Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The latest Democracy Perception Index reveals shifts in global perceptions

By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | May 21, 2024

The Democracy Perception Index (DPI) issued its 2024 report on 8 May, revealing important and interesting shifts in global perceptions about democracy, geopolitics and international relations. The conclusions in the report were based on the views of over 62,000 respondents from 53 countries, representing roughly 75 per cent of the world’s total population.

The survey was conducted between 20 February and 15 April this year, when the world was largely transfixed by the Israeli war against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

It is important to note that the DPI, although informative, is itself conceived in a biased context as it is the product of a global survey conducted by western-based companies and organisations.

The DPI results were published ahead of a scheduled 2024 Copenhagen Democracy Summit, whose speakers will include Hillary Clinton, US Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell and President of the European Council Charles Michel. The first speaker listed on the conference website is Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the Founder and Chairman of the Alliance of Democracies Foundation, which commissioned the DPI.

All of this is reflected in the kind of questions which are being asked in the survey, placing greater emphasis on whether, for example, ties should be cut with Russia over Ukraine, and China over a war that is yet to take place in Taiwan. Such major shortcomings notwithstanding, the outcome of the research remains interesting and worthy of reflection.

There are some major takeaways from the report. For a start, there is growing dissatisfaction with the state of democracy, and such discontent is not limited to people living in countries perceived as non-democratic; it also includes people in the US and Europe.

What’s more, democracy, in the collective awareness of ordinary people, is not a political term often infused as part of official propaganda. When seen from the viewpoint of the people, democracy is a practical notion, whose absence leads to dire implications. For example, 68 per cent of people worldwide believe that economic inequality at home is the greatest threat to democracy.

On the question of “threats to democracy”, there is growing mistrust of Global Corporations (60 per cent), Big Tech (49 per cent) and their resulting Economic Inequality (68 per cent), and Corruption (67 per cent). This leads to the unmistakable conclusion that western globalisation has failed to create the proper environment for social equality, empower civil society or build democratic institutions. The opposite, based on people’s own perceptions, seems to be true.

Then we have global priorities which, as seen by many nations around the world, remain committed to ending wars, poverty, hunger, combating climate change, etc. However, this year’s top priority among European countries, 44 per cent, is also centred on reducing immigration, a significant number compared with the 24 per cent who prioritise fighting climate change.

Although the world appears to be divided about cutting ties with Russia and China, the selection of the question again reeks with bias.

The respondents in western countries, who are subjected to relentless media propaganda, prefer cutting such ties, while most people in the rest of the world prefer keeping them. Consequently, due to China’s positive perception in Asia, the Middle East and North Africa, the DPI gave Beijing a “net positive”. Russia, on the other hand, is on the “path of image rehabilitation in most countries surveyed with the exception of Europe,” reported Politico.

The greatest decline was suffered by the United States, largely due to Washington’s support for Israel in its ongoing war in the Gaza Strip. “Over the past four years… perceptions of the US’s global influence became more positive – peaking in 2022 or 2023 – and then declined sharply in 2024,” the report concluded.

The large drop took place in the Muslim countries that were surveyed: Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkiye, Morocco, Egypt and Algeria. Some western European countries are also becoming more critical of the US, including Switzerland, Ireland and Germany.

Most people (55 per cent compared with 29 per cent) believe that social media has a positive effect on democracy. Despite growing social media censorship, many in the Global South still find margins in these platforms which allow them to escape official or corporate media censorship. Growing criticism of social media companies, however, is taking place in western countries, according to the survey.

Despite official propaganda emanating from many governments, especially in the west, regarding the greatest threats to world peace, the majority of people want their governments to focus on poverty reduction, fight corruption, promote economic growth, and improve healthcare and education, while working to reduce income inequality. “Investing in security and defence,” came seventh on the list.

Finally, people in countries which have an overall negative perception of the United States include some of the most influential global and regional powers, such as China, Russia, Indonesia, Austria, Turkiye, Australia and Belgium.

Despite massive media propaganda, censorship and scaremongering, people around the world remain clear on their collective priorities, expectations and aspirations, which are real democracy, social equality and justice. If these collective yearnings continue to be denigrated and ignored, we should expect more social upheaval, if not outright insurrections and military coups in coming years.

May 22, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine launches drone attack near Europe’s largest nuclear power plant

RT | May 22, 2024

Kiev’s forces have once again attacked the grounds of the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) using a kamikaze drone, the facility’s press service reported on Wednesday. The facility is the largest of its type in Europe.

According to a message issued by the service on Telegram, the drone reportedly hit a transport workshop of the ZNPP but did not cause any casualties or critical damage to the facility.

The strike comes amid a series of UAV attacks on the city of Energodar, located next to the facility, over the past two days, the press service said. It stressed that the shelling of civilians and attacks on the nuclear plant and its infrastructure are “unacceptable and clearly constitute terrorist acts.”

Throughout the Ukraine conflict, the ZNPP has repeatedly been targeted with drones and artillery since the Russian military captured the facility in the early months of its campaign.

The co-chairman of the council on integrating Russia’s new territories, Vladimir Rogov, also claimed in an interview last month that Ukraine’s special forces were in the midst of conducting exercises that focused on crossing the Dnieper river and capturing a “large man-made object.” According to Rogov, this “object” appears to be the ZNPP.

Moscow and Kiev have blamed each other for the shelling of the plant while Ukraine and its Western backers have accused Russia of using the facility as cover for its troops.

However, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi was unable to confirm the accusations after personally visiting the facility on several occasions. Following his latest visit in April, he admitted seeing armored vehicles and some security presence at the station, but said that there was “no heavy weaponry” or prohibited arms such as tanks, artillery or rocket launchers.

Nevertheless, Grossi was unable to determine which side had been attacking the facility, stating that the IAEA does not have a mandate to make such determinations and that “indisputable evidence” was needed to establish the culprits.

Meanwhile, Russia’s permanent representative to the UN, Vasily Nebenzya, stated last month following a UN Security Council meeting that the West, after accusing Russia of being responsible for the dangerous situation at the ZNPP, has effectively issued Moscow an ultimatum: “hand over control of the ZNPP to Kiev and then the attacks will stop.”

Nebenzya stated that the West had thereby “not only betrayed the Zelensky Regime completely, but also actually admitted to complicity in these irresponsible attacks.”

May 22, 2024 Posted by | Environmentalism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

Dubious Eagle: Why Has Pentagon Pumped $756 Mln Into Hypersonic Missile That Doesn’t Fly?

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 22.05.2024

The US Army has been teasing the deployment of its ground-based Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW) system since 2021, with the system touted as the Pentagon’s first nearly operational hypersonic missile amid development delays and cancellations plaguing nearly a dozen similar projects for and by the Army, Air Force, Navy, and DARPA.

The US Army has awarded Lockheed Martin another $756 million for its delay-plagued LRHW “Dark Eagle” program, with the contract involving the provision of battery equipment, unspecified logistics, systems, and software engineering support.

In development since 2017, the LRHW’s $41 million apiece truck-launched missiles are expected to be able to accelerate to speeds up to Mach 17, and boast a 3,000 km operational range. The system uses the common All Up Round (AUR) munition also used in the Navy’s Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) program.

But like other US hypersonic missile efforts to date, Dark Eagle has become a somewhat “Dubious Eagle” after a string of testing issues. The Congressional Research Office has counted at least five failures to date:

  • In October 2021, an LRHW test failed when the Common-Hypersonic Glide Body (C-HGB) did not deploy.
  • In June 2022, the complete LRHW missile system suffered another test failure.
  • A scheduled LRHW test was canceled in October 2022 to “assess the root cause” of the June 2022 failure.
  • In March 2023, a scheduled test launch from the Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida was scrapped.
  • A second planned test at Cape Canaveral was canceled in September 2023, followed by an Army statement that it would not be able to meet the goal of deploying Dark Eagle in the current fiscal year.
  • A November 2023 review by Army and Navy acquisition execs blamed the delays on unspecified “problems” with the Lockheed-made launcher, and said the issues would take “months” to iron out.

The poor track record of US hypersonic missile programs to date has been surprising, given the tens of billions of dollars in research and development funding lavishly doled out by Congress in annual defense budgets – which typically outpace the defense spending of all of Washington’s major adversaries combined.

Last month, veteran Russian defense observer and missile expert Dmitry Drozdenko told Sputnik that the reason hypersonic weapons are so difficult to develop comes down not to the ability to accelerate vehicles to hypersonic speeds (which has been possible since virtually the dawning of the missile age), but creating materials that can withstand the ultra-hot temperatures hypersonic missiles encounter during flight – when they are covered by clouds of plasma. The USSR was leagues ahead of the US in the study of plasma physics during the Cold War, with Russia inheriting this invaluable knowledge and putting it to good use to field its first-in-the-world hypersonic missiles.

“Technologies are developed by people,” Drozdenko explained. “Money is one means of developing a technology, but it can happen that a technology is created with a minimum amount of funds. It can turn out that you have a lot of money, but the technology doesn’t work out. Therefore, money is not the main thing here. The main thing is people, and having the appropriate academic knowledge,” the observer said.

May 22, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

Failure in Ukraine presents the West with a clear yet difficult choice

By Sergey Poletaev | RT | May 22, 2024

In our last article, we analyzed Kiev’s military prospects in light of its new mobilization law. Here we consider the West’s options in the proxy war it’s using the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) to fight.

Western officials have been talking about sending troops to Ukraine since the beginning of the year. French President Emmanuel Macron said that he is ready to consider “any scenario,” including a ground operation. Government officials in Estonia and Lithuania (including Prime Minister Ingrida Simonyte) were quick to support him. And the Leader of the House Democratic Caucus Hakeem Jeffries became the first US politician who didn’t exclude the possibility of sending troops.

Formally, Ukraine hasn’t requested Western troops – Kiev has only demanded more weapons. But now, the New York Times reports that Kiev has officially asked the US and NATO to send military instructors to train 150,000 recruits on its territory, closer to the front line. Though the US has refused to comply with the request, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Charles Q. Brown Jr, has said that a NATO deployment of trainers appears inevitable, and that “we’ll get there eventually, over time.”

The subject of sending troops to Ukraine comes up quite often but, so far, Western countries have steered clear. Why? Is a full-fledged NATO intervention in Ukraine possible and what would happen if it took place? And how else might the West turn the course of the conflict in its favor?

A larger-than-life bet

Western doctrine in regard to Russia was defined even before the start of the full-scale conflict: the idea was to fight Russia “with the hands of” Ukraine and on Ukrainian territory. The goal was to force Russia to play by Western rules (ideally, by defeating it on the battlefield) and reassert the US-led bloc’s shaky global hegemony. But, at the same time, officials wanted to minimize their own risks and avoid being drawn into a direct military confrontation that could result in a nuclear war.

The second staple of this doctrine – a total trade war – has not yielded the desired results. In 2022, it became clear that the West overestimated the degree of its control not only over the international financial system, but even over its own financial flows. Despite certain losses and additional costs, Russia has been able to replace old trade ties with new ones and to do so with a minimal loss of revenue. The severe sanctions imposed by the West on its own companies turned out to be quite useless, since for the most part Russia continues to receive the latest Western products and technologies.

As for the idea of defeating Russia on the battlefield, the turning point occurred in the summer of 2023. After the failure of Ukraine’s counteroffensive, it became clear that the AFU would not be able to impose peace on its own terms. The problem is that in the conflict with Russia, the West has gone ‘all in’ and any military outcome that could be regarded as beneficial for Moscow – even negotiations on an equal footing – would now be regarded as a defeat. The whole world would realize that they can stand up to the hegemon and not just avoid becoming an outcast, but even gain some benefits. The West cannot allow this, since it could cause a chain reaction on a global scale.

Two options

By the beginning of 2024, Western countries faced a dilemma: In the current proxy war it was clear that they were losing and Ukraine was getting weaker, while Russia was growing stronger. Western leaders realized that the situation will continue to get worse until the middle or end of 2025 – by which time their own military production should gain momentum and Moscow may begin to experience a shortage of volunteers at the front. In other words, the worst-case scenario meant that Russia would be able to conduct at least three more successful military campaigns (summer and winter ‘24, and summer ‘25) with superior military forces.

The logic of the conflict is pushing the West towards the choice that we wrote about back in May 2022 – either intervening directly and fighting Russia on its own, or starting serious negotiations with Russia on the topic of Ukraine’s NATO membership and, more broadly, security in Eastern Europe.

Paradoxically, though, the West has chosen a third option: doing nothing. And it’s not just because of inertia, but also down to the weakening position of globalist elites, who have many unsuccessful ‘crusades for democracy’ behind them, from Vietnam to Afghanistan.

As of now, the AFU is growing weaker, the scale of the hostilities is growing, and the chances of the West directly entering the war, with potentially catastrophic consequences, are increasing every day. In the fall of 2022, before the limited mobilization in Russia, 10-15 NATO brigades could have turned Ukraine’s notable but rather meaningless victories near Kharkov and Kherson into a strategic success – for example, they could’ve ensured a breakthrough to the Azov Sea and a subsequent blockade of Crimea – but now it would take a lot more effort to simply support the front.

Fooling the system

The reason for the West’s indecisiveness is clear: it fears an escalation of the conflict. Russia is the world’s largest nuclear power and President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stated that he will not tolerate a widespread NATO intervention, which will result in a nuclear war.

Moscow’s warnings have challenged Western countries, headed by the US, to find ways “to intervene without intervening” and to enable Ukraine to win (or at least save face) without directly defeating Russia. In short, Western countries are forced to walk the thin line between defeat and nuclear war, without a clear end goal in sight.

After the failure to cut open a land corridor to Crimea, the West has not been able to find an alternative military strategy. Moreover, it has no idea how to get out of the war of attrition which, even in the case of a positional deadlock and a ‘static’ front, will result in Ukraine’s defeat, since an opponent that is many times weaker (Ukraine’s current population is at least five times less than that of Russia) will inevitably lose. We see plenty of such examples in history.

In this situation, the only thing that Western strategists have managed to come up with is to continue supporting the AFU and “increase costs” for Russia in the hope that Putin will get tired of fighting. Of course, no one in the West takes Ukraine’s suffering into account. It takes for granted the fact that Ukrainians will continue to die en masse just so that the West can save face. Neither do they care about Ukraine’s demographic and social collapse (unprecedented in post-WWII Europe) or the destruction of its infrastructure, which will prevent not only a normal economy but even normal life in these territories for many decades. Such issues are simply ignored or considered collateral damage.

The West may not explicitly state its strategy in regard to Russia, but it is clearly expressed in various publications and statements: the goal is to support the AFU at the front and at the same time move the conflict deeper into Russian territory in the hope that Putin will beg for mercy before Ukraine collapses.

It is unlikely that Western leaders still hope to see a victory for Kiev on the battlefield. The more likely goal now is either the “Korean scenario” where no one wins and Ukraine is kept as Russia’s opponent, or the “Palestinian scenario,” ie, eternal war on Ukraine’s former territory. What is clear is that the West will do anything it can to avoid holding serious negotiations with Russia.

War of the cities

Despite the growing escalation and the West’s increasing involvement in the conflict, one red line still exists: Ukraine is not allowed to hit Russia’s”old” territories – ie, those territories which the West recognizes as part of Russia – with Western missiles.

However, the ways in which Ukraine (with the West’s approval) circumvents this ban resemble the methods of an ingenious lawyer who finds the most unexpected loopholes in laws. For example, if “territory” is interpreted as “land” then air targets are not considered “territory” and Ukraine may hit air targets in internationally recognized Russian airspace; if a long-range drone has Western components and Western targeting, but was assembled in Ukraine, this also doesn’t count; and if Western weapons are used under a false flag (for example, by the Ukraine-based paramilitary group Russian Volunteer Corps) – this is fine, too. Of course, there are many such examples.

Why so? It is unknown whether any clear agreements regarding this issue exist but, in any case, Moscow has clearly stated that any obvious attacks on its “old” territories will allow Russia to retaliate and hit Western cities directly – not through proxies.

In military terms, the AFU will hardly benefit from such an escalation. Firstly, by resorting to such strikes, the Ukrainian army won’t change the strategic situation at the front, just as bombing Russia’s “new territories” and Crimea with all sorts of weapons hasn’t helped.

Secondly, the supply of Western missiles is not enough to overload Russian missile defense systems and achieve real military goals. Even though occasional missiles hit its territory, Moscow has adapted to the situation, takes measures to prevent future attacks, and carries out retaliatory strikes.

In other words, by striking Russian cities, (an unheard-of idea even in the most intense years of the Cold War), the West will not achieve anything but will only face increased risks and an escalation which it wishes to avoid.

However, it is possible that the desperate situation at the front and the need for some kind of propaganda success will sooner or later force the West to take such a step – and perhaps this may happen very soon. So far, this seems to be the most likely scenario that may lead to an escalation of the conflict beyond the zone of the Ukrainian “sandbox.”

Boots on the ground

And what about sending troops to Ukraine – will the West actually do it? This is unlikely. As pointed out already, in the past two years the scale of the conflict has changed and, in order to achieve success, NATO would now need to send dozens of brigades to Ukraine (at least 100,000-150,000 people), several hundred aircraft, and launch huge cruise missile attacks (hundreds of volleys per day).

Finally, even though such efforts might stabilize the situation at the front and save the AFU (supposing that the Kremlin does not declare a greater or even full mobilization in response), it would not guarantee Russia’s defeat but would only bring nuclear war closer.

In a direct intervention, NATO ground forces (just like Ukrainian ones today) will eventually face a shortage of ammunition and, in the air, NATO forces will suffer damage from Russian missile defense systems and will be exposed to attacks (currently, NATO reconnaissance operates over the Black Sea without any obstacles). Moreover, conflict with China also looms on the horizon and, if NATO empties its arsenals in Ukraine, China may either watch the situation unfold or offer Russia direct assistance.

As a result, NATO countries would find themselves in a positional conflict with heavy losses and unclear goals. Eventually, though, this may help to resolve the contradictions between Russia and the West, since, like a stubborn child, the US-led bloc may feel it has to try all means of resistance before giving in.

Another option for the West would be to move troops to Ukraine “symbolically”– for example, to send one or two brigades that would serve as instructors for AFU recruits (though it must be said that, two years into the war, the veterans on both sides of the front line are the ones who should teach the rest of the world, including NATO, how to fight), or just maintain aircraft.

Of course, it goes without saying that any third-country troops stationed in Ukraine will become a military target for Russia.

***

In conclusion, we may say that the Western doctrine – ie, the combination of a total trade war and a proxy war – has failed to bring about victory and has put its “client” (Ukraine) at risk of a major defeat. The West is still afraid to get directly involved in the conflict, even when it comes to striking “old” Russian territories or operating missile defense systems under its own flag, not to mention directly sending troops.

At the same time, the West avoids serious negotiations with Russia and prefers to go with the flow, consoling itself with the idea that Russia will eventually get burned by growing costs and retreat.

Meanwhile, Moscow is adapting to the situation, rebuilding its economy, trade relations, and society in order to live and successfully develop in the reality of a long conflict. The West’s strategy (or rather, the absence of such) has been clearly unsuccessful – especially considering the current level of involvement in the conflict, Ukraine may exhaust its forces long before Russia experiences any major inconvenience at the front.

Sergey Poletaev is an information analyst and publicist, co-founder and editor of the Vatfor project.

May 22, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

The failure of Western financial sanctions

By Mauricio Metri | Strategic Culture Foundation | May 21, 2024

On March 24, 2024, some newspapers reported the 25th anniversary of the plane’s U-Turn over the Atlantic, with the then-Russian foreign minister, Yevgeny Primakov, due to the kick-off NATO bombings over Serbia, without approval from the UN Security Council. Amid the onslaught against Belgrade, NATO forces deliberately struck the Chinese embassy. Beijing hasn’t forgotten the date, and on May 7, 2024, President Xi Jinping was in the capital of Serbia to pay his respects to the dead and pass a message to the West. These events determined the beginning of Russia’s reconstruction, the acceleration of the Chinese rise process, and the deepening of Sino-Russian partnerships (1).

During this period, starting from economic fragility and a military delay position concerning the USA, Russia established a strategic advantage in weapons in 2018 by developing hypersonic weapons. It also rebuilt its national economy, circumventing unprecedented economic sanctions against it. Despite the sanctions, Russia’s economy expanded significantly in 2023 compared to other North Atlantic countries. This year, the IMF corrected its forecasts for Russia, doubling its estimates upward.

The financial sanctions policy is one of the expressions of the monetary power of the dollar in the international system, especially after the Bush Doctrine of 2002 (2). However, the effectiveness of Washington’s economic sanctions regarding its foreign policy objectives has been very low, not to say null. For example, despite the severe sanctions introduced in 2007, Iran has acquired the ability to resist and develop an adequate offensive military capacity, allowing it to change the balance of forces in Southwest Asia. A month ago, on April 12, 2024, Tehran abandoned its “policy of strategic patience” and revealed to the world, through the missile attack, its ability to pierce the Israeli anti-aircraft defense system.

The main targets of U.S. sanctions (Russia, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, and Cuba) have generally succeeded in withstanding this kind of violence, and one of the most relevant reasons for this is China’s rise to the status of the largest economy, surpassing the U.S. one. In 2023, China’s share of world GDP based on purchasing power parity reached 18.73%, while that of the USA was 15.56%. Due to its dynamism, size, and sophistication, the Chinese economy made bypassing the payment systems controlled by Washington possible. For instance, after the start of Russian military intervention in Ukraine, when one imposed unprecedented sanctions, Sino-Russian trade grew 64%, reaching a record U.S. $240 billion in 2023.

Not for any other reason, on April 8, 2024, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, visiting Beijing, threatened Chinese companies, stating, “There will be significant consequences for companies that provide material support to Russia. Those who do not comply will face the consequences”.

The Chinese response came a few days later when Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov visited Beijing. Both countries committed to maintaining the stability of the industrial supply chain, including Chinese material support for Russia’s war against Ukraine and the Russian defense industrial base. According to the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Moscow and Beijing “reinforced calls for their two countries to work more closely together against ‘hegemonism.’”

A few weeks later, once again in Chinese territory, a U.S. authority reiterated Washington’s threats. The U.S. Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, in a statement during his official visit to China, stated, “The United States is ready to take new measures and impose sanctions against China and the background of the situation in Ukraine. (…) If China does not take measures to solve this problem, the U.S. will do it.”

Washington’s persistent threats reveal a well-established consensus in the North Atlantic that, on the one hand, the dollar’s power as an instrument of economic sanctions has been eroding continuously. On the other hand, China is the main reason for this. One talks openly about the topic. On April 29, 2024, the chair of the House of Commons Treasury Select Committee of the United Kingdom and member of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, Harriet Baldwin, stated, “There is a consensus that sanctions are not working in terms of their stated intent – ​​causing real trouble for the Russian economy.” A few days later, in the same way, Italy’s defense minister, Guido Crosetto, expressed that “economic sanctions against Russia had failed and called on the West to try harder to negotiate a diplomatic solution with President Vladimir Putin to end the war in Ukraine. (…) the West had wrongly believed its sanctions could stop Russia’s aggression, but it had overestimated its economic influence in the world.” A few days ago, on May 6, 2024, after meeting with the Chinese president at the French capital, the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, returned to the topic. She stated, “We have also discussed China’s commitment not to provide any lethal equipment to Russia. More effort is needed to curtail the delivery of dual-use goods to Russia that find their way to the battlefield. And given the existential nature of the threats stemming from this war for both Ukraine and Europe, this does affect the EU-China relations.”

Therefore, in the North Atlantic power structures, the perception has already been consolidated that a kind of “debasement” of the dollar as an instrument of violence via financial sanctions exists. However, another understanding continues to prevail in Washington concerning the privilege to command the global reference currency: the enlargement of its spending capacity without apparent limits and the imposition on the world of the financial burden of its global wars. This privilege, unlike sanctions, goes on operating at full strength, as in the case of the U.S.$95 billion aid package for Ukraine, Israel, and the Indo-Pacific recently approved by the U.S. House of Representatives.

(1) For more details, see: Metri, M. “História e Diplomacia Monetária”. Ed. Dialética, São Paulo, 2023. (cap. 15).
(2) For more details, see: Nascimento, Maria A. W. V. do. “A Doutrina Bush e a Institucionalização do Poder Coercitivo do Dólar”. Dissertação de Mestrado. PEPI, IE-UFRJ, 2024

May 22, 2024 Posted by | Economics | , , , , | Leave a comment

Russia Dismisses US Claims of Counterspace Weapon Satellite as Misinformation

Sputnik – 22.05.2024

MOSCOW – The recent statement by the US Department of Defense alleging that Russia launched a satellite carrying a counterspace weapon is misinformation and Moscow will not respond to it, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said on Wednesday.

On Tuesday, US Defense Department spokesperson Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder said that Russia launched last week a satellite carrying a counterspace weapon that is presumably capable of attacking other satellites in low Earth orbit. Ryder claimed that Russia deployed the satellite without communicating this fact to the United States.

“I do not think we should respond to any misinformation from Washington. The Russian space program is developing as planned, launches of spacecraft for various purposes, including devices that solve the problem of strengthening our defense capability, are also not news. Another thing is that we always consistently oppose the deployment of strike weapons in low-Earth orbit,” Ryabkov told reporters.

If the United States wanted to ensure the safety of space activities, it should have reconsidered its approach to Russia’s space proposals, the senior diplomat added.

Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that US officials said Russia launched a research spacecraft into space in February 2022 intended to test components for a potential nuclear anti-satellite weapon.

In February, the US government claimed that Russia was developing a space-based anti-satellite weapon that poses a serious threat to US national security.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Russia has always been categorically opposed to deploying nuclear weapons in space. Russia’s activities in space are no different from those of other countries, including the US, Putin added.

Speaking about introduction of the Bulava ICBM into service, Ryabkov said that Russia does not violate the limits set by the New START Treaty.

The R30 3M30 Bulava (RSM-56 for use in international treaties, SS-NX-30 according to NATO classification) is a Russian three-stage solid-fuel intercontinental ballistic missile, designed to arm the advanced Borei-class nuclear-powered strategic missile submarines. It was officially reported that the missile is capable of carrying several hypersonic nuclear warheads with individual guidance. The Bulava is expected to form the basis of Russia’s strategic nuclear forces grouping until 2040-2045, according to Russian military statements.

May 22, 2024 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

West Confirms Its Intention to Militarize Space – Nebenzia

Sputnik – 20.05.2024

UNITED NATIONS – Having prevented the UN Security Council from adopting Russia’s draft resolution, the West has confirmed its intention to continue militarization of space, Russian Permanent Representative to the UN Vasily Nebenzia said at a meeting of the Security Council.

Earlier, due to the position of Western countries, the UN Security Council did not adopt Russia’s resolution on preventing an arms race in space. Russia, China, Algeria, Guyana, Ecuador, Mozambique, Sierra Leone voted in favor of the resolution. Switzerland abstained. The United States, France, Britain, Japan, Slovenia, the Republic of Korea, and Malta voted against.

Nebenzia recalled how in April the US and its allies in the UNSC were loudly assuring everyone of their commitment to peaceful space.

“Today, after they have confirmed their real intentions to continue militarizing space and creating appropriate weapons, attempts to justify their actions by the allegedly non-consensual nature of our project look especially cynical and hypocritical,” Nebenzya said.

According to him, Russia is generally satisfied with the result of today’s vote. “In addition to the numbers, it has demonstrated the watershed between those who seek peaceful space exploration and those who are leading the way towards its militarization. Western countries found themselves today essentially isolated in the Council. And this is symptomatic,” the permanent representative emphasized.

According to the permanent representative, it is deeply regrettable that these countries did not allow the Security Council to make a balanced “and urgently needed decision in favor of preserving space exclusively for peaceful use.”

“Thus, today they finally threw off their masks, self-disclosed themselves and showed us what they really are,” Nebenzia noted.

“The reason why you did not support our project is trivial and simple. You just want to leave yourselves free hands to use space for military purposes and to place any kind of weapons there,” the permanent representative concluded.

The militarization of space by the West will require analysis and retaliatory steps by Russia, but Moscow will remain committed to its obligations under international law, Nebenzia highlighted.

“Of course, the current situation will require analysis and response steps from our side. At the same time, Russia will remain committed to its obligations in outer space in accordance with international law,” the diplomat stressed.

“We have repeatedly confirmed and reaffirm our commitment. Despite the aggressive attitude of the United States and its allies, we will continue to work in this direction and make every effort together with responsible UN member states to keep space peaceful,” he emphasized.

May 20, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Stop taking advantage of Ukraine crisis, China warns US

RT | May 20, 2024

Washington is deliberately prolonging the Ukraine conflict and seeking to profit from it, while “smearing” Beijing with false accusations, the Chinese deputy envoy to the UN told the Security Council on Monday.

During the meeting about the Ukraine conflict, Ambassador Geng Shuang addressed US claims that China was supplying Russia with weapons components, calling them “groundless” and “totally unacceptable.”

“China is not the creator, or a party to the Ukraine crisis,” said Geng. “Nor have we provided lethal weapons to any party in the conflict. We have not done… what the US has done, which is to deliberately prolong the fighting and profit from the crisis. We will not do that.”

The Chinese diplomat warned that the fighting in Ukraine is being prolonged by large quantities of weapons and ammunition of “expanding variety and scope,” supplied to Kiev by the US and its allies. Meanwhile, Beijing has consistently advocated for a ceasefire and a diplomatic settlement of the crisis.

“Weapons may end wars, but they do not bring about lasting peace,” Geng told the Security Council.

He reiterated Beijing’s position that US and EU sanctions on Chinese companies doing business with Russia are unilateral and illegitimate.

“China has a right to carry out normal economic and trade cooperation with all countries in the world, including with Russia, and such cooperation should not be interfered with or undermined,” the diplomat said. “We urge the US to stop attacking, smearing, and slandering China and spreading fabrications, and stop unilateral sanctions against, and unreasonable suppression of, Chinese enterprises.”

While the US and its allies have poured over $200 billion worth of weapons, equipment and ammunition into Ukraine – while insisting that does not make them party to the hostilities – they have repeatedly accused China of helping the Russian military by exporting dual-use goods, and threatened Beijing with sanctions.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry addressed the accusations directly last week, telling Washington that “diverting attention and shifting the blame is not the right way” to solve the conflict.

On Monday, Geng added that the US needs to “stop taking advantage of the Ukraine crisis to advance its geopolitical strategy, provoke bloc confrontation, and serve its own agenda.”

May 20, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , | Leave a comment

Russia reacts to US nuclear experiment

RT | May 20, 2024

Moscow will not carry out tests of its nuclear weapons as long as Washington refrains from doing so, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said on Monday.

Ryabkov’s statement followed a US announcement last week that it had performed a successful subcritical nuclear experiment at the PULSE facility in Nevada. According to the National Nuclear Security Administration, the trials allowed it to collect “essential data” on atomic warheads “without the use of nuclear explosive testing.”

“We are looking closely at what is happening at the American nuclear test site. Of course, we register and monitor all public signals coming from the US administration in this area,” the deputy foreign minister said.

Russia understands that such subcritical experiments are being done “as part of testing of the performance of the relevant components and systems of the US nuclear arsenal,” the diplomat added.

Washington has previously said that subcritical experiments are not prohibited under the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which forbids nuclear test explosions in all environments. Both the US and Russia signed the 1996 accord, but stopped short of ratifying it.

“Our stance remains unchanged: as long as the US does not conduct actual nuclear tests, Russia will also adhere to this position,” Ryabkov stated.

However, the deputy foreign minister stressed that “signals” coming from Washington suggest the possible further development of American nuclear weapons “including not only delivery vehicles, but also the warheads themselves.” Moscow treats this information “seriously” and takes it into account while planning its actions.

Earlier this month, Russia announced plans to test its military’s ability to deploy tactical nuclear weapons “in the near future.” According to the Russian Defense Ministry, the exercises were ordered by President Vladimir Putin in response to the continued “power politics” pursued by the US and its allies against Moscow.

The ministry statement said the West openly declares its support for “terrorist acts” by Ukraine against Russia and “directly contributes” to such attacks. Increasingly powerful weapons are being supplied to Kiev by its foreign backers, the statement continued, singling out deliveries of US-made ATACMS missiles capable of “striking targets deep inside Russian territory.”

Moscow’s statement was preceded by a suggestion by Poland of potentially hosting US nuclear weapons, and remarks by French President Emmanuel Macron about the possibility of sending French and other NATO soldiers to Ukraine.

May 20, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

The Vietnamization of Ukraine

By Ron Paul | May 20, 2024

As Ukraine’s defeat in the war moves closer, the neocons are desperate to draw the US further into the fight. Over the weekend, former US State Department official Victoria Nuland told ABC News that the US must help facilitate Ukrainian missile attacks deep inside Russian territory. The Biden Administration has to this point avoided involvement in such attacks, likely because Russian president Vladimir Putin has warned that Russia will strike any facility that supplies or facilitates strikes inside of Russia, wherever they may be.

It’s a clear warning from a nuclear power, but as Nuland and her fellow neocons see their Ukraine project failing, they demand escalation. This is just what they did in their previous disastrous projects like the Iraq War, the attacks on Syria and Libya, and the 20-year occupation of Afghanistan. For them the failure is never because it was a bad idea in the first place, but that not enough lives and resources were poured into that bad idea to create a good outcome.

But Russia is no Iraq nor is it Libya. This time they are playing with World War III and nuclear destruction and no one in DC seems concerned.

Last Thursday the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Charles Q. Brown, said that NATO trainers deployed within Ukraine was inevitable. “We’ll get there eventually, over time,” he said. This, of course, is exactly how we got the Vietnam War, but Russia in 2024 is hardly late -1950s Vietnam. Russia of today is a country that can fight back and can project military power all the way to the source, which means the United States.

Is Nuland’s Ukraine project worth dying in a nuclear war over?

The whole US involvement in this proxy war has been based on lie after lie. They said we had to help Ukraine defeat Russia because democracy itself was at stake. Then Ukrainian president Zelensky cancelled elections, so they told us we have to help Ukraine defeat Russia because Putin won’t stop there – he’ll soon be marching through Berlin, London, and maybe even New York!

Doesn’t it remind you of how the neocons were warning us that Saddam was going to attack the US mainland with drones and that he was operating mobile weapons labs? Anything to get the public on board for their war.

The fact is the neocons and warmongers lie constantly. They will do whatever it takes to get their wars and sadly we do not have an independent media in the US to challenge them on their lies. Our media is so closely tied to the military-industrial complex that it is also a stakeholder in war profits, so they aren’t about to rock the boat.

Anyone who thinks we cannot get sucked into another war like we were with George W. Bush’s lie that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction is not paying attention. It is happening again, in real time.

The fact is we live in a deeply corrupt society dominated by individuals who do not believe in truth. When you don’t believe in truth you will have no qualms about manipulating others to do your will. So unless they are stopped, neocons like Nuland will demand more attacks on Russia, more US troops in Ukraine, more escalation. Until Russia fights back. Then it will all be over. Is this what we want?

May 20, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

One civilian killed as Ukrainian drone strikes minibus – governor

RT | May 19, 2024

One person has been killed and “many” others wounded in a Ukrainian drone strike on a minibus carrying civilians in Russia’s Kherson Region, Governor Vladimir Saldo said on Sunday.

The attack took place in the village of Radensk on Sunday morning, Saldo wrote on Telegram. The UAV targeted a vehicle with workers on their way to harvest strawberries, he added.

“The explosion killed one person. There are many wounded, who are receiving necessary medical assistance,” the governor said.

Russian regions have seen several attacks on buses by Ukrainian drones since the start of this month.

On May 6, seven people were killed and dozens wounded after UAVs targeted two minibuses carrying farmers near the village of Beryozovka in Belgorod Region.

Two days earlier, two people were injured when a drone struck a bus in the village of Voznesenka, also in Belgorod Region.

Russia’s Defense Ministry said on Sunday that “a number of attempts by the Kiev regime to carry out terrorist attacks” on Russian territory with the use of US-supplied ATACMS missiles and drones were prevented overnight.

Nine ATACMS were shot down by air defenses over Crimea, while a total of 57 drones were intercepted in the Krasnodar Region, the ministry said. Three UAVs were destroyed in Belgorod Region, it added.

May 19, 2024 Posted by | War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Moscow responds to latest EU ban on Russian media

RT | May 18, 2024

Russia’s State Duma chairman has accused the EU of censoring alternative opinions and curtailing freedom of speech, with the goal of deceiving citizens.

Vyacheslav Vlodin was commenting on Brussels’ latest ban on Russian media outlets, which has sparked a warning of countermeasures from the Foreign Ministry in Moscow.

On Friday, the European Council announced it was suspending the broadcasting activities of four additional media organizations, claiming that they “spread and support” Russian propaganda.

The blacklist includes RIA Novosti news agency, newspapers Izvestia and Rossiyskaya Gazeta, and the Czech-based portal Voice of Europe.

Writing on Telegram on Saturday, Volodin described the move as showing the EU’s desire “to close access to objective and reliable information” for residents of member states.

According to the lawmaker, “the policy of double standards has become an integral part of European structures” as they only “talk about freedom of speech, but do not tolerate it in reality”.

Officials in Brussels have no arguments to convince EU citizens that they are right and as soon as they see any problems, they just block “any alternative point of view, destroy freedom of speech, and violate the right to freely disseminate and receive information,” Volodin stressed.

“In fact, they introduce censorship with the only purpose – to deceive their citizens and stay in power,” he argued.

The Russian Foreign Ministry, commenting on Brussels’ move, noted that Moscow has repeatedly warned the EU that “repressive measures” against Russian media will not go unanswered.

“Ignoring these warnings forces us to take countermeasures, which will follow inevitably,” the ministry’s spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova said on Friday.

According to the diplomat, Brussel’s decision is proof “of the neglect by the EU and its member states for their international obligations in the field of ensuring media pluralism and another example of the degeneration of democratic societies” in the West.

Since the Ukraine conflict escalated into open hostilities in February 2022, the EU has barred several Russia-associated media outlets from engaging with audiences in member states. Even hosting content made by the targeted organizations is illegal in the bloc.

Moscow has also taken a harsh stance on Western media. Citing anti-Russian sentiment, misinformation and censorship, the national media regulator has barred access to Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and the websites of the BBC, Deutsche Welle, along with other media outlets.

May 18, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Progressive Hypocrite, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »