency of the EU Council, is even punished by the EU for simply engaging in diplomacy with Ukraine, Russia, and China to end the war.

In every war, the call for peace is denounced as support for the adversary while in-group loyalty and patriotism must be expressed as war enthusiasm. After every war, we also acknowledge that the war narrative was full of falsehood and we believe that we have learned an important lesson for the next war.

July 26, 2024 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Militarism, Video | , , , , | Leave a comment

Most Germans Oppose US Missile Deployment, Move May Spark Protests – Politician

Sputnik – 26.07.2024

A majority of Germans disapprove of the plans to host long-range US missiles in the country and may want to protest the move, Ralph Niemeyer, chairman of the German Council for Constitution and Sovereignty, told RIA Novosti.

The Pentagon said on July 10 that starting 2026, the US would begin episodic deployments of long-range weapons in Germany as part of planning for enduring stationing of these weapons in the future. This includes SM-6, Tomahawk and developmental hypersonic missiles.

“We are completely against this as an organization, but the majority of German nationals are strongly against the deployment of any missiles as well,” Niemeyer said.

A survey published by Stern magazine on July 16 showed that 47% of Germans were concerned that US missile deployment would increase the risk of war between NATO and Russia, while only 17% said it would not.

Niemeyer that similar discussions on missile deployment took place in the early 1980s and suggested that the move could hurt the public image of Chancellor Olaf Scholz.

German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock told media over the weekend that it would be too “naive” of Germany to say “no” to what she described as enhanced deterrence and additional counterweapons.

Scholz explained the decision to deploy long-range US weapons to the country by Russia’s military buildup. Russia has for years objected to NATO’s enhanced presence on its borders, with President Vladimir Putin saying on several occasions that Moscow was not going to attack NATO. The Kremlin said that Russia did not threaten anyone but would not ignore actions that represented a risk to its interests.

July 26, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Pompeo offers Trump an escalatory ‘peace plan’ for Ukraine

RT | July 26, 2024

Former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has claimed that Donald Trump would be open to dramatically ramping up US support for Ukraine if elected president. Pompeo’s plan, however, contradicts almost everything Trump has said about the conflict to date.

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed published on Thursday, Pompeo and co-author Mark Urban, a neoconservative strategist, argued there is “much evidence” that Trump would give Ukraine enough aid to dictate peace terms to Russia.

The two policy hawks claimed that Trump’s supply of Javelin missiles to Ukraine in 2017 and his decision not to lobby against the passage of a $61 billion military aid package for Kiev this spring prove that he would be willing to embrace a hawkish plan to tilt the balance of power in Kiev’s favor.

Such a plan would involve ramping up sanctions on Moscow, expanding US energy production to drive down Russia’s oil and gas revenues, forcing NATO members to spend more on defense, and offering Ukraine a $500 billion “lend-lease” fund to purchase arms.

Ukraine would also be given permission to use any kind of weapons to strike targets anywhere in Russia, Pompeo and Urban wrote, claiming that this gloves-off approach would force Moscow to the negotiating table, where it would accept Ukraine joining NATO and the EU, and agree to the “demilitarization” of Crimea, where Russia’s Black Sea fleet is based.

Pompeo’s plan has not been endorsed by Trump, and the former president has repeatedly promised to deliver a more peaceful end to the conflict. Speaking to Fox News after naming Ukraine critic J.D. Vance as his running mate last week, Trump described Russia as “a war machine” that cannot be defeated by the Ukrainian military.

After a phone call with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky last Friday, Trump announced that “both sides will be able to come together and negotiate a deal that ends the violence and paves a path forward to prosperity.”

Trump has never revealed how he would force both sides to the table, telling NBC News last year that “if I tell you exactly, I lose all my bargaining chips.” According to a Bloomberg report earlier this year, Trump would consider cutting off military aid to Kiev unless Zelensky accepted the loss of some of Ukraine’s pre-conflict territory and made peace with Moscow.

However, Trump has expressed support for lending Ukraine money at a preferential rate, and for pressing NATO’s European member states to up their defense spending.

Pompeo, who served as Trump’s CIA director and then secretary of state, is one of numerous Republican figures attempting to shape the policies of a potential second Trump presidency. Last month, a group of Trump’s key advisers handed the former president a dramatically different proposal for Ukraine, which stipulated that Kiev would only get more American weapons if it agreed to a ceasefire based on current battle lines and peace talks with Moscow.

July 26, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Slanders against China over Ukraine crisis fall apart on their own

Global Times | July 26, 2024

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi held talks with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba in the southern Chinese city of Guangzhou on Wednesday. The Ukraine crisis has entered its third year, with the conflict ongoing and risks of escalation and spillover still present. As the highest-ranking Ukrainian official to visit China since the outbreak of the conflict, the discussions and the signals sent during the talks, as well as whether there are signs of peace in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, have garnered international attention. Particularly in light of China’s successful mediation efforts in re-establishing diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, and promoting internal reconciliation of Palestine, there are heightened expectations for China’s constructive role in promoting peace talks in the Russia-Ukraine issue.

As part of China’s recent diplomatic efforts to mediate international and regional hotspots, China’s proactive invitation to Kuleba to visit has garnered international attention. According to Reuters, citing Ukrainian accompanying officials, the talk lasted over three hours, longer than planned, and was “very deep and concentrated.” The word “deep” is rarely used in diplomatic settings. In a statement after the meeting, the Ukrainian side stated, “China’s role as a global force for peace is important.” This reaffirms China’s role as a peacemaker and highlights the effectiveness of the meeting.

As a direct party to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Ukraine has shown greater interest in China’s positions than before. This has led international public opinion to cautious optimism about the direction of the Russia-Ukraine issue and to pay more attention to China’s role in major regional conflicts. Even Western media, which often distorted and smeared China’s stance on the Russia-Ukraine issue, is now speculating whether China intends to preempt the US in playing the role of peacemaker. These discussions in various directions all confirm that China’s efforts to promote peace are increasingly prominent and have become an acknowledged reality in the international community.

The distortions and slanders against China by the West have largely fallen apart on their own. The fairness of China’s position has been once again validated, and China’s proposals have withstood the test of time. Western efforts to stoke the fire have only prolonged the conflict. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stated in a recent interview, “We have to finish the war as soon as possible.” More and more signs point to the fact that the resolution of all conflicts will ultimately return to the negotiating table; all disputes will eventually be resolved through political means. This is precisely what China has consistently advocated.

From the handshake between Saudi Arabia and Iran, to the historic reconciliation within Palestine, to the complex and challenging Ukraine crisis, why does China’s position repeatedly manage to gather the broadest consensus in the international community? First, it is because China maintains an objective and fair stance and is committed to mediation and promoting dialogue. Second, China adheres to the concept of common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable security, working tirelessly to maintain world peace, stability, and development. In the face of crises, China does not stoke the flames or take advantage of the situation for its own gain. This stance is visible to the international community and the parties involved in the conflict.

There is an Arabic proverb: “Seek knowledge, even if you have to go as far as China.” Now, the saying “Seek peace in China” is also becoming popular. On the complex international stage, China’s role as a responsible major power maintaining world peace is increasingly recognized. As China called for in the Global Security Initiative Concept Paper in 2023, “countries need to work in solidarity to foster a community of shared security for mankind and build a world that is free from fear and enjoys universal security.” China’s stance is clear and consistent: between peace and war, it chooses peace; between dialogue and sanctions, it chooses dialogue; between cooling down and fueling the fire, it chooses cooling down. On the Ukraine crisis, China remains straightforward and sincere, without political self-interest or geopolitical manipulation. China is truly dedicated to mediation and promoting dialogue to achieve a cease-fire and an end to the conflict.

Of course, the Ukraine crisis did not form overnight, and resolving the issue will not be accomplished in a single step. It requires the joint efforts of the international community. Recently, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken once again claimed at the Aspen Security Forum that “China can’t have it both ways.” Many in the West remain stuck in the mindset of “supporting one side,” which only complicates and intensifies the conflict. Influential major countries, in particular, should align with China to create conditions and provide support for direct dialogue and negotiations between Russia and Ukraine. Only when major powers contribute positive energy rather than negative energy can there be an early glimpse of a cease-fire in this conflict.

July 26, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Netanyahu’s ‘Abraham Alliance’ Proposal Completely Detached From Reality – Analyst

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 25.07.2024

Israel’s prime minister has sketched the outlines of a new NATO-style alliance between Tel Aviv, Washington and Arab countries which he said could “counter the growing Iranian threat.” Dr. Mehran Kamrava, professor of government at Georgetown University’s Qatar campus, explains why the proposal is ludicrous.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s hopes to bring countries like Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and perhaps Egypt into a new Israeli and US-led, NATO-style pact dubbed the ‘Abraham Alliance’ is not only unrealistic, but not original, either, Kamrava told Sputnik, commenting on Netanyahu’s Wednesday afternoon address to a joint session of Congress.

“I don’t think that [an alliance between Israel and the Gulf States, ed.] is a realistic assumption because Saudi Arabia normalized relations with Iran… Bahrain and Iran have been in conversations about a rapprochement, and the UAE, despite having maintained its relationship with Israel, has also maintained a relationship with Iran,” Kamrava pointed out.

In his speech, Netanyahu outlined a “vision for the broader Middle East” involving taking a cue from what the US did after the Second World War by creating NATO and applying it to the Middle East. The proposed bloc should include the US and Israel, and “all countries that are at peace with Israel” or wish to “make peace with Israel,” Netanyahu said.

The Abraham Alliance proposal is “not new,” Kamrava stressed, noting that Netanyahu has “been advocating this for a number of years,” with Israel’s push to normalize ties with its Gulf neighbors seen as the first step in this direction.

Today, Israel can only dependably rely only on United States Central Command and Washington for weapons and other support, Kamrava said. That’s because “the Israeli lobby is quite powerful in the United States, particularly in Congress,” with both parties and all of its major figures, from presidents Biden and Trump to vice president Harris, declaring themselves Zionists or otherwise voicing “strong support” for Israel.

Netanyahu, meanwhile, remains mired in a “deep” and hopeless political mess, Kamrava said, facing “pressure from [his] left that want the hostages back…pressure from the Israeli army, which has said that it is unable now to bring the remaining hostages home through continued use of force and the continuation of the war,” and “pressure from the right that want a complete eradication of Palestinians.”

In this situation, only a continuation of the war, and playing up the “Iranian boogeyman” can save him, the observer summed up.

July 25, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment