Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Lavrov accuses West of ‘childish babble’

RT | August 19, 2024

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky would not have attacked Russia’s Kursk Region unless he had direct orders from the US, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said.

Speaking to Russian journalist Pavel Zarubin on Monday, the foreign minister stated that throughout the Ukraine conflict, Washington’s attempts to deny responsibility for Kiev’s actions have “evolved” from claiming it has nothing to do with them to accusing Ukrainian military commanders of disobeying orders.

“Listen, this is childish babble,” Lavrov said. “Everyone understands perfectly well that Zelensky would never have decided on this if the United States had not instructed him to do this.”

Last week, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aide and former Security Council secretary, Nikolay Patrushev, also accused Washington of playing a role in Kiev’s incursion, stating in an interview with Izvestia that “the US leadership’s claims of non-involvement in Kiev’s actions in Kursk Region do not correspond to reality.”

“Without their participation and direct support, Kiev would not have ventured into Russian territory,” Patrushev said, adding that “the operation in Kursk Region was also planned with the involvement of NATO and Western special services.”

Kiev launched its incursion into Russia almost two weeks ago, reportedly deploying over 10,000 troops armed with Western-supplied heavy weapons. Zelensky has stated that the purpose of the attack is to establish a “buffer zone” in Russia and inflict military and economic damage on the country.

While Western officials have publicly expressed support for Ukraine’s incursion, none, including the US, have admitted to having prior knowledge. Washington has insisted that it was not informed or involved in the preparation of the cross-border attack.

Zelensky aide Mikhail Podoliak, however, has contradicted these claims, telling The Independent last week that Kiev had discussed the operation with partner forces, “just not on the public level.”

While Kiev’s forces continue to occupy several settlements in the border region, the Russian Defense Ministry has reported that the advance has been halted. Moscow has estimated that Kiev has lost more than 3,400 troops and around 400 armored vehicles in the operation.

August 19, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

NATO’s War on Russia

From covert war in 2014 to the invasion of Russia in 2024

By Glenn Diesen | August 19, 2024

The use of NATO weapons to attack Russia is a controversial topic due to the ambiguity about the role of NATO. The common argument by the Western political-media elites is that Ukraine was attacked in an unprovoked Russian invasion, and NATO has every right to assist Ukraine with weapons to defend itself. This is an appealing narrative that serves the purpose of manufacturing consent from the public to send weapons worth billions of dollars to fight Russia. If one accepts this narrative, it is even seen to be immoral to put restrictions on Ukraine in terms of where these weapons are used as the country is correctly fighting for its survival. The problem with this narrative is that NATO is not a passive non-participant in this war.

The war began in February 2014 when Western governments backed the coup in Ukraine that removed the democratically elected President of Ukraine and replaced him with a government hand-picked by Washington.[1] On the first day of the new Ukrainian government, a partnership was established between the CIA, MI6 and the intelligence services of the new government in Ukraine installed by the US.[2] This happened before there were any conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, and it resulted in 12 secret CIA bases along the Russian borders. Over the next 8 years, the US instigated tensions with Russia, armed Ukraine, and sabotaged the Minsk peace agreement to extend and weaken Russia.[3]

The US developing Ukraine as a proxy against Russia was the reason for the Russian invasion in 2022. As reported by the New York Times : “Toward the end of 2021, according to a senior European official, Mr. Putin was weighing whether to launch his full-scale invasion when he met with the head of one of Russia’s main spy services, who told him that the C.I.A., together with Britain’s MI6, were controlling Ukraine and turning it into a beachhead for operations against Moscow”.[4]

When Russia invaded in 2022, it contacted Ukraine on the first day after the war to start negotiations to impose a peace agreement that would restore Ukraine’s neutrality.[5] The US and UK sabotaged the Istanbul peace agreement by promising Zelensky all the weapons he would need if he would walk away from the peace talks and fight. Both the Israeli and Turkish mediators confirmed that the US chose war as it saw an opportunity to fight Russia through a proxy and thus weaken a strategic rival. Numerous American leaders have since expressed that this is a great war as they get to weaken Russia without losing any American troops. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has dismissed diplomacy and insists that “Weapons are the way to peace”.

Niall Ferguson wrote in Bloomberg in March 2022 that US and UK officials had confirmed that the only acceptable outcome for the war was the military defeat of Russia and regime change in Moscow. The objective was for “the conflict to be extended and thereby bleed Putin” as “the only end game now is the end of Putin regime”.[6] The US Helsinki Commission argued in March 2022 that peace must be achieved by “decolonising” Russia, the destruction of Russia by Balkanising it.[7] The President of Poland (Andrzej Duda) and the incoming Foreign Policy Chief of the EU (Kaja Kallas) have also defined victory in Ukraine in terms of breaking Russia into many small nations.

NATO is providing weapons, ammunition, training, war planning, intelligence, target selection, management of complex weapon systems, and mercenaries to fight Russia – all under the guise of “helping Ukraine” to defend itself. NATO has authorised the use of long-range missiles to strike inside Russian territory and provides its support in the invasion of Russian territory. From Britain to Germany, the success of conquering Russian territory is openly used as an argument to send more weapons.

In this context, if we look at the actual objectives of the US and NATO, rather than the childish assertion that the US is merely attempting to protect democracy, then one can only conclude that NATO has gone to war against the world’s largest nuclear power.

Russia’s dilemma: Emboldening NATO or risking nuclear war

The insanity of NATO’s relentless escalations in the Ukraine proxy war rests on the narrative that Russia will not defend its red lines as it is deterred by NATO. This delusion exists because all Russian responses are presented as “unprovoked” and thus occur seemingly in a vacuum. Yet, when the Western government toppled the Ukrainian government in February 2014 and subsequently threatened the Russian naval base in Sevastopol, Russia responded by seizing Crimea. When Western governments sabotaged the Minsk agreement for 7 years and then refused to give Russia any security guarantees in December 2021, Russia responded by invading Ukraine in 2022. When NATO began to send weapons to Ukraine to fight Russia, Russia responded by annexing four oblasts – Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporizhiya, and Kherson.

How will Russia respond? Russia is faced with a dilemma: It has been restrained as retaliations could easily escalate into a NATO-Russia nuclear exchange, yet the failure to retaliate will only embolden NATO. Western media refers to the failure of Russia to respond as a reason for why NATO can continue to escalate, as Russia is not retaliating. Yet, with every step up the escalation ladder, the pressure mounts on Russia to restore its deterrent.

The retaliation will come, but Russia keeps its head cool to decide when, where and how it best serves Russian interests. The Western media is obsessed with the objective of humiliating Putin without considering the possible consequences. Anyone calling for a return to common sense is denounced as being soft on Russia, and the recognition of Russia’s nuclear deterrent is framed as accepting Russia’s “nuclear blackmail”. Consequently, warmongering is celebrated as morality while advocating for diplomacy is denounced as appeasement. In our narrative-driven media, even arguing that NATO has gone to war against Russia is deemed treasonous as it is depicted as “taking the side of Russia”.

The propaganda prevents us from asking the most important question: How exactly do we think this escalation will end? Irrespective of what narrative we have sold to our own public about defending democracy, from Moscow’s perspective, NATO has now placed itself in the same category as Napoleon and Hitler. Let’s pick up a history book and ask ourselves how Russia will likely respond: capitulation or a powerful response?

I was on the Indian TV channel WION discussing NATO weapons being used to target Russian territory.

[1] Ukraine crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call – BBC News

[2] The Spy War: How the C.I.A. Secretly Helps Ukraine Fight Putin – The New York Times (nytimes.com)

[3] Read the RAND report on how to overextend Russia: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3063.html

[4] The Spy War: How the C.I.A. Secretly Helps Ukraine Fight Putin – The New York Times (nytimes.com)

[5] Address by the President to Ukrainians at the end of the first day of Russia’s attacks — Official website of the President of Ukraine

[6] Niall Ferguson: Putin and Biden Misunderstand History in Ukraine War – Bloomberg

[7] Decolonizing Russia: a Moral and Strategic Imperative – CSCE

August 19, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Video | , , , , | Leave a comment

Clooney Foundation declared ‘undesirable’ in Russia

RT | August 19, 2024

The Clooney Foundation for Justice (CFJ) has been designated as ‘undesirable’ in Russia, the country’s Prosecutor General’s Office has announced. The label means that the organization is essentially banned from operating in the country and is considered a security threat.

In a statement on Monday, the Prosecutor General’s Office said that the CFJ, founded by actor and filmmaker George Clooney and his wife, human rights lawyer Amal Clooney, “has been working to discredit Russia in a Hollywood fashion.”

It also accused the foundation of supporting “pseudo-patriots who have fled the country” as well as those involved with extremist and terrorist organizations.

“Under the guise of humanitarian ideas, the ‘fighters for justice’ from Madison Avenue support the campaign to prosecute Russia’s top leadership, and publicly disseminate negative pseudo-expert assessments of Russian legislation on foreign agents and NGOs,” officials added.

The CFJ has repeatedly condemned Russia’s military operation against Ukraine and supported its prosecution for alleged war crimes, which Moscow has consistently denied.

In May, Anna Neistat, the legal director of the foundation’s Docket project, said the CFJ wanted the West to prosecute “Russian propagandists,” particularly journalists covering the Ukraine conflict. The controversial remarks sparked a backlash from Moscow, which described the foundation as “madmen” and urged international organizations to investigate “a judicial safari targeting Russian journalists.”

Faced with criticism, Clooney himself downplayed the controversy, suggesting that “someone in our foundation misspoke.” “We at the Clooney Foundation would never go after journalists, even if we disagree with them,” he added.

The word ‘undesirable’ is a legal term applied to foreign organizations deemed to pose a threat to Russia’s constitutional order, defense, or security. Organizations given the label are banned from holding public events and distributing promotional materials in Russia, and face heavy fines or criminal charges if they breach the terms of their designation.

August 19, 2024 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance | | Leave a comment

Russia to Respond Properly If Poland Attempts to Intercept Russian Missiles Over Ukraine

Sputnik – 19.08.2024

MOSCOW – Moscow will give a specific and adequate response if Poland attempts to intercept Russian missiles over Ukraine, Oleg Tyapkin, the director of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s Third European Department, said in an interview with Sputnik.

“If official Warsaw succumbs to an adventurous impulse and decides to attempt to intercept long-range weapons legally used by our armed forces to neutralize military threats emanating from Ukrainian territory to Russia, then the response to them will be adequate and quite specific. Russian diplomacy has repeatedly pointed out the risks that potential direct participation of Western states in military actions on the side of the Kiev regime entails,” the Russian diplomat said.

“There are no negotiations on this issue with anyone. Our position is well known to both Warsaw and NATO,” he added.

Earlier, Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski said that Warsaw was considering the possibility of shooting down Russian missiles over Ukraine.

Kiev previously called on Western countries to shoot down missiles over Ukraine from their territory. French media, citing Ukrainian officials, reported in late June that Kiev was pushing European allies to create a no-fly zone in western Ukraine by deploying air defense systems in Poland and Romania.

Russia launched a special military operation in Ukraine on February 24, 2022. Russian President Vladimir Putin said its goal was “the protection of people who have been subjected to abuse and genocide by the Kiev regime for eight years.” He noted that the special operation was a forced measure, Russia “was left with no chance to act differently, the security risks were such that it was impossible to respond by other means.”

August 19, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Moscow denies Washington Post claims about secret Russia-Ukraine talks

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova © Sputnik / Sergey Bobylev
RT | August 18, 2024

Russia and Ukraine have not been involved in any “direct or indirect” talks that could have been derailed by Kiev’s cross-border incursion into Kursk Region, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told journalists on Sunday.

She was asked to comment on a Washington Post article which claimed, citing sources, that the Ukrainian attack thwarted secret indirect negotiations between Moscow and Kiev regarding a potential moratorium on striking energy infrastructure. The supposed talks were said to be mediated by Qatar, the outlet wrote on Saturday.

“No one has derailed anything,” Zakharova said, explaining that the two sides have not discussed any “security regimes” for critical infrastructure facilities.

She went on to say that threats to energy facilities such as the nuclear power stations in Zaporozhye and Kursk come from Kiev, not Moscow.

Earlier, a Russian journalist had reported that Kiev was plotting a “false flag” attack involving a dirty nuclear bomb either at the nuclear plant in Zaporozhye or Kursk. Commenting on the matter, the Russian Defense Ministry said it takes such reports seriously and vowed a swift and harsh response to any such attacks. Moscow has called on the UN to condemn the alleged plot, while Kiev has denied the claims.

According to Zakharova, Moscow and Kiev have not engaged in any talks since spring 2022, except for prisoner exchanges facilitated by third-party mediators. Peace talks held over the first months of the conflict collapsed after Kiev withdrew from them due to what Moscow claims was Western interference.

Ukraine had “all the chances” to resolve the conflict through negotiations, the spokeswoman said. Moscow repeatedly stated that it was ready to enter into negotiations at any moment as long as the situation on the ground was taken into account.

Kiev banned any talks with the current Russian leadership at the national level through a presidential decree signed in 2022. The move came after four former Ukrainian regions voted overwhelmingly to join Russia.

This June, Moscow put forward another peace initiative, Zakharova noted. At the time, President Vladimir Putin said Russia was ready to immediately open peace talks with Kiev if it withdrew its troops from the four regions that joined Russia in 2022 and committed to maintaining neutral status.

According to Zakharova, Kiev reacted to this “goodwill gesture” by launching an incursion into Kursk Region, where Ukrainian forces were “deliberately killing medics, rescuers, and volunteers, as well as attacking civilian transport.” In the wake of the attack, Putin said there can be no talks with those “who conduct indiscriminate strikes on civilians.”

August 19, 2024 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | Leave a comment

Chinese Scientists Propose Magnetic Launcher on Moon to Send Resources to Earth – Reports

Sputnik – 18.08.2024

BEIJING – Chinese scientists proposed building a magnetic launcher on the Moon, which could become an cost-effective way to deliver resources mined on the lunar surface to Earth, and, in addition, part of the Russian-Chinese lunar station project, Chinese media reported on Sunday.

According to the publication, scientists from the Shanghai Institute of Satellite Engineering suggest that the magnetic levitation installation will work on the same principle as the hammer throw in athletics, but the rotation at increasing speed will be carried out before a cargo capsule is sent to Earth.

Scientists are convinced that, due to the unique environmental conditions on the Moon, such as high vacuum and low gravity, payloads can be sent twice a day, and the cost of such transportation will be about 10% of the cost of existing methods.

“The system’s technical readiness is relatively high. Since it consumes only electricity and does not require any propellant, it will be relatively small in scale and straightforward to implement,” the scientists said in their paper.

They also noted that the main task will be the extraction of helium-3 to help solve the problem of the energy crisis on Earth. The project, in their opinion, will also contribute to the development of space mining technologies, heavy launch vehicles and artificial intelligence.

The proposed launch system will use a 50-meter-long rotating arm and a high-temperature superconducting engine to launch capsules with mined resources. Ten minutes after launch, the rotation speed of the arm will reach the second cosmic velocity of the Moon of 2.4 kilometers per second and about one-sixth of the second cosmic velocity of Earth — and put it on the correct trajectory for returning to Earth.

The system is designed to last at least 20 years, but it will weigh about 80 tonnes, so before it can be delivered to the Moon, it will be necessary to wait for the start of operation of the Chinese super-heavy launch vehicle, the publication said.

The team working on the project suggested that it could be part of a proposed joint Russian-Chinese project to build a research station at the south pole of the Moon by 2035.

The intergovernmental Russian-Chinese agreement on the joint creation of the International Scientific Lunar Station (ISLS) was signed on November 25, 2022. Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a law ratifying the agreement on June 12, 2024, and it entered into force on July 18. The document was published on July 25. It indicates that the station will be created in three phases and will receive modules both on the surface of the Earth’s natural satellite and in its orbit. During the third phase, it is planned not only to study and develop the Moon, but also to assist other countries in landing on the Moon. The implementation dates for each of the phases are not yet mentioned.

August 18, 2024 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Biden’s incriminating admission of U.S. involvement in offensive on Russia

Strategic Culture Foundation | August 16, 2024

It is breathtaking what is going on with the offensive into the Kursk and Belgorod regions of the Russian Federation. This is as close to World War Three taking place as it can get, if not already happening.

This week American President Joe Biden admitted deep U.S. involvement in the invasion of Russia by Ukrainian forces. The complacent, casual admission is shocking. Biden told media that his officials were in “constant contact” with the Kiev regime on the offensive that began on August 6. Biden added with undisguised pleasure that the incursion had created a “real dilemma” for Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

It seems likely that the summer offensive will go the same ill-fated way as last year’s offensive by Ukraine that took place in the main war zone area of Donbass, the region which was formerly eastern Ukraine but is now legally part of the Russian Federation. The offensive last summer turned out to be a disaster for Ukrainian forces as superior Russian defenses decimated them. As with this summer’s offensive, there has been much Western media hyping of the initial gains. But the optimism is giving way to the reality that Russian forces are containing the cross-border foray and will eventually expel Ukrainian troops. There are indications that the Ukrainian side has lost over 2,000 casualties over the past 10 days and incurred heavy losses of destroyed NATO military equipment.

Nevertheless, it is alarming what has been embarked on by the NATO-backed regime. This is the first time that Russia has been invaded by a foreign enemy since the Great Patriotic War when Nazi Germany waged its genocidal war. Ironically, a turning point in that war was in the Kursk region when the Red Army defeated the Wehrmacht.

The symbolism of today’s events in Kursk and Belgorod is horrifying. Here we have Ukrainian militants who glorify the Third Reich wearing Nazi helmets while they terrorize Russian civilians. Video footage shows deliberate shelling of civilian homes and apartment blocks in what can only be described as a scorched earth campaign. Up to 200,000 civilians have been evacuated from the Kursk and Belgorod regions.

The invasion force is equipped with NATO tanks and armored vehicles. This is an incredible echo of history whereby German, British, and American tanks are marauding on Russian soil and terrorizing towns and villages. Furthermore, there is reliable reporting that the enemy infantry is made up of NATO special forces from the United States, Britain, France, and Poland alongside the NeoNazis of Ukraine.

In short and shocking terms: NATO has invaded Russia with a terror campaign replicating Nazi Germany.

The United States and its NATO allies officially maintain that they are not involved and that the Kiev regime embarked on this assault independently.

That innocent pretense is contemptible. This duplicity has been going on for too long. The West has been arming a proxy force to the teeth to attack Russia since the CIA coup in Kiev in 2014 which culminated in open warfare in February 2022. The offensive capability of Western weaponry has increased relentlessly to the point where Washington, London, Paris, and Berlin are supplying long-range missiles to strike deep into Russia. Not only that but publicly permitting the use of these weapons.

The NATO side has delivered main battlefield tanks and in recent weeks F-16 fighter jets that potentially are nuclear-capable. Biden this week is reportedly considering approving the supply of JASSM air-launched missiles with a range of over 350 kilometers. The distance from Sudzha in Kursk, reportedly captured by the NATO side this week, to Moscow, is just over 600 km.

There can be little doubt that the invasion of Russia is an offensive signed off by NATO leadership. We have Joe Biden’s clumsy admission of that.

The Kiev regime also admitted that its Western patrons were involved in the planning of the invasion.

Moreover, Nikolai Patrushev, a top Russian intelligence figure, stated that NATO is participating in the invasion.

Former Pentagon analysts have also concurred that for such an audacious military endeavor to take place, the Kiev regime would have required U.S. and other NATO surveillance intelligence and logistics to implement it.

The strategic objective is dubious. The lightning assault may have gained sensational headlines in the Western media and notions of Ukrainian success. But such notions will be short-lived as Russian forces bear down on the enemy with withering firepower, despite a Ukrainian command center supposedly being set up in Sudzha.

Even Western media reports are conceding that the initial Ukrainian-NATO gains are slowing down. There are also Western reports expressing concern that the futile foray will only weaken the already overstretched Ukrainian lines in the main battle region of Donbass which will accelerate Russia’s advances in Ukraine. Moscow is indicating that it will push on without stopping to defeat the Kiev regime.

As with Nazi Germany’s Kursk offensive, the NATO-backed regime will be seen to have recklessly overplayed its hand. The last reserves of its best battalions are taking severe losses in Kursk.

From Russia’s perspective, the NATO invasion per se is not a serious threat. It is a barbaric violation of Russian territory and its citizens. But the assault in itself does not in any way constitute a national security threat. It will be dealt with harshly. The best way to characterize it is a desperate final roll of the dice by the NATO proxy, as our columnist Finian Cunningham wrote this week.

Legally, under international law and the United Nations charter, Russia has every right to retaliate militarily against all those complicit in the latest attack on its territory. Potentially, that could mean Russia’s military hitting the United States, Britain, France, Germany, and other NATO states.

This is as close to World War Three as it can get. One senses that only the calm discipline and strategic prudence of the Russian leadership are preventing the moment from escalating to a global catastrophe. By contrast, one can imagine how the American and NATO leaders would react if the shoe was on the other foot and Russia was somehow orchestrating offensive attacks on their soil.

It’s as well to keep calm. The Kiev regime is collapsing from internal corruption and despotism and Russian forces are steadily proceeding to take down this regime. Kursk and Belgorod – while abominable – are provocations to escalate the conflict. It is the collapsing Western powers that need all-out war to save their necks from systematic, historic failure.

However, there is a fiendish dilemma. There is a danger that the reckless, desperate, and disconnected Western elites will magnify their irrationality and provoke Russia even more. This is happening because Moscow is being too stoic and restrained.

Typical of the irrationality is this article for the Atlantic Council with the headline: “Ukraine’s invasion of Russia is erasing Vladimir Putin’s last red lines”.

The article, which no doubt reflects factions of Western strategic thinking, mockingly states: “The Ukrainian army’s advance into Russia… exposes the emptiness of Vladimir Putin’s red lines and the folly of the West’s emphasis on escalation management.”

In a chilling conclusion, it adds: “Now that the Ukrainian military has crossed the last of Putin’s red lines and invaded Russia without sparking World War III, there are no more excuses for restricting [Kiev’s] ability to defend itself or denying Ukraine the weapons it needs to win the war.”

Thus, Russia’s containment of the NATO invasion is not seen as a reality check on crazed assault. Rather, it is emboldening Western imperialism to double down on its criminal gambling with world security.

In that case, the moment may have arrived when Russia needs to take retaliation in a way that the NATO enemy understands. Russia’s reasoned restraint is insanely misinterpreted as weakness, thereby inciting more NATO insanity.

Vladimir Putin once remarked how dealing with bullies in his younger days growing up in St Petersburg was best done by punching them in the nose before they got out of hand.

As the impudence of Biden and other Western leaders this week shows, the U.S. and NATO’s malicious arrogance towards Russia is that of an insufferable bully who is acting more and more brazenly because of impunity.

August 17, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

UK trained Ukrainian soldiers before Kursk attack – Times

A Ukrainian soldier during training in the UK. © Getty Images / Finnbarr Webster
RT | August 16, 2024

Some of Kiev’s troops underwent training in the UK shortly before the Ukrainian incursion into Russia’s Kursk Region, The Times has reported.

On August 6, Ukrainian forces launched their largest attack on Russian territory since the outbreak of the conflict in February 2022. The advance of Kiev’s troops in Kursk Region was swiftly halted by the Russian military, but they still remain in control of a number of settlements.

Kiev “utilized some of Ukraine’s most battle-hardened fighters” taken from other parts of the front line during the incursion, the British paper said in an article on Friday.

A Ukrainian serviceman, who talked to the Times from a hospital bed after being wounded in clashes in the Russian border town of Sudzha, said his unit had been defending Volchansk in Ukraine’s Kharkov Region when he was told that “today they were going to invade Russia.”

According to the article, the members of this formation were already “specialists in street fighting” after being involved in “some of the bloodiest battles” of the conflict, including the fight for the strategic settlement of Avdeevka in Russia’s Donetsk People’s Republic, which Ukraine lost in February.

But The Times reported that, “a month before they were dispatched into Kursk, some of the unit were sent to England where they underwent a few days of training alongside British soldiers.” The major focus of this training course was “raids on high-rise buildings,” it revealed.

Western officials have voiced their support for the Ukrainian incursion into Kursk Region, but denied any prior knowledge of the operation or involvement in it. However, Mikhail Podoliak, the top adviser to Ukrainian leader, Vladimir Zelensky, claimed earlier this week that “there were discussions between partner forces, just not on the public level,” of the attack on Russian territory.

Adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin and former Security Council secretary, Nikolay Patrushev, told Izvestia newspaper on Friday that Kiev’s incursion was “planned with the involvement of NATO and Western special services.” It was the US and its allies who “put the criminal junta at the head of Ukraine,” while “NATO countries have supplied Kiev with weapons, military instructors, and continuous intelligence while controlling the actions of neo-Nazis,” Patrushev added.

Russia’s Defense Ministry said on Friday that, since the start of the incursion, Ukraine had lost up to 2,860 servicemen and several hundred units of military hardware, including 41 tanks, 40 APCs, and three US-supplied HIMARS multiple rocket launchers.

August 16, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

Russia steps in to quell tensions between US proxies and Syrian tribes

The Cradle | August 14, 2024

The US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) ended on 13 August the siege it had imposed on the northern Syrian cities of Hasakah and Qamishli for the past week, thanks to the mediation of the Russian army.

“All roads that were closed to civilian movement have been opened, with the start of the entry of water, fuel, flour and food tankers into the centers of the cities of Al-Hasakah and Qamishli. Things have returned to how they were before the siege,” Hasakah governor Louay Sayyouh told Al Mayadeen on Tuesday.

Russian military officials held talks with SDF and Syrian army representatives in Qamishli on 13 August, Al Mayadeen and Sputnik reported.

Sputnik’s correspondent said “intensive Russian efforts” took place during the meeting between the commander of Russian forces in Syria and the head of the SDF, Mazloum Abdi, aimed at lifting the SDF siege and de-escalating tensions in the eastern Deir Ezzor governorate, where a large Arab tribal rebellion against Washington’s Kurdish proxy is ongoing.

“There was an initial agreement on the necessity of releasing all detainees in the Syrian army held by the SDF in the cities of Qamishli and Hasakah, along with the necessity of lifting the siege imposed by the SDF on the neighborhoods under the control of the Syrian Arab Army in the cities of Hasakah and Qamishli,” the Sputnik correspondent said.

The SDF siege on Damascus-held areas of Hasakah and Qamishli had been ongoing for the past seven days and was imposed in response to the Arab tribal offensive against the Kurdish militant group last week.

Prior to the Russian visit to Qamishli, which began last week, SDF leaders had “rejected mediation and insisted on continuing the siege,” according to Syrian journalist and TV presenter Haidar Mustafa.

Mustafa added that the SDF siege tactic will not “deter the tribal ‘resistance’ from continuing its project aimed at pressuring the US occupation and its Kurdish militias.”

The Russian mediation came as US forces continued attacks on Syrian army positions in the countryside of Deir Ezzor in support of its SDF allies, who are engaged in clashes with a coalition of Arab tribesmen said to be receiving support from Damascus. SDF forces have also been targeting Syrian military positions with artillery in recent days.

“US Army forces launched a violent attack using heavy artillery and drones on positions of the Syrian army’s auxiliary forces in the villages and towns of Khasham, Marat and Hawijat Sakr in the northeastern countryside of Deir Ezzor,” Sputnik’s correspondent reported during the early hours of 14 August.

The source of the US fire was Washington’s illegal military base in the Conoco oilfield.

On Sunday, several Syrian army soldiers were killed and others wounded in an airstrike targeting a vehicle near Syria’s eastern city of Al-Bukamal on the Syrian–Iraqi border. The strike was widely believed to have been carried out by US forces that had attacked Syria several times since last week’s tribal assault.

A coalition of Syrian Arab tribes launched a massive offensive against the SDF in Deir Ezzor’s countryside on 7 August as part of a rebellion launched against the US-backed militants last year.

The tribal fighters have since lost some of the towns and positions they managed to capture as a result of US air cover provided to the SDF.

The SDF helps oversee oilfields occupied by the US army in Syria and is complicit in Washington’s theft of the country’s natural resources.

It has also released hundreds of ISIS fighters held in its prisons across northern Syria – who have then gone on to attack Syrian troops and civilians.

The rebellion against the Kurdish militants represents a broader rejection of US occupation in Syria.

“The events unfolding today in Syria’s eastern region are a result of the repercussions of the Palestinian resistance’s Operation Al-Aqsa Flood and the broader spillover of conflicts across West Asia … while some may view the recent developments as a local conflict – either between Arab clans or between Arab clans and Kurds – the reality suggests otherwise, as the clans find common cause and common targets with the Axis of Resistance,” political affairs writer and researcher Dr Ahmed al-Druze told The Cradle on 12 August.

August 14, 2024 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Subliminal Message from Beijing to Washington amidst the War Drums

By Lama El Horr – New Eastern Outlook – 12.08.2024 

Anger is a pyromaniac. Under its influence, we tend to provoke a reaction from our adversary, which serves as fuel to fan the flames, thus increasing the legitimacy of the angry inferno. The method is convenient for practicing accusatory inversion and making the one reacting to aggression the instigator of hell.

Today, Washington is angry. The object of this anger is China’s spectacular rise to power, which is increasingly shaking the foundations and legitimacy of US domination of the world. This American anger desperately needs pretexts to both justify and intensify hostilities against Beijing. The United States is therefore seeking to provoke a violent reaction from its main geopolitical rival: China.

So far, this American strategy of one-upmanship has had the opposite effect to that intended. Whether in Beijing’s immediate vicinity, in the Middle East, Africa or Europe, American pressure against China and its partners has reinforced Beijing’s pacifist vocation, to the point of making it a key diplomatic player in the resolution of the world’s most acute crises. Much to the chagrin of Washington’s thirst for fire.

An escalation of tensions meticulously organized by Washington and its allies

Washington’s strategy of escalating tensions aims to target the fulcrums that make the multipolarity advocated by Beijing and Russia a geopolitical reality. Fomenting conflicts involving Beijing’s strategic partners is the path the United States seems to have chosen to curb China’s rise to power and harm its strategic investments.

When Washington allowed Israel to assassinate the Hamas political leader in charge of negotiations, on Iranian soil and in the wake of the Beijing Declaration, the efforts of Chinese diplomacy to unify the Palestinian factions were also targeted. When Israel bombed the Iranian consulate in Damascus in defiance of the Vienna Convention, China, which has a strategic partnership with Iran and Syria, was also targeted. When Washington and its allies bomb Yemen to remove any obstacle to the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian territories, China, which worked for the rapprochement between Riyadh and Teheran, then between Riyadh and Sanaa, is also targeted. When the members of the UN Security Council adopt a resolution on the need for a ceasefire in Gaza, and the United States declares that this resolution is non-binding, China, which urges respect for international law and whose strategic interests are threatened by regional insecurity, is also targeted.

The latest developments concerning the Western Sahara bear striking similarities to those in West Asia. As with the Palestinian question, the Western bloc is flouting international law, which enshrines the Saharawi people’s right to self-determination – except that here, it’s the China-Algeria economic partnership, and the Russia-Algeria security partnership, that seem to be in Washington’s sights. And let’s not forget that Algerian gas is supposed to relieve Europeans of anti-Russian sanctions, and that Algeria continues to speak out on behalf of the Palestinian people.

Likely to inflame tensions on North Africa’s western flank, the Western Sahara is a godsend for Washington at a time when Algeria and its southern neighbors (Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso) have embarked on a process of decolonizing their development and security model – a process that is about to extend to other countries that have also lived under Western tutelage since independence, such as Chad and Nigeria.

Like Israel against Iran, Ukraine against Moscow or Seoul against Pyongyang, France has been assigned the role of executor of the US strategy to contain China, through the demonization of Algeria. Paris is aided in its mission by the Abraham Accords, concluded between Morocco and Israel under the aegis of the Trump administration, which contribute to reinforcing NATO’s presence in North Africa – in a less brutal manner, for the time being, than in the former Yugoslavia.

This strategy of Atlanticist escalation borders on the grotesque when it comes to Venezuela, a BRICS candidate country and one of the world’s leading oil and gas reserves. After decades of outrages suffered by Caracas – attempted coups d’état, media killing of legitimate leaders, suffocation of the economy by apartheid-style sanctions – the United States has still not achieved its goal: to take control of the country’s strategic resources and install its military bases there. As in the case of Iran, the assistance of Beijing and Moscow was crucial in preventing Venezuela’s collapse.

The Western bloc’s decision to resume the affront of not recognizing the elected president has just been severely thwarted by Beijing and Moscow. Invited to the BRICS Summit to be held in Russia in October, Nicolas Maduro announced that he could entrust the exploitation of his country’s strategic resources to members of this structure. Caracas seems to be warning Washington: if you don’t curb your greed, you run the risk of losing everything.

On China’s doorstep, the outbreak of violence that forced the resignation of Sheikh Hasina, Prime Minister of Bangladesh – another BRICS candidate country – raises questions about Washington’s Indo-Pacific strategy. The former head of government’s statements concerning the intentions of “a certain country” to build a military base on the island of Saint Martin in the Bay of Bengal, and also to create a Christian state that would include parts of Bangladesh, Myanmar and even India, offer a reading of events quite distinct from what is being said by the Western media and Muhammad Yunus, the Bangladeshi Nobel Prize winner who has just been entrusted with the head of the interim government.

One power struggle, two world views

Through its leaders, its satellite countries and its megaphone, the mainstream media, the United States strives to portray East-West tensions as a conflict of hierarchy between two models of governance: liberal democracies, synonymous with the West, and autocracies, synonymous with emerging powers. China, on the other hand, offers a different interpretation: the reason for global geopolitical tensions is the questioning of the hierarchy of power in a world where the overwhelming majority of people are challenging American hegemony.

Despite the risk of confrontation it raises, the exacerbation of tensions between Beijing and Washington certainly has one merit: it shows that the two powers have two diametrically opposed conceptions of the world, of their place in it, and of the rules that are supposed to govern relations between states.

Just as it cannot conceive of its own sovereignty without respecting the sovereignty of other states – which implies the primacy of the principle of non-interference and the rejection of any hegemonic power – China also considers that there is an interdependence between its development and that of other nations. This is the founding idea of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, complemented by the vision of a Community of Destiny for Mankind.

This is the bedrock of Chinese political philosophy, in which the notions of development, security and peace are inextricably linked. The BRI and China’s Security, Development and Civilization initiatives are the best illustrations of this concept of civilizational interdependence. In Beijing’s view, we’re all piloting the same ship: it’s up to each and every one of us to be a good pilot, a good teammate and a good visionary, because we’ll have to work collectively to achieve prosperity, and collectively to avoid the pitfalls. The success of such a project depends on keeping the peace on board.

On the contrary, the United States believes that its sovereignty depends on the subordination of other states to its power, and that its continued development depends on obstructing the economic, technological and military independence of other global players. This denial of peoples’ right to self-determination betrays a supremacist conception of power – not inconsistent with imperialist ideology – and logically raises objections throughout the world.

Despite these objections, judging by its militaristic headlong rush, the American administration continues to endorse the statement attributed to Caligula: ‘Let them hate me, so long as they fear me!’ Yet today, with the exception of EU members and a handful of other satellite states, the United States no longer commands the fearful respect it once did in the golden age of its omnipotence – despite the increasingly exorbitant budget allocated to its arms industry.

Behind Beijing’s placid posture, a message to Washington

In this explosive geopolitical context, Washington is seeking to drive Beijing up against the wall, by limiting the Asian giant’s choice to two options. Either China persists in avoiding confrontation – in which case Washington will inevitably gain ground – or China sinks into the spiral of American pyromania – in which case Beijing will turn away from its own geopolitical priorities, in favor of those of its rival. In other words, Washington is offering Beijing the choice between capitulation and surrender.

China doesn’t see it that way, and has its sights set on a third way: pacifism without capitulation. Whether it’s Taiwan, the Korean peninsula, tensions in the South China Sea, conflicts between NATO and Russia, or between the US and Iran, China persists in advocating the peaceful resolution of disputes. In support of this position, Beijing has woven a network of inclusive partnerships, as opposed to exclusive military alliances.

Clearly, this pacifist plea reflects the Chinese authorities’ strategic decision to refrain from knee-jerk reactions to Washington’s military provocations. China’s challenge is to break the United States’ militaristic logic, without indulging its strategy of conflagration.

For the time being, Beijing has decided to meet this challenge with silence. A good illustration of this is the conflict in the Middle East and Gaza. China’s silence has prompted the Western bloc to reveal its cards and discredit itself. ‘Freedom’, ‘Human Rights’, ‘Democracy’ and ‘International Law’ are suffering the same carnage as the Palestinian people.

Beijing’s silence also keeps Washington in the dark about the military capabilities of Beijing’s and Moscow’s partners. The extra-judicial assassinations of Palestinian, Lebanese and Iranian leaders, marked by the seal of international illegality, are the very demonstration of the United States’ frustration at the military calm of its geopolitical adversaries.

Added to this are the uninterrupted requests for membership of the BRICS and the SCO, the hallmarks of the multipolar world. This simple fact means that the tornado of hostilities towards Beijing has not succeeded in diverting the world majority from its aspiration to emancipate itself from the American hegemonic order. Now, if living under the American yoke is intolerable for Iran, Algeria or Venezuela, it’s easy to imagine the degree of irritation the world’s second-largest economy must feel.

But ultimately, as the NATO-Russia conflict has shown, the United States cannot conceive that the deterrent power of its rivals can be applied to itself. It was only by confronting NATO militarily, through Ukraine, that Russia’s deterrent power could be restored. The provocations against Moscow revealed that Washington did not possess all the details of Russia’s military architecture. Today’s outcome of this conflict, revealing the overwhelming superiority of the Russian army, suggests that Moscow, like Beijing and Teheran, had shown unlimited strategic patience before resorting to the military option. Unfortunately, the USA and its NATO allies discovered this at the same time as they discovered Moscow’s firepower.

Today, when Washington seems to be saying: We run the world, and China is part of the world, China seems to be replying, in the manner of Aimé Césaire: Strength is not within us, but above us.

August 12, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine accused of ‘new level of nuclear aggression’

RT | August 12, 2024

A Ukrainian drone strike on Russia’s Zaporozhye nuclear power plant (NPP) started a fire at the facility and caused serious damage to one of its cooling towers, nuclear power agency Rosatom has said. Its CEO Aleksey Likhachyov also noted that the attack represented “a completely new level of targeted aggression aimed at the infrastructure of nuclear facilities.”

In a statement on Monday shared by Russian media, Rosatom said one of the cooling towers at the Zaporozhye NPP had been hit by two Ukrainian attack drones on Sunday evening. The strikes resulted in a fire that burned internal structures, it added.

While the fire was mostly extinguished by first responders within a couple of hours, “the internal structures of the cooling tower suffered serious damage. The risk of the structure collapsing will be assessed by specialists as soon as possible, Rosatom stated.

The agency accused Ukraine of “nuclear terrorism,” arguing that the strike had targeted crucial cooling equipment, adding that Zaporozhye NPP, the largest facility of its kind in Europe, as well as the city of Energodar have frequently been attacked by Kiev in the past.

Commenting on the incident, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky claimed that “Russian occupiers started a fire” at the facility, without mentioning any drone strikes. He also shared footage showing a large blaze in the lower levels of the tower, with plumes of smoke rising hundreds of meters into the sky.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has a mission at Zaporozhye NPP, said that its experts heard “multiple explosions” at the facility, without attributing responsibility to either Russia or Ukraine. The watchdog stated that “no impact has been reported for nuclear safety.”

IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi also condemned what he called “reckless attacks” that “endanger nuclear safety at the plant and increase the risk of a nuclear accident.”

Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova blasted the IAEA for its apparent inaction. “Where is Rafael Grossi and the rest of the IAEA? Is there at least an imitation of the work of this UN body in this critical area?” she asked, adding that the “terrorists in Kiev, under the leadership of the collective West, destroyed their country… and now they have begun the nuclear terror of the continent.”

Zaporozhye NPP was seized by Russian forces in 2022, several days after the start of the conflict. While Zaporozhye Region joined Russia in a public referendum in the autumn of 2022, the facility itself is located not far from the front line. Against this backdrop, Ukraine and Russia have often traded accusations over who was behind attacks on the facility.

August 12, 2024 Posted by | Nuclear Power, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

Russia decries ‘routine repression’ of dissidents in EU states

RT | August 7, 2024

The West is turning into a “neoliberal dictatorship” that is intolerant of any form of dissent, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova claimed on Wednesday. She was commenting on the prosecution of journalist Svetlana Burtseva by EU member Estonia.

Burtseva, a 57-year-old naturalized Estonian citizen, was charged this week under an article of the Estonian penal code that prohibits relations with a foreign entity with the intention of committing treason.

Specifically, Burtseva was accused of writing under a pen name for a Baltic-focused Russian-language news outlet that belongs to the Russian media group Rossiya Segodnya, which is sanctioned by the EU.

Estonian officials have claimed Burtseva committed subversive activities such as writing a book that “belittles” the Baltic country, as claimed by public prosecutor Eneli Laurits.

Commenting on the case, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zakharova said that “similar to other ‘advanced democracies’ of the Baltics, Estonia continues to systematically use repression as a routine tool for quashing dissent.”

She described the allegations against Burtseva as “obviously fabricated” and claimed that they reflect Tallin’s “flawed and absolutely irreconcilable” attitude to opposition.

Moscow perceives the prosecution as an attempt to punish Burtseva for journalism and voicing opinions critical of the Estonian government. International bodies that should defend freedom of speech share the blame, since they have neglected their duties and have long turned a blind eye to the stifling of critical press by the Baltic states, the diplomat argued.

The entire situation “showcases the deep crisis and the deterioration of the Western-style democracy, how it is morphing into a neoliberal dictatorship,” Zakharova concluded.

August 7, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »