Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Finland’s Military Spending Soars to Cold War Levels as It Joins NATO

By Igor Kuznetsov – Sputnik – 25.04.2023

Having formally joined NATO earlier this month, Finland has recorded its highest year-on-year spike in defense spending since 1962, the height of the Cold War.

Finland, which shares the longest border with Russia in Europe at 1,300 kilometers, recorded the most drastic spending boost in the EU (36 percent), underpinned by a number of costly purchases, such as a new fleet of 64 F-35 fighter jets from US weapons company Lockheed Martin. The 10-billion-euro procurement was billed as the single largest splurge in the Nordic country’s history.

During the late Cold War-era, Finland spent approximately 1.9 percent of its GDP on defense, yet saw its spending plummet in the subsequent years and reach its lowest in 2001 at 1.1 percent of GDP. Barely two years earlier, the defense expenditure still stood at a meager 1.3 percent of GDP. However, last year alone, Finland’s outgoing five-party government led by the Social Democrats agreed to add more than 2 billion euros ($2.2 billion) in defense spending, citing hostilities in Ukraine as a pretext.

In doing so, Finland notably eclipsed its fellow European nations, such as Lithuania, Sweden and Poland, which saw the next biggest spikes in their defense budgets at 27 percent, 12 percent and 11 percent, respectively.

As a new-fledged NATO member, Finland has emerged as one of the top military spenders in the alliance, spending about 2 percent of GDP. In 2022, only the US (3.5 percent of GDP), Poland (2.4 percent), Estonia (2.3 percent) and the UK (2.1 percent) spent more on defense per capita than Finland. Despite NATO’s spending goal of 2 percent, many nations fall well below this target. For instance, Finland’s neighbor Norway had a spending level of just 1.55 percent. Its neighbor Sweden, with which it filed a joint NATO bid only to part ways later on, has pledged to reach the bloc’s target of military spending “as soon as possible,” whereas Denmark seeks to reach NATO’s target within a decade, by 2033.

Meanwhile, global military expenditure rose to a record high last year amid the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, which spurred European nations and, broadly, the West, into reaching spending levels unseen since the Cold War. European military spending alone shot up 13 percent last year.

According to an estimate by researchers from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), last year’s total global military spending rose by 3.7 percent in real terms to $2.24 trillion. SIPRI stressed that the hike rests on multi-year plans to boost spending from several governments, which is why it is reasonable to expect military expenditure in Central and Western Europe to keep rising in the years to come.

April 25, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Bulgarians hit streets against US-led NATO, urge Sofia’s neutrality in Ukraine war

Press TV – April 24, 2023

Thousands of Bulgarians have poured into the streets against the US-led NATO military alliance in the capital Sofia, calling on their government to adopt a neutral position on Russia’s military operation in Ukraine.

The angry demonstrators hit the streets on Sunday carrying national flags and signs that read, “Bulgaria is not NATO, NATO is not Bulgaria” and “I want peace”.

Anti-war activists in the Balkan nation also collected signatures for a referendum called ‘Bulgaria for Peace and Sovereignty’ in a bid to prevent Sofia’s potential involvement in the Ukraine war that completed a year recently.

“If Bulgaria enters as a party to this conflict, some of those killed will be Bulgarians. This is something we do not want, something we will not allow,” activist Grigor Saryiski was quoted as saying.

Bulgaria is a member of the European Union and the US-led NATO military alliance, but it also has close historical and cultural ties with Russia.

Over the past two years, it has been ruled by technocratic caretaker governments, fueling political instability in the East European country.

Bulgaria has refused to toe the line of other NATO members in getting fully involved in the Ukraine war.

Under former Prime Minister Kiril Petkov’s government, however, a secret supply of Bulgarian-made ammunition made its way to Ukraine as early as April 2022, according to reports.

Snap parliamentary elections were held in Bulgaria earlier this month, with analysts predicting the results could influence Bulgaria’s position on the war.

The center-right bloc GERB-SDS, led by former Prime Minister Boyko Borisov, won the elections, with the centrist bloc comprising ‘We Continue the Change’ (PP) and Democratic Bulgaria (DB) taking the second place.

Both centrist bloc parties share pro-European, pro-NATO positions and strong support for Ukraine.

The far-right Revival party, which ended up in third place in the polls, is seen as sympathetic to Russia.

April 24, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

Beware Perfidious Albion as Britain Takes Lead Role in War Provocation

By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | April 23, 2023

The much-vaunted Anglo-American “special relationship” is gaining a new dubious meaning as Britain emerges as an adept agent provocateur for inciting a wider NATO war against Russia.

Warmongering British lawmakers are this week demanding a more robust NATO response over an alleged “act of war” by Russia involving a Royal Air Force spy plane and a Russian fighter jet.

Recent documents leaked from the Pentagon have indicated that a British recon plane was nearly shot down by a Su-27 over the Black Sea. Following the incident last September, the British Ministry of Defense played down the encounter as a “technical malfunction”.

It appears now, however, that the British RC-135 spy plane was fired on by the Russian jet, but that the missile missed. It may have been a deliberate warning shot as the British surveillance aircraft is understood to have been near the Russian territory of Crimea. The British and the Americans are supplying the Kiev regime forces with targeting information. So Russia is arguably entitled to take defensive measures against belligerents, as it did when an American MQ Reaper drone was intercepted last month over the Black Sea. The U.S. has reportedly restricted its surveillance flights in the area since that incident.

Now that it is being reported that a Russian missile was fired, some British politicians are demanding a response to “an act of war”.

This particular incident may well blow over. But it raises concern that British forces are playing an incendiary role in the NATO proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. With that country already pumped up with NATO weapons, and the Black Sea and Baltic region packed with NATO forces conducting massive war maneuvers over the next weeks and months, the danger is heightened for an accidental or even intended escalation. Given NATO’s common defense commitments, an incident involving one member of the military alliance would inevitably trigger the other 30 members into an all-out war-footing.

Britain’s treacherous role has recently taken on a routine, calculated character in Ukraine.

As NATO has stepped up arms supplies to Ukraine over the past year, it is London that seems to have upped the ante all the way. It was the British that broke the taboo over sending battlefield tanks when they announced earlier this year the supply of Challenger 2 tanks. That move then put the onus on Germany and the United States to accede to supplying the Leopard 2 and Abrams tanks.

The Brits then went a step further by announcing they would supply Ukrainian forces with depleted uranium artillery shells. Russia condemned that move for its known environmental contamination hazards as well as breaching the line for using radiological/nuclear weapons. Moscow and others contend that depleted uranium shells are a form of “dirty nuclear bomb”.

In any case, technical quibbling aside, the move to supply depleted uranium weapons by London is seen as a particularly gratuitous provocation toward Russia.

The recent Pentagon leaks, which appear to be authentic albeit distorted by U.S. media spin, also confirmed previous separate claims that NATO special forces are operating on the ground in Ukraine fighting against Russian military.

Significantly, it is the British who have deployed the biggest number of special forces compared with other NATO members. What these commandoes are doing in Ukraine is not clear. As the BBC reported:

“According to the document, dated 23 March, the UK has the largest contingent of special forces in Ukraine (50), followed by fellow Nato states Latvia (17), France (15), the U.S. (14) and the Netherlands (1). The document does not say where the forces are located or what they are doing.”

Without a hint of irony, the BBC added: “UK special forces are made up of several elite military units with distinct areas of expertise, and are regarded to be among the most capable in the world.”

Distinct areas of expertise, most capable, indeed! That’s classic British euphemism for you.

It is alleged that British operatives have been helping Ukrainian artillery hit the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant – Europe’s largest civilian nuclear power plant – as a way to escalate the war.

It is also alleged by Moscow that it was members of the British Special Boat Service (SBS) that orchestrated the mass drone attack on Russian bases in Crimea last November. The air raid was thwarted by Russian defenses, but if it had succeeded the response from Russia would have been geopolitically explosive.

It should also be recalled that even before Russia launched its military intervention in Ukraine on February 24, 2022, there was a serious provocation involving a British warship in the Black Sea.

HMS Defender infringed on Russian territorial waters south of Crimea on June 23, 2021. After ignoring Russian verbal warnings, the British destroyer was fired on. A Russian Su-24 fighter jet dropped bombs in the ship’s path.

Similar to the more recent incident involving the Royal Air Force RC-135 spy plane, the British Ministry of Defense tried to play down the naval incident. But it later transpired from secret documents that London sought to deliberately provoke Russia in a show of support for Ukraine.

For the most part of the past century, the failed British empire was assigned the junior role as the butler to service the needs of the American empire. This special relationship involved London giving political and diplomatic cover for its American boss, as well as military services when required for one dirty war or another.

It is axiomatic that a dying empire is a dangerous beast, liable to lash out to salvage its waning power. The American empire has reached its death throes moment. But perhaps more dangerous than a dying imperial power is a dying imperial side-kick flunky.

Today, Britain is a broken-down impoverished de-industrialized wasteland whose shocking numbers of poor are like an army of living dead. It has long ago lost former colonies to parasite off. But there is one former colony – the United States – that might just be stupid enough to allow Perfidious Albion to manipulate a catastrophic war.

The tensions over the NATO proxy war in Ukraine with Russia are a powder-keg situation. And the British dirty-tricks brigade are the past masters that merit being closely watched.

April 23, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

‘Sophisticated naval forces’ bombed Nord Stream – Danish navy veteran

RT | April 21, 2023

Whoever sabotaged the Nord Stream pipelines likely had access to fast-moving underwater drones, one of Denmark’s most “experienced navy divers” told Bloomberg on Thursday. NATO forces trained with these unmanned underwater vehicles near the blast site prior to the explosions.

The diver said that “finding the pipelines without precise coordinates or tracking technology, then transporting and placing the explosives, would’ve challenged diver-saboteurs,” in the newspaper’s words.

“The diver estimates the operation, including a safe ascent, would’ve taken an individual diver several hours. He surmises that whoever carried out the attack had access to a fast-moving autonomous submersible vehicle, like the ones employed by sophisticated naval forces,” the report continued, adding that “a surface vessel remaining relatively static for hours…would’ve attracted unwanted attention.”

The Danish navy described the diver’s hypothesis as sound, while the country’s intelligence agency, defense ministry, and foreign affairs ministry offered no comment.

The Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines –  which were built to deliver Russian natural gas directly to Germany – lost pressure abruptly on September 26, following a series of underwater explosions off the Danish island of Bornholm, within the economic zones of Denmark and Sweden. Denmark is one of five countries independently investigating the incidents but has not shared any conclusions.

The diver’s hypothesis seems to disprove the theory – promulgated by US and German spies in the New York Times and Washington Post – that a “pro-Ukrainian group” used a rented yacht to ferry explosives to the blast site. The intelligence officials quoted by both newspapers made no mention of the supposed group having at their disposal underwater drones.

NATO militaries do, however, have access to these unmanned subs. During last June’s BALTOPS exercises, the US navy’s Sixth Fleet trained with underwater “mine-hunting” drones for ten days off the coast of Bornholm, according to a NATO statement. The Ukrainian government has also received six of these drones from the UK, and although the Sixth Fleet trained Kiev’s forces in operating them, no evidence has emerged placing Ukrainian operators near Bornholm last summer.

According to a report by American journalist Seymour Hersh, US navy divers used the BALTOPS drills as cover to plant the explosives, aided by their Norwegian counterparts. Citing a source with “direct knowledge of the operational planning,” Hersh said that the sabotage mission was planned by the CIA under the direct orders of President Joe Biden.

Multiple US officials have denied Hersh’s version of events, and a former CIA operative told Bloomberg that, in his opinion, someone involved in the planning would have stepped in and said “this is the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.” However, Hersh wrote that this exact scenario happened – with State Department and CIA officials deeming the plan “stupid” – but the skeptics were overruled and the pipelines destroyed with explosives triggered remotely three months after they were planted.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said last month that he “fully agrees” with Hersh’s conclusions, blaming the sabotage on “US intelligence.” The Kremlin has dismissed the “pro-Ukrainian group” theory, calling it “a coordinated media hoax campaign.”

April 21, 2023 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism | | Leave a comment

Missile Buildup by US, Allies Aimed at Achieving Global Superiority Over Russia, China – Moscow

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 21.04.2023

Russia suspended its participation in the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty in late February in the wake of Ukrainian drone attacks on an airbase used by Russian strategic aviation. Before that, Washington unilaterally scrapped multiple agreements designed to ensure strategic stability, including the ABM and INF treaties.

The global arms race, including in the area of strategic missile weaponry, is spinning out of control, with the US and its allies seeking to achieve superiority over Russia and China, Russian Foreign Ministry Ambassador-at-Large Grigory Mashkov has said.

Mashkov, the former chairman of the Missile Technology Control Regime, a multilateral grouping of nations seeking to limit the proliferation of missiles and missile technology, warned in a Friday interview with Russian media that in today’s world, “in essence, we are witnessing a missile arms race with consequences that are very difficult to predict.”

“Tens of billions of dollars are being invested in improving missile technologies. This process is becoming uncontrollable,” the diplomat said.

At the same time, he noted, efforts are being made by some states to redistribute the strategic balance of power related to intercontinental ballistic missiles. “The buildup of weapons, primarily missiles, by the United States and its allies is aimed at achieving global superiority over potential rivals – China and Russia. Two vectors of a long-term military confrontation with a consolidated Western world have already clearly emerged – the European and the Asian,” Mashkov said.

“Strategic offensive weapons are being modernized at a rapid pace. The People’s Republic of China is actively building up its missile capabilities. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has recently broken into the club of ICBM powers. The ‘threshold’ countries – Israel, India, Pakistan – have not abandoned the idea of creating missiles with a range beyond 5,500 km,” Mashkov said.

According to the strategic weapons specialist, Moscow needs to be prepared for “any scenarios” after the expiration of the New START Treaty in 2026, including the possibility that a new agreement is not reached to replace it. “It cannot be ruled out that after the expiration of the New START Treaty in February 2026, a vacuum could form over the long term when it comes to international legal instruments designed to maintain stability.”

On top of that, Mashkov said, given the security challenges Russia is facing, Moscow has an obvious need to build up its missile potential, including tactical and intermediate-range weapons. The diplomat pointed out that in the wake of the US decision to rip up the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) in 2019, a logical question arose about “how far we have fallen behind other countries which possess this type of weapon over the 30 years of our participation in the treaty, and what needs to be done first and foremost to eliminate the imbalance that exists here.”

“There is an obvious need for Russia to build up its tactical missile potential and further increase the effectiveness of its use and stockpiling of missile weaponry in order to effectively respond to any challenges to national security, including in Kaliningrad, where NATO has set out to threaten Russian territory using American MLRS weapons,” Mashkov added.

The diplomat also warned that Moscow may have to rethink its voluntary commitment not to be the first to deploy medium and long-range missiles in western Russia, given the potential challenges to the country’s strategic security by the US and NATO. Russia, he noted, is also forced to “remain vigilant” on its eastern frontiers, given that it cannot be ruled out that the West will try to draw Russia into new conflicts against its will.

“Another area where questions arise relates to tactical missile systems, their preemptive and reactive potential for solving problems on the battlefield,” Mashkov said. “Therefore, it’s important to understand what kinds of threats are forming in this direction, how to counter them, as well as what we expect from our international partners in this regard, what kinds of compromises they may be prepared to make. It’s important to approach this not only from the perspective of resolving the current problems in Ukraine, but also ensuring long-term national security in the post-conflict period,” the diplomat said.

The past two decades have witnessed the dismantling of almost the entirety of the post-Cold War security architecture. In 2002, the Bush administration unilaterally scrapped the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty – a major weapons agreement restricting the number and types of anti-missile missile defenses the nuclear superpowers could develop. In 2019, the Trump administration pulled out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which prohibited the creation of ground-based nuclear-capable missile systems in the 500-5,500 km range. In 2020, the US pulled out of the Treaty on Open Skies – a major post-Cold War agreement with Russia and nearly three dozen other countries which provided for military aerial surveillance flights over treaty party nations, and designed to facilitate confidence in one another’s peaceful intentions. All of this proceeded as NATO engaged in an eastward expansion, swallowing up every former member of the former Warsaw Pact, plus over half a dozen members of the former Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, and setting its sights on expanding into Ukraine and Georgia, which Moscow warned constituted its “red lines.”

Earlier this year, Russia suspended its participation in the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (but committed to continue to abide by its limitations on missiles and nuclear weapons), citing Washington’s creation of new strategic weapons, as well as attacks by America’s client state – Kiev, on a base hosting elements of the aerial prong of Russia’s strategic nuclear deterrent. Biden Secretary of State Antony Blinken called Moscow’s decision “really unfortunate and very irresponsible.”

April 21, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

NATO Expansion versus OPEC+ Oil Shock

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – 19.04.2023

Finland’s inclusion in, and the consequent expansion of, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), has supposedly brought much joy to the Western world supposedly fighting Russia for the protection of democracy and human rights. The real purpose of this fight, as we already know, is to preserve the West – mainly, the US-led – dominated post-Second World War world order, which assumed the shape of unilateral US hegemony after the fall of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. With Russia – and China – delivering the hitherto clearest shock to this unilateral hegemony of the US, the latter is doing all it can to win more and more allies to augment its position against a very formidable threat. NATO’s expansion is one of the many steps the West – again, mainly the US – has recently taken to preserve the world order. But the ongoing Russia-Ukraine (NATO) military conflict has changed the world in many significant ways. For one thing, NATO’s expansion notwithstanding, the US cannot possibly even hope to successfully “isolate” Russia globally. As far as China is concerned, the US can neither “decouple” from China without facing a heavy cost, nor will be doing so without geopolitical consequences.

More than anything else, the recent decision of the OPEC+ countries to cut their production levels – and consequently raise oil prices – shows that the world’s most powerful oil producers continue to stand with Russia. This unanimous decision is not just an economic matter. In fact, the ability of the OPEC countries to reject US pressure and follow an autonomous approach – and support Russia – shows how these countries are actually following the Russian and Chinese vision of a multipolar world where countries – or blocks – can act according to their own national interests and without compromising them to appease the US. For the US hegemony, this irresistible drift toward multipolarity is much more damaging for its future than the expansion of NATO. NATO’s expansion means the organisation now has one more country with no significant military power from within Europe as its member, but the consolidation of alternative – and counter-hegemonic – power blocks outside of Europe/NATO means a fast shrinking space across the rest of the world for the US and its allies to force advantageous foreign policy outcomes.

Now, whereas the decision to cut oil production is going to hurt the US and its allies in Europe already facing an economic crunch and a cost of living crisis, the decision also shows an acute indifference to how it will hurt the Biden administration directly both geopolitically and domestically.

Consider this: since the start of the Russia-Ukraine (NATO) conflict, the US has been selling expensive oil to Europe. In March, the US oil sales to Europe hit an all-time high. But this enhanced supply has also led to about a 50 per cent increase in prices. Now, with OPEC deciding to cut its production and raise oil prices, Washington’s European allies – and indeed consumers in the US itself – will now be buying even more expensive oil and gas, which could add to the cost of living crisis they’re already facing.

Domestically, therefore, the Biden administration’s decision to force Europe to cut back their sale of Russian oil and/or put a price cap and thus start an economic war against Russia will become even more sensitive. Politically speaking, the Biden administration’s policy to release oil regularly from the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve in attempts to micromanage the oil prices and keep them abnormally low in the interests of American consumers will become even more difficult to implement in the next few weeks.

For the Biden administration – which is jubilant over NATO’s expansion – its decreasing inability to permanently micromanage oil prices coincides with the start of what many see as Donald Trump’s aggressive presidential campaign.

There are, as such two shocks. The fact that Russia has OPEC on its side means the US and NATO have so far failed to defeat Russia in any meaningful sense at all. Joe Biden cannot claim a victory over Russia for his re-election due next year. On the other hand, Washington’s inability to influence OPEC means drastic foreign policy failure, indicating a Russian success. In geopolitical terms, the OPEC+ move came after a meeting between Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak and Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman in Riyadh on March 16 that focused on oil market cooperation. Therefore, it is widely seen as the tightening of the bond between Russia and Saudi Arabia.

The failure to manage the cost of living crisis and the fact that the Biden administration has lost allies, such as Saudi Arabia, combine to become very crucial rallying points for an assertive Donald Trump, who is already framing hurdles against his come-back in terms of the Biden administration’s “conspiracy” to have him convicted and eventually arrested.

Within Europe, this oil shock will complicate domestic politics and foreign policy even further. Recent large-scale protests in France against pension reform or the widespread strikes in Britain for higher wages will become a recurrent scene. Replication of such protests across Europe could force many of the European countries to reconsider the extent of their support for the US war on Russia (and China).

The oil shock delivered by Russia and Saudi Arabia, therefore, outweighs the shock the US expected to deliver to Russia via NATO’s expansion – which is unlikely to have any effect on the ground in Ukraine, and which Russia has other means to counter.

Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.

April 21, 2023 Posted by | Economics | , , , , , | Leave a comment

NATO member questions Stoltenberg’s stance on Ukraine

RT | April 21, 2023

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has cast doubt on NATO’s purportedly universal support for accepting Ukraine into the US-led bloc.

Orban took to Twitter on Friday to share an article by Politico on NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg’s visit to Kiev, where he proclaimed Ukraine had a “rightful place” within the bloc.

Commenting on the article, Orban simply wrote: “What?!”

Stoltenberg made a surprise appearance in Kiev on Thursday, in a first visit to the country since the beginning of hostilities between Russia and Ukraine in February 2022.

During a joint press conference with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, Stoltenberg praised the continuous military aid flowing from NATO member states to Ukraine. He also insisted a multi-year support initiative for Kiev was “testament to NATO’s long-term commitment” to the country.

“Allies are now delivering more jets, tanks, and armored vehicles, and NATO’s Ukraine fund is providing urgent support… All of this is making a real difference on the battlefield today,” Stoltenberg asserted. He further claimed that Kiev has a “rightful” place within the bloc.

Ukraine’s rightful place is in the Euro-Atlantic family. Ukraine’s rightful place is in NATO. And over time, our support will help to make this possible.

However, the secretary-general failed to provide a specific timeframe for Ukraine’s potential accession into the alliance. Zelensky, for his part, urged Stoltenberg to “overcome the reluctance” of some NATO members to supply long-range rockets and modern fighter jets to Ukraine.

Hungary has repeatedly said it will not support Ukraine’s applications to either NATO or the EU. Budapest has refrained from providing military aid to Kiev, as well as refusing to allow such shipments to travel through its territory and onto Ukraine.

Budapest and Kiev have long been at odds over the latter’s attitude towards the ethnic Hungarian minority in Ukraine. Some 150,000 ethnic Hungarians live in modern Ukraine, primarily in the Transcarpathian region. Kiev’s efforts to crack down on Russian speakers following the 2014 Maidan coup have affected other minorities as well, including Hungarians. Kiev, meanwhile, has repeatedly accused Budapest of meddling in its internal affairs, particularly by granting citizenship to Ukraine’s ethnic Hungarians.

April 21, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Spain to send naval defense equipment to Kiev

By Lucas Leiroz | April 21, 2023

In a rather irresponsible and provocative way, the Spanish government has announced a new military aid package for the neo-Nazi regime in Kiev, which includes naval defense equipment. As well known, naval defenses are items of high strategic relevance, and their supply represents a great advance in the level of co-participation in the conflict by the exporting country. In this sense, it is possible to say that Madrid is taking a dangerous step in NATO’s proxy war with Russia, generating high risks of escalation.

The announcement of the shipment of new Spanish arms to Ukraine was made on April 20 by the Minister of Defense Magarita Robles. According to the official, the new equipment aims to reinforce the Ukrainian armed forces in different sectors considered strategic, such as land, anti-aircraft and especially naval defenses. Robles claims that improving the Ukrainian situation on the naval battlefield is an essential step to ensure the stability of regional security, which would “justify” the need to send such weapons to the Ukrainian regime.

“The new shipments are aimed at reinforcing the Armed Forces of Ukraine in such areas as armored vehicles, means of ground troops protection, antiaircraft defenses and naval defenses. The latter is considered essential for the security of ‘the green sea route’ that allows the transportation of the Ukrainian grain via the Black Sea”, she said during a press conference.

It is curious to note that the minister used as an excuse for her country’s decision the supposed need to defend the Ukrainian positions in the Black Sea, protecting the flow of grains through a safe route. Obviously, the minister said this while absolutely ignoring the clear truth that the Ukrainian side is the only one that repeatedly provokes the Russian ships and ports in the region, preventing the effective working of the grain agreements and raising the risks of food insecurity.

Although details about which naval weapons would be sent to Kiev have not been clarified yet, it is important to remember that the announcement comes as a response to the request formally made by Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov on a recent visit to Madrid. At the time, Resnikov stated that Kiev would be interested in Spanish amphibious vehicles as well as in technical assistance from the country’s military, considering its experience in amphibian attacks.

So, it is possible to assume, analyzing the information available so far, that Kiev plans to carry out amphibious attacks against Russian cities in the Black Sea, which includes Crimea and other strategic regions. If this happens, the escalation of the conflict will be significantly high, as amphibious attacks are extremely dangerous and demand an extraordinary level of military mobilization. The Russian response to this type of incursion would be particularly strong, certainly causing even greater damage to the already weakened Ukrainian armed forces.

However, the Spanish anti-Russian audacity goes beyond this naval issue. Madrid is also sending to the neo-Nazi regime some Leopard 2A4 battle tanks as well as TAT vehicles and many other types of equipment. Also, in addition to weapons, the Spanish government has also promised to send an additional package of humanitarian and medical aid as soon as possible. What is possible to see is that Spain is really focused on increasing its participation in the conflict, fulfilling NATO’s requests for all members of the Atlantic alliance to advance their military agendas and remain in combat readiness.

In the same sense, the president of the Spanish Government, Pedro Sánchez, announced that he will visit Washington in May to talk with his American partners, the Ukrainian issue being a central topic on his agenda. The objective would be to discuss new ways in which Spain could contribute more actively to the war against Russia. In addition, some discussions related to Latin America, a region where the US seeks hegemony and with which Spain has historical ties, are also expected for the summit.

Indeed, there are not enough reasons to justify the Spanish desire for war. It is possible to understand the reasons why Ukraine wants to increase its cooperation with Spain. As a country with an extensive coastline and a military history marked by naval conflicts and amphibious attacks, Spain seems to become an interesting partner for Kiev to seek help in its war ambitions – not only in arms supply, but also in technical assistance. However, there simply seems to be no advantage for the Spanish government to adhere in depth to this type of partnership.

Being in western Europe, Madrid seems a long way from any direct effects of the conflict. Any kind of anti-Russian paranoia seems irrational in the Spanish case. Even if there is an eventual internationalization of the conflict in the near future, Spain will certainly not be the side most threatened by escalation. What appears, therefore, is that Madrid is making a kind of bet on military expansionism, seeking to increase its strategic relevance through active participation in NATO’s war against Russia.

This seems problematic and irresponsible from many points of view, since Madrid obviously does not have enough military capacity to reverse the battlefield scenario. Spanish help can only cause Kiev to carry out more dangerous provocations, which will be responded to in an intense way, accelerating the inevitable collapse of the Ukrainian forces. The best Madrid can do is avoid getting involved in irreversible conflicts and raise its own national defense capabilities, assuming skepticism about the “umbrella” promised by NATO.

Lucas Leiroz is a journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.

You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

April 21, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine: Stalemate in an attritional war?

BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | APRIL 20, 2023 

The Russian President Vladimir Putin travelled to the country’s “new territories” of Lugansk and Kherson/Zaporozhye Regions on Monday to assess the military situation. 

The countdown has begun for the Ukrainian “counterattack”. The arrival of Patriot missile system in Ukraine testifies to the scale of mobilisation to impose heavy losses on Russia. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg paid a surprise visit to Kiev today, his first since the war began. 

The leaked Pentagon documents are sceptical about the success of the Ukrainian counter-offensive, but Moscow makes its own assessments. Primarily, the neocons are not going to pull the plug on the Zelensky regime, since that means opening the Pandora’s box when President Biden is about to announce his bid for a second term as president and cannot accept that Ukraine is losing the war. 

In reality, Ukraine is haemorrhaging. It is in the nature of attritional wars that at some point, the weaker side breaks and thereupon, the end comes very fast. This was how in Syria where once the 5-year old Battle of Aleppo was won in December 2016, the government forces swept through the country in a string of military victories bringing the curtain down on the conflict. 

The attritional war in Ukraine may look “stalemated” but the clincher will be which side is inflicting the greater casualties. There is no question that the massive military, intelligence, financial and economic assistance by the West notwithstanding, Russian forces have ground down the Ukrainian side all along the line of contact.

The Russian ambassador to the UK recently said the ratio of losses in the attrition war is roughly seven Ukrainian soldiers to every Russian soldier. To put things in perspective, western media reports estimate that around 35,000 Ukrainian soldiers will be involved in the upcoming counter-offensive along the 950-km frontline while Putin is on record that the Russian reserve forces on the frontline come to 160,000 soldiers!      

The Ukrainian air defence system is in a critical state. Russians have a predominance of artillery and, Russians have heavily fortified the frontline in the recent 5-6 months in multiple layers of defence such as mines, earthworks and bollards to impede advancing tanks, etc. 

This is a desperate gambit for Ukraine, which has lost a large share of its most experienced soldiers (estimated 120,000 casualties), to take on the Russians who are having air superiority and missile superiority, air defence superiority and artillery superiority, and trained manpower superiority, above all.   

The areas that Putin chose to visit — Kherson / Zaporozhya and Lugansk — are where the Ukrainian counteroffensive is most expected. Putin heard from the commanders the military situation and of course, most certainly, that will be inputs for his decisions on Russian counter-strategies, both defensive and offensive. 

Despite the Pentagon leaks and the ensuing disarray and confusion in Washington and European capitals (and Kiev), the Ukrainian counterattack will go ahead to gain back at least some of the lost territory. This is a desperate throw of the dice. 

However, delusional thinking still prevails in Washington. This is apparent from a recent article in Foreign Affairs co-authored by two veterans of the US establishment — former State Department official Richard Haass and Charles Kupchan, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations — titled The West Needs a New Strategy in Ukraine: A Plan for Getting From the Battlefield to the Negotiating Table. 

The article largely sticks to the myths spawned by the neocons — that Russia’s special military operations failed and the war has “turned out far better for Ukraine than most predicted” — but has occasional flashes of realism. It builds on the refrain currently in vogue in Washington that “the most likely outcome of the conflict is not a complete Ukrainian victory but a bloody stalemate.” 

Haas and Kupchan wrote that “By the time Ukraine’s anticipated offensive is over, Kyiv may also warm up to the idea of a negotiated settlement, having given its best shot on the battlefield and facing growing constraints on both its own manpower and help from abroad.” 

The authors take note en passe that Russia’s leadership has options and calculations too, as western sanctions have failed to cripple the Russian economy, popular support for the war remains high (above 70%) and Moscow senses that time is on its side as the staying power of Ukraine and its Western supporters and their resolve will wane and Russia should be able to expand its territorial gains substantially.

Fundamentally, Haas and Kupchan hail from another planet. They cannot comprehend that Russia will never accept a scenario where the conflict ends with a ceasefire but the NATO will continue to beef up Ukraine’s military capabilities and steadily integrate Kiev into the alliance. 

Why would Russia want to play another game of musical chairs while the West formalises Ukraine’s NATO membership — that is, acquiesce in a replay of the grotesque interregnum between Minsk Agreements of 2015 and Russia’s special military operations? 

Putin’s visit to the new territories at this crucial juncture with the attritional war at a tipping point conveys a powerful signal that Russia too has an offensive plan and it is not up to Biden to blow the whistle and call off the proxy war — out of sheer fatigue or pressing distractions in the Asia-Pacific region or due to cracks in western unity or whatever else. 

Equally, it is improbable that Russia can ever reconcile with the Zelensky regime, which Moscow sees as a puppet of the Biden administration. But how can Biden possibly dump or lose sight of Zelensky while the skeletons are rattling in the family cupboard? 

Most important, Russian public opinion expects Putin to redeem the pledge he made while ordering the special military operations. Anything short of that will mean tens of thousands of Russian lives perished in vain. 

It is not in the grain of Putin’s political personality to ignore the groundswell of Russian opinion — or overlook the wounded national psyche as images are playing out of forced eviction of hundreds of monks of  Pechersk Lavra, the 11th-century Orthodox cave monastery complex in the heart of Kiev, branded as Russian fifth columnists. It was a calculated political move by Zelensky with tacit western encouragement. (here and here)

What the neocons in the US are yet to grasp is that they failed to subjugate Russia despite all the humiliations poured on its national honour, proud history and enviously rich culture. Why would Russia normalise with states that appropriated its sovereign wealth and imposed such draconian sanctions to bleed and weaken its economy?

US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has admitted on CNN that sanctions may ultimately risk hegemony of the US dollar. But her remarks do not go far enough. 

Meanwhile, the Russia-China strategic partnership has strengthened, the signal this week being Moscow’s willingness to coordinate with Beijing to counter military challenges in the Far East. (See my blog China, Russia circle wagons in Asia-Pacific) 

Russia is far from isolated and enjoys strategic depth in the international community. Whereas, through the past one-year period, the systemic decline of the West and the US’ waning global influence has become an inexorable historical process. 

April 20, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

The Slow Art of Whole-of-Government ‘Warfare’

By Alastair Crooke | Strategic Culture Foundation | April 17, 2023

The Washington Post tells us that President Macron’s China jaunt has created an European ‘uproar’. So it seems. Though on the face of it, his geo-strategic recommendation that Europe should keep equidistant from both the U.S. behemoth and the China colossus, is scarcely so very radical. Yet, whatever Macron’s underlying motivations, his comments seem to have touched raw nerves. He is accused of something approaching ‘betrayal’. The betrayal of America curiously – rather than a betrayal of ordinary Europeans.

Perhaps the irritation reflects our habitual love of comfort, normalcy, and a desire to ‘not rock the boat’. This normalcy bias keeps people frozen in a state of status quo, as if some inner voice intrudes to say: ‘things will be somehow ok. This will pass, and things will again be as they were. “Everything must change, for everything to remain the same”, in the famous quotation pronounced by Tancredi, Prince Fabrizio Salina’s beloved nephew in The Leopard.

On the other hand, Malcom Kyeyune, writing from Sweden, detects a more profound shift under way – an agony writhing within European Atlanticism:

“The war fever that swept Europe in the summer of 2022 made discussion impossible. Ritual denunciations of “Putinists” and even supposed Russian spies became commonplace on social media, and chest-thumping about the immense power of the West and NATO became obligatory. Again, there was a huge pressure not to notice things:

“The only acceptable position was maximalist: Suggesting that a peace deal would likely involve coming to some sort of compromise marked you out as a “Putin loyalist” and “Russian agent.”

“But once again, the fever is starting to break. Few still post about Ukraine on social media; people by and large prefer to pretend it isn’t happening. The chest-thumping has gone away, replaced with a sullen, bitter silence. People aren’t quite ready to admit that the sanctions were a failure and that the West overplayed its hand, but many know these things are true, and that the economic and political consequences of these failures are only really beginning to be felt.”

Is Macron picking up on these ‘vibes’? That is to say, the self-deception, by which we feel the illogicality of going about our daily lives with ‘darkening clouds’ looming ever closer, yet never questioning why Europe is being de-industrialised; why its industry is relocating to the U.S. or China; or why Europeans have to import Liquid Natural Gas at three or four times its going price.

Are Europeans then beginning to notice things again? Are they asking ‘how come’ the economic paradigm has been so drastically eclipsed, or ‘how come’ the fall into mad fervour for incipient wars with China and Russia?

Macron’s equidistant prescription is entirely aspirational. He gives it no substance; he gives no explanation of how strategic autonomy would be achieved, nor does he address the issue of ‘the empty stable’. There is no point in shutting the stable door now after the autonomy horse’ has long fled; It ‘fled’ with the war fever of 2022. We are therefore, where we are. Can the autonomy horse still be led home? That seems improbable.

So much of the ‘uproar’ no doubt reflects the warding-off of uncomfortable admissions, as things begin to be noticed again. Macron at least has opened the issue (however sensitive it may be); He is an outlier for the moment, but is not alone.

EU Council chief, Michel, in an interview, said: “Some European leaders wouldn’t say things the same way that Emmanuel Macron did”, adding: “I think quite a few really think like Macron.” And SPD chair in the Bundestag, Rolf Mützenich, said “Macron is right” and “we must be careful not to become party to a major conflict between the U.S. and China.”

There are multiple revolutions afoot everywhere across the globe. And Macron asks where does the EU fit in, which is fine. But he doesn’t give the answer. To be fair, though, at this point, maybe there isn’t one, for now.

Equidistant from the U.S.? Does Macron mean equidistant from specifically the Neo-con strategy of maintaining U.S. global hegemony through aggressive projections of military and sanctions power? If so, this needs to be made explicit.

For America, too, is undergoing a quiet revolution, and the Macron prescription could need nuancing in the case that the Ukraine war marks the final collapse of the Neo-cons’ short-lived ‘American Century’. There has been a noticeable tone of desperation to western MSM reportage this past week. Ever since the Intelligence leaks, it’s been doom, gloom and panic. The leaks have made uncomfortable truths unmissable (even to those who preferred not to notice) – that the vast ‘optics’ construct that is the Ukraine project is slowly coming undone.

The ‘Saving Ukraine for Democracy’ project was supposed to underwrite the legitimacy of the U.S.-led World Order. In reality, Ukraine has become the “harbinger of terminal crisis”, Kyeyune suggests.

The political path likely to be followed in America however, is far from straight-forward. It is possible though that today’s ‘Other Project’, the ‘western class war’ inversion ‘project’ may similarly collapse in the crisis (in this case) of U.S. societal schism. The Woke ‘project’ is an unlikely one – a strange neo-Marxist construct, in which an ‘oppressed class’ actually is composed of élite affirmative-action intellectuals (who lay claim to the mantle of being redeemed oppressors), whilst Americans, working in industry and in the low-paid service industry, are conversely denigrated as racist supremacist, anti-diversity, white oppressors.

China, too, is undergoing transformation: It is preparing for the war which the American ‘uniparty’ China hawks increasingly clamour. Meanwhile, its ‘political warfare’ strategy is to use geo-political mediation, underpinned by a powerful economy, as the non-intrusive means by which to pursue the Chinese operational art. This project already has re-shaped the Middle East –and its geo-strategic appeal is spanning the globe.

President Putin’s slow, long-term practice of political warfare (as opposed to China’s operational ‘art’) is clearly conceived with an understanding that the slowly-building disillusionment in the West with woke-liberalism – requires time in the chrysalis. In the Russian perspective, this Sun Tzu approach (overcoming the western paradigm, without militarily fighting it) calls for the ‘economy of military application’ within an all-of-system, holistic political ‘war’.

Russia’s is perhaps then, the more complex and more revolutionary: Embracing reform and efficiencies in all areas (cultural, economic, and political) of Russian society too.

China disavows the explicit aim to force a change of behaviour on the West, but for Russia its security is contingent on the U.S. fundamentally changing its military posture in Europe and Asia. This objective requires both patience and employing all complementary means at Russia’s command, (i.e. effectively ‘weaponising’ non-military tools such as financial ‘warfare’ and energy) to overcome the enemy – yet staying at some threshold, just short of all-out war.

The West, by contrast, conceptually separates the military from the political means, which perhaps explains why western analysts misconceive Russian ‘switching’ between military procedures to diplomatic or financial pressures as reflecting some deficiency or stumble in the Russian military machine. It is not. Sometimes the violins play; other times the cellos. And sometimes it is the moment for the big bass drums to sound; It is up to the conductor.

Julian Macfarlane has commented that Russia has started a veritable ‘revolution’, with China now joining in. To make his point, Macfarlane adapts Thomas Jefferson’s “we hold these truths to be self-evident …” speech and glosses it to say “… that all States are equally entitled to sovereignty, undivided security and full respect”. He contextualises this in terms of a Jefferson focus on the tyranny of the British Crown, whereas Putin formulates his multi-polar order doctrine, as versus U.S. hegemonic ‘Rules’ tyranny.

Xi Jinping says it straight: “All countries, irrespective of size, strength and wealth, are equal. The right of the people to independently chose their development paths should be respected, interference in the affairs of other countries opposed – and international fairness and justice maintained. Only the wearer of the shoes knows if they fit or not”.

It is a doctrine winning support across the globe. The EU would be unwise to discount its appeal.

So, back to Macron and the equidistant concept for European Union ‘strategic autonomy’: It is hard to see what space might comprise a median ground between homogenous, ‘Rules Hegemony’ and the Sino-Russian declaration of heterogenic ‘National Rights’. It will have to be one or the other (with perhaps a little ‘betweenness’ just possible, should the U.S. drop its “with us; or against us” dogma).

Equally, Macron warns the EU against the extra-territorial reach of the U.S. dollar (and therefore of sanctions and Third Country sanctions).

Yet, the EU cannot escape the U.S. dollar. The Euro is its’ derivative.

Europe has little autonomous defence manufacturing infrastructure. NATO is the political, as well as the military, framework in which the EU operates. How does it escape from a NATO framework that is so closely meshed in with the EU political one?

The EU is deeply divided on its future path: Macron wants more strategic autonomy for Europe (and Charles Michel says this is supported by not a few member-states), whereas Poland, the Baltic States and certain others want more America and more NATO and a continuing war to destroy Russia. Poland has proved to be a vociferous critic of Western Europe’s perceived softness toward the Kremlin.

Indeed, the war in Ukraine has ushered in a kind of geopolitical shift in Europe, Ishaan Tharoor writes, moving “NATO’s centre of gravity” – as Chels Michta, a U.S. military intelligence officer, recently put it – away from its traditional anchors in France and Germany, and eastward to countries such as Poland, its Baltic neighbours and other former Soviet Republics. In Central and Eastern Europe, wrote Le Monde columnist Sylvie Kauffmann, “the weight of history is stronger … than in the West, the traumas are fresher and the return of tragedy is felt more keenly”.

The EU is deeply divided on structure as well: Warsaw, nervous about a general election due this autumn, is encouraging anti-German paranoia. Its propaganda suggests that Polish opposition politicians are secret agents in a German plot to take control of the EU, and to force degenerate western permissiveness on heterosexual Catholic Poland – a ‘bastion of western Christian civilisation’ – unlike Brussels, which is viewed as a as a “Germanised” conspiracy to overrule the right of independent nations to make their own laws.

Jarosaw Kaczyski, leader of the PiS party, plays with an alternative future for Europe. This would be a Europe des patries, almost on de Gaulle’s model: an alliance of fully sovereign nation states, within NATO but independent of Brussels, which would include post-Brexit Britain, rather than just the EU’s present members. (No EU Third ‘Empire’ there).

In a major speech, the Polish Prime Minister has emphasised that now is the moment to shake up the status quo further West and dissuade those in Brussels who would “create a super-state government by a narrow elite. In Europe nothing can safeguard the nations, their culture, their social, economic, political and military security better than nation states”, Morawiecki said. “Other systems are illusory or utopian”.

Elections are due this autumn in Poland, and polls suggest that the outcome will be close.

It seems that Macron has opened a veritable can of worms. Possibly, this was his intent; or maybe he just didn’t care – his objective being primarily domestic: i.e. to shape a new image in the context of a changing, and turbulent, French electoral landscape.

But in any event, the EU is caught in the midst of a maelstrom of geopolitical change at a moment when it faces the possibility of a banking crisis, high inflation and economic contraction. Simple survival may become more pressing than addressing Macron’s speculative musings about the EU becoming a Third Force.

April 17, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Russophobia | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Czechs rally against ‘warmonger’ government

RT | April 17, 2023

Thousands protested in downtown Prague on Sunday, arguing that the Czech government is devoting too many resources to helping Ukraine fight Russia rather than tackling the energy crisis and high inflation at home. Many are calling on Prime Minister Petr Fiala to resign.

The ‘Czechia Against Poverty’ rally was spearheaded by the opposition party Law, Respect, Expertise (PRO 2022). Protesters gathered at Wenceslas Square, condemning what one called “the lying government” and carrying banners that said “No to war” and “Get out of NATO.”

Addressing the crowd, Jaroslav Foldyna, an MP from the Freedom and Direct Democracy party, said that “the government needs to go before it destroys the country.”

A protester named Renata Urbanova told AFP that the government is “full of warmongers” who “are making us suffer economically.”

A group of people with Ukrainian flags rallied in support of Kiev in the center of the capital at around the same time. Members of opposing camps shouted at each other, but were ultimately separated by police.

A similar anti-government demonstration was held last month. More than a dozen people were arrested and scuffles with police broke out at that event.

The monthly cost of living has increased for most Czechs and up to 70% of households were forced to resort to austerity measures, according to a survey released by pollster Median in January.

At the same time, Prague has supplied heavy weapons to Ukraine, including 89 tanks, and has backed economic sanctions imposed on Russia by the EU. More than 460,000 Ukrainian refugees arrived in the Czech Republic after February 2022, and around 300,000 of them are still in the country, according to Euronews.

Last year, the Czech parliament adopted a law aimed at providing assistance to refugees, which was recently extended until April 2024.

April 17, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Russophobia, Solidarity and Activism | , , | Leave a comment

Poland about to manufacture depleted uranium weapons

By Lucas Leiroz | April 14, 2023

On April 12, Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki stated that he wants to make his country a “service center” for US M1 Abrams tanks. These “services” would include the manufacture of depleted uranium (DU) ammunition, with the possible creation of a factory specialized in this toxic equipment in Polish territory.

“I want a service center for Abrams tanks for the whole of Europe, for maintaining their battle readiness, to be located in Poland (…) This is possible, I am in talks regarding this”, he told a journalist during an interview to local press. Also, specifically about DU weapons, he commented that Warsaw is “striving” to have an industry capable of producing them as soon as possible.

The official’s statement comes after his meeting with US Vice President Kamala Harris during his last visit to Washington. On his US tour, Morawiecki visited some facilities of the US military-industrial complex, including an Army warehouse in Alabama where Abrams tanks are stationed. Apparently, this would have “inspired” him to build something similar in Poland, leading him to initiate talks in this regard with his American partners.

With this, Morawiecki plans to formalize Poland’s role as the center of American provocations in Eastern Europe. In practice, the country has played this role for a long time, considering that it is from Poland that departs the largest flow of weapons and mercenaries that enter Ukrainian territory to be used against Russian forces. However, there now appears to be a desire on the part of Polish officials to formalize this role for the country, promoting measures such as the creation of large tank depots and the manufacture of DU ammunition, as well as an “additional presence of [US/NATO] several thousand soldiers” – in Morawiecki’s own words.

Poland’s strategic value to NATO is already clear. The geographical location makes Poland extremely interesting to become a NATO “service center”. In addition, anti-Russian ideology has been disseminated in the country for decades, with high degrees of racism which is why it is easier to convince politicians and even the population to support bellicose measures against Moscow.

Some important steps towards escalating Polish militarization have also been taken recently. Warsaw ordered 250 new American Abrams tanks. In addition, the country is also replacing its entire arsenal of Soviet-made T-72 tanks – many of which were delivered to Kiev – with new modern equipment of high combat power. The objective would be, according to Morawiecki, to build a kind of “armored curtain” to “protect” Poland, as well as attending NATO’s demand of combat readiness.

However, the main problem in this scenario is that the Polish government simply does not seem to understand that it is only serving the interests of another power, without gaining any major strategic advantage from these measures. Some analysts, including in the Polish media, believe that Morawiecki’s recent trip to the US was the result of American pressure to respond to Macron’s trip to China.

The French president, despite being geopolitically aligned with the US, has always been marked by his quest for “European autonomy”, trying to make the EU the leading bloc of the “Western world”. In this regard, he made a statement saying that Europe could not be a “vassal” of the US. According to experts, the American government would have summoned the Polish prime minister not only to increase bilateral cooperation but to make it clear that there are EU countries that disagree with Macron and that they are, in fact, willing to do anything to support Washington.

In this sense, by receiving American tanks and creating a supposed “service center” to handle this equipment, Poland would only be guaranteeing American power in Europe, without clear national benefits. Furthermore, by creating a DU munitions factory, the country would be taking a dangerous step against its own security. The toxic agents of these ammunition are harmful to human health, with reports of health problems with British and American soldiers who used them on the battlefield in Yugoslavia and Iraq. Recently, UK announced that it would be supplying such weapons to Kiev, creating a risk of escalation and internationalization of the conflict.

Poland, apparently, wants to be added to this context of rivalries without gaining anything in return. Accepting to produce radioactive weapons for American tanks – which will certainly be delivered to Kiev at some point in the future – is to frontally violate Russian red lines, increasing the risk of military escalation. Considering that DU ammunition does not have specific international regulation, Moscow could understand its manufacture and use as a violation of the principle of non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. Warsaw is needlessly and irresponsibly fomenting regional chaos just to serve American interests.

Lucas Leiroz is a journalist and researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.

You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

April 14, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »