Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

S. Korea Considers Suspension of Deconfliction Agreement with N. Korea Because of Hamas Attack

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | October 12, 2023

South Korean Defense Minister Shin Won-shik is pushing Seoul to abandon a 2018 agreement that reduced the military presence along the demilitarized zone (DMZ). The military official believes North Korea could use tactics similar to Hamas to attack South Korea. The potential for Seoul to walk away from the deal meant to reduce tension on the peninsula comes as the chances for military confrontation between the US and North Korea has skyrocketed under the Joe Biden administration.

Shin, who was appointed as Defense Minister on Saturday, argued that withdrawing from the agreement was necessary. “Hamas has attacked Israel, and the Republic of Korea is under a much stronger threat,” he said. “To counter (that threat), we need to be observing (North Korean military movements) with our surveillance assets, to gain prior knowledge of whether they are preparing provocations or not. If Israel had flown aircraft and drones to maintain continuous monitoring, I think they might have not been hit like that.”

It is unclear why Shin believes North Korea, a nuclear power, would utilize the same tactics as Hamas, a stateless militia.

The 2018 agreement signed between then-South Korean President Moon Jae-in and North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un created a buffer zone along the DMZ that prevents military confrontations. The deal was inked during a period of warming relations on the Korean Peninsula that was driven by Moon, and fostered by then-President Donald Trump’s willingness to reduce the American military presence and war games in South Korea.

However, President Biden and Yoon have taken a more aggressive approach. Washington and Seoul have conducted several rounds of provocative military drills. Additionally, the White House has committed to deploying more weapons that can launch nuclear weapons to South Korea.

On Thursday, the USS Ronald Reagan aircraft carrier, and the fleet of warships in its strike group, arrived in South Korea. The ships will conduct trilateral war games with Japan and South Korea.

North Korea sees trilateral military operations between Washington, Tokyo, and Seoul as the White House attempting to create an “Asian NATO.” Officials in Pyongyang have repeatedly warned that the US-led military activity on the Korean Peninsula is pushing the region towards a nuclear war.

October 13, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Gang/Counter-gang Operations: Dearlove’s Sleight of Hand and the Wuhan Lab Psyop

By Matthew Ehret | UKColumn | September 26, 2023

Former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove’s long-standing role as anti-China provocateur and Zelensky-handler gives us the opportunity to look into the mind of empire and see how our society is being played to acquiesce to an agenda that will ultimately lead to the Third World War.

By adding his voice to those Anglo-American fanatics blaming China for creating Covid–19 in a lab and intentionally spreading it around the world, Sir Richard has demonstrated a classic case of “gang/counter-gang operations” practiced by the British Empire for centuries.

The Modern Origins of Gang/Counter-gang Operations

British Army officer Frank Kitson (now a nonagenarian, retired at the rank of General) produced an insidious little handbook in 1960 called Gangs and Counter-gangs, based on his work coordinating special operations against the 1955 Mau Mau uprising in Kenya that threatened to break this valuable African country free of British colonialism. Kitson’s handbook was a modern adaption of a centuries-old practice according to the needs of putting down independence and civil rights movements that threatened to undo the age of empires.

During his work in Kenya, Kitson recognized that when outnumbered and faced with organized independence movements, it is just not very effective for thinly spread colonialists to try to put them down by force directly and much wiser to change the rules of the game by sleight of hand. The formula for changing the game is to cultivate one or more opposition groups to whatever force is posing a threat to the empire, and then to cultivate a counter-gang to that opposition group to create a new set of conflicts within your target population (hence the terminology of “gang/counter-gang”).

While the target society becomes polarized by the two warring (yet ultimately controlled) opposition movements, the genuine independence movement simply gets diffused and lost in the chaos.

Describing his insight which would later be put to use in the FBI’s COINTEL program within America soon thereafter, Kitson wrote:

As a result of our informers and pseudo gangs we were getting to know a bit about the future movements of the gangs which was much better than merely analysing past events. We had a long way to go before we could say that we were producing the information that would enable the Security Forces to destroy the Mau Mau in our area […] I began to feel that at last I was on the road which led to the desired goal. [p. 90]

Covid–19’s Anomalous Origins

In late January 2020, with the publication of a report from the Kuzuma School of Biological Sciences, the theory of Covid–19’s natural evolution was first put into serious doubt.

Increasingly doctors working on the front lines in New York such as Dr. Kyle-Sidell began reporting the anomalous behaviour of Covid–19 symptoms as unlike any pneumonia he had ever seen and observed that Covid–19 acted more like some form of high altitude sickness, with ventilators not only useless but resulting in deaths in 9 out of 10 patients (meaning deaths were being artificially provoked by the medical protocols enforced by national governments around the world).

With these growing anomalies, thinking citizens became increasingly concerned by the disturbing matter of the vast Pentagon-controlled bioweapons infrastructure scattered throughout the globe. Bulgarian researcher Dilyana Gaytandzhieva reported on the Pentagon’s global bioweapons labs—all of which were conducting billions of dollars of secretive research on new and more virulent forms of viruses, with over $50 billion spent on the practice officially ever since Dick Cheney’s Bioshield Act of 2004 was signed into law.

Since the earliest days of the pandemic, China’s foreign Ministry has raised the possibility that the virus came to China via the American team who participated in the Wuhan Military Games in October 2019—an event at which several athletes were hospitalized for Covid-like symptoms. And since Victoria Nuland admitted to America’s operation of more than 40 biolabs in Ukraine alone during her congressional testimony in 2022, both the Russians and Chinese have tried on dozens of occasions to introduce the evidence of these biowarfare facilities to the United Nations Security Council, but to no avail.

On 13 May 2020, the Russian Government directly put into question America’s bioweapons laboratories in Georgia, Ukraine and South Korea, with Sergei Lavrov saying:

These [U.S.] laboratories are densely formed along the perimeter of the borders of the Russian Federation, and, accordingly, next to the borders of the People’s Republic of China.

By referring to the biolaboratories “next to the borders of the People’s Republic of China”, Lavrov was undoubtedly referring to the Jupitr and Centaur biolaboratories in South Korea, built up under the Obama administration in 2013. These have inspired vast public protests by Koreans over the last decade, who are unhappy that weaponized pathogens, and anthrax, have been cooked up in their nation without any national oversight.

A 14 May 2020 editorial in China’s Global Times stated:

The U.S. can’t just claim all reasonable inquiries to its bio-labs as “conspiracy theories,” and when U.S. politicians keep accusing China’s lab in Wuhan as the origin of Covid–19 without providing any evidence, they should respond to the questions on U.S. bio-labs, including the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick.

It is tough to dismiss this sort of matter as “conspiracy theory” when North Carolina’s Chapel Hill bioweapons labs went so far as to create a novel coronavirus called SHCO14 designed to jump from bats to humans with USAID/CIA grant money in 2015 and events sponsored by both the Rockefeller Foundation, the CIA and Bill Gates have been using novel coronaviruses in their pandemic scenarios for over a decade [see footnote].

The China Counter-Gang Narrative

When it became evident that the story of the laboratory origins of Covid–19 wasn’t going to disappear on its own, a new counter-narrative was spun which involved embracing the evidence of the laboratory origins while shifting the blame from the hands of Anglo-American intelligence to … China.

Emerging out of the bowels of Oxford’s Henry Jackson Society, the story was concocted early on that the culprit behind this virus’ origins was none other than China, whose BSL–4 laboratory in Wuhan had been conducting research on novel coronaviruses and had received a $3.7 million grant from the U.S. National Institute of Health from 2014-2019. Is this proof that China caused Covid–19?

Is this even proof that Covid–19 was the murderous killer virus that the Pfizer-funded media let on? Dr Denis Rancourt proved irrefutably that zero all-cause mortality increased until the vaccine was rolled out, with all deaths having been caused either by statistical manipulation or government enforced policies targeting the weakest, and oldest members of society.

Here, the story subdivided itself further, as one group—represented by the likes of Professor Neil Ferguson and Steve Bannon—maintains that the international spread of the virus was done deliberately, with China apparently going so far as to intentionally pack planes full of sick people to contaminate the world (a lie entirely annihilated by Daniel A. Bell on 21 April 2020), and another group—including some well-intentioned like Francis Boyle or the late Dr. Luc Montagnier—which maintain that Covid–19 leaked out of said Wuhan lab … by accident.

No matter what form this sleight of hand has taken, it has been just that: a misdirection designed to ensure that the discussion of the Pentagon’s more than 300 international bioweapons labs would be lost in the chaos. This false debate also helped defuse the danger of any serious investigation into the Pentagon’s program for ethnically targetted pathogens, as outlined in the September 2000 Project for a New American Century reportRebuilding America’s Defenses.

The neocon authors of that report — which shaped the entire Bioshield Act of 2004 and strategy behind the Anthrax Attack inside job launched from September-December 2001—wrote (emphasis added):

Combat will likely take place in new dimensions: In space, cyber-space and perhaps the world of microbes […] advanced forms of biological warfare that can “target” specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.

Britain

Now, we should not be surprised to find MI6’s very own former director Sir Richard Dearlove to be a loud voice in this anti-China clamor.

This is the same Dearlove who allegedly covered up Princess Diana’s death while director of MI6’s Special Operations from 1994 to 1999, and who oversaw the Yellowcake Dodgy Dossier while director of MI6 in 2002, which justified the launching of the war in Iraq and the conversion of the USA into a Five Eyes-managed surveillance state. This was also the same Sir Richard who later vetted another dodgy dossier created by his former employee Christopher Steele in 2016, designed to overthrow President Trump and usher in a war with Russia.

On 4 June 2020, Dearlove was among the earliest voices to launch the “China-created-Covid-as-a-Bioweapon” narrative, when he opined:

If China ever admits responsibility, will it pay for repairs? I think this will make every country in the world rethink how it sets up its relations with China and how the international community will behave towards Chinese leadership […] Of course, the Chinese must have thought “If we are to suffer a pandemic, perhaps we should not try too hard to warn our competitors, so to speak, that they will suffer from the same disadvantages that we have.

Sir Richard’s comments were timed to coincide with a new University of London peer-reviewed paper entitled A Reconstruction of Historical Etiology of the SARS–CoV–2 Epidemic, which stated that virus sequencing indicated “intentional manipulation”. Where it was relatively foreseeable that most minds would look to the over 300 international biolabs managed by the Pentagon and contractors tied to the Biden syndicate, the British researchers stated that the virus “was probably designed through a Wuhan laboratory experiment to develop ‘high potency chimeric viruses”.

With NATO’s proxy war against Russia in Ukraine facing a threatened end with Xi Jinping’s first official call to the stressed Vladimir Zelensky on 25 April 2023, Dearlove wasted no time jumping on a jet and met with the Ukrainian president in order to keep Zelensky in the game plan. After this meeting, Dearlove delivered a speech to the British National Conservative Convention, saying:

The reality is that today we remain confronted with two autocratic polities still focused on the eventual destruction of our value system. The sheer brutality of Putin’s regime leads me to the conclusion that Russia’s DNA is so corrupted that only another revolutionary change may rebalance it.

Dearlove went further in his speech to bring in Chinese villainy and to rally his audience around the British imperial narrative that Zelensky is the greatest freedom fighter of our age, saying:

I am worried when I witness eminent members of our own elite doing the work of our ‘almost enemies’ for them [applause]. Whether it is advocating for Huawei [or] whether it is refusing to publish any serious scientific study that questions the Chinese narrative on the origins of the SARS-COV-2 virus [applause] … or promoting a settlement in the war in war between Russia and Ukraine that ignores the peace conditions laid down by President Zelensky.

Amidst the turmoil and confusion caused by these gang/counter-gang operations radiating noise and polarization across the political and scientific landscape, the reality of the financial collapse looms overhead, as one system sits upon the precipice of collapse and a battle wages over who will control the emergence of the new system.

Will this inevitable new system be based on win-win cooperation, space exploration (as opposed to militarization), new discoveries and long-term infrastructure benefiting all nations and cultures, or will it be an order defined by a 21st-century Anglo-American oligarchy sitting atop an ivory tower as a divided world of chaos and depopulation suffers below?

Note

Philanthrocapitalism, past and present: The Rockefeller Foundation, the Gates Foundation, and the setting(s) of the international/global health agenda by Anne-Emanuelle Birn, University of Toronto, 2014, is one useful resource, as is the September 2019 Global Vaccination Summit and October 2019 Event 201.

September 29, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Putin-Kim Summit: Western Hysteria Can’t Conceal Historic Failing Of Western Imperialism and Criminality

Strategic Culture Foundation | September 15, 2023

Western news media have become a parody of misreporting, misinformation and outright imperialist propaganda. Nobody of sound mind can take their claims seriously anymore. This week such media “excelled” in their deceptions and distortions with hysterical coverage of the meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

It is, however, instructive to analyze what motivates the Western hysteria and false narratives.

The tone of Western reporting and commentary was akin to reading reviews of a new James Bond movie. In their telling, the summit was portrayed as a tete-a-tete between the world’s most dastardly villains. The Washington Post perhaps took the laurels for hyperbole, describing the summit as having “nefarious glamor” and went on to mention Kim arriving in a bulletproof train (as if that is somehow weird) and how the two leaders met at a “remote space port” (cue the James Bond music) and dined on “duck salad and crab dumplings” (oh, how very evil!). All that was missing, it seemed, was a shark tank.

The contrived menacing tone projected by the gamut of Western media speculated on Russia cutting a deal with North Korea to supply artillery munitions for the 18-month-old conflict in Ukraine. There were also heavy inferences that Russia would help bolster its East Asian neighbor’s nuclear arsenal thereby allegedly posing a greater threat to the United States.

It was widely claimed that the summit demonstrated that Russia was isolated internationally over the Ukraine war and that President Putin was “desperate” by reaching out to “pariah state” North Korea.

As we noted above, Western media have long ago forfeited any credibility. Their narratives have become embarrassingly discredited. Anything that American or European news media pronounce on should be taken with a risible pinch of salt, if not with utter contempt.

One topical example suffices. This week saw an appalling human disaster in Libya from storm floods. Up to 20,000 people are feared dead from torrential flooding. Not one Western media outlet even remotely made the connection that this horror was made wholly possible because the North African country was destroyed and turned into a failed state by the criminal military attack on the nation in 2011 by the U.S.-led NATO alliance.

Given this total denial by Western media of the underlying cause of Libya’s ruination, one can reasonably dismiss their credibility and moral presumption to discuss any other world events. Their function is to mislead, not inform.

The summit this week between the Russian and North Korean leaders was indeed a significant marker. Their meeting occurred while the 8th Eastern Economic Forum was proceeding in Russia’s Far East city of Vladivostok. The forum brought together political and business leaders from scores of nations with a focus on investment and partnership in the Asia-Pacific. President Putin delivered a keynote address to delegates before hosting Kim Jung Un at the Vostochny Cosmodrome in the Arum region, about 1,500 kilometers from Vladivostok.

The meeting between the Russian and North Korean leaders was a cordial event involving lengthy discussions (up to six hours, according to some reports) and a lavish state dinner attended by senior dignitaries. The details of the one-on-one talks were not elaborated on in public but the general topic areas included partnership in developing space technology and military matters.

Russia and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea have a long and honorable history, as both leaders warmly acknowledged. Putin noted how Soviet soldiers fought alongside Korean revolutionaries to defeat Japanese imperialism to help establish the DPRK in 1948. The partition of the Korean Peninsula into North and South was largely instrumented by the United States as a Cold War measure to contain the Soviet Union and China.

There is nothing sinister about the Far East Asian neighbors reaching out to each other to further develop fraternal relations for the benefit of both nations. The spirit by which Putin and Kim embraced is fully consistent with the historic emergence of a new multipolar world order.

In this new global reality, the notion of hegemonic dominance by the United States and its Western partners is rapidly becoming redundant and indeed repugnant. The arrogant and brutal imposition of unilateral sanctions by Western powers are increasingly seen for what they are – criminal vestiges of a by-gone era of Western neocolonialist self-ordained privileges.

The truly sinister aspect about the Putin-Kim summit is the glaring absence of any Western media acknowledgement that the DPRK has for decades been subjected to Western economic warfare as well as unrelenting military aggression by the United States from annual “war games” that rehearse “decapitation strikes” and an invasion of North Korea. The U.S. continues to refuse to make a formal peace settlement with the DPRK even after 70 years from the end of the Korean War in 1953. During that war, the U.S. inflicted genocidal mass aerial bombing killing up to three million civilians.

Instead of admitting historical truth and realities about the nefarious nature of American-led Western imperialism, the pathetic Western media would rather focus on “nefarious duck salad” supposedly eaten by Putin and Kim.

While the Western media go into hysterics about North Korea allegedly supplying weapons to Russia for the conflict in Ukraine, the same media are vacant in any questioning about the supply of $100 billion in weaponry by Washington and its NATO accomplices to prop up a Nazi regime in Kiev. That’s because they promote the absurd propaganda lie that the Western powers are “defending democracy” in Ukraine, in spite of the well-documented facts about the Kiev regime’s rampant corruption, repression, forced conscriptions and Nazi associations.

On the particular scare-and-smear story by Western media that Russia is desperately seeking arms supply from North Korea, it seemed to go un-noticed that the New York Times completely undermined this speculation with a separate report this week claiming that Russia is more than self-sufficient in artillery and arms production.

Anyway, even if the DPRK and Russia enter into a military supply deal, so what?

Russia has every legal right to confront the years-long aggression that NATO has embarked on in Ukraine. The United States is this week considering supplying long-range (300 km) ATACMS missiles to the Nazi regime and, according to its criminally insane Secretary of State Antony Blinken, has given the go-ahead for attacks on Russian territory.

This is the shocking and deplorable reality of Western-induced escalation of war between nuclear superpowers. And yet, according to the Western media, the sinister thing the Western public should be concerned about is a neighborly summit between Putin and Kim.

As Russia’s President Putin noted in his plenary address and in public dialogue during the Eastern Economic Forum, the Western arrogant powers have destroyed their own privileged financial system from decades of abusing the rest of the world and using their neocolonialist prerogatives to parasite off others. The West is desperately trying to conceal the reality of the historic global shift towards a multipolar world and away from self-ordained Western hegemony. Part of this denial and cover-up entails the West resorting to the old and weary game of trying to create bogeymen stories to corral the Western public behind otherwise bankrupt leaders.

The bogeymen narratives don’t work anymore. That’s because Western media are seen to be bankrupt in credibility, having been exposed over and over again as liars and con artists as seen from their apologetics for endless criminal wars – Libya is a stark case in point this week. Another reason for narrative impotency is due to the visible moral bankruptcy of Western political leaders. How can anyone take these elite charlatans seriously? Biden, Sunak, Scholz, Rutte, Macron, Trudeau, Von Der Leyen, Borrell, to name a few.

Another reason why Western bogeymen tales don’t cut it is because the harsh economic and social reality hitting most citizens in Western states is actually much scarier than any fictitious claims about foreign villains. The latter begins to seem even more absurd and disdainfully divorced from reality.

What should be – and no doubt is already – deeply troubling to Western elites and their media is that the public is realizing that their real and only enemy is within, in the form of elite rulers and their elite-serving economic system. That was always the case historically, but in former times, that reality could be diverted from with bogeymen stories about foreign enemies, “Commies and Reds”, and so on. Now, however, no amount of Western media spinning and fantasizing can conceal the dawning and dreadful reality of Western inherent corruption and failure, and the long overdue need for justice and accountability for the multiple capital crimes of Western imperialism.

September 16, 2023 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Russian-North Korea cooperation and the talks outcome

By Uriel Araujo | September 16, 2023

North Korean leader Kim Jung Un unexpectedly extended his visit to Russia. Russian President Vladmir Putin and his North Korean counterpart met on September 13 to reportedly discuss bilateral cooperation and after the five-hour meeting at the Vostochny Cosmodrome,  it has become clear the ongoing discussions include military and technical cooperation. For one thing, Putin  has vowed to help the East Asian nation develop satellites, and accepted Kim’s invitation to visit the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) – Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov is also to visit the country in October, according to spokesman Dmitry Peskov. Kim in turn vowed to bring about “a new era of 100-year friendship” between the two states.

The DPRK has been struggling with heavy sanctions for a long time and suffered the impact of pandemic related border closures – which have been relaxed recently.

US State Department spokesman Matthew Miller threatened by saying the US would “not hesitate to take action” if Pyongyang provided weapons to Moscow. In response, the Kremlin said that Russian and North Korean interests mattered, “not warnings from Washington.” There are however “certain limitations” to Russian-North Korean military cooperation (to which Russia complies), as Putin himself acknowledged, probably referring to UN Security Council resolutions which Moscow voted for in the past. Even so, there are many points of cooperation to be explored – the challenge will be to navigate the aforementioned limitations.

On September 14, the national security advisers of Japan, South Korea, and the US jointly issued a warning pertaining to Russian-North Korean cooperation, thereating that there will be “clear consequences” if United Nations Security Council resolutions are breached. The White House said US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan had talked with his South Korean and Japanese counterparts to discuss the Putin-Kim meeting.

Last year, amid the US-Japan-South Korea summit, I wrote on how frictions were escalating in the Korean peninsula, but also involved Russian-Japanese tensions. At the same time, Washington’s new stance on Taiwan added fuel to the fire. There is in fact another angle to Russian-North Korea discussions about strengthening military ties: they are about diversifying partners as much as they are also a response to US-Japanese-South Korean Pacific developments and Aukus.

Much is talked about the Quad (the “Asian NATO”) described by Lavrov as a US-led policy aimed against China. From a Russian perspective, however, this initiative – together with the overall American “Indo-Pacific” policy, also affects balance in a web of state relationships in Asia. Thus, for Russia, engaging with North Korea is arguably also about balancing US-Japanese-South Korean influence in Asia.

For example, over two years ago, I wrote on how Biden’s approach to the DPRK had been a setback – this was so largely due to the fact that Washington saw any interaction with the country as “unacceptable” nuclear negotiations – and such an approach was hardly an incentive to bring Pyongyang back to the table.

Nothing much has changed in that regard. As I wrote, in 2021, talks with the US were (and still are) very unlikely to deliver much, the nuclear issue being a true impasse – this being so, a natural path for North Korea would be to enhance its bilateral relations with Moscow, who, after all, has always been critical of the sanctions against Pyongyang: even though Russia did join the 2013 sanctions against the Asian country (in line with UN Security Council Resolution 2087), talks about setting up an advanced “development zone” in the Russian Far East and North Korea started in 2015 – this being a sphere of cooperation free of the scope of sanctions back then. Li Haidong, a International Relations of China Foreign Affairs University professor wrote, also in 2021, that the Russia-China-North Korea trilateral relationship had the potential to advance regional stability in the region.

Although there has been a common will towards stability and peace in the Korean peninsula, Biden’s administration has largely been a hindrance. In any case,  engaging with North Korea and “controlling” its existing nuclear arsenal is a much more realistic goal than full denuclearization. The hard reality is that Pyongyang has achieved nuclear power and will not let it go; thus, engaging with the DPRK is the only reasonable approach. In a way, this is also what Moscow is doing right now. To sum it up, the Russian strategy for the Korean peninsula should not be seen merely in the context of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and arms deals but should also be seen from a larger geopolitical perspective.

September 16, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

The New York Times Confirmed That Russia Is Far Ahead Of NATO In The Race Of Logistics

BY ANDREW KORYBKO | SEPTEMBER 14, 2023

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg belatedly admitted in mid-February that his bloc is in a “race of logistics”/“war of attrition” with Russia, and over half a year later, the New York Times (NYT) just confirmed that Moscow is far ahead in this competition. Here are the relevant highlights from their latest article about how “Russia Overcomes Sanctions to Expand Missile Production, Officials Say”, which will then be analyzed to update readers about the latest dynamics of the NATO-Russian proxy war in Ukraine.

———-

* Russia’s military-industrial complex is performing better than ever

– “Russia has managed to overcome sanctions and export controls imposed by the West to expand its missile production beyond prewar levels, according to U.S., European and Ukrainian officials, leaving Ukraine especially vulnerable to intensified attacks in the coming months.”

* Its military-intelligence services are responsible for this astounding success

– “Russia subverted American export controls using its intelligence services and ministry of defense to run illicit networks of people who smuggle key components by exporting them to other countries from which they can be shipped to Russia more easily. “

*  Ukraine should brace itself for a nationwide missile onslaught

– “Officials fear that increased missile stocks could mean an especially dark and cold winter for Ukrainian citizens…Ukraine does not have enough air defense systems to cover the entire country, and must pick the sites it defends. An increased barrage of missiles could overwhelm the country’s air defenses”.

* Russia has successfully transitioned to a wartime economy

– “Today, Russian officials have remade their economy to focus on defense production…The senior Western defense official said that Russia had reallocated nearly a third of its commercial economy toward arms production.”

* Its artillery production is a whopping 7x more than NATO’s

– “As a result of the push, Russia is now producing more ammunition than the United States and Europe. Overall, Kusti Salm, a senior Estonian defense ministry official, estimated that Russia’s current ammunition production is seven times greater than that of the West.”

* And its shells cost 10x less to produce

– “It costs a Western country $5,000 to $6,000 to make a 155-millimeter artillery round, whereas it costs Russia about $600 to produce a comparable 152-millimeter artillery shell, he said.”

* Russia also now has more of some missile types than it did before the special operation

– “It does not have huge inventories of missiles, though they have more of some kinds — like the Kh-55 air-launched cruise missile — in stock now than they did at the beginning of the war, according to people briefed on intelligence reports.”

* Several backpacks’ worth of smuggled chips can make several hundred cruise missiles

– “In cases where Russia needs millions of one particular component, export controls can grind production to a halt. But the chips needed to make a couple of hundred cruise missiles would fit into a few backpacks, which makes evading sanctions relatively simple, Mr. Alperovitch said.”

* And only basic and widely available chips are needed, not high-tech and ultra-restricted ones

– “One of the challenges for the U.S. government is that Russia does not need higher-end chips that are easier to track, but commoditized chips that can be used in a wide range of things, not just guided missiles.”

* Russia is reportedly looking to North Korea to further bolster its arsenal

– “Even though Russia is on pace to produce two million rounds of ammunition a year, it fired about 10 million rounds of artillery last year. That has led Moscow to desperately search for alternative sources to increase its stocks, most recently by trying to secure a weapons deal with North Korea, U.S. and Western officials said.”

* That country or others could also theoretically help Russia procure additional materials

– “And although Moscow has been successful in smuggling processors and circuit boards, it is facing a shortage of rocket propellant and basic explosives, American officials said, material that can be harder to smuggle than circuit boards. Those shortages are likely to constrain Moscow if it tries to step up further production of ammunition, missiles or bombs.”

* North Korea can also help Russia fill potential labor shortages in its military-industrial complex

– “The country faces a labor shortage that could make further industrial gains harder to achieve too.”

———-

North Korea Can Make Everything Even Worse For NATO

The NYT’s latest report proves that the West’s sanctions policy failed to curtail Russia’s military-industrial production, which actually ended up surging over the past 18 months as a result of clandestine procurement and the successful transition to a wartime economy. Moreover, whatever gaps still exist in production, material, and labor can conveniently be addressed by North Korea, thus adding crucial strategic context to Kim Jong Un’s visit earlier this week.

The preceding hyperlinked analysis elaborates more on this in detail, but the pertinent takeaway to the present piece is that Russia appears willing to share high-level military technology with North Korea across a variety of domains from submarines to satellites in exchange for ammo, materials, and labor. Regarding the last-mentioned aspect of their potential deal, the NYT reported earlier this year that North Korean workers are performing various jobs in Russia’s Far East region.

The Argument For Importing (More?) North Korean Labor

They of course framed this a form of “slavery” that also violates UNSC sanctions, but in the event that there’s any truth to the gist of their report regarding the continued presence of these laborers in Russia, then it could set the basis for importing more to work in that country’s military-industrial complex. After all, some of the tasks required are rather menial, so any potential labor shortage could be filled by low-skilled foreign workers who don’t have to speak Russian to perform their jobs.

Professor Artyom Lukin from Russia’s Far Eastern Federal University hinted at this in his interview with Sputnik on Wednesday: “Lukin postulated that there is a considerable need of workers in the Russian Far East and Siberia, and that North Korea may provide a solution to this problem by supplying labor to Russia. ‘I would venture a guess that in the following months we may see North Korean workers at construction sites and in the fields in Russia.’”

UNSC International Obligations vs. Russian National Security

Even though he was talking about their involvement in other industries, the point is that this esteemed expert from one of Russia’s top universities specializing in regional affairs extended credence to the prediction that Kim Jong Un’s visit could lead to (more?) North Korean laborers in his country. As was earlier argued, they could easily be put to work in Russia’s military-industrial complex if needed, which would adequately address whatever labor shortages it might be experiencing right now.

Although President Putin and his spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that Russia’s cooperation with North Korea will comply with the UNSC sanctions that Moscow previously approved, the case can be made that its international obligations won’t take precedence over national security needs. If the Kremlin concludes that ignoring those obligations could protect its people, help make progress on the special operation, and thus accelerate the global systemic transition, then it’ll cut “prohibited” deals with North Korea.

The Rationale For Russian-North Korean Strategic Relations

Kim Jong Un’s proclamation that “Relations with the Russian Federation is the main priority for our country at present” strongly suggests that he shares this view, which is likely why he made his trip in the first place. The North Korean leader knows that China won’t risk the threat of Western sanctions by going against its UNSC obligations to give him the high-level military technology that he needs, but Russia has nothing to fear in this respect and is therefore open to a deal if he helps meet its needs too.

Circling back to the NYT’s piece, Russia’s commanding lead in its “race of logistics” with NATO will grow even further in the event that a “prohibited” military deal with North Korea results in addressing whatever production, material, and/or labor gaps might still exist. Should that happen, then Russia would be in the best possible position to launch another ground offensive in the coming future and/or resume last fall’s strategic strike campaign aimed at crippling Ukrainian infrastructure.

Concluding Thoughts

The purpose in doing so would be to maximally pressure the West into forcing Zelensky to agree to freeze the conflict or formally return to the peace talks that they sabotaged in spring 2022, which he already fears that they might do as evidenced by an analysis of his latest interview with The Economist. If they refuse to comply with Russia’s implied demand, then they’d risk the scenario of it achieving a breakthrough sometime next year powered by the support that Pyongyang might soon provide.

Despite this drastically raising the odds that their proxy war on Russia will end in an Afghan-like disaster, the US’ liberalglobalist policymaking faction might still refuse to settle for a ceasefire, thus either making the aforesaid breakthrough a fait accompli or prompting them to unprecedentedly escalate. It remains to be seen which of these two scenarios will unfold, but either way, Russia’s lead in its “race of logistics” with NATO will continue growing and ultimately be a game-changer one way or the other.

September 14, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

Kim Traveling to Russia to Meet Putin, US Threatens Response

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | September 11, 2023

North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un is traveling to eastern Russia to meet President Vladimir Putin. Washington threatened to increase sanctions on Pyongyang in response.

Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin’s spokesman, described the meeting as a full-state visit. “There will be talks between the two delegations. And after that, if necessary, the leaders will continue their communication in a one-on-one format,” he said. “We will continue to strengthen our friendship.” The leaders will meet in Vladivostok. South Korea says Kim is currently traveling to Russia by train.

US State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said Washington plans to respond “aggressively.” “I will remind both countries that any transfer of arms from North Korea to Russia would be in violation of multiple United Nations Security Council resolutions.” He continued, “We, of course, have aggressively enforced our sanctions against entities that fund Russia’s war effort, and we will continue to enforce those sanctions and will not hesitate to impose new sanctions if appropriate.”

It is unclear what new sanctions the US could place on North Korea that would further isolate Pyongyang. The Treasury Department has already placed thousands of penalties against North Korean officials, government offices, and industries on the blacklist.

The New York Times reports that Kim is expected to agree to supply Russia with weapons, including artillery shells. Adrienne Watson, a National Security Council spokeswoman, demanded the North Korean leader not discuss the issue with his Russian counterpart. “We urge [North Korea] to cease its arms negotiations with Russia and abide by the public commitments that Pyongyang has made to not provide or sell arms to Russia,” she said.

Pyongyang is believed to have significant stockpiles of shells and production capacity. On the Ukrainian battlefield, artillery has become crucial. Western countries have begun to run out of 155mm rounds to send to Ukraine, prompting President Joe Biden to provide Ukraine with cluster munitions to cover the shortage.

Currently, NATO states are producing less artillery than Ukraine is using. With Ukraine’s counteroffensive stalled, the war appears likely to draw on into the foreseeable future.

In July, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu traveled to North Korea to meet with Kim. South Korean intelligence claims Moscow offered to allow Pyongyang to participate in trilateral war games with Beijing.

Washington’s sanctions campaigns against several states are becoming counter-effective. The US is currently attempting to smash the governments of Russia, Afghanistan, North Korea, Syria, Nicaragua, Iran, and Venezuela through economic warfare. However, in response, those countries have increasingly engaged in non-dollar trade to bypass American sanctions. Additionally, other countries such as China, India, and Brazil have become willing to ignore the Treasury’s blacklists and trade with sanctioned nations.

September 12, 2023 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

The Reported Russian-North Korean Military Deal Is All About Geostrategic Balancing

BY ANDREW KORYBKO | SEPTEMBER 12, 2023

Many observers believe that Russia and North Korea have decided to strengthen their military ties due to shared threats from the West. Reports claim that they’re exploring a swap whereby Russia would share hypersonic, nuclear, satellite, and submarine technology with North Korea in exchange for Soviet-era ammunition and artillery. The first part of this deal would balance the emerging US-South Korean-Japanese triangle while the second would keep Russia’s special operation going into next year.

There’s likely a lot of truth to this assessment since it makes sense for them to help each other against their shared opponents in the New Cold War, but there’s more to it than just that. For starters, the preceding report about their impending swap doesn’t account for Russia’s growing edge in its “race of logistics”/“war of attrition” with NATO that’s responsible for defeating Kiev’s counteroffensive. Even without North Korea’s Soviet-era supplies, Russia is still impressively holding its own against all of NATO.

This proves that Russia’s military-industrial complex (MIC) already meets its needs in the present and beyond, thus raising the question of why Russia would countenance a military deal with North Korea in the first place, let alone such a seemingly lopsided one. A cogent explanation is that Russia’s MIC might struggle in that scenario to meet its military-technical obligations to third parties, ergo the need to purchase lower-quality supplies so that production facilities can prioritize higher-quality exports.

Even if that’s the case, then it doesn’t answer the question of why Russia would be willing to share such potentially game-changing military technology with North Korea for these supplies instead of simply paying for them with hard currency, nor why it either can’t or won’t try to get them from China. Likewise, one might also wonder why North Korea can’t receive the aforesaid military technology from China and would have to request it from Russia as part of their reported swap.

The answer to those three questions concerns China’s reluctance to burn all bridges with the West as well as Russia and North Korea’s shared interests in preemptively averting potentially disproportionate dependence on the People’s Republic. Beginning with the first balancing act, while President Xi arguably envisages China leading the creation of alternative global institutions as strongly suggested by his decision to skip last weekend’s G20 Summit in Delhi, he’d prefer for this to be a smooth process.

Any abrupt bifurcation/”decoupling” would destabilize the global economy and therefore sabotage his country’s export-driven growth, but the US might force this scenario in response to China’s large-scale arming of Russia and/or transfer of game-changing military technology to North Korea. For that reason, President Xi likely wouldn’t agree to either of those two deals except if they were urgently required to prevent their defeat by the West, but neither is facing that threat so China won’t risk the consequences.

As for the second part of this balancing act, even if President Xi offered to meet Russia’s and North Korea’s military needs, those two would still probably prefer to rely on one another for them instead of China in order to not become disproportionately dependent on the People’s Republic. Both regard that country as one of the top strategic partners anywhere in the world, but each would feel uncomfortable if they entered into relationship where Beijing plays too big of a role in ensuring their national security.

From Russia’s perspective, it’s a matter of principle to never become disproportionately dependent on any given partner since such ties could curtail the Kremlin’s foreign policy sovereignty even if its counterpart doesn’t have any nefarious intent. In the Chinese context, relations of that nature might make some policymakers less interested in maintaining their country’s balancing act between China and India, thus leading to them subconsciously favoring Beijing and pushing Delhi closer to Washington.

Should that happen, then the global systemic transition to multipolarity would revert back towards bipolarity (or rather bi-multipolarity) as Russia turbocharges China’s superpower trajectory in parallel with India helping the US retain its declining hegemony. The result would be that only those two superpowers would enjoy genuine sovereignty while everyone else’s would be greatly limited by the natural dynamics of their competition. Russia obviously wants to avoid this scenario at all costs.

Unlike Russia’s global interests, North Korea’s are purely national, but they’re still complementary to Moscow’s. Pyongyang had been disproportionately dependent on Beijing since the end of the Old Cold War after the USSR collapsed, but China later leveraged this relationship to expand ties with the West by approving UNSC sanctions against North Korea. Russia did the same for identical reasons, but North Korea wasn’t dependent on Russia so Pyongyang didn’t hold a grudge against Moscow like it did Beijing.

It was this growing distrust of China that inspired Kim Jong Un to seriously explore Trump’s ultimately unsuccessful de-nuclearization proposal in order to rebalance his country’s relations with the People’s Republic. The same motivation was why Myanmar agreed to a rapprochement with the US under Obama that also ultimately failed. Both countries felt that their disproportionate dependence on China was disadvantageous and accordingly sought to rectify it by rebalancing ties with the US.

Since the American dimension of their balancing acts didn’t bear any fruit and is no longer viable, each is now looking towards Russia to play that same role in helping them relieve their disproportionate dependence on China. Russian-Myanmarese relations were explained here while Russian-North Korean ones will now be elaborated on a bit more. From Pyongyang’s perspective, even if Beijing gave it game-changing military technology, this could always be cut off one day if China reached a deal with the US.

In fact, China probably wouldn’t consider giving North Korea such technology anyhow since that could make it more difficult for Beijing to ever leverage its influence over Pyongyang again in pursuit of such a deal with Washington, thus limiting China’s own foreign policy sovereignty. The likelihood of Russia reaching a major deal with the US anytime soon is close to nil after all that’s unfolded over the past 18 months, so North Korea believes that Russia will be a much more reliable long-term military partner.

Russia and North Korea’s complementary balancing acts at the global and national levels vis-a-vis China coupled with China’s reluctance to burn all bridges with the West as it begins building alternative global institutions are the real driving forces behind the first two’s reported military deal. This grand strategic insight enables one to better understand the true state of relations between these countries and therefore helps objective observers produce more accurate analyses about them going forward.

September 12, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | Leave a comment

US Carries Out ICBM Test Amid Tensions with North Korea and Russia

By Connor Freeman | The Libertarian Institute | September 6, 2023

The US Air Force and Space Force jointly launched an unarmed Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) on Wednesday, amidst increased tensions with Pyongyang and Moscow. Air Force Global Strike Command carried out the test firing from the Vandenberg Space Force Base in California.

“These test launches demonstrate the readiness of [US] nuclear forces and provide confidence in the lethality and effectiveness of the nation’s nuclear deterrent,” said Space Launch Delta 30 vice commander Col. Bryan Titus.

A day earlier, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan threatened Pyongyang over a potentially upcoming meeting between Kim Jong Un, the supreme leader of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), and Russian President Vladimir Putin. “[This] is not going to reflect well on North Korea and they will pay a price for this in the international community,” Sullivan said.

National Security Council spokesman John Kirby claimed “arms negotiations” between the two nations are “actively advancing.” Although, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov explained that he cannot confirm the leaders’ rumored meeting as there is “nothing to say.” The US has already pledged $113 billion backing Kiev in its proxy war with Moscow.

The latest US miliary aid package for Kiev includes depleted uranium tank ammunition which is radioactive and toxic, it has been linked to cancer as well as birth defects where it has been used such as during the Iraq War. Largely as a result of Washington actively undermining diplomacy and ruling out peace talks or ceasefires, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists has warned humanity has never been closer to a nuclear holocaust.

Former Defense Intelligence Agency officer Rebekah Koffler told Fox News Digital that “Washington is signaling to Moscow that it’s nuclear deterrent is combat ready should Putin decide to resort to nuclear warfare whether on the battlefield in Ukraine or outside of it… the risk of unintentional escalation due to misinterpretation of each other’s intentions is now heightened.”

Last Friday, Moscow put its nuclear Sarmat missile on “combat duty.” In 2022, Putin remarked that the advanced ICBM will “reliably ensure the security of Russia from external threats and make those, who in the heat of aggressive rhetoric try to threaten our country, think twice.”

Since 2022, massive joint US-South Korean live fire war games have resumed and, in response, the DPRK has launched more than 100 missiles. Last week, hours after the US flew bombers in separate joint air drills with Tokyo and Seoul, North Korea test fired two short-range “tactical” ballistic missiles.

During the Joe Biden administration, tensions have soared on the Korean peninsula as a result of Washington’s myriad war games which have seen the White House deploy armed Reaper dronesnuclear capable bombers, and aircraft carriers. In July, a US nuclear-armed submarine docked in South Korea for the first time since 1981.

September 7, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Korean Armistice at 70: Redefining Atrocities as Victory

By James Bovard | The Libertarian Institute | August 4, 2023

Last week was the 70th anniversary of the armistice that ended the fighting between North and South Korea. In a low-key commemoration, the White House Press Office issued a statement from President Biden calling to “renew our commitment to the democratic values for which [American troops] served and sacrificed.” In reality, almost 40,000 American soldiers died pointlessly in that conflict to buttress the principle that presidents could deceive the nation and intervene wherever they damn well chose.

If politicians and policymakers were honest and prudent, the Korean War would have vaccinated America against the folly and evil of foreign intervention. Instead, the war was retroactively redefined. As Barack Obama declared in 2013, “That war was no tie. Korea was a victory.”

The war began with what Harry Truman claimed was a surprise invasion on June 25, 1950, by the North Korean army across the dividing line with South Korea that was devised after World War Two. But the U.S. government had ample warnings of the pending invasion. According to the late Justin Raimondo, founder of antiwar.com, the conflict actually started with a series of attacks by South Korean forces, aided by the U.S. military: “From 1945-1948, American forces aided [South Korean President Syngman] Rhee in a killing spree that claimed tens of thousands of victims: the counterinsurgency campaign took a high toll in Kwangju, and on the island of Cheju-do — where as many as 60,000 people were murdered by Rhee’s US-backed forces.”

The North Korean army quickly routed both South Korean and U.S. forces. A complete debacle was averted after Gen. Douglas MacArthur masterminded a landing of U.S. troops at Inchon. After he routed the North Korean forces, MacArthur was determined to continue pushing northward regardless of the danger of provoking a much broader war. By the time the U.S. forces drove the North Korean army back across the border between the two Koreas, roughly 5,000 American troops had been killed. The Pentagon had plenty of warning that the Chinese would intervene if the U.S. Army pushed too close to the Chinese border. But the euphoria that erupted after Inchon blew away all common sense and drowned out the military voices who warned of a catastrophe. One U.S. Army colonel responded to a briefing on the Korea situation in Tokyo in 1950 by storming out and declaring, “They’re living in a goddamn dream land.”

The Chinese military attack resulted in the longest retreat in the history of America’s armed forces — a debacle that was valorized in the 1986 Clint Eastwood movie, Heartbreak Ridge. By 1951, the Korean War had become intensely unpopular in the United States — more unpopular than the Vietnam War ever was. Truman insisted on mislabeling the war as a “police action,” but it destroyed his presidency regardless. When the ceasefire was signed in 1953, the borders were nearly the same as at the start of the war.

While the Friends of Leviathan paint Truman as the epitome of an honest politician, he was as demagogic on Korea as Lyndon Johnson was on Vietnam. When Republicans criticized the Korean war as useless, President Harry Truman condemned “reckless and irresponsible Republican extremists” and “the false version of history that has been copyrighted by the extremists in the Republican Party.”

Perhaps the biggest disaster of the Korean war was that intellectuals and foreign-policy experts succeeded in redefining the Korean conflict as an American victory. As Georgetown University professor Derek Leebaert noted in his book Magic and Mayhem, “What had been regarded as a bloody stalemate transformed itself in Washington’s eyes; ten years later it had become an example of a successful limited war. Already by the mid-1950s, elite opinion began to surmise that it had been a victory.” Leebaert explained, “Images of victory in Korea shaped the decision to escalate in 1964-65 helping to explain why America pursued a war of attrition.” Even worse, the notion that “‘America has never lost a war’ remained part of the national myth, and the notion of having ‘prevailed’ in Korea became a justification for going big in Vietnam.” But as Leebaert noted, “in Vietnam, [the U.S. Army] had forgotten everything it had learned about counterinsurgency in Korea as well.”

On last year’s armistice anniversary, President Biden proclaimed, “During the Korean War, nearly 1.8 million Americans answered the call to serve and defend the freedoms and universal values that the people of South Korea enjoy today.” The “call to serve” mostly came from summons from draft boards for military conscription. American media commemorations of the Korean War have almost entirely ignored perhaps the war’s most important lesson: the U.S. government has almost unlimited sway to hide its own war crimes.

During the war, Americans were deluged with official pronouncements that the U.S. military was taking all possible steps to protect innocent Korean civilians. Because the evils of communism were self-evident, few questions arose about how the United States was thwarting Red aggression. When a U.S. Senate subcommittee appointed in 1953 by Sen. Joseph McCarthy investigated Korean War atrocities, the committee explicitly declared that “war crimes were defined as those acts committed by enemy nations.” This same standard prevailed in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and practically any other place where the U.S. militarily intervened.

In 1999, forty-six years after the cease fire in Korea, the Associated Press exposed a 1950 massacre of Korean refugees at No Gun Ri. U.S. troops drove Koreans out of their village and forced them to remain on a railroad embankment. Beginning on July 25, 1950, the refugees were strafed by U.S. planes and machine guns over the following three days. Hundreds of people, mostly women and children, were killed. The 1999 AP story was widely denounced by American politicians and some media outlets as a slander on American troops.

The Pentagon promised an exhaustive investigation. In January 2001, the Pentagon released a 300-page report purporting to prove that the No Gun Ri killings were merely “an unfortunate tragedy” caused by trigger-happy soldiers frightened by approaching refugees.

President Bill Clinton announced his “regret that Korean civilians lost their lives at No Gun Ri.” In an interview, he was asked why he used “regret” instead of “apology.” He declared, “I believe that the people who looked into it could not conclude that there was a deliberate act, decided at a high-enough level in the military hierarchy, to acknowledge that, in effect, the Government had participated in something that was terrible.” Clinton specified that there was no evidence of “wrongdoing high-enough in the chain of command in the Army to say that, in effect, the Government was responsible.”

But the atrocities against civilians had been common knowledge among U.S. troops 50 years earlier. As Charles Hanley, Sang-Hun Choe, and Martha Mendoza noted in their 2001 book, The Bridge at No Gun Ri, the Pentagon in 1952 “withdrew official endorsement from RKO’s One Minute to Zero, a Korean War movie in which an Army colonel played by actor Robert Mitchum orders artillery fire on a column of refugees.” The Pentagon fretted that “this sequence could be utilized for anti-American propaganda” and banned the film from being shown on U.S. military bases.

In 2005, Sahr Conway-Lanz, a Harvard University doctoral student, discovered a letter in the National Archives from the U.S. ambassador to Korea, John Muccio, sent to Assistant Secretary of State Dean Rusk on the day the No Gun Ri massacre commenced. Muccio summarized a new policy from a meeting between U.S. military and South Korean officials: “If refugees do appear from north of U.S. lines they will receive warning shots, and if they then persist in advancing they will be shot.” The new policy was radioed to Army units around Korea on the morning the No Gun Ri massacre began. The U.S. military feared that North Korean troops might be hiding amidst the refugees. The Pentagon initially claimed that its investigators had never seen Muccio’s letter. Louis Caldera, who was Army secretary in 2001, declared, “Millions of pages of files were reviewed and it is certainly possible they may have simply missed it.” But Muccio’s letter was in the specific research file used for the official exoneration report.

Conway-Lanz’s 2006 book Collateral Damage: Americans, Noncombatant Immunity, and Atrocity after World War II quoted an official U.S. Navy history of the first six months of the Korean War stating that the policy of strafing civilians was “wholly defensible.” An official Army history noted, “Eventually, it was decided to shoot anyone who moved at night.” A report for the aircraft carrier USS Valley Forge justified attacking civilians because the Army insisted that “groups of more than eight to ten people were to be considered troops, and were to be attacked.”

In 2007, the Army recited its original denial: “No policy purporting to authorize soldiers to shoot refugees was ever promulgated to soldiers in the field.” But the Associated Press exposed more dirt from the U.S. archives: “More than a dozen documents — in which high-ranking U.S. officers tell troops that refugees are ‘fair game,’ for example, and order them to ‘shoot all refugees coming across river’ — were found by the AP in the investigators’ own archived files after the 2001 inquiry. None of those documents was disclosed in the Army’s 300-page public report.” A former Air Force pilot told investigators that his plane and three others strafed refugees at the same time of the No Gun Ri massacre; the official report claimed that “all pilots interviewed … knew nothing about such orders.” Evidence also surfaced of massacres like No Gun Ri. On September 1, 1950, the destroyer USS DeHaven, at the Army’s insistence, “fired on a seaside refugee encampment at Pohang, South Korea. Survivors say 100 to 200 people were killed.”

Slaughtering civilians en masse became routine procedure after the Chinese army intervened in the Korean war in late 1950. MacArthur spoke of turning North Korean-held territory into a “desert.” The U.S. military eventually “expanded its definition of a military target to any structure that could shelter enemy troops or supplies.” Gen. Curtis LeMay summarized the achievements: “We burned down every town in North Korea … and some in South Korea, too.” Yet, despite the hit-anything-still-standing bombing policy, most Americans believed the U.S. military acted humanely in Korea. Historian Conway-Lanz noted: “The issue of intention, and not the question of whose weapons literally killed civilians or destroyed their homes, became the morally significant one for many Americans.”

A million civilians may have been killed during the war. A South Korean government Truth and Reconciliation Commission uncovered many previously unreported atrocities and concluded that “American troops killed groups of South Korean civilians on 138 separate occasions during the Korean War,” the New York Times reported.

Truth delayed is truth defused. The Pentagon strategy on Korean War atrocities succeeded because it left facts to the historians, not the policymakers. The truth about No Gun Ri finally slipped out — ten presidencies later. Even more damaging, the Rules of Engagement for killing Korean civilians were covered up for four more U.S. wars. If U.S. policy for slaying Korean refugees (or anyone who “moved at night”) had been exposed during that war, it might have curtailed similar killings in Vietnam (many of which were not revealed until decades after the war).

Former congressman and decorated Korean War veteran Pete McCloskey (R-Calif.) warned, “The government will always lie about embarrassing matters.” The same shenanigans permeate other U.S. wars. The secrecy and deceit surrounding U.S. warring has had catastrophic consequences in this century. The Bush administration exploited the 9/11 attacks to justify attacking Iraq in 2003, and it was not until 2016 that the U.S. government revealed documents exposing the Saudi government’s role in financing the 9/11 hijackers (15 of 19 whom were Saudi citizens). The Pentagon covered up the vast majority of U.S. killings of Iraqi civilians until Bradley Manning and WikiLeaks exposed them in 2010.

When politicians or generals appear itching to pull the United States into another foreign war, remember that truth is routinely the first casualty. Governments that recklessly slay masses of civilians won’t honestly investigate and announce their guilt to the world. Self-government is a mirage if Americans do not receive enough information to judge killings committed in their name.

August 4, 2023 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | 1 Comment

North Korea demonstrates remarkable capabilities during Shoigu’s visit

By Drago Bosnic | July 29, 2023

On July 26, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu held high-level defense talks with his North Korean counterparts. In a clear message to the United States, Pyongyang is also conducting a series of ballistic missile tests that serve as a warning to Washington DC’s belligerence. Namely, the US is escalating tensions with everyone in the area, including by sending its nuclear-powered submarines to South Korean ports. Apart from various guided missile submarines (SSGNs), the US Navy also sent the USS “Kentucky”, a nuclear-armed ballistic missile submarine (SSBN), that docked in the southern port city of Busan on July 18. It should be noted that this was the first such visit since the 1980s, marking not only a symbolic, but an actual US return to Cold War-era posturing.

Sending SSBNs such as the USS “Kentucky” to the region is not only a message to North Korea, but also Russia and China. This Ohio-class submarine can be armed with up to 20 UGM-133A “Trident II” SLBMs (submarine-launched ballistic missiles), which, albeit over 30 years old at this point, can carry up to 14 warheads each, including the latest very low yield W76-2, with the power of approximately 2–7 Kt (kilotons of TNT). While such warheads are not nearly as destructive as the original W76, they’re equipped with new advanced fuses and their primary purpose is the destruction of enemy ballistic missiles while they’re still in silos. Such weapons are a direct threat to all three (Eur)Asian nuclear powers, as it gives the US certain first-strike capabilities that are yet to be matched by anyone outside Russia.

Such US moves are certainly part of the reasons why Shoigu visited Pyongyang and held talks with his North Korean counterpart Kang Sun-nam. He reiterated President Putin’s message about friendly bilateral relations that are “bound to be improved in all fields”. Shoigu expressed confidence that the meeting would strengthen military cooperation between the two countries.

“I am confident that today’s talks will contribute to strengthening cooperation between our defense ministries. Visits of warships, official visits of high-ranking defense officials, exchanges of working-level delegations and personnel training have all contributed to maintaining peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula,” he said, adding: “I am glad to make your acquaintance and meet with you. I happily accepted your invitation to visit Pyongyang, the capital of a friendly state. I am grateful to my Korean friends for the rich program you have offered. From the very first minute, I felt your care and attention. I hope we will manage not only to work actively, but also to learn a lot of interesting things about [North] Korea, your culture and traditions and see the sights.”

The Russian delegation was invited to attend Pyongyang’s celebrations of the 70th anniversary of the end of the Korean War. The ceremonies also included a massive military parade and the display of a plethora of advanced weapons that North Korea has developed in recent years. The visit by Russian officials will be the first of this kind in several years. China is also sending a delegation of high-ranking officials to the anniversary, marking its intention to not only maintain, but also strengthen relations with its eastern neighbor. In a recent push against US plans for NATO expansion in the Asia-Pacific region, both Moscow and Beijing are coordinating their efforts with Pyongyang, as the “pocket superpower” has significant strategic capabilities, completely disproportionate to its small size (relative to the giants surrounding it).

And while North Korea’s portrayal by the mainstream propaganda machine is unflattering, mildly speaking, Shoigu’s visit has demonstrated that underestimating Pyongyang isn’t only foolish, but also patently dangerous. It should be noted that such reverie is wholly limited to the infowar arena, as the Pentagon is deeply alarmed by North Korea’s recent advances in various military technologies that rival even that of global superpowers. Pyongyang’s innovations include not only missiles, but also advanced strategic drones. The footage released by its Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) shows one of the largest drones in the world. Superficially, the unmanned aircraft resembles the USAF’s RQ-4A “Global Hawk” and the USN’s MQ-4C “Triton” HALE (high-altitude, long-endurance) drones that are used for strategic ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance).

In addition to these platforms, North Korea seems to have developed a strike drone, as demonstrated by the presence of one that resembles the US MQ-9 “Reaper”. Developing such capabilities shows that Pyongyang is anything but “technologically backward”. These developments are a landmark achievement for its rapidly growing military industry that in some aspects has surpassed even the US. Namely, North Korea is only the third country in the world to field hypersonic weapons (including HGVs – hypersonic glide vehicles), something the Pentagon has been unable to accomplish after repeated tests have failed spectacularly, despite several decades of futile attempts and massive investments.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

July 29, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , | 2 Comments

Remember the Atrocities of the Korean War, Not the Propaganda

By Jim Bovard | The Libertarian Institute | July 27, 2023

Today is the 70th anniversary of the armistice that ended the fighting between North and South Korea. Almost 40,000 American soldiers died pointlessly in that conflict. If politicians and policymakers were honest and prudent, the Korean War would have vaccinated America against the folly and evil of foreign intervention. Instead, the war was retroactively redefined. As Barack Obama declared in 2013, “That war was no tie. Korea was a victory.”

The war began with what Harry Truman claimed was a surprise invasion on June 25, 1950, by the North Korean army crossing the dividing line with South Korea that was devised after World War II. But the U.S. government had ample warnings of the pending invasion. According to the late Justin Raimondo, co-founder of Antiwar.com, the conflict actually started with a series of attacks by South Korean forces, aided by the U.S. military:

“From 1945-1948, American forces aided [South Korean President Syngman] Rhee in a killing spree that claimed tens of thousands of victims: the counterinsurgency campaign took a high toll in Kwangju, and on the island of Cheju-do—where as many as 60,000 people were murdered by Rhee’s U.S.-backed forces.”

The North Korean army quickly routed both South Korean and U.S. forces. A complete debacle was averted after General Douglas MacArthur masterminded a landing of U.S. troops at Inchon. After he routed the North Korean forces, MacArthur was determined to continue pushing northward regardless of the danger of provoking a much broader war. By the time the U.S. forces drove the North Korean army back across the border, roughly 5,000 American troops had been killed. The Pentagon had plenty of warning that the Chinese would intervene if the U.S. Army pushed too close to the Chinese border. But the euphoria that erupted after Inchon blew away all common sense and drowned out the military voices who warned of a catastrophe. One U.S. Army colonel responded to a briefing on the Korea situation in Tokyo in 1950 by storming out and declaring, “They’re living in a goddamn dream land.”

The Chinese military attack resulted in the longest retreat in the history of America’s armed forces—a debacle that was valorized in the 1986 Clint Eastwood movie, Heartbreak Ridge. By 1951, the Korean War had become intensely unpopular in the United States—more unpopular than the Vietnam War ever was. Truman insisted on mislabeling the war as a “police action,” but it destroyed his presidency regardless. When the ceasefire was signed in 1953, the borders were nearly the same as at the start of the war.

While the friends of leviathan paint Truman as the epitome of an honest politician, he was as demagogic on Korea as Lyndon Johnson was on Vietnam. When Republicans criticized the Korean War as useless, President Harry Truman condemned “reckless and irresponsible Republican extremists” and “the false version of history that has been copyrighted by the extremists in the Republican Party.”

Perhaps the biggest disaster of the Korean war was that intellectuals and foreign-policy experts succeeded in redefining the Korean conflict as an American victory. As Georgetown University professor Derek Leebaert noted in his book Magic and Mayhem, “What had been regarded as a bloody stalemate transformed itself in Washington’s eyes; ten years later it had become an example of a successful limited war. Already by the mid-1950s, elite opinion began to surmise that it had been a victory.” Leebaert explained, “Images of victory in Korea shaped the decision to escalate in 1964-65 helping to explain why America pursued a war of attrition.” Even worse, the notion that “‘America has never lost a war’ remained part of the national myth, and the notion of having ‘prevailed’ in Korea became a justification for going big in Vietnam.” But as Leebaert noted, “in Vietnam, [the U.S. Army] had forgotten everything it had learned about counterinsurgency in Korea as well.”

On last year’s armistice anniversary, President Joe Biden proclaimed, “During the Korean War, nearly 1.8 million Americans answered the call to serve and defend the freedoms and universal values that the people of South Korea enjoy today.” The “call to serve” mostly came from summons from draft boards for military conscriptionAmerican media commemorations of the Korean War have almost entirely ignored perhaps the war’s most important lesson: the U.S. government has almost unlimited sway to hide its own war crimes.

During the war, Americans were deluged with official pronouncements that the U.S. military was taking all possible steps to protect innocent Korean civilians. Because the evils of communism were self-evident, few questions arose about how the United States was thwarting Red aggression. When a U.S. Senate subcommittee appointed in 1953 by Senator Joseph McCarthy (R-WI) investigated Korean War atrocities, the committee explicitly declared that “war crimes were defined as those acts committed by enemy nations.” This same standard prevailed in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and practically any other place where the U.S. has militarily intervened.

In 1999, forty-six years after the cease fire in Korea, the Associated Press exposed a 1950 massacre of Korean refugees at No Gun Ri. U.S. troops drove Koreans out of their village and forced them to remain on a railroad embankment. Beginning on July 25, 1950, the refugees were strafed by U.S. planes and machine guns over the following three days. Hundreds of people, mostly women and children, were killed. The 1999 AP story was widely denounced by American politicians and some media outlets as a slander on American troops.

The Pentagon promised an exhaustive investigation. In January 2001, the Pentagon released a 300-page report purporting to prove that the No Gun Ri killings were merely “an unfortunate tragedy” caused by trigger-happy soldiers frightened by approaching refugees.

President Bill Clinton announced his “regret that Korean civilians lost their lives at No Gun Ri.” In an interview, he was asked why he used “regret” instead of “apology.” He declared, “I believe that the people who looked into it could not conclude that there was a deliberate act, decided at a high-enough level in the military hierarchy, to acknowledge that, in effect, the Government had participated in something that was terrible.” Clinton specified that there was no evidence of “wrongdoing high-enough in the chain of command in the Army to say that, in effect, the Government was responsible.”

But the atrocities against civilians had been common knowledge among U.S. troops 50 years earlier. As Charles Hanley, Sang-Hun Choe, and Martha Mendoza noted in their 2001 book, The Bridge at No Gun Ri, the Pentagon in 1952 “withdrew official endorsement from RKO’s One Minute to Zero, a Korean War movie in which an Army colonel played by actor Robert Mitchum orders artillery fire on a column of refugees.” The Pentagon fretted that “this sequence could be utilized for anti-American propaganda” and banned the film from being shown on U.S. military bases.

In 2005, Sahr Conway-Lanz, a Harvard University doctoral student, discovered a letter in the National Archives from the U.S. Ambassador to Korea, John Muccio, sent to Assistant Secretary of State Dean Rusk on the day the No Gun Ri massacre commenced. Muccio summarized a new policy from a meeting between U.S. military and South Korean officials: “If refugees do appear from north of U.S. lines they will receive warning shots, and if they then persist in advancing they will be shot.” The new policy was radioed to Army units around Korea on the morning the No Gun Ri massacre began. The U.S. military feared that North Korean troops might be hiding amidst the refugees. The Pentagon initially claimed that its investigators had never seen Muccio’s letter. Louis Caldera, who was Army secretary in 2001, declared, “Millions of pages of files were reviewed and it is certainly possible they may have simply missed it.” But Muccio’s letter was in the specific research file used for the official exoneration report.

Conway-Lanz’s 2006 book Collateral Damage: Americans, Noncombatant Immunity, and Atrocity after World War II quoted an official U.S. Navy history of the first six months of the Korean War stating that the policy of strafing civilians was “wholly defensible.” An official Army history noted, “Eventually, it was decided to shoot anyone who moved at night.” A report for the aircraft carrier USS Valley Forge justified attacking civilians because the Army insisted that “groups of more than eight to ten people were to be considered troops, and were to be attacked.”

In 2007, the Army recited its original denial: “No policy purporting to authorize soldiers to shoot refugees was ever promulgated to soldiers in the field.” But the Associated Press exposed more dirt from the U.S. archives: “More than a dozen documents—in which high-ranking U.S. officers tell troops that refugees are ‘fair game,’ for example, and order them to ‘shoot all refugees coming across river’—were found by the AP in the investigators’ own archived files after the 2001 inquiry. None of those documents was disclosed in the Army’s 300-page public report.” A former Air Force pilot told investigators that his plane and three others strafed refugees at the same time of the No Gun Ri massacre; the official report claimed that “all pilots interviewed…knew nothing about such orders.” Evidence also surfaced of massacres like No Gun Ri. On September 1, 1950, the destroyer USS DeHaven, at the Army’s insistence, “fired on a seaside refugee encampment at Pohang, South Korea. Survivors say 100 to 200 people were killed.”

Slaughtering civilians en masse became routine procedure after the Chinese army intervened in the Korean War in late 1950. MacArthur spoke of turning North Korean-held territory into a “desert.” The U.S. military eventually “expanded its definition of a military target to any structure that could shelter enemy troops or supplies.” General Curtis LeMay summarized the achievements: “We burned down every town in North Korea… and some in South Korea, too.”  Yet, despite the hit-anything-still-standing bombing policy, most Americans believed the U.S. military acted humanely in Korea. Historian Conway-Lanz noted: “The issue of intention, and not the question of whose weapons literally killed civilians or destroyed their homes, became the morally significant one for many Americans.”   

A million civilians may have been killed during the war. A South Korean government Truth and Reconciliation Commission uncovered many previously unreported atrocities and concluded that “American troops killed groups of South Korean civilians on 138 separate occasions during the Korean War,” The New York Times reported.

Truth delayed is truth defused. The Pentagon strategy on Korean War atrocities succeeded because it left facts to the historians, not the policymakers. The truth about No Gun Ri finally slipped out—ten presidencies later. Even more damaging, the Rules of Engagement for killing Korean civilians were covered up for four more U.S. wars. If U.S. policy for slaying Korean refugees (or anyone who “moved at night”) had been exposed during that war, it might have curtailed similar killings in Vietnam (many of which were not revealed until decades after the war).

Former congressman and decorated Korean War veteran Pete McCloskey (R-CA) warned, “The government will always lie about embarrassing matters.” The same shenanigans permeate other U.S. wars. The secrecy and deceit surrounding U.S. warring has had catastrophic consequences in this century. The George W. Bush administration exploited the 9/11 attacks to justify invading Iraq in 2003, and it was not until 2016 that the U.S. government revealed documents exposing the Saudi government’s role in financing the 9/11 hijackers (15 of 19 whom were Saudi citizens). The Pentagon covered up the vast majority of U.S. killings of Iraqi civilians until Bradley Manning and WikiLeaks exposed them in 2010.

When politicians or generals appear itching to pull the United States into another foreign war, remember that truth is routinely the first casualty. Governments that recklessly slay masses of civilians won’t honestly investigate and announce their guilt to the world. Self-government is a mirage if Americans do not receive enough information to judge killings committed in their name.

Jim Bovard is the Junior Fellow for The Libertarian Institute. He is the author of Public Policy Hooligan (2012), Attention Deficit Democracy (2006), Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty (1994), and 7 other books.

July 27, 2023 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , | 2 Comments

North Korea spurns offer of peace talks

RT | July 17, 2023

North Korea has dismissed a US proposal for peace talks as a ploy, accusing Washington of provoking conflict in the region while holding out false hope that it can persuade Pyongyang to halt its nuclear weapons program by temporarily easing sanctions or suspending military exercises.

Kim Yo-jong, North Korea’s foreign policy chief and sister of leader Kim Jong-un, said on Monday that the best way to ensure peace and stability on the Korean peninsula is for Pyongyang to amply display its military might, “rather than solving the problem with the gangster-like Americans in a friendly manner.” She called Washington’s latest offer of peace negotiations a “trick” to buy time for trying to denuclearize the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK).

“It is a daydream for the US to think that it can stop the advance of the DPRK and, furthermore, achieve irreversible disarmament” by offering such reversible incentives as sanctions relief, suspension of the Pentagon’s joint military exercises with South Korea and a halt to deployment of strategic weapons in the region, Kim Yo-jong said in a statement carried by state-run news agency KCNA.

Kim made her comments one day after US President Joe Biden’s national security advisor, Jake Sullivan, told reporters that Washington was willing to negotiate with North Korea “without preconditions” concerning its nuclear weapons program. He said the Biden administration is closely monitoring the threats posed by North Korea’s missile launches and is concerned that Pyongyang will conduct its seventh nuclear warhead test.

Kim said the US should stop its “foolish” provocations toward the DPRK, which have only imperiled Washington’s own security. “We are aware that lurking behind the present US administration’s proposal for dialogue without any preconditions is a trick to prevent the thing that it fears from happening again.”

Even if the US were to go as far as removing all of its troops from South Korea in exchange for permanent denuclearization by Pyongyang, it could redeploy strategic weapons to the peninsula within 10 hours and bring back enough soldiers to resume joint exercises within 20 days, Kim said. She added that any promises made by the current administrations in Washington and Seoul could be “instantly reversed” when their successors come to power, such as when Biden replaced Donald Trump in the White House.

Similarly, Kim said the US and its allies could easily renege on diplomatic concessions. “It is as easy as pie for the US political circles to exclude the DPRK from the list of ‘sponsors of terrorism’ today but re-list it tomorrow.” She claimed that tensions in the region have escalated on Biden’s watch to the point that “the possibility of an actual armed conflict and even the outbreak of a nuclear war is debated.”

July 17, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , | 1 Comment