Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

NATO’s War Narratives Collapse

Aaron Maté & Glenn Diesen
Glenn Diesen | April 18, 2025

Investigative journalist Aaron Maté discusses how NATO’s war narratives are falling apart. Maté is renowned for debunking the Russiagate hoax, yet the lessons about the dangers of embracing false stories have not yet been appreciated.

April 20, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia, Video | , , , | Leave a comment

US proposes leaving former Ukrainian territories under Russian control – Bloomberg

RT | April 18, 2025

The US has presented its allies with the details of its peace plan to bring the conflict between Russia and Ukraine to an end, Bloomberg reported on Friday, citing European officials familiar with the matter.

The contours of the plan were outlined during a meeting in Paris on Thursday. The proposal reportedly includes easing sanctions on Russia, as well as terminating Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO. The roadmap would effectively freeze the war, with the formerly Ukrainian territories held by Russia remaining under Moscow’s control, the sources suggested.

One of the officials told Bloomberg that the proposal still had to be discussed with Kiev, adding that the plan would not actually amount to a definitive settlement of the conflict. Moreover, Kiev’s European backers would not recognize the territories as Russian, the source suggested.

The Paris meetings involved senior officials from several countries. The US delegation was led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and White House special envoy Steve Witkoff. They met with French President Emmanuel Macron and also held discussions with top officials and negotiators from France, Germany, the UK, and Ukraine.

Earlier on Friday, Rubio signaled Washington was ready to “move on” if a way to end the hostilities between Moscow and Kiev could not be found shortly.

“We need to figure out here now, within a matter of days, whether this is doable in the short term. Because if it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on,” Rubio told reporters before departing from France.

Moscow has signaled a full ceasefire with Ukraine was highly unlikely, citing Kiev’s violations of previous deals. Speaking to reporters at the UN headquarters on Thursday, Russian envoy Vassily Nebenzia said there are “big issues with the comprehensive ceasefire,” recalling the fate of the now-defunct Minsk agreements, which were “misused and abused to prepare Ukraine for the confrontation.”

The diplomat also cited repeated Ukrainian violations of a US-brokered 30-day moratorium on energy infrastructure strikes, implemented on March 18.

“How close we are to the ceasefire is a big question to me personally, because, as I said, we had an attempt at a limited ceasefire on energy infrastructure, which was not observed by the Ukrainian side. So, in these circumstances, to speak about a ceasefire is simply unrealistic at this stage,” Nebenzia said.

April 18, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

With Yemen attack, U.S. continues long history of deliberately bombing hospitals

By Alan MACLEOD | MintPress News | April 11, 2025

In repeatedly targeting and destroying a cancer center in Yemen, the United States has carried on a long pattern of bombing hospitals.

On March 24, the United States carried out a premeditated attack on the Al Rasool Al-Azam Oncology Hospital in Saada, Yemen, turning it into rubble. At least two people were killed and 13 more injured.

This was not an isolated incident. Eight days previously, on March 16, Washington launched 13 separate airstrikes against the building, systematically destroying the hospital’s five blocks.

The Anti-Cancer Fund, a local government medical organization, described the events as a clear “war crime.”

“These attacks are not just airstrikes, but systematic executions, intended to eliminate hope and wipe out life amid a suffocating blockade,” it said in a statement.

The Yemeni Cancer Control Fund, a government body tasked with overseeing the country’s healthcare system, agreed, alleging that they were part of what it called:

A systematic American policy that has targeted the Yemeni people for years through bombings and a suffocating blockade, exacerbating the humanitarian crisis and spreading deadly diseases, including cancer, which has surged due to the use of internationally banned weapons since 2015.”

The newly built Al Rasool Al-Azam Hospital was the centerpiece of the region’s healthcare network. Costing over $7.5 million, the center provided crucial treatment to hundreds of cancer patients who previously went without any care at all or faced an eight-and-a-half-hour round trip to the capital, Sanaa, for therapy.

The repeated strikes on healthcare facilities in Yemen have received virtually zero attention in the United States. Indeed, Washington’s attacks on Yemen have elicited almost no critical coverage, with corporate media seemingly more outraged that senior Trump officials used a Signal group chat to plan their operations than those deeds leading to the deaths of dozens of civilians.

The United States returned to bombing Yemen because its government, in an effort to halt the Israeli assault on Gaza, stopped Israeli ships traveling through the Red Sea. And like Palestine, Yemen is under an international blockade, depriving its people of basic necessities.

Post-9/11 Hospital Attacks

The destruction of the Al Rasool Al-Azam Oncology Center was far from a unique occurrence. In fact, the attack carries on an extremely long and well-documented tradition of the United States targeting hospitals.

In August 2017, the Trump administration itself not only bombed a hospital in Raqqa, Syria but reportedly used white phosphorous munitions to do so. Officials from the Red Crescent reported that the U.S. carried out 20 separate attacks on the hospital, systematically targeting its power generators, vehicles and wards, turning the site into rubble. At least 30 civilians were killed, some likely due to the effects of the white phosphorous, which causes respiratory damage and organ failure.

A highly controversial and widely-banned weapon, white phosphorous instantly ignites upon contact with oxygen, sticks to clothes and skin, and burns at an extremely high temperature. It cannot be extinguished by water, leaving those affected to suffer excruciating – and deadly – injuries.

In 2015, the U.S. Air Force carried out a bombing campaign against a Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan. The trauma center, one of the newest, largest, and most recognizable buildings in the city, was deliberately targeted; Doctors Without Borders had already supplied the military with its precise coordinates.

The aftermath of US airstrikes on the MSF Trauma Centre in Kunduz, Afghanistan in October 2015. Photo | MSF

An internal inquiry revealed that the airmen aboard the AC-130 gunship that carried out the operation pushed back against their superiors, questioning the strike’s legality. However, they were overruled and ordered to bomb the hospital regardless of their concerns. A Doctors Without Borders report concluded that the U.S. knew where the hospital was and that it did not hide any Taliban fighters and targeted it anyway. At least 42 people are known to have been killed in the incident.

The 2015 Kunduz bombing was a unique moment in history, as it was the first time that one Nobel Peace Prize winner (Barack Obama) bombed another one (Doctors Without Borders).

During his time in office, Obama bombed seven countries, including Libya. In July 2011, as part of its mission to overthrow the government of Muammar Gaddafi, NATO planes bombed Zliten, destroying the city’s hospital. Eighty-five people were killed, including at least 11 at the medical center. The event helped turn what was once Africa’s most prosperous and stable country into a failed state replete with open-air slave markets. Libya’s downfall has, in turn, helped to destabilize the entire Sahel region.

Perhaps no country in the 21st century has felt the wrath of Washington as much as Iraq. U.S. strikes on civilian infrastructure were a frequent occurrence, and hospitals were no different. Arguably, the most notable example is the April 2003 bombing of the Red Crescent Maternity Hospital in Baghdad.

American missiles struck the city center complex housing the hospital, killing several and wounding at least 25 people, including doctors.

The charitable hospital was crucial to providing affordable healthcare to working-class Iraqis, charging ten times less than the city’s private clinics. It developed a reputation as a first-class maternity hospital, delivering an average of 35 babies per day before the invasion. UNICEF noted a sharp rise in maternal mortality after the bombing, partially due to the lack of obstetric care in Baghdad.

Clinton’s War on Hospitals

Four years earlier, in May 1999, U.S.-led NATO planes dropped cluster munitions on an outdoor market and hospital in the Yugoslav city of Nis, killing at least 15 people and injuring 60 more, according to the hospital’s director. Cluster munitions are now banned under international law. Regardless, between 2023 and 2024, the United States transferred large quantities to Ukraine for use against Russian forces.

Two weeks after the Nis bombing, NATO targeted a hospital in the Yugoslav capital, Belgrade. The missile strike destroyed much of the maternity ward, with rescuers pulling infants and mothers from the rubble in the dead of night. At least three people were reported killed.

The Yugoslav attacks were not the Clinton administration’s only attacks on medical facilities. In 1998, in response to Osama bin Laden’s recent bombings of American Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, President Bill Clinton ordered an attack on the Al-Shifa medicine factory in Sudan. Fourteen cruise missiles hit the plant, turning what had been the largest producer of medicine in the country into a pile of twisted metal. The factory had produced over half of Sudan’s pharmaceuticals, including crucial antibiotics and antimalarial and diarrhea medications.

While not a hospital, the destruction of Al-Shifa was vastly more lethal than any other attack listed. The event led to a collapse in the availability of drugs in one of Africa’s poorest countries. The German Ambassador to Sudan estimated that the death toll reached into the “tens of thousands.”

The Clinton administration publicly insisted that the plant was actually bin Laden’s chemical weapons factory. Privately, however, Secretary of State Madeline Albright worked hard to suppress a government report, noting this was not true.

Sudan was Clinton’s second attack on Africa. In June 1993, U.S. soldiers (under U.N. auspices) carried out a mortar attack against Digfer Hospital in Mogadishu, Somalia. The bombs destroyed the main reception area, blew a gaping hole in the wall of the recovery room, and shattered glass across the building. “It probably will never be known how many Somalis died in the U.N. [U.S.] onslaught,” wrote The Chicago Tribune. One reason for this is that helicopter-borne soldiers attacked reporters and photographers attempting to cover the attack, throwing stun grenades at them and chasing them away from the scene.

Latin American Dirty Wars

During the 1980s, Latin America and the Caribbean were the sites of intense U.S. interest. In October 1983, during the U.S. invasion of the island, American warplanes hit the Richmond Hill Mental Hospital in Grenada. The Reagan administration initially attempted to deny the attack before finally conceding their culpability. Dozens of people were injured, and at least 20 were killed, although The New York Times suggested an actual death toll of over twice that number.

The U.S. invaded Grenada in order to crush the island’s socialist revolution. In Central America, however, it relied on funding, training and arming proxy forces to do its bidding. These death squads would wreak destruction across the region and continue to shape its politics and society to this day.

In El Salvador, U.S.-trained forces waged a dirty war against the population in order to crush leftist FMLN guerilla forces. Hospitals were among their preferred targets. On April 15, 1989, for instance, pilots flying U.S.-made A-37 jets and UH 1M and Hughes-500 helicopters bombed an FMLN hospital in San Ildefonso, killing five people.

Paratroopers armed with M-16 rifles arrived on U.S. helicopters and attacked and abducted the medical staff, including French nurse Madeleine Lagadec. Before executing her, the soldiers spent eight hours raping and torturing her. Images of the remains of her mutilated body caused outrage in France, which issued an international arrest warrant for the four U.S.-backed officers overseeing the operation.

In Nicaragua, meanwhile, throughout the 1980s, U.S.-trained paramilitaries intentionally attacked “soft targets” such as hospitals in an effort to terrorize the population into dropping their support for the country’s socialist government.

A study by Richard M. Garfield, Professor of Nursing at Columbia University, found that, between 1981 and 1984, at least 63 health centers were forced to close due to attacks from the U.S.-backed “Contra” death squads.

These operations were carefully planned for maximum effect, with the Contras leaving behind graffiti at the crime scenes, announcing that the “Lion Cubs of Reagan” had visited the area. Throughout their campaign, President Reagan supported the Contras, labeling them “the moral equivalent of our Founding Fathers.” Dr. Michael Gray, Chairman of Occupational Medicine at Kino Community Hospital in Tucson, AZ., a doctor who visited Nicaragua, held a different opinion, describing them and their actions as “no different than the SS at the end of the Second World War.”

Cold War Killing Machine

During the American wars in Indochina, the bombing of hospitals was official – if unstated – U.S. policy.

Alan Stevenson, a former Army intelligence specialist, testified that, while on duty in Quang Tri province in Vietnam, he regularly identified hospitals to be struck by U.S. fighter jets. “The bigger the hospital, the better it was,” he said, explaining the military’s thought process. “This wasn’t something that was hush‐hush,” he added. “We really didn’t consider it that nasty an item.”

Former Air Force captain Gerald Greven corroborated Stevenson’s allegations, noting that he personally ordered bombing raids against medical centers. It was official policy to “look for hospitals as targets,” he said.

Perhaps the most notorious and well-documented case of this in Vietnam occurred on December 22, 1972, when American planes dropped over 100 bombs on the 1000-bed Bach Mai Hospital in Hanoi, nearly obliterating the building, in the process killing 28 medical staff and an unconfirmed number of patients.

The U.S. military justified the strike by claiming that the hospital “frequently housed antiaircraft positions” and noted its proximity to a military airbase.

During the Congressional hearings on clandestine U.S. activities in Laos and Cambodia, meanwhile, lawmakers were told that the bombing of hospitals was “routine.” Indeed, the former remains the most bombed country, per capita, in world history.

Like in Vietnam, the targeting of hospitals was not only commonplace but deliberate. In 1973, former Army captain Rowan Malphurs testified that, while serving with the Combined Intelligence Center of Vietnam, he helped orchestrate attacks on Cambodian health centers. “We were planning bombings of hospitals,” he said. Yet Malphurs was unrepentant. “I think it was a good thing because the North Vietnamese Army had a privileged sanctuary in Cambodia,” he added.

Thus, as this brief rundown of the past five decades has shown, last month’s attacks on the Al Rasool Al-Azam Oncology Hospital in Yemen are far from an aberration. As these examples from 13 different countries show, Washington, in fact, has a longstanding history of targeting medical centers.

Going further back, the government of North Korea estimates that the U.S. military destroyed some 1,000 hospitals during the Korean War. These numbers are entirely plausible, given the gigantic bombing campaign that the country faced. Entire cities were leveled or flooded after American planes targeted dams. Professor Bruce Cummings, America’s foremost expert on Korea, estimates that the U.S. killed around 25% of the entire North Korean population between 1950 and 1953.

Radio Silence

Article 8 of the Rome Statute, one of the fundamental texts of international law, explicitly identifies “intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives,” as war crimes.

That the Trump administration repeatedly struck a well-known and easily identifiable hospital in Yemen is an extremely important story. But it has, in fact, received zero coverage in corporate media. Searches for “Al Rasool Al-Azam Hospital” and “Yemen Hospital” in the Dow Jones Factiva news database, a tool that records the content from more than 32,000 U.S. and international media outlets, show that no mainstream American publication has even mentioned this grave war crime.

This is not because the information is particularly hard to find. Well-known media figures such as Pepe Escobar and Jackson Hinkle visited Saada and recorded viral videos from the wreckage where the hospital once stood. The information has been all over social media for weeks and has been covered widely in alternative media, including Drop Site News, AntiWar.com, Truthout, Common Dreams, and foreign outlets such as Al-Jazeera, RT (formerly Russia Today), and The Cradle. Thus, every single editor in every newsroom and television studio in the United States has access to this information and made the decision not to cover the story – a fact that suggests a lot about the diversity of opinion and freedom of our press.

This complete disinterest in U.S. misdeeds sits in stark contrast to when official enemy states do the same thing. When Russia hit hospitals in Ukraine and Syria, those incidents became front page news and led television news bulletins. Moreover, corporate media regularly explicitly framed the events as war crimes (see PBS, Politico, Foreign Policy, CNN, Newsweek, ABC News and the Los Angeles Times). Talking heads waxed lyrical about how Russian President Vladimir Putin must be brought to justice. And yet, when the United States does the same, that cacophony falls to complete silence – even when it is carried out by a president that many in corporate media appear desperate to attack at any opportunity.

What the recent attack on the cancer center in Yemen underlines is that it is dangerous to be a healthcare worker. The United States has a longstanding history of targeting hospitals in nations it selects for regime change. This is true of both Democratic and Republican administrations.

Therefore, the sad truth is that if you are in a country targeted by the United States, you are often safer away from a hospital than inside one.

April 17, 2025 Posted by | War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

Full speed ahead for war preparations in Europe: What are French military cartographers doing in Romania?

By Erkin Oncan | Strategic Culture Foundation | April 17, 2025

In the French newspaper Le Figaro, a striking report was published regarding the presence of French Army cartographers in Romania in preparation for a possible “conflict with Russia.” The article, titled “French Army Cartographers Deployed on NATO’s Eastern Flank Amid Rising Tensions with Russia” and penned by Nicolas Barotte, details new military preparations being undertaken with the anticipation of a Russian attack.

According to the report, French Army cartographers are mapping regions along Romania’s borders with Moldova and Ukraine.

It is noted that soldiers are identifying elevated locations such as water towers or bell towers every five kilometers.

According to the French soldiers, these structures will be used as reference points for artillery targeting if necessary.

The French troops have also prepared an extremely detailed map that includes movement routes for military units and the axes along which the army can advance. The main purpose of the mapping effort is to facilitate orientation on the ground even if satellite signals are disrupted.

Who conducted the mapping?

The mapping operation was carried out by the 28th Geographic Group (28e Groupe Géographique).

Known by the abbreviation “28e GG,” this unit is stationed in the town of Haguenau near Strasbourg and is one of the smallest yet most strategic units of the French Army. The 28e GG provides geographical information, map production, and topographic analysis support to land forces. It was under the Intelligence Command for many years, but in the fall of 2023, it was reassigned to the Engineering Brigade (brigade du génie).

This unit, which plays a critical role in military operations, is responsible for map production in operational areas, 3D terrain mapping using methods such as LIDAR (a laser-based positioning method), drones, and mobile data collection tools. It also identifies passage routes for military targets and infrastructure, determines reference points for use in case satellite signals are cut off, and supports artillery with target identification and fire support planning. Comprising 350 soldiers, this unit actively participates not only in operations but also in planning processes.

French military presence in Romania

Meanwhile, the French Army’s presence in Romania is not new. When the Russia–Ukraine war began, France deployed a thousand troops to Cincu, located in the Transylvania region of central Romania, as part of NATO’s efforts to reinforce its eastern flank.

French soldiers also lead the NATO-established Multinational Battlegroup – Romania stationed there.

Why Romania?

According to Le Figaro, the unit has already hung the map it prepared in Romania on the wall of its headquarters in Haguenau.

On the map of Romania, the country’s topography is displayed in three dimensions. The 28e GG identified reference points every five kilometers and created a map of military mobility routes.

The map was created using a technology similar to Google’s Street View. A vehicle equipped with high-resolution cameras and laser sensors, used by the 28e GG, scanned the region in 3D.

The most critical aspect of this military preparation is the Focșani Gate.

The Focșani Gate

The Focșani Gate (or Focșani Pass) is located in eastern Romania and has historically been a region of great military strategic importance.

It is a narrow and flat passage between the Eastern Carpathians and the Danube Plain, serving as a corridor between Moldova, Transylvania, and the Danube region.

Unlike the mountainous terrain surrounding it, this flat region is difficult to defend and easy to attack.

Given NATO’s assumption that Russia may launch an attack through this route, it is predicted that a successful Russian invasion through Focșani could spread to the heart of Romania and even reach the Black Sea via Constanța.

Moreover, the historical use of Focșani for military purposes by the Ottomans, Russia, Germany, and the Soviets contributes to the strategic interest in the area.

What happens if Russia attacks through Focșani?

The emphasis on Focșani is undoubtedly part of the broader effort to militarize Europe under the narrative of a “Russian invasion.” But what if NATO’s assumptions prove true?

If Russia attacks through Focșani as expected, the first military forces it would encounter would be Romania’s 8th Division and the 2nd Infantry Division. The initial air response would come from Romanian aircraft based at the Fetești and Borcea air bases.

If NATO activates Article 5 and decides to fully confront Russia, the U.S. air base at Mihail Kogălniceanu on Romania’s Black Sea coast would also come into play.

If Russia were to attack through Focșani, the heavy NATO presence in the Baltic region would not have a primary impact. For example, due to the Carpathian Mountains, direct intervention in the Moldova–Romania axis by Poland and other Baltic countries would be logistically difficult. At most, these countries could apply a distraction strategy by opening a new front in the north against Russia.

In such a scenario, another key NATO force that comes to mind is the NATO Rapid Deployable Corps – Italy, established in 2001 as NATO’s Immediate Response Force.

Turkey’s position

Assuming Turkey sets aside its balancing diplomacy and fulfills its alliance obligations as the country with NATO’s second-largest land army, Turkey’s potential actions would include deploying its units to Romania within 72 hours.

As of 2023, Turkey is part of the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) with high-readiness units such as the 66th Mechanized Infantry Brigade (Istanbul) or Commando Brigades.

In this context, the 66th Mechanized Brigade in Istanbul and experienced commando brigades from Syria operations appear to be the fastest units that could provide ground support to Romania.

The Turkish Navy, also the largest NATO naval force in the Black Sea, contributes on a rotational basis to NATO’s Standing NATO Maritime Group-2 (SNMG2) and Standing NATO Mine Countermeasures Group-2 (SNMCMG2) with frigates, fast attack boats, and minehunters.

Likewise, Turkey’s air power can provide reinforcements of combat troops and ammunition to NATO bases in Romania by air; with UAVs and maritime patrol aircraft, it can carry out reconnaissance and deterrence missions. Amphibious units with landing capabilities and SAT/SAS commandos could also be deployed to Romanian territory under NATO’s operational plans.

Of course, direct military involvement by Turkey in such a scenario is seen as a possibility that falls outside the scope of Turkey’s traditionally balance-oriented foreign policy.

While the likelihood of such a simulation materializing under the current political circumstances is clearly remote, it would require Russia to first capture Odessa and reach the Moldovan border, then attempt to invade Romania via Moldova (Transnistria).

However, even though direct Turkish involvement in a war remains unlikely for now, the possibility of Turkey taking on new responsibilities within the current “deterrence” concept is increasingly being discussed out loud.

Especially in a political climate where U.S. President Donald Trump is perceived to have “abandoned” Europe, and eyes are turning to Turkey, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s recent statement at the Antalya Diplomacy Forum—“Turkey is ready to take responsibility for Europe’s security”—is the clearest indication yet that Turkey will play a more active role in the European security architecture in the near future.

Although there is much talk lately about Turkish troops going to Ukraine, it would not be surprising to see Turkish units in Romania, a key focus area for NATO.

Conclusion

Alongside Eastern Europe, NATO also considers Southeastern Europe as a potential attack route for Russia and is tailoring its war preparations accordingly. While U.S.-Europe relations remain volatile during the Trump era, the ongoing preparations suggest that neither side truly believes the U.S. will withdraw troops from Europe in the short term. Indeed, NATO and U.S. officials have already started attempts to “reassure” on this matter.

On the other hand, while NATO considers Romania a strategic route in the event of a Russian attack and views the region as militarily critical, it is also evident that any anti-NATO or anti-EU shift in a country like Romania would cause severe damage to current strategies. This fact is already apparent from the first round of Romania’s presidential elections.

Although Romania currently plays a key role in NATO’s southeastern flank, signs of a potential shift in political preferences are beginning to emerge. In the first round of Romania’s 2024 presidential elections, pro-Western and pro-European Union parties lost significant ground, while nationalist and EU-skeptical tendencies gained momentum. This shift could pose serious challenges to NATO’s future plans in the region if it continues.

As NATO strengthens its eastern and southeastern flanks in anticipation of a long-term confrontation with Russia, it must also closely monitor the political transformations in its member states. Public discontent, nationalist rhetoric, and the rise of far-right political movements may undermine the alliance’s cohesion and operational capacity.

Moreover, it is becoming clear that the current U.S.-European alliance is not solely built on military arrangements. The sustainability of this alliance also depends on internal political stability and public support within member countries. In this context, the role that Turkey will play is of particular significance, both as a NATO member and as a regional power capable of influencing developments in Southeastern Europe and the Black Sea basin.

While the French military’s cartographic activities in Romania may seem like a routine technical operation, they are, in fact, part of a much broader preparation for war. The choice of mapping locations, the level of detail, and the focus on vulnerable corridors such as the Focșani Gate all point to a well-thought-out military contingency plan.

In summary, Europe is once again preparing for war—this time not against a distant enemy, but against a powerful and nuclear-armed neighbor. And countries like Romania, which sit at the intersection of these fault lines, are being rapidly militarized. Whether this is genuine preparation or a calculated form of deterrence, one thing is certain: the cartographers of war are already on the move.

April 17, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

European and British leaders are using the Sumy airstrike to push for the war in Ukraine to continue

By Ian Proud | Strategic Culture Foundation | April 16, 2025

The Sumy airstrike provides a reminder that civilians and children have been killed indiscriminately since the Ukraine crisis started in 2014. Rather than calling on Russia to accept a ceasefire on Ukraine’s terms and encouraging Zelensky to avoid dialogue, European and British leaders need to get behind real negotiations.

On 13 April, a Russian airstrike in the centre of Sumy in Ukraine lead to the deaths of 34 people and injury to 117 others, including children. The strike targeted a planned medal award ceremony organised by the Ukraine Armed Forces’ 117th Territorial Defence Brigade, although the vast majority of the casualties were civilians.

The decision to plan a military event in a built-up city centre has prompted internal concern within Ukraine that this invited a Russian attack. A Mayor of one town in Sumy called on the Governor and the regional head of Ukrainian Military intelligence to resign, for organising a military event in a civilian area.

Russian military bloggers have admitted that the second of two ballistic missiles used did not hit the intended target, causing widespread casualties.

But there was also a depressing sense of déjà vu in this latest tragedy. In an Amnesty International report of 4 August 2022, six months after the war started, the Secretary General, Agnès Callamard, remarked ‘we have documented a pattern of Ukrainian forces putting civilians at risk and violating the laws of war when they operate in populated areas.’

The strike in Sumy offers a timely reminder that civilians have regularly been caught in the cross-fire of a conflict in Ukraine that has been burning since 2014. Over 15,000 civilians have been killed during that eleven-year period, 3000 of those in the years of 2014 and 2015, as part of Ukraine’s so-called Anti-Terror Operation against the separatists in Donetsk and Lugansk.

The first official record of civilian deaths in the Ukraine conflict was in a report by the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission on 5 July, which said, ‘the military campaign of the Ukrainian army in the east of the country continued.. The UN stated that there were numerous reports of death of people due to the intensified security operations in Donetsk and Luhansk, including a killing of a five-year-old girl.’

A 2016 report by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, spoke about ‘rampant impunity’ within the Ukrainian anti-terror offensive across the period from 2014-2015, with ‘90 per cent of the conflict related civilian deaths.. caused by the indiscriminate shelling of residential areas.’ The remaining deaths were mostly caused by summary executions by groups on both sides of the conflict.

15,000 civilian deaths across eleven years is an appalling number. But that number pales against the more than one million total deaths and injuries to military personnel on both sides during the war, each one the child of someone.

Everyone should be striving with every sinew to end this needless bloodshed and finally bring peace. But they are not.

Performative accusations against Russia by the western media and politicians create an epic distraction from the real issue; that this would not be happening if there was peace between Russia and Ukraine.

A new propaganda narrative has formed that in this war, Russia is the aggressor and Ukraine is the victim. This is both a gross over-simplification and wilfully ignores Ukraine’s role as the other party to the war. It also infantilises casual western consumers of the mainstream news who, stripped of real information and analysis of the history of the conflict, are invited to accept the premise that Ukrainians are the good guys, and the Russians are the bad guys. That this is a fight between the righteous and the wicked. Between David and Goliath.

Antony Blinken, the grossly complicit former US Secretary of State, recently repeated this good versus evil line in an interview. But, when you look at it from the other perspective, you might realise that Russia considers NATO Goliath, and itself David.

Ursula von der Leyen, took to X after the attack in Sumy to amplify this attack line. ‘Russia was and remains the aggressor.’ She goes on to assert that, ‘Europe will continue to.. maintain strong pressure on Russia until the bloodshed ends and a just and lasting peace is achieved, on Ukraine’s terms and conditions.’ Prime Minister Keir Starmer posted on X that ‘Putin must now agree to a fully and immediate ceasefire without conditions.’

But this is deluded. Russia is slowly winning on the battlefield and has been for at least a year and a half. There is no rational world in which Russia will be pressured to accept a ceasefire on Ukraine’s terms. And Russia has conditions, the biggest one that Ukraine repudiate its claim to NATO membership. This has been the case, not since 2022, not since 2014, but since 2008.

A ceasefire will only happen when Ukraine engages in direct talks with Russia, something that President Zelensky steadfastly refuses to do. Calling for more pressure on Russia, and discouraging Zelensky from dialogue, is just delaying an end to hostilities and consigning more innocent people to die.

The EU and Britain, which have both avoided at all costs sending troops to fight, can’t produce enough weapons and are fast running out of money to support Ukraine’s failing state, are encouraging Zelensky to press for something that President Putin will never accept.

President Trump – with whom I disagree deeply on Middle East policy and on tariffs – has been measured in his response, referring to the Russian airstrike in Sumy as a mistake. Secretary of State Marco Rubio was also balanced in his statement, pointing out that, ‘this is a tragic reminder of why President Trump and his Administration are putting so much time and effort into trying to end this war and achieve a just and durable peace.’

Rather than falling back on the same old performative tropes and failed prescriptions, European and British leaders finally need to get behind ending the bloodshed. They must encourage Zelensky to negotiate, rather than humouring him with assurances that won’t reassure, and with promises we’ll never keep.

April 17, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Belgium eyes welfare cuts to meet NATO target – minister

RT | April 16, 2025

Belgium is preparing to raise debt and cut welfare to meet NATO’s minimum military spending target, the EU country’s budget minister has said.

Vincent Van Peteghem told the Financial Times on Wednesday that Brussels recently agreed to lift its 2025 military budget to 2% of GDP through a mix of temporary cash injections, creative accounting, and structural reforms.

The planned hike in military spending could exacerbate the budget crisis as debt mounts. Recent government plans to cut social services have sparked protests, with over 100,000 people rallying in Brussels in February.

Belgium had previously planned to meet the 2% target only by 2029. Military spending currently stands at around 1.31% of GDP, or roughly €8 billion ($8.5 billion), according to Defense Minister Theo Francken.

The shift comes amid pressure from Washington and ahead of a NATO summit in June, where members are expected to consider raising the spending target to above 3% of GDP. US President Donald Trump has urged the bloc members to increase military spending to 5%, warning that countries that fail to do so may no longer be guaranteed American protection.

Higher spending on military budgets would take a toll on the EU’s welfare programs, Van Peteghem warned.

Last month, the European Commission proposed exempting military budgets from fiscal rules and offering €150 billion in loans as part of its ‘ReArm Europe’ plan, which aims to mobilize up to €800 billion through debt and tax incentives for the bloc’s military-industrial complex.

Van Peteghem said Belgium would tap both options to fund additional military spending this year.

To maintain the 2% level, the government plans to raise more debt and may privatize state-owned assets, the minister said. The remaining gap would be filled through spending cuts, including curbs on unemployment benefits, pension reforms, and tax changes.

“But of course, we will need to do more,” Van Peteghem, who also serves as deputy prime minister, said.

France has also announced plans to cut €5 billion from its budget, with some of the savings potentially redirected to military spending.

Moscow has condemned the EU’s military buildup. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called it “a matter of deep concern,” noting that it was aimed at Russia.

April 16, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Are Chinese Soldiers Fighting in Ukraine?

By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | April 14, 2025

If Chinese soldiers are fighting in the Russian armed forces in Ukraine, that is not the big story. The big story is the effect the claim could have on the possibility of peace.

Ukraine has not yet even proven the months old claim of the presence of North Korean soldiers fighting for Russia on Russian soil. Now they are making the much more provocative claim that Chinese soldiers are fighting for Russia on Ukrainian soil.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced on April 9 that the Ukrainian armed forces had captured two Chinese soldiers fighting in the Donetsk region of Ukraine. He then said that Ukrainian intelligence has uncovered 155 Chinese citizens who are “fighting against Ukrainians on the territory of Ukraine” and that they “believe that there are many more of them.”

Independent journalists and organizations have not had access to the two prisoners in order to verify the truth of the claim. Ukraine has provided a video and documents listing names and passport documents. Media outlets have seen them, but CNN and The Independent both say that they have not been independently verified.

There are tens and perhaps even hundreds of thousands of ethnic Chinese living in Russia. And even if the captured soldiers are from China, that does not mean they were sent by China. They could have enlisted on their own as mercenaries, a possibility that two former U.S. intelligence officers “with knowledge of the issue” now say U.S. intelligence believes to be the case. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs has called the claim that many Chinese citizens are fighting in the Russian army “totally unfounded,” and said that “the Chinese government always asks Chinese citizens to stay away from conflict zones, avoid getting involved in any form of armed conflict, and especially refrain from participating in any party’s military operations.”

Zelensky, though, has made the provocative claim that the Chinese government is allowing its citizens to fight in Ukraine. Asked whether China had a policy of sending soldiers to Ukraine, Zelensky answered, “I don’t have an answer to this question yet. The Security Service of Ukraine will work on it…We are not saying that someone gave any command, we do not have such information.” However, he added that “[o]fficial Beijing knows about this” and did not prevent it.

Zelensky then escalated the claim, saying, “The Chinese issue is serious” and calling on “the U.S. and the rest of the world for a response.”

It is that threat to the peace process and not the possible presence of Chinese soldiers that is serious and significant. Mercenaries from many countries have been welcomed by both Ukraine and Russia since the beginning of the war. Al Jazeera reports that, not only Chinese, but Nepalese and Indians have fought for Russia. They also report that Colombians, Sri Lankans, Indians and Americans have fought for Ukraine. At least nine Canadians have been killed in Ukraine, and more are known to have fought there. The Russian Defense Ministry claimed in March 2024 that 1,005 Canadian mercenaries have fought in Ukraine. They also claim that 2,960 have come from Poland, 1,113 from the United States, 356 from France and others from the United Kingdom and Romania. Ukraine says their international legion comprises around 20,000 fighters from fifty countries.

More seriously, it is not just mercenaries who have arrived in Ukraine. A leaked March 2023 Defense Department document reveals the presence of 97 NATO special forces in Ukraine. A recent New York Times article reports that more than three dozen military advisers were sent to Kiev and that CIA officers were in Kharkiv and “command posts closer to the fighting.” The British prime minister’s office has confirmed that the United Kingdom has boots on the ground in Ukraine. The presence of French forces has also been revealed, and Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski confirmed that “NATO soldiers are already present in Ukraine.”

Unless the Chinese government has a policy of sending troops to fight alongside Russia in Ukraine, which would be serious, since it could draw China into the war, it is not the alleged presence of Chinese soldiers that is dangerous. At a time when peace talks are at a fragile beginning, and U.S. President Donald Trump is insisting on both sides showing they are serious about peace, it is the provocative statements coming out of Kiev that are potentially serious.

“Russia’s involvement of China, along with other countries, whether directly or indirectly, in this war in Europe is a clear signal that Putin intends to do anything but end the war,” Zelensky said. “This definitely requires a response. A response from the United States, Europe, and all those around the world who want peace.” The suggestion that Putin is not serious about negotiating undermines U.S. led negotiations.

The statements are also ill timed and hazardous. The United States and China are engaged in a trade war. It is a volatile time to provide Washington with a cause for turning up its anger against China. Zelensky intends the presence of Chinese soldiers to evoke an American response. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said the U.S. is “aware of those reports” and that “It’s disturbing with the Chinese soldiers having been captured,” though the White House has not confirmed the claim. National Security Spokesman Brian Hughes said that “if the Chinese government is allowing their citizens to fight on behalf of the Russia government, this would be a concerning escalation and the U.S. will consider options moving forward.”

Beyond challenging the peace process, the comments coming out of Kiev are provocative to China, questioning its credibility and its lack of involvement in the war. Equally importantly, it challenges any potential role of China both in the negotiations before the end of the war and in security arrangements after the end of the war: both potentially important roles for China.

Ukraine’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Andrii Sybiha, said that “Chinese citizens fighting as part of Russia’s invasion army in Ukraine puts into question” not only “China’s declared stance for peace” but even that it “undermines Beijing’s credibility as a responsible permanent member of the UN Security Council.”

If the two captured soldiers turn out to be from China, and if they turn out to be mercenaries fighting without the approval of China, then their presence in Ukraine is not the big story. If the claims being made about them and about China resonate in the White House, then the effect of the claims could make difficult peace talks even more difficult. And that is what the potential big story would turn out to be.

April 14, 2025 Posted by | Sinophobia | , , | Leave a comment

Disaster in the Making: Secretary of State Rubio Proclaims the US Should Spend Five Percent of GDP on ‘Defense’

By Adam Dick | Peace and Prosperity Blog | April 12, 2025

Since his first term, we have grown used to President Donald Trump badgering governments of fellow NATO countries to increase their “defense” spending to five percent of their respective GDPs. Quote marks are used in the preceding sentence because such spending by these governments, or the US, will largely be used for offense, feeding the military-industrial complex, and other purposes far removed from defense.

So far, fellow NATO members have steered clear of achieving this spending goal. Their residents should be happy that is the case as the money can instead be left in their pockets or at least be hoped to be spent by government on something that may provide them with some benefit instead of furthering death and destruction — butter, not guns.

Interestingly, the US government, despite all its hectoring, has also refrained from reaching that five percent of GDP figure for its spending on the Department of Defense. The targeted spending level would come in at nearly double current spending on what is already a top area of government spending. That increase would drop down some if various spending beyond the Defense Department spending is included as “defense” spending.

Comments made last week by US Secretary of Defense Marco Rubio indicated the goal is for the US to also reach this spending level. Rubio declared ahead of a NATO meeting that “we do want to leave here with an understanding that we are on a pathway, a realistic pathway, to every single one of the [NATO] members committing and fulfilling a promise to reach up to five percent of spending; that includes the United States will have to increase its percentage.”

Hopefully, this is just talk. To follow through on this course would be to invite disaster.

With a huge and growing debt, the US cannot afford the increase. Such an increase will help bring the nation more quickly toward financial disaster. It will likely even help ensure increased spending in other areas as was experienced during the Ronald Reagan administration when the executive branch bargained with legislators for more military spending by agreeing to increased spending in other areas too.

More war can be expected as a result as well. The temptation for politicians to use a “new and improved” military brought into being by the increased spending would be immense.

More debt and more war is a literally killer combination for America.

April 12, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

NATO needs Romania to launch WWIII – Georgescu

RT | April 11, 2025

Calin Georgescu, a former Romanian presidential candidate whose bid was controversially invalidated earlier this year, has claimed that NATO wants to “launch World War III from Romania.” In an interview with US journalist Tucker Carlson, he said his staunch pro-peace stance was among the main reasons why he was barred from running for president.

The right-wing politician, known as an outspoken critic of NATO, the EU, and Western support for Ukraine, scored a surprise win in the first round of November’s presidential election, receiving 23% of the vote. However, the country’s Constitutional Court swiftly moved in to annul the result over alleged “irregularities” in his campaign. Later, Georgescu was stripped of his right to run for office.

Appearing on Carlson’s podcast on Thursday, the former Romanian presidential candidate alleged that NATO wants to “launch… World War III from Romania.” The politician cited the fact that the “largest military base of NATO is in Romania,” coupled with the 380-mile (612 km) long border that his country shares with Ukraine.

“In this situation of course Romania is the asset for [the] European Union, for [French President Emmanuel] Macron in order to launch the war,” Georgescu insisted.

“They want to turn NATO [into] an offensive force” and are “pushing for war,” he alleged, adding that “my position was exactly against them.”

According to Georgescu, “all my campaign was just concentrate[d] on peace[.] When I said… the word ‘peace’, they immediately alerted… because they need war.”

The right-wing politician went on to say that the “majority of Romanian people… have this position against any intervention and any participation [in] war.”

“I was denied [the right to run for president] by the globalist mafia,” the former candidate alleged, further claiming that the people behind the invalidation of his candidacy were the same people who attempted to derail Donald Trump’s presidential campaign in the US, using similar smear tactics.

Appearing on ‘The Shawn Ryan Show’ in January, Georgescu similarly suggested that NATO military infrastructure in Romania could be used to launch a major offensive against Russia.

Bucharest, a NATO member since 2004, has been expanding the MK Air Base to make it the largest NATO installation in Europe.

Moscow has described the base as “anti-Russian” and warned that it would be among the first targets for retaliatory strikes in a military conflict.

April 11, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine risks losing Odessa if ideas of European troop deployment entertained

By Ahmed Adel | April 9, 2025

Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova stated that Europe has its eye on Odessa and Lvov and is making plans for military intervention that are “reminiscent of the military intervention by the Entente” during the 1917-1922 Russian Civil War. Despite Western plans, Russia will not allow the presence of NATO forces on Ukraine’s territory, as this would pose a direct threat to national security.

Given the strategic importance of Odessa and Lvov, the West did not accidentally target these cities. Odessa is a port that leads to the Danube, and whoever controls the historically Russian city greatly influences the Black Sea. Meanwhile, Lvov is Ukraine’s gateway to the European Union.

Although Kiev, Kharkov, and Dnipropetrovsk are also large Ukrainian cities, the West will not risk its troops there, especially in the latter two, because they are too close to the front line. This is the same issue as Odessa, which is not far from the Dnieper and Kherson, but the city has too much strategic value to surrender.

Odessa, founded in 1794 by the Russian Empress Catherine the Great as a military and trading port on the Black Sea, has always been considered a Russian city. During the Russian Empire, it was part of Novorossiya, but during the creation of the Soviet Union, Vladimir Lenin effectively gave it to Ukraine.

Odessa, a city that was occupied for more than 900 days during World War II, was liberated from German Nazi forces by Red Army soldiers. For Russians, Odessa is a hero city, but even more than that, because it was one of the first cities where the Russian Spring began, a mass action that was a response to the coup d’état in Kiev in 2014, when pro-Western and neo-Nazi currents took power.

Mass pro-Russian protests were held in many cities in southeastern Ukraine, and the discontented people, who were facing repression from the new Kiev regime, rose up to defend the Russian language and their rights. It all culminated in early May 2014 in Odessa, where supporters of the “Anti-Maidan,” opponents of the Ukrainian putschists, were burned alive in the Odessa House of Trade Unions. Ukrainian neo-Nazis shot those who tried to escape by jumping out of the building. Almost 50 people were killed and more than 250 were injured. The Ukrainian authorities have obstructed the investigation into this crime for years, and a decade later, this crime remains unpunished.

Despite all the tribulations and trials, Odessa has remained a Russian city historically, culturally, and in its mentality and spirit.

A “Coalition of the Willing” summit was held in Paris towards the end of March and representatives of about 30 countries, without the United States’ participation, discussed possible security guarantees for Kiev after the end of the Ukrainian conflict and the potential deployment of a military contingent on Ukraine’s territory.

Zakharova specified that the summit in Paris discussed the Franco-British initiative to deploy some “reassurance forces” in Ukraine after the conclusion of a peace agreement, rather than a peacekeeping contingent. According to her, this is reminiscent of the military intervention of the Entente forces during the Russian Civil War.

The parallels between that historical event and what is happening today are quite obvious.

European countries, the US, and Japan intervened in the Russian Civil War, hoping to grab their share of the crumbling Russian Empire. They thought that while fighting was waging on the front, they could grab Russia, including Ukraine, which was then in the process of being created. Ultimately, when they realized they were losing, they fled.

In essence, this is how they plan to introduce these contingents—it is unclear what kind—into Ukraine today.

The Kremlin has repeatedly said that it will not allow the deployment of NATO forces in Ukraine, while emphasizing that it was precisely the Atlantic Alliance’s expansion to the East that was the reason for the start of the Russian special military operation in February 2022.

NATO’s entry into any city, whether Lvov, Odessa, Kiev, or Kharkov, is unacceptable for Moscow, and it is clear that they will perceive this as NATO’s conquest of Ukrainian territory. Ukraine is the “soft tissue at the bottom of Russia’s belly,” and the entry of NATO forces would be an increased threat to Russian national security.

The loss of Odessa would be fatal for the Ukrainian economy and military, as Ukraine would lose its last major port on the Black Sea through which Western arms shipments now flow and where Ukraine can export to the world, particularly metals and wheat. Odessa has been mostly spared from the current war, with Russia not having yet attempted to liberate the city, but if discussions in the West to deploy troops continue and Kiev entertains it, it could instigate a Russian action to take the city. That would deal another major blow to Ukraine’s ailing economy and post-war recovery.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

April 9, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Republican Voters on Ukraine Aid: Time to Turn Off the Cash Spigot – Poll

Sputnik – 07.04.2025

Unlike 83% of Democrats who continue to support pumping US financial aid to Ukraine, 79% of Republicans oppose such spending, a Wall Street Journal survey revealed.

The survey, carried out among 1,500 registered voters from March 27 to April 1, laid bare growing divisions between the two political parties over American foreign policy.

Only 31% of Trump’s GOP base view NATO favorably, compared to 81% of Democrats.

At least 62% of American voters believe that expanding US territory by including Greenland and Canada is a bad idea, according to the survey.

Only 25% of the respondents support this idea, while the remaining 13% said they did not know the answer to this question or refused to answer it at all. That said, more than half of Republicans (51%) support US President Donald Trump’s statements about territorial expansion.

April 7, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

Germany Will Hold 800K Troop Drills to ‘Prepare for Russian Attack’

Sputnik – 05.04.2025

NATO troops will gather in Hamburg in September to practice troop deployments to the Baltic states and Poland, local media reports.

Germany’s army, the Bundeswehr, will hold massive military exercises in September involving NATO soldiers to practice a scenario of an allegedly possible “Russian attack,” with up to 800,000 servicemen to take part in them, the Bild newspaper reported.

The drills will be held in Hamburg for three days and will be dubbed Red Storm Bravo, the scenario is a Russian attack on the West, the publication says.

According to the publication, the exercises will be aimed at practicing the operational transfer of NATO troops to the Baltic countries and Poland, in which Hamburg, which has a “strategically important port,” will play a key role.

German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius previously stated that Germany should prepare for a possible war with Russia by 2029.

Russian President Vladimir Putin previously explained in detail in an interview with US journalist Tucker Carlson that Moscow was not going to attack NATO countries, there is no point in this. The Russian leader noted that Western politicians regularly intimidated their people with an imaginary Russian threat in order to distract attention from domestic problems, but “smart people understand perfectly well that this is a fake.”

Recently, the West has increasingly voiced ideas about a direct armed conflict between the alliance and Russia. The Kremlin, however, noted that Russia did not pose a threat, did not threaten anyone, but would not ignore actions that are potentially dangerous to its interests. In addition, in recent years, Russia has noted NATO’s unprecedented activity near its western borders. The alliance is expanding its initiatives and calls this “containment of Russian aggression.” Moscow has repeatedly expressed concern about the buildup of the Alliance’s forces in Europe. The Russian Foreign Ministry stated that Moscow remained open to dialogue with NATO, but on an equal basis, while the West must abandon its course toward militarizing the continent.

April 6, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »