Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The Militarisation of Scandinavia & the Coming Wars

How a Region of Peace Became an American Frontline

By Glenn Diesen | September 6, 2024

The militarisation of Scandinavia will drastically undermine the security of the region and invite new conflicts as Russia will be compelled to respond to what could become an existential threat. Norway has decided to host at least 12 US military bases on its soil, while Finland and Sweden follow suit by transferring sovereign control over parts of their territory after they recently became NATO members. Infrastructure will be built to bring US troops faster to Russian borders, while the Baltic Sea and the Arctic will be converted into NATO seas.

Scandinavia as a Key Region for Russian Security

Ever since Kievan Rus disintegrated in the 13th century and the Russians lost their presence on the Dnieper River, a key security challenge for Russia has been its lack of reliable access to the world seas. Furthermore, economic development is also dependent on reliable access to the seas as they are the arteries of international trade. Similarly, hegemonic powers have always been required to dominate the seas, while Russia can be contained, weakened and defeated by restricting its access.

Sweden was initially such a great power. In the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries, Sweden sought to restrict the access of Russia in the Baltic Sea, while also attempting to encroach upon its Arctic port in Arkhangelsk. During the “The Time of Trouble” that involved the Swedish occupation of Russia, approximately 1/3 of Russia’s entire population died. The conflict ended with the Treaty of Stolbova in 1617, which involved territorial concessions that cut off Russia’s access to the Baltic Sea. This lasted until the time of Peter the Great, who eventually defeated Sweden in the Great Northern War in 1721. The war ended Sweden’s era as a great power, while Russia became a great power due to its access to the Baltic Sea.

The dominant maritime powers, Britain and then the US, pursued similar attempts to limit Russia’s access to the world’s oceans for the next three centuries. During the Crimean War (1853-56), European diplomats had been explicit that the objective had been to push Russia back into Asia and exclude it from European affairs.[1] This explains Russia’s fierce response to the Western-backed coup in Ukraine in 2014 as Russia responded by seizing Crimea in fear of losing its strategic Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol to NATO. The US sabotage of the Minsk agreement (2015-2022) and the Istanbul peace agreement (2022) was similarly motivated by the goal of arming Ukraine to take back Crimea and make Sevastopol a NATO naval base.

The militarisation and vassalisation of Scandinavia are important to challenge Russia’s access to the two other seas on Russia’s Western borders – the Baltic Sea and the Arctic. Former NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen optimistically announced that NATO expansion in Scandinavia would enable NATO to block Russia’s access to the Baltic Sea in a conflict: “After the accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO, the Baltic Sea will now be a NATO sea… if we wish, we can block all entry and exit to Russia through St. Petersburg”.[2] Poland and the Baltic States have also begun to casually refer to the Baltic Sea as a “NATO sea”. The Financial Times argues that “Denmark could block Russian oil tankers from reaching markets” as part of sanctions.[3] A NATO Colonel also argued that the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad would come under much greater pressure and become a “problem” for Russia: “The ascension of Finland and the upcoming ascension of Sweden will totally change the setup in the Baltic Sea region. Russia will experience Kaliningrad being surrounded”.[4]

Sweden’s NATO membership now threatens to reverse the outcome of the Great Northern War in 1721, which by implication would diminish the basic foundations of Russian security. The Battle of Poltova is recognised to have been the largest and most decisive battle of the Great Northern War that resulted in Sweden’s defeat. The videos emerging of Swedish casualties in the recent Russian missile strike on Poltova is very symbolic of the militarisation of Scandinavia.

America’s attack on Nord Stream demonstrated how control over the Baltic Sea is important to cut Russian-German economic connectivity. The US has attempted to blame the Ukrainians for the attack, suggesting that “the CIA warned Zelensky’s office to stop the operation”.[5] The admission of knowing about the attack before it happened is nonetheless interesting as the US and NATO blamed Russia for the attack and used it as a reason to intensify the naval control over the Baltic Sea and escalate the Ukraine War. This is an admission that the US lied to their own public and the world, and used the lie to escalate their wider war on Russia. The attack also demonstrates that the Americans will treat the Europeans as proxies just like they used the Ukrainians, while the Europeans would not stand up for their interests but silently accept an ally destroying their own vital energy infrastructure. The revelation also demonstrated that the people we generously refer to as journalists will not ask any critical questions or discuss objective reality if it challenges the war narrative.

Finland was perhaps the greatest success story of neutrality, yet it was converted into NATO’s longest frontline against Russia. There was no threat to Finland, yet expansion was framed as being a blow to Putin as an objective on its own. Foreign military deployments will predictably soon emerge in the north of Finland to threaten Russia’s Northern Fleet in Arkhangelsk. The pretext will most likely be the concern that Russia will want to seize part of Lapland in the north of Finland. It will make no sense whatsoever, but obedient media will drum up the required fear.

The militarisation of Norway has followed a gradual incrementalism. Initially, US troops were stationed in Norway on a rotating basis, which enabled the government to claim they were not permanently deployed. In 2021, Norway and the US agreed on a few military bases but called them “dedicated areas” as Norway officially does not allow foreign bases on its soil. The US has full control and jurisdiction over these territories and the US media refers to them as military bases that will enable the US to confront Russia in the Arctic, but the Norwegian political-media elites must still refer to them as “dedicated areas” and dismiss that they have any offensive purposes. The frog is slowly boiling, believing it has identical interests to its masters in Washington.

Ignoring the Security Competition when Interpreting the Ukraine War

As Scandinavia is converted from a region of peace to a US frontline, one would expect more debate about this historical shift. Yet, the political-media elites have already reached the consensus that expanding NATO enhances our security due to greater military force and deterrence. More weapons rarely result in more peace, although this is the logic of hegemonic peace that this generation of politicians has committed themselves to.

The point of departure in security politics is the security competition. If increasing the security of country A decreases the security of country B, then country B will likely be compelled to enhance its security in a manner that reduces security for country A. The security competition can be mitigated by deterring the adversary without provoking a response, which is ideally organised through an inclusive security architecture.

Scandinavia’s ability to be a region of peace relied on mastering the deterrence/reassurance balance. Finland and Sweden were neutral states and were an important part of the belt of neutral states from the north to the south of Europe during the Cold War, which contributed to reducing tensions. Norway was a NATO member but imposed restrictions on itself by not hosting foreign military bases on its soil and limiting the military activities of allies in the Arctic region. It was common sense that security derived from deterring the Soviets without provoking them, this common sense is now long gone.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is cited as the main reason why Finland and Sweden had to abandon their neutrality and join NATO. This logic makes sense when ignoring security competition as Russia’s actions then occur in a vacuum. Acceptable discussions about the Ukraine War are limited by the premise that Russia’s invasion was “unprovoked”, and any efforts to widen the debate by addressing NATO’s role can be shut down with accusations of “legitimising” Russia’s invasion.

NATO expansion caused the Ukraine War, and the response to this war was NATO expansion to Finland and Sweden. This twisted logic prevails as the narrative of an “unprovoked” invasion has become immune to facts. German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, explained that she had opposed offering Ukraine the Membership Action Plan to join NATO in 2008 as it would have been interpreted by Moscow as “a declaration of war”.[6] Wikileaks also revealed that Germans believed that pushing NATO expansionism could “break up the country”.[7] William Burns, the US Ambassador to Moscow and now the current Director of the CIA, warned that “Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite”.[8] Burns warned of the consequences:

“Not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests… Russia is particularly worried that the strong divisions in Ukraine over NATO membership, with much of the ethnic-Russian community against membership, could lead to a major split, involving violence or at worst, civil war. In that eventuality, Russia would have to decide whether to intervene; a decision Russia does not want to have to face”.[9]

Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, NATO’s Secretary General in 2008, recognised that NATO should have respected Russia’s red lines and should therefore not have pledged membership to Ukraine and Georgia in 2008.[10] Former US Secretary of Defence and CIA Director Robert Gates also acknowledged the mistake as “Trying to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO was truly overreaching”.[11] Even the support for bringing Ukraine into NATO had dubious intensions. In late March 2008, one week before the NATO Summit in Bucharest where Ukraine was promised future membership, Tony Blair told American political leaders how they should manage Russia. Blair argued the strategy “should be to make Russia a ‘little desperate’ with our activities in areas bordering on what Russia considers its sphere of interest and along its actual borders. Russia had to be shown firmness and sown with seeds of confusion”.[12]

In September 2023, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg gleefully argued that Russia’s actions to prevent NATO expansion would now result in more NATO expansion.

“President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent us. And [it] was a pre-condition for not invading Ukraine. Of course we didn’t sign that. The opposite happened. He wanted us to sign that promise, never to enlarge NATO… We rejected that. So he went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders. He has got the exact opposite. He has got more NATO presence in eastern part of the Alliance and he has also seen that Finland has already joined the Alliance and Sweden will soon be a full member”.[13]

Stoltenberg did not specify why he thought more NATO expansion would increase security if NATO expansion was the cause of the war. However, NATO also insists that Ukraine must become part of NATO as Russia would not dare to attack a NATO country, while NATO also argues that Russia must be stopped in Ukraine as Russia will thereafter attack NATO countries. Much like the recognition of security competition, the logic is also absent.

Blinded by Ideological Fundamentalism

Scandinavia’s recognition of security competition has suffered from what is referred to in the literature as “ideological fundamentalism”. Actors are seen as either good or bad based on political identities that have been assigned by ideology. Ideological fundamentalism reduces the ability to recognise that one’s own policies and actions may constitute a threat to others, because one’s own political identity is held to be indisputably positive and dissociated from any threatening behaviour. There is a lack of understanding for why Russia would feel threatened by NATO expansion even after Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and the proxy war in Ukraine. NATO is merely a “defensive alliance”, even as it bombs countries that never threatened it. Ideological fundamentalism can best be explained by President Reagan’s reaction to how Able Archer, a NATO military exercise in 1983 that almost triggered a nuclear war. Convinced that the US was a force for good that was fighting an evil empire, he was bewildered that the Soviets did not see it the same way:

“Three years had taught me something surprising about the Russians: Many people at the top of the Soviet hierarchy were genuinely afraid of America and Americans… I’d always felt that from our deeds it must be clear to anyone that Americans were a moral people who starting at the birth of our nation had always used our power only as a force of good in the world”.[14]

Trapped in the tribal mindset of “us” versus “them”, the Scandinavians exaggerate what “we” have in common, and dismiss any commonality with “them”. It is assumed that the US shares the interests of Scandinavia, and is primarily building a military presence there to provide security. The US has a security strategy based on hegemony, which is dependent on weakening all emerging rivals. The US Security Strategy of 2002 explicitly linked national security to global dominance as the objective to “dissuade future military competition” should be achieved by advancing “the unparalleled strength of the United States armed forces, and their forward presence”.[15] While Scandinavia has an interest in maintaining peaceful borders with Russia, the US has defined its interests in destabilising Russian borders.[16] Peacetime alliances are reliant on perpetuating conflicts rather than solving them as conflict ensures loyalty from the protectorate and the containment of the adversary. In his famous work on how to advance and perpetuate US global hegemony, Brzezinski wrote the US must “prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and keep the barbarians from coming together”.[17]

A Lack of Political Imagination to Move Beyond Bloc Politics

The Scandinavians recognise that their security has been reliant on the US since the end of the Second World War, and they simply do not have the political imagination for other security arrangements. If it worked then, why should it not work now? As security competition is no longer a consideration, the Scandinavians conveniently neglect that NATO was a status quo actor during the Cold War, while after the Cold War it became a revisionist actor by expanding and attacking other countries in what NATO refers to as “out-of-area” operations.

The lack of alternatives to NATO enables the US to simply demand “alliance solidarity” as a code word for bloc discipline. Case in point, in the 2000s Norway was criticising the US missile defence system that threatened the nuclear balance as it could enable a US first strike. Wikileaks revealed that the US Ambassador reported that the US was pressuring the Norwegian government, political figures, journalists, and think tank researchers to overcome Norway’s firm opposition to missile defence, or at least “to a minimum counter Russian misstatements and distinguish Norway’s position from Russia’s to avoid damaging alliance solidarity”.[18] It was argued that “thanks to our high-level visitors”, Norway had begun to “quietly continue work in NATO on missile defence and to publicly criticise Russia for provocative statements” (Wikileaks, 2007b).[19] In the words of US Ambassador Whitney, Norway had to “adjust to current realities” since it would have a “hard time defending its position if the issue shifts to one of alliance solidarity”.[20] Following the Norwegian U-turn on missile defence, it was declared in the Norwegian Parliament that “it is important for the political cohesion of the alliance not to let the opposition, perhaps especially from Russia, hinder progress and feasible solutions”.[21]

The world is yet again undergoing dramatic change as it changes from a unipolar to a multipolar world order. The US will increasingly shift its focus and resources to Asia, which will change the trans-Atlantic relationship. The US will be able to offer less to the Europeans, but it will demand more loyalty in terms of economics and security. The Europeans will have to sever their economic ties to American rivals which will result in less prosperity and more dependence. The US will also expect the Europeans to militarise the economic competition with China, and NATO has already become the most obvious vehicle for this purpose. Instead of adjusting to multipolarity by diversifying their ties and pursuing opportunities from the rise of Asia, the Europeans are doing the opposite by subordinating themselves further to the US in the hope that it will increase the value of NATO.

Scandinavia was a region of peace as it attempted to mitigate the security competition. As Scandinavia surrenders its sovereignty to the US for protection against an imaginary threat, the region will be converted into a frontline that will unavoidably trigger new conflicts. The only certainty is that when Russia reacts to these provocations, we will all chant “unprovoked” in unison and make some obscure reference to democracy.

[1] J.W. Kipp and W.B. Lincoln, ‘Autocracy and Reform Bureaucratic Absolutism and Political Modernization in Nineteenth-Century Russia’, Russian History, vol.6, no.1, 1979, p.4.

[2] Lrt, ‘Putin’s plan includes Baltics, says former NATO chief’, Lrt, 19 July 2022.

[3] H. Foy, R. Milne and D. Sheppard, Denmark could block Russian oil tankers from reaching markets, Financial Times, 15 November 2023.

[4] E. Zubriūtė, Kaliningrad is no longer our problem, but Russia’s’ – interview with NATO colonel, LRT, 13 November 2023.

[5] B. Pancevski, A Drunken Evening, a Rented Yacht: The Real Story of the Nord Stream Pipeline Sabotage, The Wall Street Jounral, 14 August 2024.

[6] A. Walsh, ‘Angela Merkel opens up on Ukraine, Putin and her legacy’, Deutsche Welle, 7 June 2022.

[7] Wikileaks, ‘Germany/Russia: Chancellery views on MAP for Ukraine and Georgia’, Wikileaks, 6 June 2008.

[8] W.J. Burns, The Back Channel: A Memoir of American Diplomacy and the Case for Its Renewal, New York, Random House, 2019, p.233.

[9] W.J. Burns, ‘Nyet means nyet: Russia’s NATO Enlargement Redlines’, Wikileaks, 1 February 2008.

[10] G.J. Dennekamp, De Hoop Scheffer: Poetin werd radicaler door NAVO’ [De Hoop Scheffer: Putin became more radical because of NATO], NOS, 7 January 2018.

[11] R.M. Gates, Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War, New York, Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, 2014.

[12] Telegraph, ‘Tony Blair and John McCain talk about Israel/Palestine and Russia handling’, The Telegraph, 27 March 2008.

[13] J. Stoltenberg, ‘Opening remarks’, NATO, 7 September 2023.

[14] Reagan, R., 1990. An American Life: The Autobiography. Simon and Schuster, New York, p.74.

[15] NSS, ‘The National Security Strategy of the United States of America’, The White House, June 2002.

[16] RAND, ‘Extending Russia: Competing from Advantageous Ground’, RAND Corporation, 24 April 2019.

[17] Z. Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geopolitical Imperatives, New York, Basic Books, 1997, p.40.

[18] Wikileaks, 2007. Norway: Missile defense public diplomacy and outreach, OSLO 000248, US Embassy, Oslo, 13 March

[19] Wikileaks, 2007. Positive movements in the missile defence debate in Norway but no breakthrough, OSLO 000614, US Embassy, Oslo, 8 June

[20] Wikileaks, 2008. Norway standing alone against missile defense, OSLO 000072, US Embassy, Oslo, 12 February.

[21] Stortinget, 2012. Norwegian Parliamentary meeting, Sak 2, 15 May 2012.

September 6, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Militarism, Russophobia, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Norway closes its Palestine office after Israel revokes status of diplomats

Press TV – August 16, 2024

Norway has announced the closure of its Representative Office in al-Ram, Palestine, after Israel’s “extreme” decision to revoke the diplomatic status of several Norwegian diplomats.

Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide said it was an “extreme and unreasonable” decision made by the regime.

“This decision seeks to target the Palestinians and the Palestinian Authority and all those who defend international law, the two-state solution and the Palestinians’ legitimate right to self-determination.”

The minister vowed that his country will continue to support the Palestinian people “with full force.”

“We will do our utmost to ensure that this does not affect our work for Palestine and for a viable Palestinian state. Our commitment will continue with full force.”

He noted that the Israeli decision obviously “has consequences for our work in Palestine.”

“It affects our locally employed staff. Many of them have worked at the representative office for several years. It also affects our diplomats and their families. We are now fully focused on how to safeguard our employees and our work in the best possible way,” Eide said.

Earlier this month, Israel revoked the diplomatic status of eight Norwegian diplomats who had been working in Norway’s representative office to the Palestinian Authority.

Ties between Oslo and Tel Aviv have been deteriorating since Norway recognized the state of Palestine in May.

More than two-thirds of the United Nations, approximately 140 countries, already recognize a Palestinian state.

August 16, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , | Leave a comment

Norwegian fund drops stake in US construction giant over Palestinian home demolitions

(Photo Credit: Kobi Gideon/Flash90)
The Cradle | June 26, 2024

Norway’s largest private pension fund, Kommunal Landspensjonskasse Gjensidig Forsikringsselska (KLP), has dropped its stake in US construction giant Caterpillar Inc, citing “concerns” the company is contributing to the destruction of Palestinian homes in the occupied West Bank.

“Although Caterpillar has shown itself willing to engage in a dialogue with KLP, the company’s responses failed to credibly substantiate its ability to actually reduce the risk of violating the rights of individuals in situations of war or conflict, or of violating international law,” Kiran Aziz, the firm’s head of responsible investments, told Bloomberg.

Aziz highlighted that KLP dropped $69 million worth of Caterpillar shares and bonds earlier this month over the Texas-based company’s equipment being used “to demolish Palestinian homes and infrastructure to clear the way for Israeli settlements.”

She also cited allegations that Caterpillar equipment is being used by the Israeli army in Gaza.

The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights last week named Caterpillar among several corporations supplying Israel with military equipment and urged investors with stakes in these companies to “take action.”

“These companies, by sending weapons, parts, components, and ammunition to Israeli forces, risk being complicit in serious violations of international human rights and international humanitarian laws,” the UN statement reads.

The UN report also urged western financial institutions and investing firms like Bank of America, BlackRock, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, Harris Associates, Morgan Stanley, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance, and Wells Fargo & Company – among many others – to “take action” and prevent funding the mass killing of Palestinians in Gaza.

The decision by KLP comes one month after the Norwegian government officially moved to recognize a Palestinian state alongside Spain and Ireland.

“For more than 30 years, Norway has been one of the strongest advocates for a Palestinian state. Today, when Norway officially recognizes Palestine as a state, is a milestone in the relationship between Norway and Palestine,” Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide said on 28 May.

On Wednesday, Palestinian media reported that the Israeli army demolished nine homes in the occupied West Bank, including Jerusalem, and another in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1948.

According to the Wall and Settlement Resistance Commission, Israel conducted “47 demolitions, affecting 66 facilities, including 35 inhabited homes, five uninhabited, and 15 agricultural and other facilities,” across the West Bank in May.

June 26, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism, War Crimes | , , , | 2 Comments

Protests and demonstrations around the world condemn the Israeli massacres in Gaza

Palestinian Information Center – May 29, 2024

European and Arab cities and capitals on Tuesday witnessed solidarity protests, marches, and vigils with the Gaza Strip, condemning the ongoing Israeli massacres against the displaced in Rafah in the south of the enclave.

The protesters demanded an end to the war and the punishment of the Israeli officials responsible for the genocide in Gaza, and also called for a halt to supplying Israel with the weapons it uses to kill women and children and destroy residential buildings in the enclave.

In Britain, thousands of supporters of Palestine demonstrated in the streets of the British capital London, condemning the continued Israeli massacres in the city of Rafah.

The protesters rallying in the vicinity of Downing Street, the official residence and office of the prime minister, called on the British government to condemn the Israeli aggression and stop arms exports to Tel Aviv. They raised banners condemning the continued aggression on Gaza and demanding an immediate ceasefire.

Dozens of protesters blocked the entrance to the Israeli arms factory belonging to the “Elbit” company in the British village of Chineham, in support of Gaza and condemning the crimes of genocide.

In Belgium, the Belgian police dispersed protesters in the capital Brussels with water cannons as they tried to reach the Israeli embassy as part of a protest against the bombardment of Rafah.

In Ireland, Palestinian, Arab and Irish activists supporting the Palestinian cause demonstrated in front of the Irish Parliament in Dublin, coinciding with the Irish government’s recognition of the State of Palestine.

The protesters raised the Palestinian flags and banners in support of Palestinian rights in front of the parliament garden, which witnessed the raising of the Palestinian flag for the first time.

In France, thousands of people demonstrated on Tuesday evening in Paris for the second day in a row, protesting the Israeli massacres in Rafah.

The place de la République in the center of the capital was crowded with people, and Palestinian flags were placed on the statue in the center, with a large banner reading “Stop the Genocide”.

In Norway, a demonstration was held in front of the Norwegian Parliament building to celebrate the government’s recognition of the State of Palestine, and to demand the withdrawal of Norwegian investments from Israel and pressure for an immediate and sustainable ceasefire.

The demonstrators raised Palestinian flags and banners calling for an immediate ceasefire, and banners accusing Israel of committing a war of extermination. The demonstrators called for the punishment of those responsible for the genocide in Gaza.

In the Netherlands, dozens of supporters of Palestine held a silent protest in front of the city hall in Utrecht, to condemn the burning of tents and the killing of civilian children and women in Tel Sultan, west of Rafah.

The protesters laid on the ground in front of the building to represent the scene of the victims’ deaths in Gaza, raising Palestinian flags and chanting slogans condemning the Dutch government’s support for Israel since the beginning of the aggression, and calling for the protection of Rafah.

In Canada, the city of Toronto witnessed a massive demonstration on Monday evening to condemn the massacre of the tents committed by the Israeli army in the Palestinian city of Rafah.

The activists marched through the streets of the city, chanting slogans condemning the ongoing Israeli crimes, and calling for an end to the ongoing genocide in Gaza and a ceasefire.

In Mexico, pro-Palestinian supporters held a protest demonstration in front of the Israeli embassy in Mexico City, condemning the Israeli massacre in Rafah and rejecting the continued aggression on Gaza.

Many of the demonstrators tried to storm the embassy building and pelted it with stones, amid clashes with the Mexican police.

In Jordan, hundreds of Jordanians demonstrated around the Israeli embassy west of the capital Amman, condemning the ongoing genocide in Gaza against the besieged civilian population.

The protesters chanted slogans supporting the Palestinian resistance, calling for the need to deliver humanitarian and medical aid.

They also condemned normalization with Israel and called on the Jordanian government and Arab governments to end all diplomatic and economic agreements with Israel.

In Yemen, protesters organized rallies and marches condemning the Israeli massacres in Rafah, according to the Saba news agency.

Hundreds of students participated in marches in the governorates of Sanaa, Amran and Hajjah, in support and solidarity with the resistance in Gaza and in solidarity with the oppressed Palestinian people.

In Morocco, hundreds of Moroccans, including human rights activists, organized a rally in front of the Parliament building in the capital Rabat, in solidarity with Gaza and condemning the recent massacres in Rafah.

Through banners calling to “Stop the Rafah Massacres”, the participating protesters expressed their rejection of Israel’s defiance of all international conventions and rulings of the International Court of Justice through its continued massacres in Rafah, calling on international institutions to activate their mechanisms to deter it.

Many Moroccan cities, including Tangier, are witnessing similar protest marches, at an almost daily pace, in solidarity with the Palestinian people and rejecting normalization.

May 29, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism, War Crimes | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Norway, Spain, Ireland to formally recognize Palestinian statehood

The Cradle | May 22, 2024

Norway, Ireland, and Spain announced on 22 May that they will formally recognize Palestine as a state next week, drawing the ire of Israel as the country immediately recalled its ambassadors to Dublin and Oslo.

“There cannot be peace in [West Asia] if there is no recognition … In the midst of a war, with tens of thousands killed and injured [in Gaza], we must keep alive the only alternative that offers a political solution for Israelis and Palestinians alike: Two states living side by side, in peace and security,” Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store said on Wednesday.

Shortly after Oslo’s announcement, Irish Prime Minister Simon Harris said his country would also recognize a Palestinian state.

“Today, Ireland, Norway, and Spain are announcing that we recognize the state of Palestine,” Harris said at a news conference. “I’m confident that further countries will join us in taking this important step in the coming weeks,” he added.

Foreign Minister Micheal Martin said via social media that the recognition will become official on 28 May.

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez followed suit, announcing Wednesday that the country’s council of ministers would also recognize an independent Palestinian state on 28 May. He also accused his Israeli counterpart Benjamin Netanyahu of putting the two-state solution in “danger” with his policy of “pain and destruction” in Gaza.

In response to the news, Tel Aviv immediately recalled its ambassadors to Ireland and Norway and pledged to recall its envoy to Spain. The foreign ministry also summoned the ambassadors from the three European nations to “reprimand” them.

Israeli foreign minister Israel Katz called the show of support for Palestinians a “folly,” adding that recognizing Palestinian statehood “[sends] a message to the Palestinians and the world: Terrorism pays.”

Palestinian officials welcomed the announcement by three European nations, with Hamas calling it an “important step.”

“We welcome the announcement by Norway, Ireland, and Spain of recognition of the State of Palestine, and we consider it an important step on the path to consolidating our right to our land and establishing our independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital,” the statement by the Palestinian resistance says.

“Historical moments in which the free world triumphs for truth and justice after long decades of Palestinian national struggle, suffering, pain, occupation, racism, murder, oppression, abuse and destruction to which the people of Palestine were subjected,” the Secretary-General of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) said via social media.

Nine European countries — Bulgaria, Poland, the Czech Republic, Romania, Slovakia, Hungary, Sweden, Malta, and the Greek Cypriot administration — have already recognized Palestine as a state.

May 22, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Nord Stream Sues Insurance Companies in London Court – Reports

Sputnik – 12.03.2024

The operator of Nord Stream gas pipelines has sued its insurers in a London court for 400 million euros ($436 million) for their refusal to cover damages following the explosions, the Financial Times reported, citing court documents.

The operator reportedly sued Lloyd’s of London and Arch Insurance companies in February.

The Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines, built to deliver gas under the Baltic Sea from Russia to Germany, were hit by explosions in September 2022. Nord Stream’s operator, Nord Stream AG, said that the damage was unprecedented, and it was impossible to estimate the time repairs might take.

Russia considers the explosions of the two pipelines an act of international terrorism. There are no official results of the investigation yet, but Pulitzer Prize-winning US investigative journalist Seymour Hersh published a report in February 2023, alleging that the explosions had been organized by the United States with the support of Norway. Washington has denied any involvement in the incident.

To date, none of the Western countries involved in the subsequent investigation – Sweden, Denmark, and Germany – have presented explanations of what happened or named a culprit. Moreover, Sweden announced on February 7 that it would drop its investigation into explosions.

March 12, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Economics, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

Four Norwegian universities cut ties with Israeli institutions over Gaza genocide

Press TV – February 24, 2024

Four Norwegian universities have decided to suspend ties with Israeli universities they deem complicit in the occupying regime’s genocidal war in Gaza.

The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) welcomed the decisions, hailing them as a crucial step in supporting the Palestinian struggle.

The move aligns with the campaign’s call for international academic and cultural institutions to sever ties with Israeli counterparts involved in Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

Among the universities taking action, OsloMet has announced the termination of its ties with Haifa University and vowed not to engage in any new agreements with Israeli universities complicit in the war.

Additionally, OsloMet has committed to discontinuing procurement contracts with suppliers linked to the Israeli military or illegal settlements.

The University of South Eastern Norway has followed suit, cutting off relations with Haifa University and Hadassah Academic College.

Similarly, the University of Bergen has severed cooperation agreements with Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design, citing the academy’s involvement in providing uniforms and gear for the Israeli military.

The Bergen School of Architecture has also joined in this action, ending its collaboration with Bezalel Academy over its ties with the Israeli military.

This move echoes the sentiments expressed by 15 Palestinian universities, which have called for Israeli universities to face international isolation for their complicity in Israel’s crimes against Palestinians.

Meanwhile, Norway’s pension fund, with some US$95 billion worth of assets, announced that it was divesting from their entire Israel Bond holdings over their links with the Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.

February 25, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Norway’s Top General Urges Defense Spending Hike Amid NATO Fearmongering

By Svetlana Ekimenko – Sputnik – 24.01.2024

The specter of a “Russian threat” ostensibly looming is being invoked in the West increasingly loudly as justification for ramping up military spending, with Norway’s top brass the latest to lap up this tenuous narrative.

Norway has only a small window of opportunity to ramp up its defense spending in the face of a “looming threat” of military conflict with Russia, the head of the Norwegian Armed Forces has warned.

Jumping on the bandwagon driving the cynical “Russian bogeyman” narrative, General Eirik Kristoffersen claimed in a recent interview that Norway needs to build up its defenses before it is too late.

“The current window of opportunity will remain open for a year or two, perhaps three, which is when we will have to invest even more in our defense,” General Kristoffersen said in an interview with the local outlet Dagbladet. He added:

“We do not know what will become of Russia in three years. We need to prepare a strong national defense to be able to meet an uncertain and unpredictable world.”

The Norwegian general lamented the fact that Moscow was reportedly building up its weapons stockpiles at a greater speed and efficiency than NATO allies had expected.

Currently, NATO member Norway lags behind the alliance’s defense spending requirement of two percent of GDP per year. While originally setting itself the timeline of achieving that goal by 2026, apparently the raucous peddling of the concocted “Russia threat” is forcing Norway’s generals to lose sleep over the ominous forebodings.

“This is a calculated risk. If the danger was imminent right now, then we could not have given so many weapons [to Ukraine]. But that is not the case,” Kristoffersen said, while adding that Ukraine needs to be supported for as long as it takes.

Norway’s chief of defense also went as far as to urge Norwegians to begin stockpiling food, saying that “What the Norwegian population should think about is their own preparedness.”

These remarks by Kristoffersen echo those of his Swedish colleague. Commander-in-Chief Mikael Byden told Swedes to “prepare themselves mentally” for an open conflict with Russia. Another warmonger, Dutch Admiral Rob Bauer, the NATO Military Committee chief, stated in Brussels last Thursday:

“We have to realize it’s not a given that we are in peace. And that’s why we [NATO forces] are preparing for a conflict with Russia.”

Boris Pistorius, the German defense minister, claimed earlier that Russia may choose to attack a NATO country within “five to eight years.”

While pumping Ukraine with billions’ worth of weapons for its proxy conflict with Russia, the US-dominated alliance has upped the Russia threat narrative in recent months. The rants have been particularly timed to the growing “Ukraine fatigue” and dwindling support for continuing to aid the Kiev regime. Pistorius’ comments echoed a report in the German daily newspaper Bild. Quoting a “confidential Bundeswehr document,” it claimed that a conflict between NATO and Russia could erupt as soon as the summer of 2025.

The Kremlin has dismissed the report as “fake news,” with spokesman Dmitry Peskov doubting Bild’s credibility. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova compared the leaked plan to a “powerful horoscope,” saying she wouldn’t be surprised if the scenario was provided to the German military by the Foreign Ministry and its notoriously Russophobic chief, Annalena Baerbock.

January 24, 2024 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Militarism, Russophobia | , , | 2 Comments

How Britain invented modern torture

By Kit Klarenberg | Al Mayadeen | January 6, 2024

On January 2, Frank Kitson, a lifelong British Army officer, writer, and military theorist died peacefully in his sleep at the grand age of 97. It was an undeservedly dignified exit for an individual who directly and indirectly inflicted misery upon untold people for much of his lifetime. It is likely many will continue to suffer adverse consequences as a result of his teachings for decades to come.

Kitson was a pioneer in the field of counterinsurgency, defined as “the totality of actions aimed at defeating irregular forces.” His assorted views on the topic were informed by Britain’s experience of brutal, asymmetric wars against nationalist rebellions and attempted revolutions throughout the Global South, as its Empire rapidly disintegrated following World War II. In several cases, he was on the literal frontline of these bloody disputes.

Kitson wrote a series of books about counterinsurgency, which were hugely influential internationally. Most notoriously, his proposed strategies for “defeating irregular forces” were deployed throughout “the Troubles” – London’s secret dirty war against the Catholic population of Northern Ireland and the Irish Republican Army (IRA). Ever since, these methods have been deployed over and again to devastating effect in theatres of war domestic and foreign, by multiple governments.

Even sympathetic mainstream obituaries of Kitson were forced to acknowledge this highly controversial legacy. The Times of London noted how in his final years, “he was still dogged by litigation” from his time leading Britain’s war on Catholics throughout the Troubles. “Threats to his personal security and that of his family continued to the end” as a result of his posting, the newspaper recorded.

Absent from these eulogies was any reference to a core, clandestine component of Kitson’s patented counterinsurgency credo – a very specific, uniquely British form of torture. Actively practiced and exported abroad by London for decades, these techniques of maltreatment have been adopted by countless militaries, security and intelligence agencies, and police forces. Just as the primary casualties of battles against “irregular forces” are invariably innocent civilians, average citizens of the world have been the ultimate victims of this mephitic push.

‘Propaganda Cover’

In the Autumn of 1969, Kitson’s British Army superiors personally tasked him with an extremely sensitive mission. He was to enroll at Oxford University and produce a thesis “to make the army ready to deal with subversion, insurrection and peace-keeping operations” over the next decade, if not beyond. The 42-year-old lieutenant colonel was an ideal candidate for the role.

Pyrrhic victory over the Nazis severely weakened London financially and militarily, prompting populations of her colonies and imperial holdings to rise en-masse against their oppressors. This produced bitter end-of-Empire wars on every continent. Kitson was a veteran of two – the 1952 – 1960 Mau Mau Rebellion in Kenya, and the 1948 – 1960 Malayan Emergency. There, he witnessed first-hand the British innovate new, vicious ways of dealing with unconventional threats, in real-time.

Kitson was dispatched to Oxford at a time when London struggled desperately to contain another popular civilian rebellion. Escalating tensions between indigenous Catholics and Protestant colonizers in Northern Ireland resulted in the British Army’s formal deployment to the province in August 1969. Initially welcomed as protectors, the situation rapidly spun out of control. The “peacekeepers” became embroiled in endless, unwinnable street-to-street battles against IRA insurgency and hostile Catholic civilians.

In September 1970, Kitson took command of the British Army’s 39th Brigade, responsible for keeping the peace in Belfast and much of the east of Northern Ireland. Serendipitously, his thesis was published as “Low Intensity Operations: Subversion, Insurgency and Peacekeeping” not long after. Received with some relief by soldiers, military chiefs, and government officials wrestling with how to deal with “the Troubles”, its contents provoked an outcry in certain public quarters.

Of particular concern were passages in which Kitson argued against conducting counterinsurgency efforts “against those practicing subversion” under typical civil, legal, and political conditions. Instead, he contended that standard freedoms, protections, and rights should be suspended, before launching military operations against “irregular targets”. In such contexts, laws could not “remain impartial and [be administered] without any direction from the government.”

“Law should be used as just another weapon in the government’s arsenal…a propaganda cover for the disposal of unwanted members of the public. For this to happen efficiently, the activities of legal services have to be tied into the war effort in as discreet a way as possible.”

Elsewhere, Kitson likened counterinsurgency to catching a fish, with civilian populations of areas where enemy groups operate as “the water in which the fish swims.” He argued that if a fish could not be caught via traditional means such as a net or rod, “it may be necessary to do something to the water which will force the fish into a position where it can be caught. Conceivably it might be necessary to kill the fish by polluting the water.’’

‘Five Techniques’

In August 1971, Operation Demetrius commenced in Northern Ireland. British soldiers went home-to-home across the province, mass-arresting IRA suspects and their family members, frequently based on outdated or outright false intelligence, in service of “internment”. This policy was entirely in keeping with Kitson’s counterinsurgency pronouncements and executed under his direct watch. It meant detention without trial for hundreds of “terrorism” suspects, over lengthy periods.

While jailed, internees were subjected to some or all of London’s “Five Techniques” of torture to make them talk. These methods, in keeping with Kitson’s counterinsurgency philosophy, evolved over the course of Britain’s assorted end-of-Empire conflicts. Catholics were spared the absolute worst excesses of the horrors meted out to indigenous populations. For example, while women were victims of internment, broken bottles, gun barrels, knives, snakes, and hot eggs were not routinely thrust into their genitalia, as was done with female Mau Mau suspects in Kenya.

Still, what was done to detainees can only be considered barbarous in the absolute extreme. In November of that year, a senior commandant within the British Army’s Intelligence Corps sketched an official history of the development of London’s military interrogation methods since World War II. Its contents were so sensitive and shocking that senior government officials wished for the report to remain secret for a century. As it was, the document was declassified after just three decades.

In brief, Britain had devised a system of torture, combining prolonged stress positions, subjection to white noise, sensory deprivation, and cessation of food, drink, and sleep. The Five Techniques could be applied to anyone in almost any context, cost little or nothing to employ, and would not leave physical marks on victims. As such, public exposure, scandal, or prosecution for human rights abuses and/or war crimes was extremely unlikely, if not impossible.

Physical pain and psychological devastation inflicted by the Five Techniques were nonetheless dependably gargantuan. In stress positions, detainees were stripped, then forced to wear buttonless boiler suits and hoods, before being forced to stand with their legs spread apart, leaning forward with their arms held high against a wall, supporting all their weight with their fingers alone. Simultaneously, relentless white noise was pumped into their cells. If a prisoner did not maintain the stress position, they were beaten into compliance.

‘Very Simple System’

The Intelligence Corps report notes these methods had been applied over the past three decades to prisoners of war, refugees, guerrilla fighters, and spies. Contained therein is a lengthy section documenting the deployment and refinement of the “Five Techniques” in numerous counterinsurgencies, while discussing their efficacy and the results gained by usage. For example, the author cites how Mau Mau “terrorists” in Kenya “were persuaded under interrogation to switch their allegiance and subsequently guided British patrols against their erstwhile comrades.”

In British Cameroon 1960/1, “members of a subversive group from the neighbouring Cameroon Republic were arrested on British-controlled territory, which they were using as a base.” An Army team set up shop in a “converted hotel annex” to interrogate 20 “high grade subjects”, of which 15 “cooperated fully” as a result of torture.”

“Information elicited included full details of rebel training camps in Morocco and other north-west African countries – even course syllabi.”

In June 1963, British Army interrogators flew to Swaziland, a protectorate of London, after 1,500 workers at a British-owned asbestos mine went on strike, demanding a basic wage of £1 a day. In a perverse irony, “it was thought that the labour problem [was] created by [a] subversive organisation,” rather than legitimate and reasonable grievances over grossly exploitative low wages paid by their colonial overlords.

After the Five Techniques were liberally applied to strikers – and, given their racial extraction, surely more gruesome methods too – “no subversive organisation was found” to be behind the strikes. This “negative result” was considered “valuable”, as “it quickly established that local grievances were the cause of unrest.” The effort was also “successful in clearing up the labour problems,” the report commended. But of course – when industrial action results in torture, workers quickly learn to stay in line.

Fast forward to March 1971, a British Army interrogation center was set up in a “disused camp” in Northern Ireland. The site “was not perfectly adaptable to the task, but was the best available,” the report records. The stage was thus set for Catholics to be subjected to the Five Techniques with total impunity. Savage tactics tested and honed against Africans, Asians, and Latin Americans were being brought “home” to British soil.

The report’s author understood the monstrousness that had been created. They noted the importance of training British soldiers to withstand comparable interrogation techniques and to know “what to expect at the hands of an unscrupulous enemy.” It is nonetheless likely that British trainees were spared the indignity of being beaten, kicked in the genitals, and having their heads smashed into walls, as many Catholic internees suffered.

The result in every case was prolonged pain, physical and mental exhaustion, severe anxiety, depression, hallucinations, disorientation, and repeated loss of consciousness. No detainee ever fully recovered from their internment – long-term psychological trauma was universal. Yet, it appears only 14 prisoners were subjected to every single one of the Five Techniques. They became known as the “Hooded Men”, and in 1976, their case was considered by the European Commission of Human Rights. It ruled that the Techniques amounted to torture.

The case was then referred to the European Court of Human Rights, which astoundingly ruled two years later that while the Five Techniques were “inhuman and degrading” and breached Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, they did not amount to torture. In 2014, after it was revealed that British government ministers had expressly greenlit the use of the Five Techniques in Northern Ireland, Dublin asked the ECHR to review its decision. Four years later, the Court declined.

The declassified British Army Intelligence Corps report notes many foreign countries “show considerable interest” in the Five Techniques, with students from the US, Netherlands, Jordan, Belgium, Germany, Norway, and Denmark regularly attending training sessions convened by London. “Our European allies look to the UK for advice… our very simple system is admired,” the report boasts. This surely explains why the Five Techniques cannot be formally recognized by the most influential and powerful human rights court in the world.

January 8, 2024 Posted by | Subjugation - Torture, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

UK about to escalate naval tensions in Black Sea

By Lucas Leiroz | December 20, 2023

The UK appears to be close to launching a new dangerous anti-Russian naval policy. According to reports, the British Navy will send new combat ships and heavy weapons to the Black Sea in order to help Ukraine strengthen its regional presence there. It appears that a formal agreement between both countries will be signed in the near future, setting out the terms for naval cooperation, which will obviously result in increased tensions with Russia.

The data was published by The Telegraph. The outlet’s sources claim that the agreement between the UK and Ukraine will be signed “in the coming weeks”, generating expanded British participation in the activities of the Ukrainian Navy. The Black Sea, which is currently a conflict zone between Russian and Ukrainian forces, is expected to receive a large number of British military ships that will support Kiev in hostilities.

The news comes shortly after the British Ministry of Defense announced the sending of at least two mine clearing ships to Ukraine. The measure was taken within the framework of a coalition of naval support for Kiev that also involves Norway. As the UK is one of the most active sponsors of the Ukrainian regime, constantly sending packages of weapons and equipment to Kiev, the delivery was not seen as something “surprising” at the time, but, apparently, London still plans to further deepen its interventionism, starting to participate in even more actions in the Black Sea.

According to anonymous sources mentioned by the newspaper, the new agreement would also make it possible to send heavy ground and air weapons, with the aim of making Ukrainian units close to the Black Sea more “interoperable” with NATO. More modern and lethal versions of British ship-based Brimstone missiles are also expected to supply the Ukrainian Navy, giving it more capability for the high-intensity fighting that is currently taking place in the region.

In addition, it is planned to advance in the training of commando troops focused on amphibious assault and mine-clearing operations. The UK has been training many Ukrainian troops since the beginning of the Russian military intervention. It is estimated that more than 30,000 Ukrainian soldiers were trained by the British last year as part of the so-called “Operation Interflex”. Now, it is believed that, under the new agreement, the Navy’s special forces training programs will be expanded.

Unconfirmed rumors also indicate that the new security pact between the UK and Kiev will have as one of its objectives to provide guarantees to Ukraine regarding post-conflict British aid. Faced with Ukraine’s evident military defeat, concerns are growing about possible aid packages to rebuild Ukraine in a post-war scenario, which is why Kiev officials are expected to pressure their partners to include guarantees in this regard in new agreements signed with Western countries.

In fact, all these measures seem irresponsible and anti-strategic from a realistic point of view. It is more than clear that no Western aid will be able to make Ukraine reverse the military scenario of the conflict, which is absolutely controlled by the Russian Federation. Defeats on the battlefield, territorial losses and the humiliating failure of their attempted “counteroffensive” have proven that Kiev’s forces have no chance of defeating their adversaries, and that it is pointless to continue supporting the neo-Nazi regime with weapons, money and equipment.

The situation is particularly delicate for Ukraine in the Black Sea, where Russia is focused on destroying all enemy targets, including suspicious commercial ships and critical infrastructure. Kiev has been using the region’s ports to store weapons, as well as transporting military equipment and troops via ships disguised as commercial vessels. After suffering several attacks against its territory due to the Ukrainian military use of civilian naval infrastructure, Moscow decided to consider such suspicious ships and ports as legitimate targets.

In this sense, the UK may be making a serious mistake by planning to expand its participation in Black Sea’s hostilities. British ships sent to the Ukrainian Navy will be seen by the Russians as a priority target and it is likely that most of the vessels will be neutralized even before they begin to be operated by Kiev’s forces. Moscow is not willing to tolerate any foreign interventionism in the region and is focused on preventing further attacks on Russian civilians from Ukrainian units in the Black Sea, so there will certainly be efforts to destroy all equipment sent by London.

Instead of creating new military agreements and aid packages, the West should simply encourage Kiev to negotiate peace, ending hostilities without further damage.

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

You can follow Lucas on X and Telegram.

December 20, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | 1 Comment

UK nuclear site ‘leaking’ – The Guardian

Sellafield nuclear reprocessing facility November 26, 2001 in Cumbria, England © Getty Images / Graham Barclay/BWP Media/Getty Images
RT | December 5, 2023

Sellafield, regarded as the most hazardous nuclear site in Europe, has developed a leak in a massive radioactive waste silo that has prompted concerns about the facility’s safety measures, as well as potential dangers to the public and the environment, The Guardian has reported.

The two-square-mile (6km sq) plant, located in Cumbria in England’s northwest, is responsible for the storage and decommissioning of nuclear waste from nuclear weapons programs and power generation. It was previously used to generate nuclear power from 1956 to 2003.

However, the decades-old facility, Europe’s largest nuclear site, has a catalog of safety issues, the newspaper said, including asbestos and fire hazards. Perhaps more concerningly, though, are cracks in storage silos which have prompted diplomatic squabbles with affected countries, including the US, Norway and Ireland.

Damage to one silo of toxic radioactive waste has caused a leak of “potentially significant consequences,” The Guardian said on Tuesday, citing official documents seen by the outlet. It adds that the leak, which it says is likely to continue until 2050, could contaminate groundwater should the situation worsen further.

Scientists are attempting to assess the full risks of the leak using “ongoing radiological dose assessments” and statistical modeling, the newspaper added. In June, the UK’s Office for Nuclear Regulation (ORR) said in a report that the risk presented by the leak is “as low as reasonably practicable.” However, the nuclear regulator remained concerned by the full impact of the leak and at what rate, if any, it may affect groundwater.

An unnamed expert who sits on a committee that monitors Sellafield and other nuclear sites told The Guardian : “It’s hard to know if transparency is put aside because no one’s brave enough to say ‘we simply don’t know how dangerous this is – other than certainly dangerous.’”

An EU report in 2001 warned that an accident at Sellafield could be more hazardous than that of the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, which exposed about five million people in Europe to radiation. Sellafield contains substantially more radioactive material than the Chernobyl facility did at the time.

Reports of Sellafield’s crumbling facade have sparked US concerns about the safety standards at the site, according to diplomatic cables seen by the publication. It has also led to complaints from the governments of both Ireland and Norway – with Oslo worried about the potential of radioactive particles being carried towards its territory by winds across the North Sea.

Health problems brought on by exposure to nuclear radiation depend on the dose but can range from nausea and vomiting to cardiovascular disease and cancer. Extremely high exposure is, in most cases, fatal.

December 5, 2023 Posted by | Environmentalism, Militarism, Nuclear Power | , , | Leave a comment

Nord Stream Blast: Why the West Still Can’t Name the Culprit

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 26.09.2023

Exactly a year ago three out of four Nord Stream pipelines running from Russia to Germany under the Baltic Sea to provide Western Europe with natural gas were destroyed. Western investigators have so far failed to find the saboteurs behind the blast.

Gas leaks from the Nord Stream pipeline system were detected on 26 September 2022, with the EU leadership admitting that this could be the result of a “deliberate attack”.

Two days later, on 28 September, the Kremlin announced that Russia was ready to consider applications from EU countries for a joint investigation into the Nord Stream incident.

However, not only did the West snub Moscow’s request but also blamed Russia for destroying its own pipelines. Later, European and American officials backtracked on their accusations but fell short of naming a potential perpetrator.

On 12 October 2022, Russian President Vladimir Putin called the incident “an act of international terrorism”. Meanwhile, as gas prices soared and US energy producers secured lucrative liquefied natural gas (LNG) contracts with European countries, it became clear that Washington had been the major beneficiary from the Nord Stream destruction.

Furthermore, the US leadership had previously issued several threats that it would destroy the pipelines.

“We know that the United States President Joe Biden, threatened openly that he would stop Nord Stream 2 if the Russians were to militarily intervene in Ukraine,” Philip Giraldi, former CIA station chief and now an executive director of the Council for the National Interest, told Sputnik. “That was repeated by Victoria Nuland, who was Number Three at the State Department. She said basically the same thing. So we had the President and a senior official both saying that they would stop the pipeline if this were to happen. So we have a statement coming from the government itself saying it would do this.”

“And then I would say on top of that, the United States – given its military capabilities – had the capability to do this. They sent divers down to attach explosives and to arrange for a drone satellite that would ignite the charges and blow up the pipelines. It had the capability to do it. And it also had the motive, which was basically to weaken Russia’s ability to use its energy resources to affect politics in Europe. So this is what it was all about,” Giraldi continued.

On 8 February 2023, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh dropped a bombshell, detailing an apparent plot by Team Biden and the US intelligence community to blast the Nord Stream pipelines with the help of Norwegian operatives.

Reflecting on Hersh’s version, Giraldi said that he feels that Hersh’s narrative is “correct in every detail.”

“And I can confirm to you that Sy Hersh, whom I know somewhat, has excellent sources inside CIA and inside the Pentagon. So what he’s telling us comes straight from people who know about it,” the CIA veteran said.

Blame Game Time: The Andromeda Yarn

On 7 March, the US and German mainstream sources published two separate articles claiming that international investigators had managed to trace the 26 September 2022 sabotage attack to a “pro-Ukrainian” group operating from the Andromeda, a 15-meter chartered yacht. The story immediately prompted a lot of controversy.

German media, for example, asked how a 15-meter chartered yacht could carry the 1,500-2,000 kilograms of explosives needed to destroy the pipelines, adding that the Andromeda does not have a crane to hoist such quantities safely into the water. It was also unclear how the group of volunteers managed to transport that amount of explosives across Europe.

Another problem, cited by the press, was that at the site of the explosion, the depth of the Baltic Sea is about 80 meters, requiring special diving equipment which the private vessel lacked. On top of this, the gang of saboteurs returned the yacht in bad condition and even left a couple of fake passports on board which made the story even fishier.

Hersh ridiculed the mainstream media yarn while discussing it with an anonymous CIA operative familiar with the issue. According to Hersh, it’s not just a “bad” media story but a deliberate “parody” fed by the CIA to the US and German media.

“In the world of professional analysts and operators, everyone will universally and correctly conclude from your story that the devilish CIA concocted a counter-op that is on its face so ridiculous and childish that the real purpose was to reinforce the truth,” the investigative journalist wrote on 5 April.

The most recent Western media stories alleging Ukraine’s involvement don’t hold water, either, according to Giraldi:

“Look, when you’re doing things in the intelligence world, you look for corroborative details – details that tell you that this story is coming from a good source or that it is fundamentally correct. And I saw none of that in this story. There have been a number of stories, of course, about people from Ukraine having done this, or people even from Germany renting boats and going over there, and they didn’t know what nationality they were. I mean, these are repeated stories. I have no reason to assume that this story is correct.”

The CIA veteran goes on to say that at present there is no story that sounds as credible as Hersh’s version. Besides, the US had the motive; it had the capability to do it; and it also had the objective to do it as a way of weakening Russia’s ability to influence Western Europe, Giraldi summarized.

“So I think that a lot of the background or the backstory supports the fact that the United States basically did it, though, apparently with the assistance of the Norwegians, and I would imagine some of the other NATO allies were also briefed in a certain fashion. In other words, not all the details, but given some indication that something might be happening in the near future in the Baltic.”

Why Couldn’t EU Investigators Name the Culprit?

It’s hardly surprising that despite official investigations in three countries – Sweden, Denmark, and Germany – the question of who is responsible for the sabotage remains unanswered, according to Giraldi.

“The fact that there have been three investigations carried out means nothing because the three countries that carry out the investigation are all NATO members. So they would have no motive whatsoever to challenge the argument that this was carried out by the Russians themselves or by the Ukrainians,” the CIA veteran said.

However, Giraldi suspects that the German investigation probably came closest to the truth. However, what they told the public was essentially a narrative acceptable to the United States and to NATO. The former CIA field officer pointed out that Germany suffered the most from the destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines.

“Their economy is in trouble. They were dependent on Russian energy and so they are paying a price for it, and I’m sure that many Germans – I do know that many Germans are aware of this and are complaining that this ever took place. I was in Eastern Europe about two months ago, and I heard this a lot from Europeans, how stupid this whole thing was to destroy a resource that was very good for Europe as well as being good for Russia.”

According to Giraldi, it’s interesting to examine who else – apart from the US and Norway – was aware of the Nord Stream plot and was foolhardy enough to get involved in it. Giraldi doubted whether Berlin had been in collusion with the US and Norway from the beginning and said that it did not make sense for a country to sacrifice its own economy willingly.

Furthermore, the Nord Stream pipelines weren’t just a Gazprom asset, Giraldi emphasized: there were other countries – other companies from Western Europe – that participated in the project that had been worth billions of dollars. And because of the US plot, their money had been squandered and their infrastructure had suffered incalculable damage.

But the financial aspect is only half the story: the most worrying part is that those who blew the pipelines up risked escalating the crisis dramatically.

“The destruction of the pipeline was an act of war,” stressed Giraldi, “… so this is an interesting story if we ever find out the truth.”

On 17 September 2023, the First Deputy Permanent Representative of Russia to the UN Dmitry Polyansky said that Russia was calling for the UN Security Council to meet to discuss the Nord Stream gas pipelines and the council will gather on Tuesday, 26 September – a year after the sabotage occurred.

On 27 August, the Prime Minister of the German federal state of Saxony, Michael Kretschmer, announced the need to repair the damaged gas pipelines which he said will help to ensure the country’s energy supply for another five to 10 years.

September 26, 2023 Posted by | Economics, War Crimes | , , , , | 1 Comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »