Majority of Moldovans Oppose Idea of Joining NATO: President
Al-Manar | April 11, 2023
The majority of Moldovan citizens oppose the idea of the country abandoning neutrality and joining NATO, President Maia Sandu said on Tuesday.
“The people should want it because it means changes to the constitution and should be done through a referendum. However, if we look at opinion polls today, we will see that there is no serious support for the idea of abandoning neutrality,” she said in an interview with PRO TV.
Sandu added that apart from the Supreme Security Council, another agency would be established in the country, which would be tasked with combating information manipulations and propaganda.
In an address to the Munich Security Conference, Sandu asked NATO members to assist her country in the fight against the spread of information reflecting Russia’s view on global developments on social media. Moldova’s parliament, in turn, passed a law making it possible “to control online propaganda and disinformation.”
Polls show that over 55% of Moldovans strongly oppose the country’s NATO membership and 27% support the initiative. However, Sandu did not rule out earlier that Chisinau might abandon neutrality and join the military alliance amid the Ukrainian crisis. She also expressed interest in boosting cooperation with NATO in rearming Moldova’s army.
Global Thunder 23: What Message Do US’ Latest Nuclear Drills Send Russia?

B-52H Stratofortresses from the 2nd Bomb Wing line up on the runway at Barksdale Air Force Base, La., Oct. 14, 2020. The B-52 is a long-range, heavy bomber that can perform a variety of missions and has been the backbone of U.S. strategic bomber forces for more than 60 years.
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 11.04.2023
United States Strategic Command, the Pentagon arm responsible for military operations involving nuclear weapons, kicked off annual command and control drills this week. What message do the drills send Washington’s adversaries?
STRATCOM’s press service has done its best to calm concerns about the nuclear drills which began on Tuesday, assuring that they are ordinary, annually-scheduled exercises definitely “not” being held “in response to the actions by any nation or other actors.”
“Global Thunder 23 (GT23) involves personnel throughout the strategic enterprise including US STRATCOM components and subordinate units. The purpose of GT23 is to enhance nuclear readiness and ensure a safe, secure, and reliable deterrence force,” the command said in a statement.
“In addition to US personnel, GT23 will involve key allied personnel and partners, including United Kingdom personnel, who will integrate into senior leadership teams and work across a broad spectrum of areas offering policy support and operational insight… As in previous years, Global Thunder 23 will include an increase in bomber aircraft flights throughout the exercise,” STRATCOM added.
The formal goal of the drills seems pretty simple: to train US forces responsible for launching nuclear weapons against Washington’s adversaries, and assess operational readiness in coordination with allies – typically including Britain, Canada, Denmark, Australia, and South Korea. US forces involved in the drills ordinarily involve Air Force Global Strike Command and nuclear bomber wings dotting North America, plus forces responsible for launching America’s intercontinental ballistic missiles, and nuclear submarine crews.
The first Global Thunder drills were held in October 2014 – the same year relations between the West and Russia collapsed in the aftermath of a US-backed coup in Kiev. So much for STRATCOM’s statement that the drills aren’t held “in response to the actions of any nation.”
The last Global Thunder drills were held in November 2021, with the 2022 drills postponed to this week amid the escalation of the Ukraine crisis into a full-blown NATO-Russia proxy war.
Global Thunder 23 comes at a curious time. Washington and its allies spent the better part of the last year warning about purported Russian plans to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine, leaving aside the fact that the US is the only nation to have ever used nuclear weapons in wartime, and the fact that only America’s doctrine allows for nukes to be used preemptively and against non-nuclear-armed enemies.
What Other Recent Nuclear Drills Have There Been?
A separate STRATCOM command exercise dubbed “Global Lightning” was held in January 2022 in coordination with US Indo Pacific Command, with those drills focusing on “headquarters processes and procedures necessary to plan and respond to a military crisis.” Unlike Global Thunder, Global Lightning involves no associated field training.
Last October, NATO held the “Steadfast Noon” drills, simulating the use of American nuclear weapons by Washington’s European allies. Those exercises took place in Belgium, the UK, and over the North Sea. 14 countries and 60 aircraft of various types, including nuclear-capable bombers and spy and tanker planes, took part.
Russia’s nuclear forces held their own nuclear exercises, dubbed “Grom” (“Thunder”), the same month, notifying the US on what the Pentagon said was a “routine annual exercise” in compliance with arms control obligations. The Grom drills involved tests of components of all three elements of Russia’s nuclear triad, including live-fire launches of submarine, aircraft, and ground-based nuclear missile systems.
The nuclear superpowers aren’t the only ones to have conducted nuclear exercises recently. Last month, North Korea held two days-worth of drills “simulating a nuclear counterattack” against enemy targets – including the firing of a tactical missile carrying a mock nuclear weapon, amid growing regional tensions sparked by the increased frequency of US, South Korean, and Japanese exercises.
Drills’ Dangers
One doesn’t have to go very far back in history to recognize the danger of nuclear exercises resulting in a spiraling escalation. Nearly 40 years ago, in November 1983, a NATO command post drill known as Able Archer almost sparked a global nuclear holocaust after the Soviet military brass and the KGB became convinced that the Reagan administration was preparing an all-out surprise nuclear attack against the Soviet “evil empire.” Recently declassified documents have revealed that Pentagon planners deliberately took a number of provocative steps to raise Soviet suspicions, including a radio-silent airlift of 19,000 US troops to Europe, training involving “new nuclear weapons release procedures,” and multiple intentional “slips of the tongue” involving references to B-52 bomber flights as “strikes.” Additional declassified docs released in 2021 revealed that the Soviet military took the Able Archer drills so seriously that it prepped over 100 strike aircraft in Central Europe with live nuclear weapons.
Although communication channels between the Kremlin and the White House have improved since that time, the situation involving nuclear weapons can arguably be said to be even more dangerous today than it was in the mid-1980s. Since then, the US has not only moved nuclear weapons-related defense infrastructure over 1,000 km closer to Russia’s borders, but come up with a dangerous new military doctrine known as “Prompt Global Strike,” which envisions a massed non-nuclear attack against adversaries using ballistic and cruise missiles to quickly decapitate the enemy’s political and military leadership. The PGS initiative, announced by the Pentagon shortly after Washington’s exit from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia in 2002, prompted Moscow to begin research into an array of next-gen hypersonic weapons designed specifically to make US military planners think twice before deciding to launch aggression.
‘Pentagon Leak’ Indicates US Allies Not Falling in Line With Washington’s All-In Ukraine Policy
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 11.04.2023
The apparent Pentagon leak has shown that Washington’s attempts to force its allies into following its military agenda is not working well anymore, as the Kiev regime is losing grip and ground, Daniel McAdams, executive director of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, told Sputnik.
Alleged Pentagon documents, with some of them marked “top secret,” have found their way to the web over the past few weeks. The trove contains information ranging from American military plans in Ukraine, to sensitive data linked to China and the Middle East, and also shed new light on Washington’s spying on its allies. This is not the first time that Pentagon documents have been leaked: in 1971, Daniel Ellsberg, a senior research associate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Center for International Studies, turned over a batch of Pentagon files pertaining to the US’ involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967 to The New York Times, which prompted a heated public debate. Meanwhile, the veracity of the latest trove is in question, as South Korea, the UK, Israel, and Bulgaria have dismissed the apparent leak as “false.”
“There’s so much speculation,” said Daniel McAdams. “Could it be someone from the Pentagon who understands that the White House has absolutely no idea what it’s doing and is dragging us into World War III? Could it be someone like that, a whistleblower? Possibly. Could it be someone in the White House understanding that this is a lost war? They’ve lost the war and they’re looking for an off-ramp. And if they could point out the fact that Ukraine’s resources are severely depleted when the so-called spring offensive comes and it fails like most people expect it to fail, they could say, ‘Well, the information was out there. You all knew that they didn’t have a chance anyway, so it’s not our fault. See you later.’ You know, that could be another thing.”
Judging from the documents in question, the US has recently been busy with persuading its allies to kick off deliveries of military equipment and lethal weapons to the Kiev regime. The alleged Pentagon files shed light on Seoul’s concerns that artillery shells provided to the US by South Korea could then be transferred to Ukraine. The batch also showed that the US has not given up hope on forcing Tel Aviv into sending missiles to the Kiev regime and even alleged that the Bulgarian government is considering sending Kiev its MiG fighter jets. However, the US allies have resolutely denied planning any of the aforementioned weaponrs deliveries to Kiev.
“I don’t think it’s anything unusual to see the US pressuring its so-called allies into doing what Washington wants done on foreign policy,” McAdams noted. “I mean, the leaks are very strange, because it’s not obvious what the purpose of leaking them was right now. The idea that the US is pressuring countries like South Korea and Israel is not a surprise, but it does show at least that the US is all-in on its Ukraine policy and it’s demanding that the rest of the world fall in line (…) There are two reasons [for the US pressuring its allies to give weapons to Ukraine]. First of all, the neocons (…) who run our foreign policy, they never back off. They never back away. That’s number one. And number two, this whole thing is a money-laundering scheme. The Central Europeans give up Soviet-era weapons, and then they use money given to them by Washington to purchase brand new weapons from the US military-industrial complex. This is a massive scam on a multi-tens of billions of dollars scale.”
The US sent Ukraine nearly $47 billion worth of military aid last year and still Washington is pressuring smaller allied nations to join its effort and fork out. However, the problem is that it isn’t working and those countries are pushing back and saying “no,” McAdams continued. He cited French President Emmanuel Macron as saying recently: “We can’t just follow the Americans on their foreign policy anymore.” According to the US scholar, this is a clear indication that “there is a shift coming.” In addition, it has also become clear that the Kiev regime is incapable of winning on the battlefield and negotiations are long overdue. The apparent Pentagon leak describes a gloomy picture of Ukraine’s depleted stockpiles and manpower.
“I think what it says is that it’s hopeless. But again, the strange thing about these leaks is that this is hardly a revelation. Anyone who follows the Ukraine-Russia conflict beyond just watching CNN understands that Ukraine is in a terrible situation. It’s already lost a thousand tanks. Another 100 tanks is not going to make a big difference. You can’t train a military on all of these different weapons systems and military systems and none of them are interconnected, none of them match. You’ve got a German tank over here, an English tank over here, and an American tank over here. You can’t win a war that way against any opponent, but certainly not against the Russian military. It can’t be won that way. So it’s not a revelation, it confirms what many people who are following this thing already know,” McAdams concluded.
‘Pentagon Leak’ Shows US Dragging Allies Into War With Russia
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 11.04.2023
South Korea, the UK, Israel, and Bulgaria have all rushed to deny the veracity of the alleged Pentagon leak. The dump not only exposed Washington’s possible plans and routine spying, but also cast a shadow on its allies, with Seoul, London, Tel Aviv, and Sofia branding the batch as “false.”
The US Justice Department on April 10 opened an investigation into the purported leak of US Department of Defense intelligence documents. The trove of apparently classified files contains the Pentagon’s assessments of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and Washington’s efforts to persuade its allies to jump on its proxy war bandwagon.
“I think [the documents are] extraordinary, for a number of reasons,” Professor Joe Siracusa, US political expert and dean of Global Futures, Curtin University, told Sputnik. “Number one, most leaks in the past we’ve learned about in retrospect. These documents are fresh. Some of them are barely 40 days old and tell us exactly the debates that are going on in South Korea. South Korea doesn’t like to pass on ammunition to third parties, for example. And there’s a debate within South Korea about the pressure from the Americans. And there it is. It’s all in the documents. It’s not even in the South Korean media. What’s extraordinary about this is how recent these documents are. And it’s not like Snowden, or Chelsea Manning, or Julian Assange, [where] sometimes the documents are two or three years afterwards, or even in my day, the Pentagon Papers were many years afterwards. These are very fresh and, I think, very embarrassing.”
Out of the Frying Pan, Into the Fire
The much-discussed Pentagon docs showed that South Korea found itself between a rock and a hard place after agreeing to sell artillery shells to help the United States replenish its stockpiles. The problem was that Seoul was worried that Washington would divert munitions to the Kiev regime. The Asian nation’s official policy prohibits it from providing lethal weapons to countries at war. In addition, the report concerning South Korea’s back-and-forths was based on signals intelligence, meaning the US has been spying on its ally, as per The New York Times.
While the leak risks triggering tensions between Washington and Seoul, it may simultaneously backfire on longstanding relations between South Korea and Russia. Addressing the plenary session of the Valdai International Discussion Club in October 2022, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned Seoul against arming the Kiev regime. The Russian president suggested that Seoul would be similarly disappointed if Moscow had resumed nuclear cooperation with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK).
Likewise, Israel appears to be displeased after the disclosure of potential scenarios in which the US believes Tel Aviv would supply Ukraine with lethal weapons. One of the scenarios, eloquently titled the “Turkish Model,” envisages that Israel could supply defense systems to Kiev through a third party while still calling for dialogue between Ukraine and Russia. The Pentagon’s list of Israeli weapons supposedly includes Barak 8 missiles, the Spyder air defense system, and Spike anti-tank missiles.
The apparently leaked report hypothesized that Tel Aviv would provide lethal weapons to Ukraine in the event of a diplomatic crisis with Moscow stemming from Russia’s growing ties with Iran. Moscow’s reinforcement of Syria’s air defenses resulting in the downing of Israeli aircraft could also drive a wedge between Israel and Russia, as per the document.
Yet another scenario raised by the report envisions US cooperation with Israel to prepare action against Tehran in order to persuade the Israelis to arm the Kiev regime.
While Israeli administrations have avoided sending lethal weapons to Kiev, the Israeli media alleged in November 2022 that Tel Aviv had agreed to fund several million dollars’ worth of supplies of “strategic materials” to Ukraine. The Israeli authorities allegedly asked participants of the deal to keep it on the hush so as not to anger Moscow. Media also suggested that Israel is covertly aiding Ukraine with intelligence and that Tel Aviv had agreed that NATO members could supply the Kiev regime with weapons systems containing Israeli components like electro-optical and fire-control systems.
To frustrate Israeli officials even further, the alleged Pentagon documents suggested that the leadership of the Israeli secret service Mossad had encouraged the agency’s staff and Israeli citizens to participate in protests against the nation’s judicial reform, advocated by the Netanyahu government.
The much-discussed docs further alleged that a Russian fighter jet “nearly shot down” a British spy plane off the coast of Crimea on September 29, 2022. At the time, UK Defense Minister Ben Wallace did not describe the incident as “a near-shootdown,” but called it a “malfunction,” adding that he had spoken with senior Russian defense officials about it.
As per the US press, the apparent episode shows that despite their bellicose rhetoric, Western military officials are trying hard to avoid being drawn directly into conflict with Moscow.
When it comes to Bulgaria, the country allegedly offered to donate its MiG-29s to Kiev, as per “the Pentagon leak.” On April 10, the Bulgarian Ministry of Defense asserted to the public that it had not held any talks on the provision of MiG-29 jets to Ukraine. “Such a decision would lead to a deficit of capabilities which is contrary to the country’s Constitution,” the Bulgarian Ministry of Defense stated.
Who’s Behind the ‘Leak’?
As per the American press, US officials have confirmed that the Pentagon docs “appear to be legitimate intelligence and operational briefs” compiled by the Pentagon’s Joint Staff, adding that at least one had been modified from the original at some point. Nonetheless, the media highlighted, citing US officials, that the apparent authenticity of the documents “is not an indication of their accuracy.”
“When they first came out, the Pentagon denied they were real,” Siracusa said. “There was a little fairy tale about these may be fake documents. Well, they are not fake documents. Someone might have fooled around with a sentence or two. They’re real documents and they come from the top Joint Chiefs, from various PowerPoint displays or whatever it is. Somebody stole these and passed them out. And so you ask yourself, were these passed on to show that the Ukrainians are probably now losing the war or were they passed on as a signal to other people? I mean, is this somebody who’s trying to bring peace to the region? I’m very interested in why people take this information. Because taking this information and publishing it is treason.”
The US political expert wonders as to who leaked the documents and what goals they are pursuing. According to Siracusa, they could be motivated by a higher humanitarian purpose or “might have just simply been released as a childhood or as a pubescent conflict between two kids who can get into the system who were playing games.” At the same time, someone in the Pentagon may have released these to show the American people that the US proxy war in Ukraine is doomed and they are trying to sweeten the pill, showing in advance that there were preconditions for a defeat, the professor presumed.
“I’m very curious about who released them and why,” he said. “Right now, people say there’s not much importance in them. That’s not true at all, because the very fact that they were released suggests to me that there are leaks at the highest levels of the Pentagon. And when things escape the Joint Chiefs of Staff meetings, I have to ask myself, ‘Well, why did that happen?’ Or maybe it actually happened with somebody on the Joint Chiefs who’s very unhappy about this situation. All kinds of things are whirling on beneath the actual story itself. We don’t know the real story yet. But I think, once we find out, if we find out who leaked this and why, I think we’ll even have a bigger story than we have today.”
Remarkably, the apparent leak followed Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh’s Nord Stream bombshell, which detailed how US and Norwegian operatives axed the underwater pipelines at the request of the Biden administration. In his follow-up articles on Substack, Hersh hinted that disgruntled CIA officials could be behind the leak of the Nord Stream plot. However, the US mainstream press almost completely ignored the veteran journalist’s story, in contrast to the latest Pentagon dump, which has been widely disseminated by the Western press over the past week.
US Proxy War in Ukraine is De Facto Direct Involvement
The NYT called the Pentagon leaks a “nightmare for the Five Eyes” intelligence alliance. However, Siracusa does not believe that the apparent leak will pose a challenge to the Anglophone bloc. As per him, it won’t impact the bloc’s intelligence sharing. However, when it comes to other allies of Washington, the unfolding scandal has definitely hit a raw nerve.
“I think The New York Times saying that this is going to have an enormous impact on the Five Eyes is an exaggeration,” Siracusa said. “I mean, the Five Eyes are on board anyway, and they’ll put up with it. But I think it would be a little disturbing to me if I were a leader of a government to find out that my deepest conversations with my military chiefs was being reported in The New York Times. I would just wonder ‘How reliable is an ally that allows top secret information, these conversations, my words, your words, to be published in print for the world to see and for my enemies to use against me.’ I think if you were a friend of the United States, tonight you’d be a little more nervous than you were yesterday.”
To complicate matters further, the leak pertains to the US and NATO’s ongoing proxy war in Ukraine and their attempts to involve more nations in their fold, thus putting the latter in dire straits. According to Siracusa, “these leaked documents (…) show that America is guiding the war, it’s providing targeting information, satellite information” to hit Russian troops and positions. The professor highlighted that he regards “a proxy war as a real war.” “This is direct involvement,” he stressed.
“I do not approve of American proxy involvement in this war. And when I find out that America is playing a leading role, continuing the war, because the longer this war goes on, the more people who are going to die, and it’s going to have no purpose at the end, because Russia will get the Donbass and Crimea, all the rest of it. I mean, there is nothing that Zelensky or the Americans can do to change the outcome, that they could have had one year ago. Now I’m looking at direct American involvement in a war that the United States says it’s not directly involved in. Well, look, that’s a lie,” Siracusa concluded.
Kiev to run out of its anti-air missiles
By Lucas Leiroz | April 11, 2023
Apparently, it is increasingly difficult to hide the catastrophic situation of Kiev’s war arsenal. According to a major Western media outlet, the neo-Nazi regime will run out of most of its anti-air missiles by next month. The source of the newspaper would be an alleged leaked Pentagon’s document. The case shows once again how unfavorable the military scenario of the conflict is for the Ukrainian forces.
The subject was discussed in a recent article published by the Wall Street Journal. According to the outlet, documents leaked on the Pentagon’s official social networks would have exposed an extremely pessimistic forecast about the future of the Ukrainian armed forces, pointing to the nearly total exhaustion of Kiev’s anti-aircraft defense capacity. Anti-air missiles are expected to run out in May, which will further complicate the Ukrainian situation and boost demand for new NATO weapons packages in order to prolong the alliance’s proxy war.
The forecast is based on a calculation taking into account the recent numbers of the Ukrainian army. Currently, Kiev is expending about 69 Buk missiles and 200 S-300 missiles a month to maintain its defense positions against the Russian air attacks. With these numbers, it is most likely that the Buk missiles will run out in early April and that the stock of S-300s will expire by May 3rd, according to Pentagon’s officials in the leaked document.
Indeed, some measures to mitigate the effects of Ukrainian anti-aircraft weakness have already been taken by Western forces. Kiev received three Iris-T anti-aircraft systems from Germany, in addition to eight American NASAMS systems. However, these devices allow a limited number of launches, which do not cover as much territory as the S-300 missiles. This limited aid has made it difficult to efficiently supply new Western missiles to Ukraine, making Kiev still heavily dependent on Soviet-era launch systems.
In this sense, a new wave of broad military support would be needed to overcome the Ukrainian deficit. The US military, according to what is exposed in the revealed paper, estimate that the necessary number will reach 16 Irist-T or NASAMS batteries and up to 12 Patriot or SAMP-T batteries. It is necessary to remember that recently the American president Joe Biden had already authorized the sending of a Patriot battery, at the same time that Germany, France and Italy promised to supply a SAMP-T system to the neo-Nazi regime. However, this equipment has not yet reached Ukraine, which is why the situation of Kiev’s defense has not yet improved.
Since late 2022, requests for military aid focused on anti-aircraft defense have been constant in Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky’s speeches. He considers this type of equipment a “number one priority”, and his advisors have also requested, in addition to anti-missile systems, the well-known US F-16 fighter jets, which have been repeatedly banned by the US government. Some pro-Ukrainian analysts believe that these aid packages would be a kind of “game changer”, but renowned experts rule out any possibility of reversing the military scenario of the conflict, regardless of whether NATO weapons reach the battlefield.
It is important to note that the US government has not yet commented on the case, with the Pentagon being silent on the authenticity of the supposed leak. The matter comes amid a recent wave of releases of classified Pentagon’s documents. Other reports from the department were exposed on social networks, including information on sensitive topics such as China, the Middle East and terrorism. There has been strong distrust on the part of analysts about the veracity of these alleged leaks. Some commentators argue that if the releases were true there would be no room for the Western media to report their existence, with a strong censorship initiative trying to hide the incident.
Although there is not enough information to point out the veracity of these leakages, it is possible to say that at least with regard to the Ukrainian anti-aircraft missiles, there is a great possibility that the numbers are real, considering the evident defeat of Kiev’s forces in the battlefield. In a more realistic perspective, it is possible to suspect that in fact there are no “leaks”, but that the Pentagon would be deliberately publishing the numbers to increase the fear of a Ukrainian defeat in public opinion, boosting support for the shipment of new weapons.
What we have seen recently is the absolute failure of the “Ukrainian victory” narrative, as Russian advances have made it clear which side militarily controls the combats. Due to this, there seems to be currently an attempt at “damage control”, with officials and mainstream media partially admitting Ukraine’s defeat. If before the justification for sending weapons was that Kiev would be winning, now it is said that Kiev is losing, but “must win”. The aim is to spread anti-Russian fear in public opinion and to convince ordinary citizens that the shipment of weapons is an urgent measure in order to save the West.
In a rational and strategic analysis, it is possible to see that at no time did Moscow show interest in expanding the limits of its military operation, therefore there is no reason for any kind of fear on the part of Western citizens. On the other hand, the exhaustion of Ukrainian forces seems to be good news, since, faced with the inability to continue fighting, the Kiev regime would be forced to surrender, which would end hostilities. This would be the best-case scenario for all sides except for NATO’s pro-war elites.
Lucas Leiroz is a journalist and researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.
Invading Mexico in the Name of the Drug War Is a Really Bad Idea
By Weimin Chen – Mises Wire – 04/10/2023
Following the violent attack on Americans in the Mexican border city of Matamoros in early March, South Carolina Republican senator Lindsey Graham stated that he was prepared to get tough and introduce legislation to set the stage for US military intervention in Mexico. The move would be a significant escalation in the long-running war on drugs that has been raging under the auspices of the United States for many decades to the dismay of many Latin American countries.
Graham continues to ignore the disastrous results of the use of force in US foreign policy as he eyes adding Mexico to his growing bucket list of interventionist missions. If previous interventions serve as examples, a US military intervention in Mexico would be just another excuse to expand national security interests and mire the country in another costly conflict.
Matamoros Attack
Graham’s comments on using military force in Mexico were sparked when four Americans were kidnapped in Matamoros on the Mexican side of the border with Texas. The area is known for having a heavy drug cartel presence due to its proximity to the US-Mexico border. The four Americans have been identified as Latavia “Tay” McGee, Shaeed Woodard, Zindell Brown, and Eric James Williams.
McGee’s mother told reporters that her daughter was traveling to undergo a cosmetic surgical procedure with the other three. They were fired on in downtown Matamoros and loaded into a pickup truck. A local woman, Areli Pablo Servando, was also killed by a stray bullet in the attack. Brown and Woodard were eventually found dead, while Williams and McGee survived.
Later, a letter of apology along with five men found with their hands tied were turned over to authorities of the Tamaulipas state law enforcement purportedly by the Scorpion faction of the Gulf Cartel. The organization extended its apology to the families of the victims and to the people of Matamoros in general for the poor decision-making and discipline of its affiliated associates.
This public relations move indicated that the cartel was alarmed by the outcry following the attack and wanted to frame it as an unusual incident outside of the ordinary rules under which it operates. Chances are that the cartel wanted to do anything they could to avoid direct US military confrontation.
Policymakers against the Cartels
Graham told Fox News that he would introduce legislation “to make certain Mexican drug cartels foreign terrorist organizations under US law and set the stage to use military force if necessary to protect America from being poisoned by things coming out of Mexico.” This highlights the concern surrounding the trafficking of fentanyl into the US from Mexico and the deadly toll it has been having on the population, and there is a growing sentiment, especially among Republican leaders, for more to be done about it.
Former attorney general Bill Barr concurred with the notion of US military action against cartels and recommended declaring the groups as “foreign terrorist organizations.” Texas representative Dan Crenshaw and Florida representative Michael Waltz have expressed their desires to authorize the president to use military force against “those responsible for trafficking fentanyl or a fentanyl-related substance into the United States or carrying out other related activities that cause regional destabilization in the Western Hemisphere.” Seventeen Republicans have cosponsored that resolution.
Georgia representative Marjorie Taylor Greene wrote on Twitter that the US “should strategically strike and take out the Mexican Cartels, not the Mexican government or their people, but the Mexican Cartels which control them all.” This common assurance that America’s execution of military plans will simply target the right people and nobody else has been used in virtually every instance of the US using force in foreign conflicts. It shows either the hubris of US foreign policy or its indifference to the lives of its innocent victims abroad.
Roots of Violence
These calls for military intervention would serve as another layer of policies and actions already implemented by the US that have had disastrous consequences. After all, the violence in Mexico is an extension of the war on drugs started by American policy. In just the last decade, the US Drug Enforcement Administration has been found laundering millions of dollars in cash and delivering drugs for Mexican traffickers, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives was found to have illegally proliferated nearly two thousand firearms with the intention of tracking criminal elements. These firearms were subsequently lost and used in cartel violence on both sides of the border.
Meanwhile, US-trained Mexican troops and federal police officers have committed widespread human rights violations. If these are the policies that have already been implemented, sending the military would be adding fuel to the fire.
Graham followed up with his statements on military force and clarified that he did not mean sending the US Army to invade Mexico but to destroy drug labs. This is reminiscent of the beginning of the US missions in the war on terror in Afghanistan, when special forces under the Joint Special Operations Command were implemented in secret raids that were highly controversial in their lack of accountability in causing collateral damage and civilian casualties. Without any clear definition of success and with the dubious effectiveness of using military force, this kind of endeavor would be susceptible to mission creep and expansions of the scope and spending, just as it did in the many interventions of the war on terror.
Mexican president Andrés Manuel López Obrador has already responded to the remarks by Republican lawmakers, saying that any US military intervention in his country would represent an unacceptable infringement of Mexican sovereignty. If the US military’s track record provides any indication, the direct use of force in Mexico would likely cause more pain and suffering in a country with a population already plagued by violence.
US once again turning sword to Latin America as its global power wanes
By Drago Bosnic | April 11, 2023
The political West is always “shocked” by how deeply unpopular it is in the Global South and cannot comprehend why it “dares” to refuse to side with them against Russia and/or China. This lesson is something the political elites of the United States and its numerous satellite states need to be reminded of from time to time. On the other hand, the political West never stopped treating the Global South as a fief that just so happens to be populated by several billion people, all of whom are seen as “fair game”. Needless to say, this has left disastrous consequences for the vast majority of those living in the targeted countries.
While some were attacked directly, such as Iraq (twice), Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen, former Yugoslavia/Serbia, etc. others were being exploited “peacefully”. Luckily for the world, the power of the globe’s most imperialist bloc is gradually fading away. This is certainly not to say that it has already collapsed, but the process is well underway. The political West is also perfectly aware of this, so it now needs to prioritize which areas of the Global South it can target. Its days of waging war on the millions of unfortunate people of the Middle East will soon be over, very likely forever.
However, as the US power projection capabilities dwindle, it’s once again turning its sword toward the immediate neighborhood. And it’s not even trying to be at least somewhat subtle about it, as the people of Mexico are being threatened to find out because many in Washington DC believe it is the Mexicans’ “fault” that America is getting flooded with drugs smuggled in by the cartels. Ironically (or should we say hypocritically) enough, it was precisely the US intelligence services that essentially created these hideously violent organizations and also made sure the connection is kept under the rug.
Last month, after two US citizens were killed, presumably by members of the CDC (otherwise known as the Golf Cartel), Washington DC warhawks threatened to bomb Mexico, a country whose law enforcement works closely with the US to fight the cartels. Earlier, in January, Republicans Mike Waltz and Dan Crenshaw called for an Authorization for Use of Military Force against Mexican cartels for drug trafficking “that has caused destabilization in the Western Hemisphere.” Infamous Lindsey Graham, along with 16 Republican cosponsors, supported the bill and criticized the Biden administration for the deteriorating situation at the southern border, claiming that “up to 100,000 people have died from fentanyl poisoning coming from Mexico and China, and this administration has done nothing about it.”
While it could be argued that fighting cartels is certainly not a bad cause, we should not forget that somewhat similar “altruistic” motives were cited as the reason for virtually any war the US started. Blaming Mexico and China for the drug abuse “pandemic” in America will certainly not resolve this issue or any of the resulting violence across the country. If the establishment in Washington DC had the interests of regular Americans in mind, they would introduce bills allocating at least 10% of their massive $858 billion military budget to the improvement of healthcare, for instance.
Unfortunately, as Abraham Maslow famously wrote in 1966, “If the only tool you have is a hammer, it is tempting to treat everything as if it were a nail.” The case of Mexico is quite telling that no country (unless heavily armed) can hope to feel safe, no matter how closely it worked with the US authorities. For decades, Mexico has been ravaged by drug cartels deeply connected to the infamous CIA and other US intelligence agencies. And despite even allowing American law enforcement to operate in the country, thus undermining its own sovereignty, it’s still faced with the prospect of being attacked.
And Mexico is far from being the only target, as Washington DC is increasingly turning to Nicaragua, a small country in Central America that has already been virtually destroyed by Washington DC during the (First) Cold War when it funded the infamous Contras. Just like then, this time the US is once again “worried about human rights” in Nicaragua. As if that wasn’t laughable enough, Washington DC also officially designated the small country “a strategic threat”. Apparently, the “sole superpower” is endangered by a country roughly the size of New York State, but with the population of Maryland. And the US is also using so-called “international institutions” to target Nicaragua.
The Organization of American States (OAS) and the UN, both largely financed by Washington DC, are being used for this purpose, according to former UN rapporteur for human rights Richard Falk. If one is to believe the “human rights reports” about Nicaragua are true, President Daniel Ortega supposedly ordered 40 people to be “executed”, while conveniently leaving out the part about violent opposition attacks using firearms. The reports also claimed that Ortega ordered hospitals not to treat wounded demonstrators, although the then-health minister had made clear that anyone injured would receive treatment. US-backed “experts” also compared Nicaragua to Nazi Germany.
The glaring hypocrisy in this regard indicates that there is no “international law” for Washington DC. If a country is part of the “rules-based world order“, it can openly embrace Nazism, and it will still be considered “a beacon of freedom and democracy”, while the “Nazi analogies” are reserved for everyone else. Nicaragua should certainly be worried, as should the rest of Latin America. With the US’ ability to project power globally going down faster than most people could’ve imagined just ten years ago, the belligerent thalassocracy might try to revive the infamous Monroe Doctrine, leaving well over 600 million people in Latin America exposed to “freedom and democracy”.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.jj
Republican Congress Members and Presidential Candidates Pushing for War in Mexico
By Adam Dick | Ron Paul Institute | April 10, 2023
Back in September of 2018, I criticized Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s suggestion that the United States military invade Mexico if Mexico legalizes heroin. Now, several Republican Congress members are using fentanyl fears as a new drug war basis for urging US military action south of the border.
Politico writer Alexander Ward provided details in a Monday article. The article begins with the following:
A growing number of prominent Republicans are rallying around the idea that to solve the fentanyl crisis, America must bomb it away.
In recent weeks, Donald Trump has discussed sending “special forces” and using “cyber warfare” to target cartel leaders if he’s reelected president and, per Rolling Stone, asked for “battle plans” to strike Mexico. Reps. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) and Mike Waltz (R-Fla.) introduced a bill seeking authorization for the use of military force to “put us at war with the cartels.” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) said he is open to sending U.S. troops into Mexico to target drug lords even without that nation’s permission. And lawmakers in both chambers have filed legislation to label some cartels as foreign terrorist organizations, a move supported by GOP presidential aspirants.
While much focus has been on Mexico, fighting drug cartels can mean globe-spanning US military action.
Read Ward’s article here.
Trump’s comments about US military actions to advance the drug war is at odds with his presidential campaign effort to run as the peace candidate. The comments, though, do follow directly from his declaration in his November 17 candidacy announcement speech that “We will wage war upon the cartels and stop the fentanyl and deadly drugs from killing 200,000 Americans per year.” Trump’s comments also fit in with those of other Republican presidential candidates mentioned in the Politico article — Asa Hutchinson and Vivek Ramaswamy — indicating they are open to labeling drug cartels as terrorist organizations and taking military action against them.
Potential presidential candidate John Bolton almost appears the moderate when quoted in the article stating that unilateral military operations “are not going to solve the problem.” That, though, leaves open the potential of US dominated coalition action à la the Bolton fave Iraq War or pressuring Mexico to consent to the intervention. Obtaining permission from Mexico for the US military to fight drug cartels in Mexico was an option Trump floated during his presidential term.
NATO to launch biggest Air Forces drill in its history
A German-led exercise involving hundreds of aircraft is scheduled for June and will coincide with a massive US troop deployment

RT | April 9, 2023
NATO is planning to hold the largest Air Force exercise this summer, the German Armed Forces – the Bundeswehr – announced in a statement. Dubbed ‘Air Defender 23,’ the drills are scheduled to take place between June 12 and June 24 and are expected to involve hundreds of aircraft from dozens of nations.
A total of 10,000 soldiers and 220 aircraft are to be involved in the exercise, the Bundeswehr said, adding that they are to train “in the European airspace.” The US is to supply 100 of the aircraft out of its stocks, the statement said. According to Berlin, the drills are to be held mostly over German territory, although a map published by the Bundeswehr shows that the airspace of Estonia, which borders Russia, and of Romania, which borders Ukraine, could be used as well.
The plan of the drills “is modeled after an Article 5 Assistance scenario,” the Bundeswehr said, calling it “challenging air operations training” for the participating troops. The exercise is aimed at “optimizing” the cooperation between the participating nations and demonstrating the “strength” of the military bloc.
A total of 24 nations are to take part in the drills, including Finland, which only joined NATO earlier in April. Sweden, which has yet to join the bloc, will participate in the exercise too.
The US Air National Guard will provide around half the aircraft used in the German-led exercise in June. Its commander, Lieutenant General Michael Loh, maintained that there is no set scenario pitting the NATO forces against a particular adversary during the drills. Yet, he still did mention Moscow during a briefing on the matter earlier this week.
“This is now putting the alliance together quickly, with a credible force, to make sure that if Russia ever lines up on the NATO border, that we’re ready to go,” he said on Wednesday. “We’re going to defend every inch.”
A similar tone was struck by the German Air Force. “We won’t write [Russia] a letter,” its commander, Lieutenant General Ingo Gerhartz said, adding that he thinks “they get the message.”
The drills coincide with a separate US-led exercise called Defender Europe 23. “This annual, nearly two-month-long exercise is focused on the strategic deployment of US-based forces, the employment of Army pre-positioned stocks and interoperability with European allies and partners,” the Pentagon’s deputy press secretary, Sabrina Singh, told journalists earlier this week.
A total of 9,000 US soldiers, together with 17,000 troops from 26 other nations, are to participate in the drills, which would take place across ten European nations, Singh said. Washington had already started shipping the equipment needed for the exercise to Europe, she added. According to the Pentagon, the first pieces of equipment have already arrived in Spain.
Some 7,000 pieces of equipment are to be transported to Europe as part of the drills. Around 13,000 other pieces of equipment are to be drawn from pre-positioned stocks, the Pentagon said. The US-led exercise is to kick off on April 22.
US deploys guided-missile submarine to Middle East
Press TV – April 8, 2023
The United States says a nuclear-powered American guided-missile submarine is operating in the Middle East in support of the US Fifth Fleet, which is based in Bahrain.
The USS Florida entered the region on Thursday and began transiting the Suez Canal on Friday, Commander Timothy Hawkins said in a statement on Saturday, according to Reuters.
“It is capable of carrying up to 154 Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles and is deployed to US 5th Fleet to help ensure regional maritime security and stability,” Hawkins added.
This came after the US Navy relocated a warship in the Mediterranean to the coast near Syria after tensions rose between Tehran and Washington over deadly attacks on Iranian military advisors in Syria.
Iran’s envoy to the UN Amir Saeid Iravani earlier on Monday warned that the Islamic Republic will take “decisive measures” to protect its forces and interests in Syria against any threats posed by the United States or others.
Last week, two Iranian military advisers stationed in Syria were killed in an Israeli airstrike near the country’s capital Damascus. Following the attack, the IRGC issued a stern warning to the Israeli regime on Sunday, vowing retaliation for the killing of its military advisers in Syria.
The relocation of the US warship came as US President Joe Biden claimed in March that the United States was not seeking a conflict with Iran.
Yellow Vest Leader Says Movement Opposed to French Arms Supplies to Ukraine
Sputnik – 07.04.2023
PARIS – The French Yellow Vest movement is opposed to arms supplies to Ukraine, as it has significantly increased the share of France’s defense spending, Thierry Paul Valette, the leader of the movement’s political arm, told Sputnik on Friday.
“They [the Yellow Vests] are against [arms supplies to Ukraine], because it comes at a price. The budget of the French armed forces will be raised to 400 billion euros [$436 billion], and that is a significant increase,” Valette, who is often referred to as the coordinator of Yellow Vest protests in Paris, said.
The movement unites economically vulnerable groups of French society, who have trouble understanding why their government is increasing defense spending in order to support the military industry of another country, he said.
While solidarity with Ukrainians, especially with women and children, was high in France in the initial phase of hostilities in early 2022, today French people are growing increasingly puzzled by their government’s continuing to shower hundreds of millions of euros on Kiev regime while the economy in their own country is crumbling, Valette said.
“The growing misunderstanding is prompting the rise of populist opinions [in France],” he said.
Valette added that “the support of Ukraine are causing more and more disapproval.”
Neither did the French people choose to sanction Russia at the cost of soaring prices and inflation at home, Valette said, going on to argue that imposing sanctions against Moscow was not a fully sovereign decision of the French government, with French President Emmanuel Macron having made that step at the instructions of Brussels.
Among the consequences of Russia sanctions in France, the Yellow Vests leader listed energy insecurity, price hikes and logistical disruptions.
The European Union has imposed 10 packages of sanctions against Russia over the Ukraine crisis to date. Russian President Vladimir Putin said that the policy of deterring and weakening Russia is the West’s long-term strategy, and sanctions have inflicted serious damage to the global economy.
The ‘Holy Trinity’ behind Russian military dominance in Ukraine
By Drago Bosnic | April 7, 2023
If we were to believe a single word uttered by the mainstream propaganda machine about the performance of the Russian military, we’d be convinced that Moscow is using WWII-era equipment begrudgingly manned by conscripts armed with shovels. Not to mention that, according to CNN’s “well-informed” (and yet, anonymous) sources, the morale of the Russian military is supposedly plummeting due to heavy casualties inflicted by the victorious AFU. On the other hand, those interested in Russia’s top-of-the-line weapons will often (over)focus on its truly world-class hypersonic missiles, directed-energy systems, superfast high-flying interceptors, next-generation fighter jets, etc.
However, what both ends of these two extremes ignore either completely (in the first case) or overlook for the most part (in the second case) are Russia’s bread-and-butter weapons that are inflicting the vast majority of casualties suffered by the embattled Kiev regime forces. Distinguished Serbian defense expert Slobodan Djukic recently identified three such weapons – Krasnopol/Krasnopol-M precision-guided artillery shells, MPK kits for turning freefall gravity bombs into high-precision glide bombs and Lancet kamikaze drones. All three are being used by the Russian military, to devastating effect on hostile troops, while significantly reducing Russian casualties.
Krasnopol/Krasnopol-M precision-guided artillery shells
Owing to its stellar performance during ground operations against foreign-backed terrorist forces in Syria, the Krasnopol series of high-precision artillery munitions was mass-produced and more widely adopted by the Russian military in recent years. Krasnopol was developed by the Tula-based KBP. There are several basic and improved variants used by 152 mm howitzers such as the towed D-20 or 2A65 Msta-B and self-propelled 2S3 Akatsiya or 2S19 Msta-S. It uses inertial guidance at mid-course and semi-active laser homing at the terminal phase. The target is illuminated by an external laser designator and once the laser signal is detected, the onboard guidance system will maneuver the shell to the target. This allows frontline troops to call in fire missions on specific high-priority targets for almost immediate destruction by a single shell.
The baseline version’s hit probability of 70-80% was improved to over 90% in newer variants. Such advanced munitions have a devastating effect on Kiev regime forces, while drastically reducing the probability of damage to friendly forces and civilian infrastructure. Krasnopol is effective in destroying weapons and ammunition depots, entrenched enemy positions, dug-in artillery pieces, etc. Thanks to its enhanced accuracy, it can be used even against moving targets such as tanks and armored vehicles. Most importantly, it’s getting incremental upgrades as the designers are working closely with the Russian military on improving its performance, even extending the maximum firing range up to 25 km. The estimated price for a single Krasnopol-M is $35,000, less than half the price of NATO’s M982 Excalibur.
MPK smart bomb kits, aka “Russian JDAM”
Ukraine inherited approximately 30% of the enormous Soviet military, including its massive integrated air defense network with thousands of launchers, radars and missiles of all ranges. Although much of this was severely worn out and suffered due to virtually nonexistent funding, the systems’ functionality was largely restored with endless subsidies from the political West. This made it significantly more challenging for the Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS), as it initially had a relatively limited amount of high-precision air-to-ground weapons, particularly smart bombs. The Russian military has a plethora of high-precision munitions, especially air-launched cruise missiles and new glide bombs. However, these are prohibitively expensive for use on the scale needed in Ukraine, limiting strikes to high-profile targets only.
The issue was resolved through a relatively inexpensive modification that turned Russia’s enormous stockpile of freefall gravity bombs into smart munitions. This enabled tactical strike aircraft to use the bombs beyond the range of Kiev regime air defenses. Folding wings are mounted on the body of the bomb via a steel rail, expanding after release and effectively turning the previously unguided weapon into a glide bomb capable of hitting targets at relatively long ranges. The MPK, short for Russian “модул планирования и корекреции”, literally “planning and correction module”, although perhaps better described as “gliding and correction module”, was developed by NPO Bazalt. It’s an upgrade kit for converting so-called “dumb” freefall bombs (in particular, FAB-500 M-62) into extended-range high-precision glide bombs.
The concept was inspired by a similar US program called Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM – hence the unofficial nickname for MPK being “Russian JDAM”) which NATO also recently transferred to Kiev. MPK’s effective range depends on the altitude from which the bomb is released, so estimates vary, but it’s generally expected that a bomb dropped from an altitude of 12-13 km can hit targets at distances of up to 50 km. Guidance is provided by Russian GLONASS. The Russian military has already upgraded a large portion of its massive Soviet-era stocks to MPK standard and is rapidly converting the rest of it, resulting in a virtually new weapon of extraordinary capabilities, all for a fraction of the cost needed to produce completely new bombs.
Lancet kamikaze drones/loitering munitions
Last but certainly not least – drones. These pesky little things have proven so deadly and effective that it would be ludicrous not to use them en masse. And this is precisely what the Russian military is doing, making it one of the first militaries around the globe to use loitering munitions on such a grand scale. Needless to say, to an absolutely devastating effect on the Kiev regime forces. There are several types of such drones, with perhaps the most (in)famous being the ZALA Lancet. Intended for the destruction of a wide range of ground targets, including APCs (armored personnel carriers), SAM (surface-to-air missile) systems, artillery weapons (towed/self-propelled), etc. its effectiveness is wholly undeniable, as evidenced by hundreds of hours of battlefield footage.
Deployed in several variants, Lancet possesses a highly advanced seeker and a stable video link up until the moment it hits the target. This is primarily thanks to its state-of-the-art comms channel that has proven to be highly resistant to jamming and other forms of electronic warfare. Usually paired with the Fortuna tactical ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) drones, Lancet can effectively identify even heavily camouflaged targets, including small groups of infantry from high altitude. Kiev regime forces are doing everything they can to hide or at least minimize the Lancet’s devastating effect by establishing additional firing positions, enclosing them with wire barriers and extra camouflage nets. And yet, even these countermeasures have had a limited effect.
All of the aforementioned weapons might not seem as important as Russia’s hypersonic missiles or its doomsday strategic arsenal, but they are no less valuable on a tactical level. Thousands of towed/self-propelled howitzers, MLRS, tanks, air defense systems, command posts, weapons production facilities, ammunition, etc. have been destroyed by these extremely cost-effective weapons. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu pointed out that one of the main goals is destroying enemy military-industrial capacity, while increasing pressure on logistics and supply lines. According to Shoigu, by the end of March this year, 14 HIMARS systems, 59 M777, 12 Paladin and over 30 other howitzers of various types delivered by the US, UK, Poland, Germany, France and Czechia were destroyed. These weapons were all neutralized by Russian systems priced at less than 1% of the combined cost of the aforementioned Western systems.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
