Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Kiev vows to use force against breakaway regions

Samizdat | September 20, 2022

Senior officials in Kiev have dismissed as irrelevant plans for a number of current and former Ukrainian regions to hold referendums on whether to join Russia.

Andrey Yermak, President Vladimir Zelensky’s chief of staff, described the proposed votes as “blackmail” by Moscow.

“This is what fear of defeat looks like. The enemy is afraid and uses primitive manipulations,” he said in a post on social media on Tuesday.

Yermak added that “Ukraine will solve the Russian question,” insisting this could be done “only by force.”

Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba also downplayed news of the upcoming referendums, dismissing the move as a “sham.”

“Ukraine has every right to liberate its territories and will keep liberating them whatever Russia has to say,” he tweeted.

The condemnations and threats came in response to bids by the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, as well as Ukraine’s Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, to hold referendums on the question of joining the Russian Federation. The votes could take place as early as this week.

Kiev previously threatened any person who takes part in such a plebiscite with criminal prosecution. Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister Irina Vereshchuk said participants could be sent to prison for up to 12 years.

September 20, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Kiev will stop asking for Western support only after Russia’s “defeat”: FM

Samizdat | September 20, 2022

Kiev will no longer request weapons deliveries from the West, only after Ukraine prevails over Russia, Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba claimed on Monday, adding that the supplies are part of a “recipe to defeat” Moscow’s forces.

Speaking to Bloomberg TV, Kuleba indicated that despite a constant flow of Western armaments into the country, Kiev needs even more of them, given that it is now fighting such an “enemy” as Russia.

“Sometimes I’m being asked when there is enough of weapons that we have received. And I always say… it will be enough only after Ukraine wins. Until then, we will be asking for more,” he stated.

The Foreign minister also noted that Kiev’s recent counter-offensive in Kharkov region has shown that the combination of Ukrainian forces’ “stamina” and Western-supplied weapons, most of which come from the US, are “the recipe to defeat Russia on the ground.” Moscow, however, insisted that it pulled its troops back from some areas to “regroup” and to strengthen the Russian forces in the Donetsk region.

At the same time, Kuleba admitted that sustainability of Western weapon deliveries is an issue, which needs to be constantly raised by Kiev authorities as they talk with their Western colleagues.

NATO has been supporting Ukraine since 2014, but has significantly ramped up its military assistance after Russia launched its military operation in the neighboring country in late February.

However, the delays in weapons deliveries have been quite frequent. Last week, Die Welt reported that while Germany has agreed to provide Ukraine with 18 self-propelled RCH-155 howitzers in addition to the military hardware already supplied, the guns would not arrive for at least another 30 months.

Earlier this month, Germany’s defense minister, Christine Lambrecht, claimed that Berlin has handed over “an unbelievable amount” of weaponry from its reserves to Ukraine, adding that the country has “reached the limit” in terms of what it can send to Kiev.

Moreover, earlier this month, NATO secretary general Jens Stoltenberg acknowledged that the bloc’s members have significantly depleted their weapons stockpiles, urging the Western defense industry to ramp up arms production.

September 20, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Swiss leaders shrug off referendum on F-35 deal

Samizdat | September 18, 2022

Swiss legislators have given final approval for the country’s controversial purchase of F-35 fighter jets from the US, ignoring a successful petition drive that was supposed to force a public vote on the issue.

Switzerland’s lower house National Council voted to approve the $6 billion deal with US defense contractor Lockheed Martin on Thursday. The upper house, the Council of States, had previously approved the purchase of 36 F-35s.

The Swiss government, which received voter approval in 2020 to modernize the country’s fleet of fighter jets at a cost of up to $6.3 billion, reached a preliminary agreement with Lockheed Martin last year after choosing the F-35 over France’s Rafale, Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet and the multinational Eurofighter Typhoon.

Opponents have argued that although voters narrowly approved the fleet’s modernization, they didn’t agree to the F-35, which has been branded too expensive and not a good fit for militarily neutral Switzerland’s defense-focused air force.

Last month, the government confirmed that the “Stop F-35” opposition group had gathered the necessary 100,000 valid petition signatures to force a referendum.

The Swiss defense department argued that there wasn’t enough time to hold the vote before Lockheed Martin’s offer expired. The government has a March 2023 deadline to sign the contract or risk higher costs and a longer wait for the jets. Other countries, such as Germany, Finland and Canada, are queuing up to buy F-35s amid the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

September 18, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

In This House . . .

“Joint Base Cape Cod” contaminated groundwater plumes

By Richard Hugus | September 18, 2022

As reported by national news in the US, on September 16, 2022, 50 illegal immigrants from Venezuela were flown from Florida to Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts. Officials on the island said they did not have the resources to take care of the immigrants, so they were transported by the Massachusetts National Guard to a military base on Cape Cod. The immigrants were tolerated on Martha’s Vineyard for exactly two days.

The military base they were taken to, with the purposely non-descriptive name, “Joint Base Cape Cod,” is about 30 miles north of the church in Edgartown where the immigrants stayed. The base was formerly known as the Massachusetts Military Reservation, or Otis/Camp Edwards. The base is notorious for being a dump site for the federal government, so it probably seemed to the authorities a logical place to get rid of the immigrants. The 22,000 acre base was designated a Superfund site in 1989 due to massive amounts of fuels and solvents dumped at Otis Air Base into the sandy soil above Upper Cape Cod’s sole-source aquifer. As more and more contaminated groundwater was being discovered on the Air Force side, yet more was discovered from the past dumping of propellants and explosives by the Army at Camp Edwards. At one site on the base in the 1960s, the Air Force dumped up to 6 million gallons of aviation fuel on the ground just to test aircraft emergency release valves. Enough fuel from here and elsewhere got into water supplies in nearby Forestdale to the point that tap water at a kitchen sink could be lit on fire. Meanwhile, the Army was accustomed for years to firing Howitzer and mortar rounds into the base “impact area” whose explosions would shake windows in residential areas all over the Upper Cape. Nearby residents also lived with the frequent sound of machine gun fire from one of many gun ranges. Indeed, the Army National Guard has lately insisted it needs 200 acres of forest clearcut for a new machine gun range, with 5,000 acres reserved for strays and overshoots. For those feigning such concern, this was some place to send a group of helpless refugees. The public has no access to and very little knowledge of this huge area of sunny Cape Cod.

Martha’s Vineyard has had its own episode of Pentagon abuse. A small island called Nomans, just south of the Vineyard, was used as an aerial bombing range for many years, leaving the land littered with unexploded ordnance and contaminated soil. Rather than remediate, the US Navy conveniently handed the land over the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife who simply called it a conservation area, posted No Trespassing signs, and called it a day. The small island, a beautiful gem once inhabited by Wampanoag Indians and early settlers, it is now just a sacrifice zone, like a closed landfill. No one is allowed to set foot on it.

Both Cape Cod and Martha’s Vineyard have a service and tourist economy. Most people who live and work there are not wealthy, but have jobs serving the wealthy in one way or another. They build and repair the homes of the rich, they entertain them, run the restaurants, cook the food, clean the houses, and maintain their boats and cars. Low wage workers and immigrant labor are brought in every year for the summer season as there is evidently not enough money to pay local workers asking for a decent wage. Nor can working people afford houses on local wages. It’s a rentier economy. Poverty is real on both Martha’s Vineyard and the Cape because so many among the rich know very well how to spend as little of their money as possible for the services they receive. While working people there might not be happy about immigrant labor lowering wages and taking jobs, they would not have called the National Guard to come in and remove the strangers from Venezuela. And of course they would not have had the power to do so even if they wanted to. That call had to have come from new world order hopeful Governor Charlie Baker, on orders from Vineyard residents like Barack Obama who don’t want to see the results of the unrestricted immigration that they initiated actually becoming visible in their own neighborhoods. This is why the 50 Venezuelans were brought to eastern Massachusetts’ go-to military dump site, incidentally also home to the Barnstable County Jail — another thing no one wanted to see or hear anywhere else on the Cape.

We might ask why people in Venezuela got to the point of leaving family, home, culture, and country to emigrate in the first place. Obviously, two decades of coup attempts from the Chavez era on, relentless sanctions, and the theft of assets by the US has made life in Venezuela hard for many people. The US government created this problem. The further abuse of Venezuelans in a program of engineered destruction of sovereign countries and cultures, which is what the immigration crisis amounts to worldwide, is the same attack multiplied. Democrats are accusing Republicans of using the 50 immigrants as pawns. Higher powers still are using the Democrats and Republicans as pawns. This is a play inside a play and involves a level of manipulation that is not just cynical, but diabolical.

We’ve all seen the “In This House, We Believe” signs. The signs are displayed by some of the people on Martha’s Vineyard who this past week didn’t mind seeing 50 of the world’s poor carted off to a restricted military base. Between the lines on these cute little emblems of virtue we now read the ugly truth:

In this house, we believe . . .

In complete, shameless hypocrisy

In full totalitarianism, as long as it’s nicely wrapped in self-righteous liberal jargon

Virtue-signaling is better by far (and much easier) than actual virtue

Immigrants are welcome (to mow our lawns and wash our dishes)

Climate change is real (how else do we explain it being sunny one day and cloudy the next?)

All orientations are preferable to heterosexuality — the human race has gone on long enough

We hate humanity

A woman’s rights are human rights (but there is no such thing as a woman, so there is no such thing as “women’s rights”)

Black lives matter (especially when they can be used to create disruption and chaos while we do nothing to actually improve the lives of black people)

No human is illegal (unless he’s too close to my $12 million oceanfront property)

There is no place for hate (unless you’re a white hetero male, a Palestinian, a Muslim, a Christian, a Russian, a ‘right wing extremist’, an anti-vaxxer, a climate ‘denier’, or anyone else on our list)

Science is real (so long as it serves pharmaceutical company profits and ‘great reset’ eugenics)

Love is love, and all other nice-sounding, mystifying, empty tautologies

Kindness is everything (after money, power, and control)

September 18, 2022 Posted by | Environmentalism, Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , | Leave a comment

‘Leading from behind’: Is Washington at war with Moscow?

By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | September 17, 2022

Though Washington insists that it is not interested in a direct military conflict with Moscow, the latter claims that the US is, in fact, directly involved. But who is telling the truth?

On 8 September, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken appeared in Kyiv on an unannounced visit. He carried with him pledges of yet another military and financial package of nearly $3 billion, mostly to Ukraine, but also to other Eastern European countries. According to a report published by The New York Times in May, US financial support for Ukraine has exceeded $54 billion.

Devex‘s funding platform states: “A relatively small percentage of that funding is humanitarian-focused.” The same source also indicates that the total amount of mostly military aid provided by the West to Ukraine between 24 February and 16 August has topped the $100 billion mark.

For such a massive military arsenal to operate, one can imagine the involvement of legions of military experts, trainers and engineers. Washington’s latest package includes hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid, such as more High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS).

And more is coming. According to Blinken: “President Biden… will support the people of Ukraine as long as it takes.”

The Russians, however, have no illusions that US military support for Ukraine is confined to mere weapons shipments or limited to financial transactions. On 2 August, the Russian Defence Ministry accused the US of being “directly involved in the conflict in Ukraine.” The ministry’s statement cited an admission by Ukraine’s deputy head of military intelligence, Vadym Skibitsky, who told The Telegraph: “Washington coordinates HIMARS missile strikes.”

This is not the first time Russia accuses the US of direct involvement in the war. As early as 25 March, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said the West had declared “total war” on Russia. In this instance, Moscow’s top diplomat was referencing every aspect of this “real hybrid war”, including unprecedented sanctions that were meant to break the back of Russia’s economy and the will of its military forces. Since then, the US Western embargo on Russia has exceeded 10,000 sanctions, an unprecedented number in modern conflicts.

Also, since then, the nature of American involvement in the war has changed. The type of weapons first provided to Kyiv by Washington quickly transformed from weapons of defensive capabilities with limited outreach, to weapons of offensive capabilities with long-range artillery systems, including HIMARS and M270.

Much of the US involvement can be understood through common sense. Consider Politico‘s report on 29 August, alleging that: “Since the early days of the war, Kyiv has seized the initiative as missile strikes and mysterious explosions have wreaked havoc on the Russian fleet, sinking several vessels… and devastating its Crimea-based air wing in a dramatic attack this month.” If these details are accurate, it is hard to imagine that such success would have been carried out by, as described by Politico itself, a “small Ukrainian navy”.

When American weapons are provided and operated by American military experts, and when the movement of Russian forces is monitored by American satellite coordinates, one should easily conclude that the US is indeed involved in a direct war with Russia. This argument is strengthened by the fact that the US is utilising all of its expertise in economic warfare, used against Iraq, Cuba and others, to devastate the Russian economy.

But why does the US refuse to accept that it is engaged in a direct war against Russia?

Successive US administrations have perfected the art of engaging in military conflicts without making such a declaration. As the US fought its protracted war in Vietnam starting in the mid-1950s, it engaged in many other military conflicts that were mostly kept secret. These undeclared wars included the Nixon administration’s secret bombing campaigns in Cambodia, which resulted in the estimated deaths of 100,000 people.

To curtail the power of the president to conduct war without notifying Congress, the US Congress passed the War Powers Resolution of 1973, also known as the War Powers Act. Despite a presidential veto, a two-thirds majority in Congress managed to pass the resolution into law. Still, successive administrations found ways around the law, including the US involvement in the bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 and again in the US war on Libya in 2011.

In fact, it was in Libya that the phrase “leading from behind” was used in abundance. Americans seemed to have found a brilliant way of engaging in war while avoiding its costly political consequences. This way, former US President Barack Obama could be involved in several wars all at once without being called an interventionist or a war-mongering president.

To understand the extent of America’s ongoing, undeclared wars, marvel at this 1 July report by The Intercept, which obtained the data using the Freedom of Information Act. This was “the first official confirmation that at least 14” military operations – known as 127e programs – were active in the Middle East and the Asia Pacific region in 2020, and that between 2017 and 2020, US commandos carried out 23 separate operations.

So, even if the US engages in direct combat against Russia, the chances of war being declared are almost nil. Therefore, the extent of US involvement can only be gleaned from evidence on the ground.

Call it “leading from behind”, “proxy war” or “hybrid war”, Washington is very much a party in the devastating war in Ukraine, which is paying a heavy price for Washington’s desire to remain the world’s only superpower.

September 17, 2022 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

NATO Began ‘Planning’ Expanded Presence Near Russia ‘Years Ago’, Top Commander Admits

Samizdat – 17.09.2022

The North Atlantic Alliance began its decades-long creep toward Russia’s borders in the late 1990s after walking out on commitments made to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990 and 1991 not to expand “one inch” east following German reunification. NATO expansion is one of the central causes of the current Ukrainian security crisis.

NATO began planning to increase its presence along its eastern flank “years” before Russia kicked off its special military operation in Ukraine, NATO Military Committee chairman Rob Bauer has revealed.

“Military leaders have a common frame of reference for both alliance-wide threats and regional threats, and that we enhance the speed and effectiveness of our rapid deployable forces. We’re talking about the biggest overhaul of our military structures since 1949. The planning for that started several years ago, but now we’re implementing it,” Bauer said, speaking to reporters at a press conference at the NATO Military Committee Conference in Tallinn, Estonia on Saturday.

NATO defense chiefs discussed the need to “sustain” and “increase” “allied support to Ukraine,” at Saturday’s meeting, Bauer said.

“The ammunition, equipment and training that allies and other nations are delivering are all making a real difference on the battlefield. With its successes on the ground and online, Ukraine has fundamentally changed modern warfare,” the officer said. “NATO will support Ukraine for as long as it takes,” he added.

Speaking alongside Bauer, Estonian Defense Forces chief Martin Herem said that NATO’s collective priority was to “deny Russia the possibility to change today’s rule-based international order,” including by stationing more troops along its border.

“Forward defense is not only about the number of allied boots on the eastern border. The entire chain must be in place. It means having the appropriate mix of national and allied in place forces, known reinforcements, advanced plans linked to assigned forces and assigned C2 [command and control],” Herem said.

Echoing Bauer’s comments on the need to “support” Kiev, Herem stressed that “it is critical to ensure cohesion and unity of allies. The winter will be difficult but [we] must stick together and stay committed” in the coming months.

Defense chiefs from Finland and Sweden joined Saturday’s discussions, and Bauer called their expected entry into the alliance at some point in the future “good news” for the bloc.

“We get extra territory to defend as an alliance, and we get a long border with Russia. But we get also Finland and Sweden’s armed forces, which are very capable, to help us defend that extra territory and to defend that longer border. Russia will have a longer border with NATO without getting extra troops. So I think the accession of Finland and Sweden is beneficial for the alliance and is creating more of a problem for Russia,” Bauer said.

The officer said the implementation of the agreements reached at the summit in Madrid in June on bulking up the bloc’s eastern border was “ongoing,” and that there are no problems to report on that front.

At the Madrid summit, NATO agreed to stand up four new battlegroups in Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia, and to deploy “robust and combat-ready forces on the Alliance’s eastern flank.” For its part, the United States moved to establish a new ground base in Poland, about 280 km southwest of the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad, and beefed up its presence in Romania by 3,000 troops. Earlier, Washington also surged its military footprint in Europe by 20,000 troops, bringing the total number to 100,000. The US also deployed two additional squadrons of F-35 fighter jets to Britain, and sent two more destroyers to Naval Station Rota in Spain, bringing the total to six.

Ramping Up Tensions With Russia

NATO has undergone several waves of expansion between 1999 and 2020, swallowing up every former member of the defunct Soviet-led Warsaw Pact, three ex-Soviet republics and four republics from the former Yugoslavia. The expansion took place despite former US Secretary of State James Baker’s verbal promise to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990 not to expand the alliance “one inch” east of the territory of the former East Germany following that country’s annexation by the Federal Republic.

In 2008, NATO recognized the aspirations of the pro-Western governments of Ukraine and Georgia to see their countries join the alliance, sparking serious security concerns from Moscow. Tensions between Russia and the West were exacerbated in 2014, after the Ukrainian government was overthrown in a coup d’état orchestrated by Washington, and the post-coup government in Kiev reiterated its ambitions join the European Union and NATO.

In late 2021, Russia presented NATO and the US with a twin set of proposed security agreements designed to dramatically ease tensions and improve relations between Moscow and the Western bloc. The draft treaties included the proposal of legally binding, written guarantees by Russia on one side and the US and NATO on the other not to deploy troops, aircraft, warships and missile systems in areas where they might be seen as a threat to other side’s national security. NATO was asked to pledge not to continue its eastward expansion, and to scrap plans to incorporate Ukraine and any other former Soviet republic into the bloc. The Western alliance was also asked not to deploy additional troops or weapons systems on the territory of those NATO members which joined the bloc after the end of the Cold War.

The US and NATO balked at Russia’s security guarantee proposals, with officials emphasizing that the Western bloc’s “open door” policy for membership would remain unchanged.

September 17, 2022 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

The Anglo-American War on Russia – Part One (1917-1991)

Tales of the American Empire | September 15, 2022

A lifetime of anti-Russian propaganda taught Americans that Russians are evil people who forever foment conflict. They are shocked to learn that American troops fought in Russia to overthrow its government in 1918. Tales of the American empire produced several short videos revealing an endless war with Russia by the British and American empires that continues to this day.

Oriental Review; April 22, 2010; https://orientalreview.org/2010/04/22…

Related Tale: “The Anglo-American War on France”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkUlo…

Related Tale: “A U-2 and World Peace were Sabotaged in 1960”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyNhE…

Related Tale: “Warmongers Almost Killed Millions in 1962”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTfA0…

“We Are Going to Deprive You of an Enemy”; Dominic Tierney; The Signal; January 10, 2021; https://www.thesgnl.com/2021/01/cold-…

September 17, 2022 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine sliding into a real war

BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | SEPTEMBER 14, 2022 

A recurring feature of the Cold War was that the United States almost always placed great store on the optics of a Soviet-American affair while Moscow chose to concentrate on the end result. The Cuban Missile Crisis is the best known example where the denouement was about the publicised abandonment of the planned Soviet deployment of missiles in Cuba and a US public declaration and agreement not to invade Cuba again. But it later came to be known that there was also  an unpublicised part, namely, the dismantling of all of the Jupiter ballistic missiles that had been deployed to Turkey.  

The behavioural pattern remains the same in Ukraine. Per the western narrative, Russia is staring at the abyss of defeat amidst the “rout” in the Kharkov Region. Interestingly, though, at the responsible levels in the Beltway, there is noticeable reticence about beating the drums presumably because of their awareness that the Ukrainian forces simply re-entered the Balakleysko-Izyum direction to occupy areas that Russians had planned to vacate. 

Moscow is once again leaving the optics almost entirely to the American journalists while Moscow concentrates on the end result, which has had three dimensions: one, complete the ongoing evacuation from the Balakleysko-Izyum direction without loss of lives; two, exploit the Ukrainian troop movements to target the forces that came out into the open from well-fortified positions in the Kharkov Region; and, three, concentrate on the campaign in Donetsk. 

The last part is becoming very sensitive for Moscow, as a significant section of Russian “war correspondents” carried sensational reports that it is apocalypse now. Even senior politicians such as Gennady Zyuganov, General Secretary of the Communist Party, and a powerful voice in the State Duma, feels agitated. 

Zyuganov said at the first plenary meeting of the Russian State Duma’s fall session on Tuesday that the “special operation”  has grown into a full-fledged war and the situation on the front has “changed drastically” in the past couple of months.  

A fragment of the speech, posted in the Communist Party’s website also quoted Zyuganov as saying that “every war requires a response. First and foremost, it requires maximum mobilisation of forces and resources. It demands social cohesion and clear prioritisation.”

Although intended as constructive criticism, Zyuganov’s advice will almost certainly be passed over by the Kremlin. Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov has responded with alacrity, saying, “At this moment — no, it (full or partial mobilisation) is not on the agenda.” 

President Putin’s support base remains as strong as ever. The recent Russian regional and local elections partly turned into a “referendum” on the Ukraine situation. And the fact that the ruling party received one of the best results in its history by winning about 80 percent of the mandates in regional and local parliaments shows a resounding vote of confidence in Putin’s  leadership. 

That said, the “angry patriots” pose a headache. That is why the latest situation around Bakhmut in Donetsk assumes particular significance. Bakhmut is undoubtedly the lynchpin of the entire fortification that Kiev erected in Donbass in the past 8 years. It is a strategic communication junction with roads in many directions —  Lysychansk, Horlivka, Kostiantynivka, and Kramatorsk — and control of the city is vital for establishing full supremacy over the Donetsk Region.

The Russian troops and allied militia groups have been trying since August 3 to break into the Ukrainian defences in the Bakhmut-Soledar direction but with patchy success. Now come reports that the Russians have entered Bakhmut city and taken control of the industrial zone in the northeastern parts. 

Some reports say the Russian military contractors known as the Wagner Group have been deployed in Bakhmut. These are highly trained ex-military personnel. 

The stakes are exceedingly high. For Kiev, the entire logistics of the operations in Donetsk can unravel if it loses control of Bakhmut. As for the Russians, the breakthrough in the Bakhmut-Soledar direction will clear the main hurdle for the crucial offensive toward the Slavyansk-Kramatorsk axis to the west, the last conglomeration of Ukrainian forces in Donetsk. Bakhmut is only 50 kms from Slavyansk-Kramatorsk. 

Speaking about the Ukrainian “counteroffensive” last weekend to National Public Radio, General Mark Milley, US chairman, Chiefs of Staff, had made some interesting points:  

  • Ukraine has amassed a good amount of combat power. How they use that will now be the determining factor. Things will clarify “in the coming days and weeks.”
  • The Ukrainian military so far fought extraordinarily well in defence. Defence has always been the stronger form of war. 
  • Ukraine is now moving into offensive operations where it is critical to integrate fire power into their maneuver in order to achieve superiority. 
  • Therefore, “it remains to be seen” what is happening in the next few weeks. “It is a very, very difficult task that the Ukrainians are undertaking” — combining their offence with maneuver.

