Yemeni FM berates Biden for faking ‘concern’, says US complicit in war, siege
Press TV – April 5, 2023
Yemen’s foreign minister says the United States is bent on whitewashing its complicity in the Saudi-led aggression against the impoverished Arab country by pretending to be concerned about achieving peace there.
Hisham Sharaf was cited by the Yemeni Saba news agency as making the remarks on Tuesday, two days after US President Joe Biden released a statement on the anniversary of the start of an UN-sponsored ceasefire in Yemen and stressed Washington’s “support” for all efforts aimed at reaching a comprehensive peace in the war-ravaged country.
Underlining that the US was “trying to evade its responsibilities” as a party responsible for the Saudi-led war and was profiting from it, Sharaf challenged Washington to “prove” its sincerity in wanting peace in Yemen by taking “concrete steps on the ground” and condemning the actions of the Saudi-led coalition.
“The countries that claim to be keen on achieving peace in Yemen should be sincere in their intentions by condemning the aggression and siege on Yemen for the ninth year in a row, stopping the supply of weapons and military experts to aggression countries, and putting pressure on the aggression countries,” Sharaf said.
The top Yemeni diplomat said Biden’s statement and the concern he showed regarding achieving permanent peace in Yemen are “not commensurate with what America is doing in reality by providing cover for the aggression countries.”
“The United States of America is trying with such a statement to evade its responsibilities as a party that participated in the aggression and siege on Yemen, which caused the largest humanitarian crisis in contemporary history, and to present itself as a dove of peace,” he added.
Emphasizing Yemen’s call for a just peace, Sharaf concluded by expressing Sana’a’s readiness to defend the Yemeni people through all legitimate means and the country’s ability to meet the legitimate demands of the Yemeni people.
Omani-hosted talks between the sides in the protracted conflict have been ongoing for the past several months, with the Iran-Saudi rapprochement having increased hopes that an end to the war could be imminent.
Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates — the closest allies of the US in the region after the Israeli regime — have been waging the war on Yemen since March 2015.
The invasion has been seeking to change Yemen’s ruling structure in favor of the impoverished country’s former Riyadh- and Washington-friendly rulers and crush the popular Ansarullah resistance movement. The Saudi-led coalition has failed to meet any of its objectives.
The war, which has been enjoying unstinting arms, logistical, and political support on the part of the United States, has killed hundreds of thousands of Yemenis and turned the entire country into the scene of the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.
Yemen’s defense forces, which feature the country’s army and its allied Popular Committees, have, however, vowed not to lay down their arms until the country’s complete liberation from the scourge of the aggression.
Ukrainization is Destroying American Politics
Sputnik – 06.04.2023
The persecution of former US President Donald Trump takes a page out of the Zelensky regime’s playbook, Ukrainian opposition leader Viktor Medvedchuk wrote in a commentary for The Other Ukraine Telegram channel.
Judge for yourself: the US government declares that it is ready to finance the war in Eastern Europe forever and indefinitely.
Of course, the American people have questions about why the country needs this war, why it has no end, and where the voters’ taxes are actually going. The American voter is not interested in funding a war on the other side of the globe because they see serious problems at home. Against this backdrop, the politics of peace becomes attractive to the American voter and is destined for a quick victory.
And now watch the hands. The country’s justice system is politically violated, and a peacekeeper is declared a criminal without any serious evidence, based solely on political desires. All this has already happened in Ukraine. First of all, we accuse politicians who stand for peace of crimes that do not exist. But it is impossible to stop here, as the Ukrainian experience shows. Next, the “wrong” media and parties with a pro-peace agenda must be shut down, churches that preach peace must be persecuted, the “wrong” political movements must be banned, and active citizens who advocate peace must be thrown in jail. And call all this a victory for democracy. This is what the American disciples did in Ukraine. But as far as the US is concerned, all this can only lead to a large-scale war, which Trump warns of in every speech.
All this means one thing: the much-praised Ukrainian “democracy” imposed by the United States in Ukraine has crawled into America and will destroy the state institutions of this country, just as Ukrainian statehood was destroyed before.
This is what Trump warns of: “We are in many ways a third world country. We are a country whose economy is floundering, whose supply chains are broken, whose stores are not full, whose deliveries are not coming in, and whose education system is at the bottom of every list…” And recently, he said, “Our country is going to hell.”
And here it is impossible not to agree with him, because Ukraine is already in hell, and it is dragging the US with it. Ukrainian students have surpassed their American teachers and have become teachers of legal chaos themselves. It only remains to add that Ukraine was pushed into a hell of lawlessness and arbitrariness by American policies, and today it is reaping the fruits of its own actions. As the saying goes, “God will repay each one according to his deeds.”
Why Most of the World Isn’t on Board with the NATO-Russia War
By Weimin Chen | Mises Wire | March 28, 2023
As the war in Ukraine drags on into its second year, protest demonstrations have been taking place in major European cities. They express the growing sentiment that the people are tired of the protracted conflict and fearful of what could come should the war continue even longer. Memories of the catastrophic world wars that ravaged Europe in the first half of the last century and the terrible threat of nuclear annihilation that divided the continent in the second half of the century form the traumatic foundation from which Europeans are voicing their aversion to this conflict, which has the potential to spiral out of control and bring a major war to Europe and the world again.
Broad Opposition to War
There have been protest demonstrations occurring in Germany, France, the Czech Republic, Greece, Spain, Great Britain, Belgium, Austria, Italy, Albania, Moldova, and others. European protests surrounding the anniversary of the start of the conflict notably span the Left-Right spectrum in opposing US-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) imperialism as well as the economic hardships that have befallen ordinary Europeans against the backdrop of sanctions on Russia and the funding of Ukraine.
Italian port workers aligned with the Left protested in Genoa specifically to resist the use of Italian ports to supply arms deliveries to Ukraine. Meanwhile in France, demonstrations organized by the right-wing Les Patriotes party in various locations across the country called for France’s withdrawal from both NATO and the European Union.
In all cases, the people on the streets at these events identify involvement in the war as harmful to general economic well-being and have been expressing frustration with their countries’ acquiescence to these intergovernmental and supranational organizations in fueling the violence while simultaneously discouraging dialogue. Feelings of skepticism toward NATO, the European Union, and the United States have become increasingly vocal in Europe due to the way that western countries are handling the war. In the minds of many Europeans, their governments are recklessly following the will of Washington, which could lead them into a serious escalation to a wider war.
German Memory
Germany suffered tremendously during the two World Wars and continued to endure the pressures of division and foreign occupation during the Cold War. A century of pain and turmoil brought about by militarism and intervention still informs the collective consciousness of the country. As part of the anniversary protests, thousands of people gathered around the iconic Brandenburg Gate in Berlin for an event called the “Uprising for Peace,” organized by prominent Left party member Sahra Wagenknecht and the feminist journalist Alice Schwarzer. The rally was a show of support for a “manifesto for peace,” which had already received well over half a million signatures by the time of the rally. It calls for the end of military exports to Ukraine and for negotiations between Kyiv and Moscow. Demonstrations have also taken place in Nuremberg (in response to the German government’s plan to send tanks to Ukraine), in Munich (during the Munich Security Conference), and outside of the prominent US air base in Ramstein where important matters regarding the Ukraine conflict are discussed among Western leaders.
At the rally in Nuremberg, one demonstrator recalled the historical record, explaining that if Germany gets involved in another war with Russia, then “based on history, it is the worst sign that we can send.” He emphasized that “no war must go through Germany, neither with arms deliveries nor anything else, because otherwise, Germany will be in the middle of it again.”
The last time war broke out in Europe between the two countries, it was one of the most catastrophic events in human history. This view echoes the glimmer of hope from just a few months before the start of Russia’s invasion that the completion of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline could have strengthened ties and prevented conflict in Europe, especially with regard to Russia and Germany. Of course, the mysterious destruction of Nord Stream a year later and the report by Seymour Hersh identifying US and allied hands in the sabotage mission completely turned that hope on its head. Those who strive for peace and an end to the bloodshed are understandably disheartened, yet they are motivated to vocally speak out to European leaders to push for peace.
Across the Atlantic and Beyond
These gatherings have run parallel to the Rage Against the War Machine rally in Washington, DC, where Americans protested against the US’s funding and arming of Ukraine as well as the diplomatic negligence in preventing the negotiation of an end to the fighting. Those speaking and demonstrating against US involvement in Ukraine have parallel grievances toward their government and echo those in Europe.
Voices spanning the political spectrum from socialists to libertarians have found common ground in opposing the many rounds of weapons packages and financial aid to Ukraine, as well as the lack of diplomatic responsibility on the part of Secretary of State Antony Blinken in communicating with his counterpart, Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov. Since the rally, President Joe Biden has included $6 billion in Ukraine and NATO funding as part of his $842 billion defense-budget request for 2024. Meanwhile, Blinken met briefly with Lavrov on the sidelines of a G20 meeting in New Delhi with no tangible progress on the subject of ending hostilities in Ukraine. While hopes from the American side remain dim, perhaps the protests in Europe may influence decisions at the levels of leadership in their respective countries.
The West’s commitment to Ukraine has also struck opposition from other regions. At this year’s Munich Security Conference, leaders from non-Western countries expressed the necessity of finding peaceful solutions. Brazil’s foreign minister Mauro Viera called upon the world to “build the possibility of a solution,” while Colombia’s vice president Francia Marquez said, “We don’t want to go on discussing who will be the winner or the loser of a war. We are all losers, and, in the end, it is humankind that loses everything.”
Namibia’s prime minister Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila stressed the waste of money and resources in the name of hostility which “could be better utilized to promote development in Ukraine, in Africa, in Asia, in other places, in Europe itself, where many people are experiencing hardships.” China went so far as to outline a political settlement to the Ukraine crisis on the anniversary of the invasion.
These statements and efforts show their acknowledgment of the much poorer state of affairs the world finds itself in as the war drags on. The Russian war in Ukraine must come to an end one day, and more people around the world are demanding a solution now.
France prepares to take militarization measures
By Lucas Leiroz | April 6, 2023
France is preparing for a conflict in the near future. The country is about to implement a new measure to raise the age of military reservists. The expansion of the number of active troops is also supposed to be announced at any moment. The declarations come amid a serious moment of internal crisis in France, with protests and police violence being reported every day due to the unpopular and authoritarian policies of the Macron government. At the same time that Paris could be seeking to improve its defense capacity in the midst of a world in tensions, the action could also be aimed at resolving the effects of the critical domestic scenario.
According to Defense Minister Sebastien Lecornu, Paris will raise the maximum age for military reservists to 70 years. He also told an important French media outlet that “certain specialists” will be allowed to remain as reservists until the age of 72 – without, however, specifying in detail which would be such particular cases. The measure represents a radical change, since more than ten years are added to the current age limits. Lecornu believes that the current law is an unnecessary limit and that it prevents qualified professionals from contributing to the French forces for a longer time.
“A lot of people of quality find themselves ejected because of this age limit, which makes no sense (…) We will increase the age limits (…) People will be able to be a reservist in the French military until they are 70 years old and until they are 72 years old for certain specialists”, he told RTL during an interview.
Currently, professionals up to 60 years old can be reservists, with some special authorizations for people up to 65 years old. As we can see, it is therefore a large-scale reform, which will have a wide impact, as ten years are added to the age limit. It is estimated that with this it will be possible to double the number of reservists, jumping from 40 thousand soldiers to more than 80 thousand ones. However, this is just one of the militarization measures involved in an apparent interest on the part of Paris to focus on military matters at the current time.
New substantial defense spending is expected for the future. As previously announced by President Emmanuel Macron himself, the government plans to raise the military fund to 69 billion euros a year by 2030 – currently such spending is estimated at an amount of 43 billion euros a year. Lecornu believes that these actions are essential for his country to deal efficiently and effectively with the “threats” and “challenges” of the contemporary world.
“There are several objectives with this unprecedented budget package: to continue to repair what has been damaged, a certain number of budget cuts have affected our army model (…) and we have a succession of threats that are all adding up,” he told media.
In fact, there are a series of factors to be analyzed in order to understand the decisions being taken by the French government. First, the measure meets NATO’s recent demands for combat readiness in the entire alliance. France is one of the most relevant military powers of the bloc and its combat strength is extremely important for the alliance to have its objectives achieved in a conflict scenario. So, in a way, it is possible to say that Paris is fulfilling Western war plans when it implements militarization measures.
But this is certainly insufficient to entirely understand the case. On the domestic scenario, France is absolutely chaotic. Recently, a social security reform that increases the retirement age in the country was illegally implemented, which generated a serious crisis of legitimacy. By ordinary procedure, the reform should not have taken place, as it did not receive sufficient legislative support, however it was adopted with the government resorting to legal maneuvers and distorted interpretations of the national constitution in what appeared to be a kind of “internal lawfare”.
The popular reaction to these maneuvers is being manifest through mass protests in main French cities. The country’s chaos can be easily seen in the newspapers as well as with videos circulating on the internet showing clashes between demonstrators and police. Law enforcement forces have acted repressively and abusively against ordinary citizens, who are simply protesting against the government’s illegal actions.
What few analysts seem to understand is that these measures also serve NATO’s war interests. France has already sent large sums of money and arms packages to Kiev since the beginning of the special military operation, both on its own initiative and through the European fund, to which the country actively contributes. Obviously, the more money that is used to support NATO’s war machine, the more money the public reserves will lack to pay its own pensioners, which create the demands for reforms. Hence, not just in France but throughout the entire West, the trend is for neoliberal reforms against pension systems to become even more common.
The case thus reflects the contemporary Western inclination of neoliberal militarization. The aim is to reduce labor and social guarantees and increase military spending to make the Atlantic alliance an anti-Russian war machine, prepared for a world conflict, while ignoring the necessities of ordinary citizens. Specifically with regard to France, there is also the rhetorical use of the narrative about the security “threats” to try to distract the population and convince citizens to accept that their rights are diminished.
It remains to be seen whether the French will really adhere to the official rhetoric and abdicate their claims for social rights, or whether they will continue to protest in the streets.
Lucas Leiroz is a journalist and researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.
Trump Is Being Politically Persecuted To Prevent Him From Brokering Peace With Russia
By Andrew Korybko | April 5, 2023
Former US President and leading Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is facing 34 felony charges related to allegedly falsifying business records, which ordinarily would have just been a slew of misdemeanors had the prosecutor not “bumped them up” on a shadowy pretext. The domestic political context extends credence to criticisms that this is actually a persecution that’s also partially being carried out to galvanize the Democrats’ base, but there’s a crucial international dimension to all this too.
The argument can be made that the real reason why this witch hunt and all prior ones were commenced against him is due to his envisaged policy of brokering peace with Russia through a series of mutual compromises that can be referred to as a “New Détente”. It was this grand strategy that he campaigned on in 2016 and which prompted his opponent Hillary Clinton to concoct the Russiagate conspiracy theory falsely misportraying him as “Putin’s puppet”.
What Trump and his team had in mind wasn’t treasonous but pragmatic from the perspective of the US’ objective interests in that there’s a reasonable logic to de-escalating tensions with Russia in Europe so as to more effectively “contain” China in the Asia-Pacific. To that end, he sincerely wanted to compel Kiev into implementing the Minsk Accords but ultimately failed because influential figures in his country’s military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (“deep state”) were opposed to this.
These individuals and their European counterparts are unofficial members of the cult known as liberal–globalism, which preaches that their Western way of life – particularly its radical liberal variant thereof – must be imposed onto the rest of the world “for their own good”. Due to a combination of ideological and strategic reasons, they believed that the US should prioritize “containing” Russia over China, hence why they united to sabotage Trump’s well-intended plans that were explained above.
The NATO-Russian proxy war in Ukraine that began last February when Moscow was forced to resort to military means for protecting the integrity of its national security red lines after this US-led bloc clandestinely crossed them there could in theory have been prevented had Trump still been in office. At the same time, however, his prior capitulation to the “deep state’s” demands to impose more sanctions on Moscow challenges this prediction, but it’s still worth considering in any case.
Despite the aforesaid skepticism, Trump recently doubled down on his envisaged pragmatic approach towards Russia by proclaiming that he’d broker peace with it and Kiev through a deal that he hinted would recognize the ground realities by legitimizing Moscow’s control over former Ukrainian territory. While the felony charges against him were already being pursued behind the scenes before this, there’s no doubt that his policy reaffirmation gave his opponents an urgent impetus to derail his re-election bid.
The former leader’s socio-economic and domestic political platform undoubtedly goes against the interests of the US elite, but they likely wouldn’t have discredited themselves by so openly persecuting him in the way that they’ve since done had he not so powerfully challenged their international interests. The reader should be remembered that ideological and strategic drivers are behind their obsession with “containing” Russia over China since the influential military-industrial complex still benefits either way.
The indisputable desperation with which his opponents are trying to derail his re-election bid exposes their true intentions in politically crucifying him all these years. They regard him as the greatest threat to their liberal-globalist cult not just because of his polar opposite socio-cultural policies at home, but because his grand strategy prioritizes reaching a “New Détente” with Russia, which the “deep state” considers to be the embodiment of everything that their belief system is against.
By hook or by crook, whether in the open or in the shadows, they’ll stop at nothing to prevent Trump from regaining the presidency during next year’s elections and fulfilling his vision. The stakes have never been higher for the liberal-globalist cult since that outcome could discredit their fellow travelers in the EU and thus possibly bring about the unraveling of their transatlantic ideological project with time. Trump must therefore be stopped at all costs, which explains his present political persecution.
China is the Rock Upon Which the U.S. World Order Breaks

By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | April 4, 2023
In March, Chinese President Xi Jinping visited Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow, where they not only “reaffirm[ed] the special nature of the Russia-China partnership,” but “signed a statement on deepening the strategic partnership and bilateral ties which are entering a new era.” As Xi was leaving the Kremlin, he told Putin that “Together, we should push forward these changes that have not happened for 100 years.” That goodbye was Xi’s not so coded call for the end of the American century.
In his February 7 State of the Union Address, U.S. President Joe Biden got carried away by his excitement and arrogantly and ineptly went off script and called out, “Name me a world leader who’d change places with Xi Jinping. Name me one. Name me one.”
But the deflating truth is that the world is lining up behind China and Russia’s vision of a multipolar world no longer exclusively led by the United States. From Africa and its unanimous attendance at the recent Russia-Africa in a Multipolar World conference, to the Middle East and its long list of countries lining up to join the Chinese and Russian led multipolar organizations BRICS and the SCO, to Latin America and most of Eurasia and Asia, including India, the weight of the world is going to Xi’s place to balance American hegemony and support a multipolar world.
Biden’s outburst was an insult and confrontation that was a personal microcosm of U.S. provocation and confrontation of China on a global level. And it has had a corrosive and dangerous effect. An angry China is not answering America’s phone calls. Biden had hoped to talk to Xi on the phone in mid-March, but Chinese officials are not responding to U.S. requests to arrange the call. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s calls to set up talks with his Chinese counterpart have also not been answered.
China is emerging as the rock upon which the U.S.-led alliance breaks.
China’s growing economic, diplomatic, and political influence is beginning to be more powerfully felt on the world stage. The rapid growth of international organizations that support China and Russia’s multipolar world vision is just one piece of evidence. China’s emergence as an influential broker is another.
Beijing has become a power that can shape the world, leaving Washington out of the process. They shocked the world in March by brokering a region transforming agreement between archrivals Saudi Arabia and Iran. And they upset the U.S. in February by initiating a peace process for the war in Ukraine. Both initiatives left the U.S. out in the cold.
The world is no longer unipolar: a world with multiple poles of power is emerging. China’s foreign policy seeks economic growth that demands the fostering of stability in the world; U.S. foreign policy seeks hegemony that demands hostility and schisms that punish and isolate resisters. The problem with China’s emergence as a broker is that it breaks U.S. hegemony. But it is also that China’s peace plans get in the way of America’s war plans.
The U.S. is not ready for peace in the Russo-Ukrainian War. Though peace plans may serve a devastated Ukraine, they do not serve the larger U.S. goals being served by the devastated Ukraine. The United States is not ready for Ukraine to go to the table and end the war before their larger goals are accomplished. As State Department spokesperson Ned Price said in March 2022, “This is a war that is in many ways bigger than Russia, it’s bigger than Ukraine.”
Biden rejected China’s potential role as a broker in the war, insisting that “the idea that China is going to be negotiating the outcome of a war that’s a totally unjust war for Ukraine is just not rational.” National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said that the U.S. does not believe that a Chinese peace proposal “is a step towards a just and durable peace.” He claims that “We all want to see the war end… And a ceasefire, at this time, while that may sound good, we do not believe would have that effect.” Kirby then added that “we don’t support calls for a ceasefire right now. We certainly don’t support calls for a ceasefire that would be called for by the [People’s Republic of China] in a meeting in Moscow that would simply benefit Russia.”
The U.S. has long insisted that no decisions will be made without Ukraine. But if a Chinese-brokered peace were to succeed, it would be because Ukraine has agreed to it. It is remarkable that it is up to Ukraine to continue the war but not up to Ukraine to end it.
China’s peace plans for the Middle East also get in the way of America’s war plans. A U.S.-led unipolar world demands the isolation of Iran. A key piece of that plan is the establishment and maintenance of a regional coalition against Iran. At the heart of that coalition is Saudi Arabia firmly in the anti-Iran camp. The recent Chinese brokered Saudi-Iran agreement breaks that coalition and mends that schism.
The Saudi-Iran agreement has had immediate effects in the region that further challenge American efforts to shape it in their own way. Fast in the wake of the agreement, Saudi Arabia and Iranian ally Syria agreed to reopen their embassies. And the shift in shape is not just bilateral, but regional. Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister is reported to be on his way to Damascus to formally invite Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to this May’s Arab League summit in Riyadh. The invitation, Syria’s first since 2011, would “formally end Syria’s regional isolation.” On April 1, Syria’s foreign minister went to Cairo for the first official visit in twelve years to begin the process of reinstating Syria in the Arab League.
That “leap forward in Damascus’s return to the Arab fold” frustrates U.S. plans to continue the isolation of Assad and Syria. The U.S. has opposed normalization of relations with Syria by countries in the Middle East. The State Department says their “stance on normalization remains unchanged” despite Saudi Arabia’s new stance and the changes in the region.
China has emerged as a diplomatic force that can broker agreements and shape the world in a way that shatters U.S. hegemony in a unipolar world. Some countries are willing to break with the United States and work with China.
France has communicated to China its “appreciation for China’s positive role in promoting peace talks.” Macron’s Diplomatic Advisor, Emmanuel Bonne, told Wang Yi, China’s Director of the Office of the Central Commission for Foreign Affairs, that “France is ready to make joint efforts with China to facilitate cessation of hostilities and seek a peaceful solution.”
France is a major European NATO ally. China’s emergence as a diplomatic superpower has created a crack in the structure of the U.S.-led alliance.
France is not alone in its willingness to work with China. Where France’s independent position reveals a rift within the U.S.-led alliance, Brazil’s independent position reveals the emergence of other poles in the newly emergent multipolar world.
The independent course charted by Brazil and its willingness to work with America’s rival reveals, not only the loss of U.S. hegemony in its own hemisphere, but the loss of U.S. hegemony globally because partnering with China is partnering with BRICS, the large international organization whose goal is to balance U.S. hegemony of a unipolar world.
Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has supported China’s efforts at negotiating a peace proposal and criticized the United States for speaking “very few words about peace.” But he has also proposed a joint effort, or a “peace club” that could include BRICS members China, India and Brazil and possibly Indonesia. Indonesia has been a leader in the nonaligned world and was recently welcomed as a guest at the BRICS Foreign Ministers’ Meeting.
China’s diplomatic entry into the war in Ukraine highlights a multipolar world that could shape a post world war and sideline the United States.
As China’s economy and the gravitational pull of its multipolar world grow, and as its force is further felt, not only economically but politically and diplomatically, the U.S. stance may stiffen, and Washington may more solidly confront China, not only by increasing sanctions, but by calling on its allies to do the same.
That call could be a challenging one for America’s European allies to answer. If Seymour Hersh’s reporting is correct, it took cutting Germany off from their Russian oil supply by a historic act of sabotage—an act of war—to keep Germany fully on board in America’s sanction regime on Russia. China has been Germany’s most important trading partner for seven consecutive years. Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Germany has only increased its investments in and economic dependence on China. It will be more difficult to pressure Germany to cut economic ties with China than it was to pressure it to cut ties with Russia. And it will be asking a lot of Germany to ask it to cut ties with both.
Dr. Suzanne Loftus, Research Fellow at the Quincy Institute Eurasia Program, told me that, “China is Germany’s most important trading partner. Having to sanction China would put Germany in a very difficult position seeing as how it has already had to sanction another one of its significant trading partners (Russia) and is also struggling with U.S. protectionist policies (Inflation Reduction Act).” Loftus continued “[f]acing difficulties at home, Germany will most likely opt out of having to sanction China if the U.S. started to put pressure on Germany to do so. It would otherwise face too much of an economic shock and increased domestic turmoil as a result.”
A hint of that potential split with the United States was provided in November when German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s defied Washington by going to Beijing, accompanied by the CEOs of Volkswagen, BMW, BASF, Bayer and Deutsche Bank, in part to discuss trade.
On the eve of his trip, Scholz wrote that “new centers of power are emerging in a multipolar world, and we aim to establish and expand partnerships with all of them.” He said that, though China is an economic power that will “play a key role on the world stage in the future,” this does not “justif[y]… calls by some to isolate China.” Scholz then wrote clearly that “even in changed circumstances, China remains an important business and trading partner for Germany and Europe—we don’t want to decouple from it.”
Future American calls to sanction China could force Europe into a choice between solidity with the U.S.-led alliance and continued economic partnership with China. For the U.S., there is a hazardous forecast that that choice could weaken that solidity.
The growing reality of China’s multipolar world vision, China’s emergence as a broker of peace plans that interfere with American war plans, the world’s shifting of shape that sees important countries willing to work with China, and the need for countries to strengthen trade ties with Beijing all suggest that China could be the rock upon which the U.S.-led alliance breaks.
RFK Jr: ‘The Neocon Projects’ in Iraq and Ukraine Have ‘Made a Laughingstock of U.S. Military Power and Moral Authority’
By Chris Menahan | InformationLiberation | April 4, 2023
Neocon control of America has led to the collapse of American global hegemony and the shredding of our nation’s moral authority, according to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
“The collapse of U.S. influence over Saudi Arabia and the Kingdom’s new alliances with China and Iran are painful emblems of the abject failure of the Neocon strategy of maintaining U.S. global hegemony with aggressive projections of military power,” Kennedy said Monday on Twitter, sharing an article from Reuters on OPEC+ cutting production to spike the price of oil in defiance of the Biden regime.
“China has displaced the American Empire by deftly projecting, instead, economic power,” Kennedy continued. “Over the past decade, our country has spent trillions bombing roads, ports, bridges, and airports. China spent the equivalent building the same across the developing world.”
“The Ukraine war is the final collapse of the Neocon’s short-lived ‘American Century.’ The Neocon projects in Iraq and Ukraine have cost $8.1 trillion, hollowed out our middle class, made a laughingstock of U.S. military power and moral authority, pushed China and Russia into an invincible alliance, destroyed the dollar as the global currency, cost millions of lives and done nothing to advance democracy or win friendships or influence,” Kennedy said.
Kennedy is absolutely correct.
His point was further underlined last month when Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador went off on the U.S. State Department for accusing Mexico of “human rights abuses” when the Biden regime is working to imprison former President Donald Trump, extradite Julian Assange and bombed the Nord Stream pipelines.
NATO’s Enlargement Targets Not Only Moscow, But Ankara as Well, Turkish Media Says
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 05.04.2023
Turkiye’s parliament approved Finland’s bid to join the Western alliance last week, citing Helsinki’s “authentic and concrete steps” to allay Ankara’s security concerns. However, one Turkish outlet fears the nod to membership may prove a strategic mistake, and that the bloc is directed as much against Turkiye as it is against Russia.
Finland officially joined NATO on Tuesday, becoming the 31st nation to join the alliance, with its accession constituting the Western military bloc’s ninth wave of expansion since its creation in 1949. Russia, which shares a 1,300+ km frontier with its Nordic neighbor, warned that Moscow would take the necessary “countermeasures” to ensure its tactical and strategic security.
Turkiye’s Defense Ministry used the occasion, which coincides with the 74th anniversary of the founding of NATO, to post a congratulatory tweet. “We have been a distinguished member of NATO since 1952. Happy 74th anniversary. Together we are stronger,” the ministry wrote, adding the hashtag “#WeAreNATO.”
But the celebration may be premature, writes Turkish newspaper Aydinlik.
“Although NATO’s enlargement has been seen as a policy of containing Russia, it is now obvious that Turkiye is being similarly besieged. In the past, the Atlantic [powers] attempted to establish global hegemony by hemming the Eurasian continent in on land, in accordance with Spykman’s Rimland theory, therefore including countries such as Turkiye, Iran, Afghanistan and China in its geopolitical axis,” the newspaper, affiliated with Turkiye’s Vatan Partisi, a left Kemalist party, wrote in an analysis published Tuesday.
From the 1970s on, the geopolitical situation began to shift, Aydinlik noted. “Among the trusted countries, Iran escaped America’s control in 1979, China after 1990, Turkiye on July 15, 2016 [the day of the attempted coup against Erdogan, ed.] and Afghanistan in 2021, becoming target countries. Therefore, the geopolitical axis was broken, and shifted to Greece, southern Cyprus and Israel. Thus, Turkiye was cut off from the Atlantic [axis], and pushed toward the Heartland, and is now besieged from Alexandropoulos to Crete, and from there to the eastern Mediterranean and northern Syria.”
Turkiye vs NATO
Aydinlik’s analysis is in line with growing anti-NATO and anti-Western sentiment in Turkiye. A 2019 poll found that only 21 percent of Turks had a positive view of the alliance. A 2021 survey discovered that a whopping 90.3 percent didn’t believe that the bloc would come to the country’s assistance in a crisis, while 51.7 percent said the bloc “exploits” Turkiye for its own interests. Another poll in early 2022 found that 39.4 percent of Turks would prefer it if their country would “give priority to Russia and China” in foreign policy, compared to 37.5 percent for the EU and the US.
Turkish grievances with the West are numerous, starting with Turkiye’s shabby treatment by Brussels – which has dangled the prospect of EU membership before the country for more than 30 years, but consistently refused to allow it to enter, ostensibly for failing to “meet membership criteria.” (Meanwhile, much less developed countries in Eastern Europe have been allowed in, and even Ukraine, which is engulfed in a NATO-Russia proxy conflict and mired in corruption and poverty, is now being considered for membership.)
NATO’s role in the 2016 coup attempt is another issue on many Turks’ minds. Some have accused NATO of direct involvement in the coup plot, and the Turkish government’s purge of NATO staff after the attempted putsch indicates that Ankara also suspects them.
America’s sheltering of Fethullah Gulen, the Muslim cleric President Erdogan suspects of masterminding the coup attempt, has served to further fray ties. As has the scandal over the F-35 fighter program. After pumping more than a billion dollars in R&D funds into the fighter and organizing the manufacture of dozens of key components, Turkiye was unceremoniously booted out of the program in 2019 and slapped with sanctions in 2020 over its purchase of advanced Russian missile defense systems.
Turkiye and NATO’s de facto leader, the United States, have also found themselves on opposite sides in Syria, where US forces have allied themselves to and shielded Kurdish militia forces which Ankara classifies as terrorists. At the same time, the ongoing standoff between Turkiye and Greece in a maritime dispute in the Mediterranean (which France, another NATO member, has joined on Athens’ side) has served to further heighten Ankara’s security concerns.
Even as Turkiye prepares for presidential and parliamentary elections scheduled for May, Ankara has accused the US of meddling in the country’s internal affairs after US Ambassador Jeff Flake met with Kemal Kilicdaroglu, Erdogan’s main rival.
“Joe Biden’s ambassador visits Kemal. Shame on you, think with your head. You are an ambassador. Your interlocutor here is the president. How will you stand up after that and ask for a rendezvous with the president? Our doors are closed to him, he can no longer come in. Why? He needs to know his place,” Erdogan said.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan speaks to the media during a joint press conference with Finland’s President Sauli Niinisto, at the presidential palace in Ankara,
With NATO’s latest expansion, the real question worth asking, Aydinlik seems to intimate, is about Turkiye’s place in the Western alliance.
Simultaneous US aggression in Black Sea and Mediterranean as multipolarity accelerates
By Drago Bosnic | April 3, 2023
Following the recent engagements between illegal American occupation forces in northeastern Syria and what the Pentagon called “pro-Iranian forces”, leaving dead and wounded on both sides, the United States has decided to further escalate tensions in Syria and the Middle East as a whole. As the multipolar, or should we say the actual world, is engaging in real and masterful diplomacy (in stark contrast to the US), reconciling archrivals such as Iran and Saudi Arabia and slowly but surely normalizing relations between Syria and Turkey, the stabilization of the globe seems like an unstoppable process. This is deeply alarming to the political West, the only entity on the planet in constant need of widespread death, destruction and chaos so it can maintain the illusion of the “garden-jungle” geopolitical framework.
Using the recent clashes as an excuse, Washington DC announced an extension of the CSG (carrier strike group) deployment led by USS “George H.W. Bush” Nimitz-class supercarrier, over 9.000 km away from its home port of Norfolk in Virginia. On Friday, US CENTCOM (Central Command) spokesman Colonel Joe Buccino stated that the extension of the “George H.W. Bush” CSG, inclusive of the “USS Leyte Gulf”, the “USS Delbert D. Black” and the “USNS Arctic” allows options to “potentially bolster the capabilities of CENTCOM to respond to a range of contingencies in the Middle East”. At the time of the announcement, the CSG was near Sicily. Apparently, the deployment will also include “a scheduled, expedited deployment of a squadron of A-10 attack aircraft to the region.”
According to Reuters, at least one US official, “speaking on the condition of anonymity”, confirmed that the George H.W. Bush CSG was “expected to remain in the European Command area of responsibility”, most likely until further notice, meaning that the US wants to keep tensions as high as possible for as long as possible. For the mainstream propaganda machine, the conflict in Syria is still called the “Syrian Civil War”, although it is anything but. Washington DC and its numerous satellite states in the region have been attacking the unfortunate country for over a decade now, resulting in hundreds of thousands of dead and millions of refugees. In addition, the US maintains an illegal occupation of northeastern Syria, where it’s supposedly “guarding” (i.e. stealing) the country’s oil reserves.
However, US militancy in Syria (and the wider Middle East) is only a fraction of the belligerent thalassocracy’s aggression against the world. Concurrently, Washington DC and its numerous NATO satellite states also conducted naval drills off the coast of Romania’s Tulcea County on the country’s Black Sea coast. The region borders the Odessa Oblast (an area currently occupied by the Kiev regime). Apparently, the war games included a scenario where thousands of NATO soldiers simulated coastal defense against a large-scale attack by an “unnamed aggressor” (obviously referring to Russia). Dubbed “Sea Shield 23”, the naval drills started on March 20 and were concluded on Sunday, April 2.
In total, close to 3,500 servicemen from the US and eleven other NATO vassals took part, including at least 30 naval ships, 14 aircraft and 15 other “fast intervention” boats. The live-fire drills were conducted both in the Black Sea and the Danube Delta, approximately 30 km from the border with Odessa Oblast. Since Russia started the special military operation (SMO), the US has conducted a number of large-scale military exercises in Eastern Europe to simulate a potential conflict with Moscow. This includes a recent simulated nuclear attack on Saint Petersburg, Russia’s second-largest city with close to six million inhabitants. A USAF B-52H “Stratofortress” flying in Estonian airspace circled in an area barely 100 km from the Russian border.
To put that into perspective, we should imagine a Russian Tu-95MS “Bear” strategic bomber/missile carrier flying just 60 miles off Manhattan, simulating a thermonuclear strike on New York City, one of the most important urban areas in the US. Still, that doesn’t prevent the US from doing everything in its power to provoke Russia. Considering that the “deep diving pro-Ukrainian group” that conducted the Nord Stream terrorist attacks has now also been dangerously close to the Turk (formerly South) Stream pipelines, the Russian Black Sea Fleet will need to be as vigilant as ever. The pipeline is the only major energy hub supplying natural gas to Turkey and Southeast Europe.
In the meantime, the world is working towards creating conditions for peaceful coexistence and cooperation of the globe’s numerous civilizations. Organizations such as BRICS and SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) are rapidly expanding by admitting new members, with Iran being the most recent constituent of SCO. Saudi Arabia also became a dialogue partner on March 29, marking an important milestone in the organization’s history, which now includes all major oil producers in Eurasia and the Middle East. This also marks a crucial step toward eliminating Western currency dominance, the key provision to limiting the belligerent power pole’s ability to conduct military and economic aggression against the world.
Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst.