The Ukrainian offensive in Kharkov was planned as a flank attack to encircle and destroy the Russian groupings in the area of Balakleya, Kupyansk and Izyum. But the Russian command anticipated such an attempt, as its frontline had thinned out lately. The Ukrainian forces outnumbered the Russians by almost 4-5 times. 

Interestingly, in anticipation of a Ukrainian offensive, civilians who agreed to leave the region for Russia were evacuated from the threatened settlements in military convoys. Using mobile defence tactics under the cover of specially organised units, Russians finally succeeded in withdrawing their forces. 

In effect, the Ukrainian/US/NATO plan to manoeuvre a flank attack and encircle the Russian troops was thwarted with minimal losses. On the other hand, Ukrainians also admit that Russians inflicted significant losses of manpower on their opponents (who included a big chunk of fighters from NATO countries.)   

But the Russian military also made mistakes. Thus, their forward positions were not mined — inexplicably enough; frontline intelligence gathering was deficient; and, the residual Russian troops (drawn down to one-third of full strength) were not even equipped with anti-tank weapons. 

The single biggest outcome of the past week’s happenings is that the conflict has assumed the nature of a full-fledged war. Zyuganov was not off the mark when he said in his Russian state Duma speech: “The military-political operation… has escalated into a full-fledged war, which has been declared against us by the Americans, NATO members, and a unified Europe. 

“A war is fundamentally different from a special operation. A special operation is something you announce — and something you can choose to put an end to. A war is something you can’t stop even if you want to. You have to fight to the end. War has two possible outcomes: victory or defeat.” 

Putin has a big decision to make now. For, while the good part for the Russian military may be that the frontline has been straightened and large Russian reserves are being transferred to the battlefields, de facto, a state of war exists now between Russia and NATO. 

The recent phone calls to Putin in quick succession by French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, after an interlude of months, signals that an exigency may have arisen to re-engage the Kremlin leader. 

September 16, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Germany to send more weapons to Ukraine despite Russia’s objection

Press TV – September 15, 2022

Germany has vowed to deliver two more rocket launchers to Ukraine despite Russia’s warning against sending weapons to Kiev.

Since Moscow launched a special military operation in eastern Ukraine in February, western countries have provided an abundance of weapons to Kiev, with Germany being a main supplier of arms.

“We have decided to deliver two more MARS II multiple rocket launchers including 200 rockets to Ukraine,” Germany’s Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht said on Thursday.

Berlin also aims to send Kiev heavily armored military MRAP infantry mobility vehicles, Lambrecht said at a Bundeswehr (armed forces) conference.

“On top of this, we will send 50 Dingo armored personnel carriers to Ukraine.”

Furthermore, Berlin would send 40 Marder IFVs to Greece in exchange for Athens delivery of 40 of its Soviet-built BMP-1 IFVs to Ukraine.

Alongside Germany, the United States and other NATO members have been sending weapons to Ukraine.

Ursula von der Leyen, Germany’s former Defense Minister, who is currently the President of the European Commission, insisted later on Thursday that European capitals should also provide the Kiev forces with battle tanks so they can better fight the Russian forces aiming to demilitarize the Donbas region of Ukraine.

Meanwhile, Russia on Thursday warned that if the United States and its allies supply Ukraine with longer-range missiles, it will cross a “red line”.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said Russia reserves the right to defend its territory and if Washington decides to supply longer-range missiles to Kiev, then it will be crossing a red line.

Russia began its operation on February 24 in Ukraine’ Donbas region which is made up of the Donetsk and Luhansk self-proclaimed republics.

September 16, 2022 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

Half of Americans think US will lose superpower status within ten years

Many think “American democracy” is turning into a dictatorship

By Drago Bosnic | September 15, 2022

For over three decades, the United States of America has been chest-thumping about being the world’s “sole remaining superpower.” Some in the US establishment have even claimed that the US has become the world’s first “hyperpower.” And indeed, in the immediate aftermath of the Soviet dismantlement, the US-led political West seemed unbeatable, unilaterally starting wars across the globe, all under various pretexts such as “humanitarianism” and the much-touted “War on Terror.” The US and NATO used both of these excuses to invade dozens of other countries, be it former Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, etc. The US military seemed unstoppable and able to overcome any opponent, oftentimes by using air power only, with minimal ground engagements, at least until it got bogged down, which in itself was very useful for the ever-profit-hungry Military Industrial Complex.

Although many in the US establishment seemed convinced this will be a perpetual state of affairs, luckily for the world, the last decade proved the power of the belligerent thalassocracy is waning. While the Pentagon could count on hundreds of thousands of battle-ready soldiers during most of the 1990s and early 2000s, in recent years, there has been a significant drop in young Americans’ interest to go die or get maimed for life in one of America’s many pointless invasions and general aggression against the world. Even though the Pentagon found other ways to continue with its imperialist belligerence, primarily through an exponential increase in the use of unmanned combat systems around the globe, indiscriminately targeting civilians under the ever-convenient pretext of the “War on Terror,” most Americans have become aware of the fact that the US power (albeit still significant) is fading away faster than anyone would’ve expected just a decade ago.

A new poll conducted by the YouGov/Economist is the latest proof of this public opinion shift. The project polled Americans about the probability of various “dire political scenarios“ and found that 50% of the US population considers that America will lose its global superpower status within a decade. The poll also found that nearly half (47%) of Americans think that a “total economic collapse“ is inevitable.

“Among 15 potential future scenarios involving instability or political violence, the one that most Americans consider likely in the next decade is that the U.S. ceases to be a global superpower (50% say this), followed by a total collapse of the U.S. economy (47%). Each of the 15 dire scenarios is considered somewhat or very likely in the next decade by at least 20% of Americans. […] 37% of Americans say [a civil war] is at least somewhat likely to occur,“ the YouGov poll found.

The most surprising aspect of the poll must be the staggering nearly 40% of US citizens who consider civil war “at least somewhat likely.“ With a population of approximately 330 million people and being among the world’s most armed nations, such a prospect seems rather terrifying. However, it’s hardly surprising, especially given the sheer level of polarization of the US society, regardless if it’s based on race, religion, sex/gender, identity, ideology or any other parameter which the parties and various interest groups in the US are trying to exploit and use for political, financial and power gain.

“[…] After an end to the U.S.’s global-superpower status and economic collapse, the next scenario is that the U.S. will cease to be a democracy (39%). Democrats believe the U.S. will become a fascist dictatorship (31%), while Republicans think it will be a communist one (21%). Two-thirds of Republicans (65%) believe that total economic collapse is at least somewhat likely, compared to only 38% of Democrats. Around half of Republicans (48%) say it’s likely that the government will confiscate citizens’ firearms; only 17% of Democrats say this. Republicans are also more likely than Democrats to believe there will be a total breakdown of law and order (49% vs. 31%),“ according to the poll.

Although it’s expected to see a larger number of Republicans being more pessimistic about the country’s future under a Democrat president and government, the percentage of Democrats who aren’t particularly optimistic is quite telling. It’s more than clear that many DNC voters themselves are unsatisfied with the policies of the current US government.

“[…] In terms of the possibility of a civil war, Republicans are likelier to believe there will be one between members of each party (45% vs. 35%) or between people from red and blue states (36% vs. 30%). Democrats are slightly more likely to believe there will be a war between the poor and rich (37% vs. 25%) or between cities and rural areas (23% vs. 20%). Democrats and Republicans are equally likely (31%) to expect a civil war between racial groups,“ the poll concluded.

Although the opinions vary significantly based on the ideological/party background, the very fact so many Americans think the US is turning into a dictatorship and that a civil war is a likely scenario speaks volumes of the unflattering state of the much-touted “American democracy” which has often been used as yet another pretext for America’s war against the world.

Drago Bosnic independent geopolitical and military analyst.

September 15, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Ukraine’s security proposal makes Russian op ‘more urgent’ – Kremlin

Samizdat | September 14, 2022

Moscow should double down on its military offensive in Ukraine after Kiev released a proposal on how the US and its allies could guarantee Ukraine’s security, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. The document highlights the threat that NATO poses to Russia, he argued.

The Russian official noted on Wednesday that the proposed series of treaties between Ukraine and the US and its allies is specifically meant as a stopgap solution before Ukraine formally joins NATO. Moscow considers Ukraine’s accession to the US-led military bloc unacceptable due to the perceived threat to its national security such a step would entail.

“One of the main threats to our nation remains, which means that one of the main reasons for the special military operation remains, or even becomes more urgent,” Peskov told journalists.

He added that the best path that Ukraine has to ensure its national security under the circumstances was to address Russia’s concern over its cooperation with NATO.

“The leadership of the country must take steps to eliminate the threat posed to Russia. They know well what those steps should be,” Peskov said.

The proposed ‘Kiev Security Compact’ was released on Tuesday by the office of Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky. The document was prepared by his chief-of-staff Andrey Yermak and former NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen.

Kiev wants the US and other members of NATO to offer legally binding guarantees of its security and pledge long-term economic assistance. The document explicitly rejects Russia’s demand of a neutral status for Ukraine.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova stated earlier on Wednesday that the proposal was meant to trick European nations into a costly sponsorship of Kiev. They will risk their own economic viability, thus undermining their own political power, which secretly is the goal of Kiev’s puppeteers in Washington, she claimed.

Russia sent troops into Ukraine on February 24, citing Kiev’s failure to implement the Minsk agreements, designed to give the regions of Donetsk and Lugansk special status within the Ukrainian state. The protocols, brokered by Germany and France, were first signed in 2014. Former Ukrainian President Pyotr Poroshenko has since admitted that Kiev’s main goal was to use the ceasefire to buy time and “create powerful armed forces.”

In February 2022, the Kremlin recognized the Donbass republics as independent states and demanded that Ukraine officially declare itself a neutral country that will never join any Western military bloc. Kiev insists the Russian offensive was completely unprovoked.

September 14, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Kiev resolute in escalating the conflict

New security document significantly worsens tensions

By Lucas Leiroz | September 14, 2022

Once again, Kiev makes clear its intentions to continue the war against Russia. On September 13, the Ukrainian government published a national security plan that provides for the extension of Western aid for decades. In the text, it is suggested that NATO states should continue to support Kiev in a variety of ways, including investments in the defense industry. In practice, the Ukrainian state has made an official statement that it intends to expand the conflict indefinitely, which makes any form of negotiation for peace impossible.

This document looks like an alternative to Ukraine’s unfeasible accession to NATO. Since 2014, Kiev has been planning to join the Western military alliance, but, despite the country having been used several times to attack Russian citizens and destabilize Moscow’s strategic environment, NATO has never really seemed interested in approving such a membership. By the rules of the alliance, states in conflict cannot be accepted, since NATO is a collective security pact that establishes that all members must cooperate with each other in case of war in any of the states. As Kiev had been in a civil conflict for the past eight years, membership would be impossible.

Obviously, this project became even more unrealistic with the start of the Russian special military operation. Despite actively helping Ukraine with military and financial assistance, the Western Alliance would not allow Kiev to gain membership as this situation would create an obligation for all other members to send troops to fight Russia. Then, faced with the impossibility of joining the alliance, the Zelensky government established a document of guarantees to create conditions for cooperation between Kiev and NATO.

The recently released document establishes the signing of the Kiev Security Compact, of which, among others, the US, Australia, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Canada, Poland and Turkey would be signatories. This would allow various NATO powers to act in an integrated manner with the Ukrainian Defense Minister, despite the fact that the country is not a real member of the alliance. It is still determined that other bilateral pacts must be concluded, seeking to reinforce a policy of collective security. The text, however, makes it clear that Kiev will continue to seek its entry into NATO, with such pacts being just a way of establishing conditions of integration at a time when membership is not possible.

Among the guarantees that Kiev demands from its partners, the document also points to the presentation of a list of military measures to be taken if Ukraine suffers any attack. Unable to demand that NATO troops be sent to face its enemies, Kiev demands that military aid be officialized, extended and improved. In addition, the supply with intelligence data and investments in infrastructure and defense industry are also required. The document even states that Kiev’s troops must participate in drills and missions operated by NATO and EU members abroad.

“The security guarantees will be positive; they lay out a range of commitments made by a group of guarantors, together with Ukraine. They need to be binding based on bilateral agreements, but brought together under a joint strategic partnership document – called the Kiev Security Compact. The Compact will bring a core group of allied countries together with Ukraine. This could include the US, UK, Canada, Poland, Italy, Germany, France, Australia, Turkey, and Nordic, Baltic, Central and Eastern European countries (…) Ukraine’s aspiration to join NATO and benefit from its mutual defense arrangements is safeguarded in its Constitution. This aspiration is the sovereign decision of Ukraine. Both NATO and EU membership will significantly bolster Ukraine’s security in the long-term”, the document says. 

There is still no formal response on the part of NATO countries to the Ukrainian initiative, but considering the alliance’s destabilizing stance in the Ukrainian conflict, it is possible that some negotiations will move forward in this direction. NATO’s high degree of interventionism has been the main reason for the escalation of the conflict, which is why all possibilities for peace negotiations have been exhausted.

The Russian reaction, as expected, was extremely negative. The deputy head of Russia’s Security Council Dmitry Medvedev commented on the case severely criticizing the Ukrainian government and stating that such a “guarantee” program looks like a prologue to WWIII. He also warned about the imminent risks of an escalation of the conflict:

“The Kiev camarilla has given birth to a project of ‘security guarantees’, which are essentially a prologue to a third world war (…) If these half-wits go ahead with the rampant pumping of the most dangerous types of weapons to the Kiev regime, then sooner or later the military campaign will achieve another level”.

In fact, Kiev is just trying to circumvent its non-membership, seeking to receive the guarantees of a NATO member state, which cannot be accepted. The alliance must act rationally and prioritize peace over its anti-Russian plans. Agreeing to give Kiev “security guarantees” would be an affront to which Russia would be forced to respond.

Lucas Leiroz is a researcher in Social Sciences at the Rural Federal University of Rio de Janeiro; geopolitical consultant. 

September 14, 2022 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment