Kiev regime promotes terror in Belgorod
A vehicle destroyed by Ukraine shelling in Belgorod. © Telegram / Valentin Demidov
By Lucas Leiroz | March 15, 2024
The Belgorod region has been the target of several Ukrainian attacks in recent days, even more intensely on March 14, just before the start of the Russian elections. The targets of the attacks were civilian facilities, without any military relevance, which makes the Ukrainian attitude absolutely criminal according to international law.
Participating in a press expedition with the BRICS Journalists Association, I was in Belgorod to report the local tragedy on the ground. Several missile and drone attacks took place throughout the day, leaving at least two dead and several injured. I visited most of the affected places and spoke to some victims, obtaining a lot of relevant information.
Locals said that these raids have become increasingly frequent and that raids intensify during important dates for the Russian Federation. Religious and patriotic holidays, for example, are often marked by intense Ukrainian shelling on the border. Currently, due to the Russian election period, these attacks are once again becoming extremely violent.
Ukrainian missiles and drones on March 14 hit facilities such as shopping centers, common streets and residential buildings. There were no military targets in the attacks, with all victims being civilians. Apparently, the Ukrainian objective is simply to promote terror throughout the city and prevent people from living normally during election time. Unable to leave their homes for fear of bombings, ordinary citizens could be prevented from voting, damaging the electoral process.
In addition to drone and missile attacks, there was a land invasion, with Ukrainian troops trying to enter Russian territory using tanks and armored vehicles, with aerial support from helicopters. The invasion, however, was quickly neutralized by the joint action of the Russian military and security forces. Some villages close to the border were severely affected, such as in the Belovskoye region, where three people were seriously injured by Ukrainian forces – including two nine-month-old children, whose bodies were partially burned by shrapnel from bombs. The damage to the civilian population was severe, despite Kiev’s absolute failure to gain ground on the Russian side of the border.
I asked local residents on the city’s streets how they felt about the Ukrainian threat during this election period. Despite the danger, the locals showed courage and fearlessness, stating that the elections would not need to be canceled or postponed. Residents said they trust the work of the Russian defense forces, which is why they feel safe going to the polls.
It must be emphasized that these attacks could have had much worse consequences if the Russian defense forces were not sufficiently precise in containing the damage. Most enemy missiles and drones are destroyed by Russian air defense before reaching their targets, saving the lives of hundreds of civilians. Although some projectiles hit their targets, the damage from the attacks is partially low, which makes the local people feel reasonably safe, despite the constant threat.
In addition to the work of the Russian defense forces, the city of Belgorod is structured to protect as many civilians as possible. There are anti-missile shelters along the streets, where locals hide as soon as the air raid sirens start to sound. This protective structure allows life to continue reasonably as normal in the city, despite the attacks. Commerce and transport services continue to operate, for example, with only small interruptions during the most critical moments.
In fact, this type of terrorist operation was already expected. The neo-Nazi regime intensifies attacks and killings of civilians during important periods, such as elections, which is why it is no surprise to Russians that this is happening now. However, the brutality with which Ukrainian forces target civilian areas should be seen as a reminder of the real nature of the Kiev regime. The Ukrainian Junta simply has a military guideline to target and kill civilians, and there is no limit to its bombings in absolutely demilitarized and strategically irrelevant regions.
Also, considering that the weapons used by Ukraine in these operations are supplied by NATO, it is also possible to say that the West is a co-participant in these crimes, having responsibility for the deaths of Russian civilians in Belgorod and other regions. As long as Ukraine has “carte blanche” from its Western partners to murder ordinary people, terrorist attacks like those in Belgorod on the 14th will be frequent – and only by the military action of the Russian forces will it be possible to save civilian lives.
Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.
Ukraine bombs Russian nuclear power plant periphery
RT | March 14, 2024
Ukrainian forces have dropped a bomb near diesel tanks located at Russia’s Zaporozhye nuclear power plant, management at the facility reported on Thursday.
In a video published on social media, plant director Yury Chernuk pointed to a crater in the ground, which he said had been created by an explosive device dropped from a Ukrainian drone.
The bomb itself was composed of explosives wrapped in foil, according to reports, but the location was significant. The crater was just five meters away from the perimeter fence, and tanks storing diesel fuel could be seen in the footage.
The plant has backup diesel generators, which kick in when electricity supply from the power grid is cut off. Its equipment needs to be powered continuously to ensure safe operation, even when nuclear reactors are not online. Blackouts have been a regular occurrence for the site since the beginning of the conflict.
”Destruction of those tanks or a fuel leak may not only cause a fire, but also result in significant loss of diesel reserves. Consequently, the plant’s preparedness for emergencies would be reduced by orders of magnitude,” Chernuk explained.
Another person, who was not identified, suggested that the bombing incident had been part of Ukraine’s intimidation tactics. Kiev considers the plant to be occupied by the Russian military.
The director of the facility noted that Ukrainian forces had targeted the plant days after the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN’s nuclear watchdog, rotated observers stationed there. The organization told Russian media that it was aware of the incident, but offered no further comment.
Following the incident, the situation was reportedly calm in Energodar, the city where the Zaporozhye power plant is located.
Theft of Frozen Russian Assets May Lead to Financial Crisis in the West
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 13.03.2024
While US policymakers are seeking to grab Russia’s sovereign assets altogether, EU officials are planning to find legal ways to seize the profits generated by the assets. Russia has signaled it will retaliate against any form of theft.
An EU official told Reuters that Russian assets frozen in the EU could generate up to €20 billion in after-tax profits through 2027, adding that only part of these profits, as well as a tax on the gross amount, could be sent to the Kiev regime. It was noted the remaining funds, however, would have to stay in the West to create a buffer against Moscow’s retaliation measures.
Of the roughly $282 billion in Russian assets immobilized in Japan and the West, around $207 billion (€191 billion) are held at Euroclear, a clearinghouse based in Belgium.
The official anticipates Euroclear may face a flurry of legal claims from Moscow if Russian money is transferred to Ukraine. The claims are due to come from the Russian Central Bank, which can seize €33 billion in Euroclear funds held in the national securities depository in Moscow as a tit-for-tat move, according to the official.
Russia may also take legal action to seize Euroclear assets held in Hong Kong and Dubai.
Western banks that have lost investment funds in Russia could also sue the clearinghouse, potentially leading to Euroclear’s bankruptcy and triggering a domino effect, given Euroclear’s key role in global financial transactions. The EU official warned that, ultimately, the trail of counterclaims could lead to nothing short of an economic crisis.
Speaking to the Financial Times in mid-February, Lieve Mostrey, chief executive of Euroclear, warned that a G7 plan to use Russia’s frozen assets as a backstop to issue debt for Ukraine, or seize the immobilized assets altogether, could pose serious financial risks to Europe.
“When we come to a logic of seizing of assets (…) then you see the trust in the Euroclear system, the trust in the European capital markets, the trust in euro as a currency substantially affected,” she told FT.
Mostrey remarked that “the risk is a bit lower” if the West grabs profits generated by the frozen sovereign assets.
Russia has underscored it will take retaliatory measures in response to any manipulations with its financial resources illegally immobilized by the West, and that it would perceive any form of grab as “theft”. Euroclear is already facing between 50 and 100 lawsuits in Russian courts over the sanctioned assets.
Any actions with Russian frozen assets will trigger a symmetrical response, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov told Sputnik in late February, adding that a similar quantity of foreign assets have been frozen in Russia.
The Russian finance minister suggested last December that in the event of confiscation of Russian assets in Europe, Russia may tap foreign funds frozen in so-called Type “C” accounts, a special type of accounts for non-residents introduced by Russia in March 2022. One cannot withdraw money from these accounts as funds can only be used for a limited range of purposes, such as paying taxes or purchasing federal loan bonds.
According to some estimates, by mid-March 2023, up to 1 trillion rubles (€10 billion) could have been accumulated in type “C” accounts in the form of dividends and coupons paid to investors from unfriendly countries at Russia’s National Settlement Depository (NSD).
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov made it clear in early February that Russia is prepared for a decade-long legal battle over the potential seizure of its assets.
“If such decisions are made, they will be deeply illegal. They will have decades-long judicial consequences for those who make these decisions and for those who implement these decisions,” Peskov emphasized.
Russia says no to Switzerland ‘peace conference’
RT | March 13, 2024
Moscow has no intention of participating in a proposed Swiss-hosted peace conference on the Ukraine conflict, even if it is officially invited, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has stated.
The official response follows recent media reports that China and Switzerland have been pushing to get Russia invited to the talks. Last month, Switzerland announced plans to organize a peace summit “by the summer.” No specific date has been named as of yet. The list of participants has also not been revealed. However, Ukraine has indicated that Russia can only be invited if it agrees in advance to a litany of preconditions.
“This forum will be dedicated to promoting the ultimatum ‘Zelensky peace formula,’ although its Swiss organizers pretend that they are looking for a common denominator in the peace initiatives of different countries,” Zakharova said, according to a press release issued on Wednesday on the ministry’s website.
She explained that Zelensky’s plan includes a number of unrealistic terms, including the withdrawal of Russian troops to Ukraine’s 1991 borders, holding Moscow accountable and paying reparations, as well as provisions on food, nuclear safety, energy, ecology, and humanitarian problems. Kiev’s basic demands remain the same, while legitimate Russian interests are being ignored, Zakharova said.
“So, the upcoming conference is a continuation of meetings in the Copenhagen format, which initially discredited themselves, and now have reached a dead end.”
Moscow is convinced that “Switzerland can hardly serve as a platform for various peacekeeping efforts, since this presupposes a neutral status, which Bern has lost,” the spokeswoman claimed.
“All this makes Russia’s participation in the aforementioned ‘peace conference’ pointless as it doesn’t matter whether it will be held in one, two or five stages – its ultimatum essence, promoted by Kiev and its masters, does not change from this,” Zakharova concluded.
Ukraine’s Western backers insist that a peace settlement can only be achieved on Kiev’s terms and have vowed to continue weapons deliveries for “as long as it takes.” Russia, meanwhile, has stressed that no amount of foreign aid will change the course of the conflict.
Peace negotiations between Moscow and Kiev were held in the spring of 2022, but broke down with both sides accusing each other of making unrealistic demands.
Russian President Vladimir Putin subsequently said the Ukrainian delegation had initially agreed with some of Russia’s terms during the talks in Istanbul that March, but then abruptly reneged on the deal.
The Kremlin has repeatedly stressed that it remains open to meaningful discussions and has blamed the lack of a diplomatic breakthrough on the Ukrainian authorities.
Does the Fate of US Arms in Ukraine Create Pause for Thought Ahead War with China?
By Brian Berletic – New Eastern Outlook – 12.03.2024
In recent months, advanced US weapon systems provided to Ukrainian forces have been cornered and destroyed on the battlefield by Russian troops. This includes the first ever confirmed footage of a US M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS), the destruction of several M1 Abrams main battle tanks, and the further loss of several more Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, Newsweek reported.
Last year, the US Department of Defense admitted that a US-made Patriot air defense battery sustained damage in a Russian missile attack, according to CNN. This year, in an article by Forbes, it is admitted that a Russian short-range Iskander ballistic missile destroyed at least two Patriot missile launchers.
These developments end decades of US claims regarding the superiority of its weapons systems, including boasts that Russia’s Soviet-era equipment “won’t be a match” for US arms, as the Business Insider claimed regarding M1 Abrams being sent to Ukraine.
Busting the Myth of American Military Supremacy
The Business Insider article, like many others across the Western media, repeated the myth of the superiority of America’s military technology based on flawed analysis of its performance during the 1991 Persian Gulf War and the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq. In both instances, the US pitted its best troops and equipment against poorly trained Iraqi forces using Soviet-era equipment already obsolete at the time.
The lopsided results of the fighting in both conflicts were cited as evidence of American superiority over Soviet and then Russian Federation military technology. It also serves as the basis of assumed military superiority over Chinese military power. Such lopsided fighting was imagined by Western analysts ahead of US weapons arriving at the battlefield in Ukraine, and despite the poor performance of these systems in Ukraine, such lopsided fighting is still imagined amid any potential conflict between the US and China.
However, for analysts carefully studying the evolution of modern warfare from 1991 to present day, the disparity between Western military technology and that of even non-state armed organizations was closing. During the 2006 Israeli invasion of southern Lebanon, Hezbollah used modern Russian anti-tank weapons to inflict heavy casualties on Israeli forces, Haaretz reported. Hezbollah’s enhanced military might allowed it to stop the advance of Israeli Merkava main battle tanks and supporting troops well before their stated objective of reaching the Litani River.
The Syrian Arab Army’s successful use of Soviet and Russian-made air defense systems during the ongoing conflict in Syria has forced US, European, and Israeli warplanes to launch attacks using longer-range stand-off weapons. These same air defense systems have been used to intercept Western cruise missiles, reducing damage to targets across the country.
Russia’s intervention in Syria at the invitation of Damascus in 2015 was followed by an effective use of modern Russian air power, cutting the supply lines of Western-backed militants, and aiding Syrian forces on the ground in encircling and destroying them.
It was becoming clear that should modern Western weapon systems face modern Russian military technology, the myth of Western military superiority would be shattered. It was also becoming clear that a similar gap was closing in terms of US military technology and its Chinese counterparts.
On the battlefield in Ukraine, Russian forces using modern Russian weapons are eliminating Ukrainian brigades trained and armed by the US and other NATO members. Despite high expectations ahead of Ukraine’s 2023 offensive, up to 9 NATO-trained and armed brigades were decimated in months of fighting. The New York Times would report at the end of 2023 that despite Ukraine’s massive offensive campaign, Russia had gained the most territory that year.
While it is true that Ukraine did not have enough time to properly integrate the Western arms transferred to it from 2022 onward, the performance of both Western and Russian weapons on the battlefield has made it clear that, now more than ever, the idea of Western military superiority is a more nostalgic interpretation of history, and far from a current reality.
Beyond the performance of Western and Russian weapons on the battlefield themselves, both Western and Russian military industrial capacity has been put to the test. Western private industry-run arms manufacturing had failed to develop surge capacity needed for the protracted, large-scale fighting now taking place in Ukraine. Russia’s military industrial base inherited and then enhanced and modernized such surge capacity from the Soviet Union and, according to the New York Times, despite sanctions, is now outproducing the collective West.
Additionally, because of the complex nature of modern Western arms, a vast network of logistics, sustainment, and maintenance is required to keep these arms operating on the battlefield. A recent press release by the US Department of Defense Inspector General reveals that no such system was created for US weapons transferred over to Ukraine and that without it, “the Ukrainians would not be capable of maintaining these weapon systems.”
Such support was not provided to Ukraine because of the massive undertaking such support requires. For any given fighting force, one many times larger is required to support, sustain, and maintain that force and the weapons and vehicles it uses.
Taken together, all of these weaknesses revealed about Western military technology do not bode well for the United States ahead of any potential conflict directly or by proxy against China.
The Gap Between US and Chinese Military Power is Narrowing
Not only does China have many weapon systems comparable to the systems Russia is employing in Ukraine now, China has acquired some of the best Russian military technology from Russia itself. This includes the Su-35 warplane and the S-400 air defense system.
The US Department of Defense admits the growing capabilities of Chinese military systems, particularly in terms of missile technology, both surface-to-surface missiles and air-to-air missiles launched by warplanes, comparable to or exceeding the capabilities of American missiles, Air and Space Forces Magazine reported.
A 2023 Reuters article would likewise cite the US Department of Defense, admitting that China’s navy was already larger than the US Navy.
Even as Russia’s military industrial base is outcompeting the collective West, China’s industrial base is larger still. Any difficulties the US is having outproducing Russia in terms of military equipment and ammunition will pale in comparison to China’s military industrial output.
Together with the fact that any potential conflict the US seeks to provoke with China will take place in the Asia-Pacific region, thousands of kilometers away from US shores, and considering the extensive nature of the networks required to support US military technology on the battlefield, the idea of Washington fighting and winning any armed conflict against China appears particularly and increasingly absurd.
Even if Washington’s strategy is to subordinate China not with the threat of fighting and winning a war against China in the Asia-Pacific region, but to hold peace and stability in the region hostage by threatening war regardless of its outcome, the US finds itself in a difficult and increasingly weak position year-by-year.
Current US foreign policy is predicated on the premise, “might makes right.” However, the US is clearly no longer “the mightest.” As it provokes conflicts around the globe directly or by proxy, it risks suffering severe consequences its previous advantages in terms of military power had protected it against decades ago.
Continuing to pursue an unsustainable policy like this will end in disaster for Washington and for the American people. However, the US could always pivot toward a policy of coexistence and cooperation, built on mutual respect for other nations like Russia and China as well as the primacy of national sovereignty of all nations.
While the US would no longer be the most powerful nation on Earth, it would still assume a prominent and respected position within a multipolar world. Conversely, if it continues pursuing a foreign policy of belligerence, it still will no longer be the most powerful nation on Earth, but will arrive at that conclusion under much more difficult conditions.
What is unfolding on the battlefields of Ukraine is giving the collective West insight into what it itself may undergo if it continues provoking conflict within a world where Western supremacy has diminished and the rest of the world is now capable of asserting their own best interests within their borders and regions of the world above the collective West and its ambitions worldwide.
The collective West insists on its continued pursuit of global primacy at its own peril.
Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer.
How Washington Killed the Nuclear Arms Control System
By Ted Galen Carpenter | The Libertarian Institute | March 12, 2024
During the Cold War, world populations faced the ongoing nightmare of a nuclear attack coming out of the blue. All it would have taken was one miscalculation by either side. Such a trigger could even have taken the form of a false alert. We know that at least one such incident nearly led to catastrophe.
In 1983, the Soviet Union’s alert system indicated that there were incoming missiles on their way. Fortunately, the alert commander ordered a double check to be sure the indications of a missile launch from NATO were genuine. That check confirmed that the alert was erroneous. Given the dire state of East/West tensions, World War III would have at the time been almost certain if the commander had not been extra cautious.
The end of the Cold War ended the prospect of such a nightmare scenario. Unfortunately, Bill Clinton’s administration “found new causes to promote using American power, a fixation that would lead to serial campaigns of intervention and social engineering.” U.S. leaders, especially Secretary of State Madeline Albright, went out of their way to demonstrate Russia’s impotence publicly. In particular, they humiliated Russia’s Serbian clients both in Bosnia and in Serbia itself. Washington’s treatment of the Serbs caused renewed East/West tensions and began to generate a second Cold War.
Even more directly, the United States and its principal European allies provoked Russia with multiple rounds of NATO expansion. In April 1998, NATO admitted Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary over Russia’s vehement objections. Expansion continued under both George W. Bush and Barrack Obama. The result was a steady increase in military tensions. In addition to provoking Russia by mistreating its Serbian clients, Washington expanded NATO eastward, creating a threat within Russia’s core security zone.
There were multiple rounds of eastward expansion involving Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barrack Obama. The mythology has also developed that Donald Trump was soft on policy toward Russia, if not an outright traitor. The reality was the opposite. U.S. policy towards Russia hardened significantly under Trump. That point was most obvious with regard to Trump’s attitude towards crucial arms control agreements.
Under Trump, the United States had adopted several measures that again raised the extent of tension. An especially unhelpful action took place during Trump’s administration when hawkish U.S. officials decided that the United States should withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty in August 2019. Such intermediate range missiles had always been Russia’s Achilles’ heel and Russian leaders were hypersensitive about their country being at a disadvantage with respect to such weapons. Threatening to withdraw from that agreement was extremely unhelpful. The situation worsened when Washington followed up by deciding to withdraw from the Open Skies Treaty in November 2020.
As Western-Russian relations deteriorated further, Russian President Vladimir Putin put Russia’s nuclear forces on higher alert in February 2022 following the advance of Russian forces deeper into Ukraine. Later in the year, relations became even more confrontational. The “architecture of disarmament and nonproliferation is now gradually being dismantled. On [November, 2023] President Vladimir V. Putin signed a law revoking Russia’s ratification of the global treaty banning nuclear testing. In pushing through the de-ratification, Putin said that he wanted to “mirror” the American position. Although the United States signed the treaty in 1996, it has never been ratified. Since the United States has never ratified the treaty, Russia’s move was more symbolic than practical. But it leaves only one significant nuclear weapons pact between Russia and the United States in place: the New START treaty.” If Russia further weakens its commitment to the test ban, that will create yet another arena for instability.
It is sobering to consider the state of global nuclear arms control today to what it was at the end of the Cold War. It is alarming that Moscow and Washington have returned to the state of nuclear rivalry and confrontation in less than a quarter century. An unparalleled opportunity for peace has been wasted.
Musk comments on US attempt to weaken Russia
RT | March 11, 2024
Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, has agreed with investor David Sacks’ view that Washington’s attempts to weaken Russia have “come true in reverse” and in reality only made it stronger.
Sharing his opinion on the Ukraine conflict in an interview posted on X on Sunday, Sacks called it “Biden’s big backfire.”
“We’ve made the Russian military stronger, it’s larger than it was before, it produces far more weapons, the industrial base is ramped up. Plus it’s now battle-tested and battle-hardened, especially against Western weapons,” he said.
Musk appeared to agree with Sacks, commenting on the post on X: “Unfortunately, this is true.”
Citing the size of Russia’s army compared to Ukraine’s, Sacks stated that Biden has “created” a much more “formidable” Russian military. Meanwhile, it’s the US that has seen its stockpiles “depleted and hollowed out,” he argued.
The economic sanctions on Russia have become another major miscalculation of Biden’s policies, according to Sacks. He believes that the idea to “crush” Russia with sanctions was delusional as the country’s economy stabilized and even outperformed G7 economies in 2023.
“The Russian economy is growing faster than any of the G7 economies. It’s really booming and it’s our European allies’ economies that have been crushed by the sanctions,” he noted.
But it is Ukraine that has been suffering the most from US involvement in the conflict, he argued. He attacked Biden who claimed that the US would “help ease the suffering of the Ukrainians” but in fact, Washington’s support “of this proxy war and our willingness to fight to the last Ukrainian” has led to a “humanitarian catastrophe.”
This is not the first time the two men have been in alignment on such issues. Earlier this month, Musk agreed with Sacks’ statement on X that NATO “faced an existential crisis” after the collapse of the Soviet Union and decided to embark on an expansion spree to fill the void.
The US has been Ukraine’s primary backer and has provided over $111 billion in military and financial assistance. However, in recent months, US aid has subsided drastically as the administration of President Joe Biden has struggled to overcome Republican resistance to its efforts to push through another $60 billion for Ukraine.
Meanwhile, Moscow has said that the US and its allies who continue to arm Ukraine cannot prevent Russia from achieving its goals and are only prolonging the suffering of Ukrainians.
Moldova about to escalate tensions with Russia
By Lucas Leiroz | March 11, 2024
Tensions in the post-Soviet space are escalating. Moldova recently signed an important military cooperation agreement with France, which tends to generate serious consequences for the stability of regional security, considering Paris’ interest in fomenting war against Moscow. In this context, many analysts fear that new violence could emerge in the pro-Russian separatist region of Transnistria, as Russia would be forced to intervene in such a conflict.
On March 7, Moldovan President Maia Sandu signed a military pact with France during a visit to Paris. On the occasion, French President Emmanuel Macron promised “unwavering support” on security and defense issues. Both sides agree that increased defense cooperation is a necessary step to confront what they call the “Russian advance.” According to them, if Moscow is not contained in Ukraine, the Russian government will launch new military actions in neighboring countries to gain more territories and zones of influence. In this sense, increasing French military cooperation would be a way of ensuring that the war “does not spread” towards Moldova.
The agreement establishes military cooperation in several sectors, mainly in arms supply contracts. Furthermore, French troops are expected to train the Moldovan armed forces. Moldovan officials have said recently that the country needs immediate help to reform its military structure to be ready for a possible conflict. Alone, Moldova is unable to overcome its current military weakness, which is why it is seeking Western help.
In parallel to this, Macron’s France has been marked by the constant attempt to further militarize the post-Soviet space and foment destabilization in the Russian strategic environment. Paris has been the main agent of disruption in Russian-Western relations recently, mobilizing “war preparation” efforts against Moscow in Europe. This is part of President Macron’s personal project to designate himself internationally as a “leader of all of Europe”, but it is also a reflection of the strategic irrationality that has today become a central aspect of Western foreign policy.
Previously, France had already started a similar project to fuel conflict in the post-Soviet space through Armenia. Paris has been endorsing the Pashinyan regime and stimulating anti-Russian sentiments in the Caucasus. The French government is playing a fundamental role in NATO’s plan to control both sides of the Armenia-Azerbaijan crisis, creating both an alliance between the US, EU and Yerevan and an alliance between Turkey and Baku. The aim of all this is simply to increase NATO’s presence in the Caucasus and generate military pressure on the Russian strategic environment.
Now, by encouraging Moldova to militarize, France is taking a step further in its anti-Russian destabilization project. Moldova has an extremely fragile domestic security architecture, as since 1992 the country has faced a separatist problem in the Transnistria region. Civil conflict has been frozen for decades – largely due to the presence of Russian peacekeepers in the region, dissuading the Moldovan government from launching a military offensive. However, like any other frozen conflict, hostilities could resume at any time if relations between the sides continue to deteriorate.
Moscow never recognized Transnistria as an independent country. For the Russians, it belongs to Moldovan territory, but both sides are required to reach a common agreement. As a region with a strong presence of ethnic Russians and Ukrainians, where the Russian language is considered native by citizens, the region deserves a special status in Moldovan politics, as well as autonomy rights must be created for the local people. Moscow has already stated that if such peace conditions are established, Russian troops will leave the region. More than that, Russia has also made it clear that it is even willing to destroy the Soviet-era weapons depots that remain in Transnistria, advancing regional demilitarization.
However, instead of seeking demilitarization, pro-Western sectors in Moldova prefer to increase ties with NATO and create even more problems with Russia. For Moldovan elites, Russia is an enemy country that must be approached with hostility. For this reason, since 2022, the West has tacitly encouraged Moldova to seek a military solution in Transnistria. The calculation is simple: the hope is to force Moscow to send troops to protect the Transnistrian people, creating a new proxy conflict and opening yet another flank for Russia.
There has been an internal balance in Moldova. Some political sectors continue to object to considering Russia and Transnistria as “threats”, but the rapprochement with France indicates that pro-war groups are gaining momentum in national politics. It is important for Moldovans to remember that they are not part of NATO, and are therefore not protected by the American military umbrella – which means that, if there really is a conflict, they will be abandoned by the West and used as mere cannon fodder, precisely as happened with Ukraine.
Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.
Trump has plan to end Ukraine conflict – Orban
RT | March 11, 2024
Donald Trump intends to end the Ukraine conflict, if reelected as US president, and has a “detailed plan” to do so, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban told local media, after meeting the presumed Republican nominee.
The former US leader repeatedly claimed on his campaign trail that, if he had remained in the White House for a second term, there would be no hostilities between Moscow and Kiev. If voted back in, he promises to end the conflict “in 24 hours” by applying pressure on stakeholders.
Orban, who spoke with Trump at the Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida on Friday, did not explain how exactly the American would do that, but said that cutting the flow of US aid was a crucial part of the plan.
”If the US will not provide the money, Europeans on their own will not be able to finance this war, and then the war will end,” Orban said in an interview with M1 broadcaster on Sunday.
During his presidency, Trump had shown himself to be “a man of peace,” the Hungarian leader claimed. That stance puts him in alignment with Hungary, unlike the administration of US President Joe Biden and many members of the EU, he added.
”The American Democratic government and the leadership of the EU, as well as the leadership of the largest EU member states are pro-war governments. Donald Trump is pro-peace, Hungary is pro-peace. At the bottom of everything lies this difference,” Orban declared.
The Kremlin declined to weigh in on the remarks, with spokesman Dmitry Peskov saying on Monday that Orban’s account of Trump’s intentions was too vague for any specific commentary.
Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky previously expressed skepticism about Trump’s ability to deliver on the promise. He said if the plan was feasible, the American politician should share it with the public, or at least with Kiev. The Ukrainian government claims that a “just peace” requires a military victory over Russia and that it would agree to nothing short of that.
Moscow has said that its strategic goals in the military operation against Kiev will be achieved one way or another. The US and its allies, who continue to arm Ukraine, cannot change that outcome and are only prolonging the suffering of the country’s people, Russian officials have stated.
Missiles near Russia, F-35s with thermonuclear bombs… Is NATO ready for war?
By Drago Bosnic | March 11, 2024
NATO’s never-ending encroachment on Russia’s borders is breaking world records in mere days. Just last week, a new major airbase was opened in Albania, despite the fact that Tirana effectively has no air force. NATO was also given full exterritoriality rights, meaning that Albania officially gave up on its already highly dubious “sovereignty”. Deployment of major ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) and strike platforms in the area can certainly bolster the belligerent alliance’s highly destabilizing presence in both Southeastern and Eastern Europe. And yet, this is not enough. Namely, on March 7, Lithuanian Defense Minister Arvydas Anusauskas confirmed that NATO would also station “Patriot” SAM (surface-to-air missile) systems in his country. While Lithuania doesn’t border mainland Russia, it has an extensive border with Belarus and Moscow’s Kaliningrad oblast (region).
“This year, the rotational air defense system will finally become operational, at least partially,” Anusauskas stated at a press conference in Vilnius, adding: “Our goal is to have a rotation similar to the air policing mission… This principle would not be a one-off thing for several months but would cover all of our calendar months and significantly increase our air defense capabilities.”
While the “Patriot” has been intentionally overhyped by the mainstream propaganda machine, particularly with laughable claims of shooting down “half of the Russian Aerospace Forces in a week”, the move can certainly be considered highly destabilizing. It’s not yet clear how many of these systems could be deployed, but given the much smaller distances that it needs to cover than in Ukraine, deploying the “Patriot” in any of the Baltic states can certainly be more consequential. Namely, the detection range of its AN/MPQ-65 radar (officially 150 km) could provide coverage into the airspace of both Belarus and the Kaliningrad oblast. In addition, Finland is acquiring similar, albeit more advanced air defense assets, including the Israeli “David’s Sling”, which has a significantly longer maximum engagement range. Amassing such SAM systems so close to Russia’s northwest is deeply destabilizing and antagonistic.
While other NATO member states in the relative vicinity of Russia’s borders also operate “Patriot” SAM systems, most notably Romania and (soon) Poland, both of these are far enough not to make the air defense system a strategic issue. On the other hand, other much longer-range weapons, such as the “Aegis Ashore” ABM (anti-ballistic missile) systems, are set to become fully operational in Poland in 2024, while another is already active in Romania (since at least 2016). It’s part of the wider ship-borne “Aegis” system that provides a level of strategic depth that neither the “Patriot” nor “David’s Sling” could. And while the system’s capabilities and effectiveness are certainly up for debate (particularly against Russian hypersonic missiles), the massive increase in their presence is of quantitative importance, which could at least partially ameliorate their qualitative shortcomings and other deficiencies.
And yet, this certainly isn’t the end of NATO’s highly destabilizing activities in Europe. Namely, its vassals and satellite states such as Finland are acquiring the F-35s, while also making it possible to accommodate other jets of the same type from the United States and other NATO member states. The forward presence of USAF F-35s in Eastern and Central Europe keeps expanding and getting ever closer to Russia. Apart from Finland, it now includes Germany, Czechia and Poland, while the Dutch, Belgian and Italian F-35s will also be forward deployed to the area around the Baltic Sea. Worse yet, the jet has been certified to carry thermonuclear weapons, specifically the B61-12 bomb, with several NATO members having the ability to use them through nuclear sharing agreements with the US. This includes the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and Italy, all of whom either operate F-35s or have them on order.
Namely, on March 9, the F-35 was confirmed to be certified to carry B61-12 thermonuclear gravity bombs. Although this refers only to the conventional F-35A, with F-35B and F-35C variants still lacking such capabilities, the latter two are deployed in much smaller numbers. The conventional F-35A is the most common version used by the USAF and other NATO air forces. The possibility of their large-scale deployment in Finland and the Baltic states gives the US premier strike capabilities, far greater than Russia ever had in Cuba 60 years ago.
What’s more, both high-ranking officials in Moscow and independent experts regularly warn about the development of new thermonuclear weapons in America, including the so-called “nuclear super-fuse” technology that the US has been testing for decades, particularly under the Obama administration. Investigative historian Eric Zuesse wrote extensively on the topic.
He has repeatedly been warning that the sole purpose of this controversial technology is to exponentially amplify the effectiveness of America’s first-strike capabilities. And while some might discard Zuesse’s warnings and even decry them as “doom and gloom fantasy” or the mythical “Russian disinformation”, recent developments only reinforce his already sound hypothesis. What’s more, NATO is directly involved in these plans. Back in October last year, the belligerent alliance concluded the “Steadfast Noon” nuclear exercise involving approximately 60 aircraft, including nuclear-capable F-16s and B-52 strategic bombers simulating strikes with B61-12 bombs. It should be noted that these bombs will also be augmented by the upcoming B61-13 variant. And although the nature of this upgrade is classified, it’s safe to assume that they will also include the aforementioned “nuclear super-fuse” technology.
The Pentagon already announced that these new thermonuclear bombs will be comparable to the B61-7 version that can have a yield of up to 340 kt (roughly equivalent to 22-23 Hiroshima bombs). Faced with such escalation, Russia doesn’t exactly have a lot of choice but to be prepared. This is precisely why Russia has been conducting nationwide drills simulating an all-out nuclear attack, as well as its own retaliatory strikes on the aggressors. Earlier, the US FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) conducted similar warning exercises.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
‘Novorossiya’ rising from ashes like phoenix
Russian President Vladimir Putin took a meeting on development of southern/Azov sea regions, Moscow, March 6, 2024
BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | MARCH 10, 2024
The Russian President Vladimir Putin’s meeting on Wednesday in Moscow with top officials of economic ministries and leaders of the southern and Azov sea regions — ‘Novorossiya’ historically — signifies a significant initiative in the Kremlin’s geo-strategy, with global ramifications, as the conflict in Ukraine meanders toward a new phase.
What lends poignancy to the occasion at once is that Putin is beating swords into ploughshares at a juncture when the US and its allies are sounding bugles. Indeed, one way of looking at Wednesday’s meeting is that it is a riposte to the fanciful conjecture 10 days earlier by French President Emmanuel Macron that European armies might march into Ukraine to push back Russians.
Putin signalled something profound — that war cries to defeat Russia is already time past. With the capture of the strategic town of Avdiivka and the rapid advance further west since then, cities like Pokrovsk, Kostyantynivka and Kramatorsk are now facing a fast-approaching front line, littered with signs of an approaching Russian army.
As the Russian forces gain more momentum in the Donetsk region, the question of where they will stop is becoming increasingly difficult to answer. There is much unfinished business still. A big concentration of Russian military facing Kharkov is ominous. Odessa is also in Russian sights.
The progress of Russian operations may seem ponderous. In the past month, Russian forces gained only around 100 square kilometres of Ukrainian territory (according to Belfer Centre’s latest Russia-Ukraine War Report Card) but then, in a war of attrition, the tipping point comes most unexpectedly, and before one catches their breath, it’s all over. The Wall Street Journal wrote that Ukraine has few remaining military strongholds in Donbass, which means that with each Russian advance, Ukraine must retreat to often underprepared positions.
A New York Times report on Thursday titled Mutual Frustrations Arise in U.S.-Ukraine Alliance ended on a sombre note citing Western officials and military experts that “a cascading collapse along the front is a real possibility this year.”
President Joe Biden was conspicuously taciturn in passing judgement on the war in his State of the Union Address at the US Congress on Thursday, except to warn the Kremlin rhetorically that “(we) will not walk away. We will not bow down.” The cryptic remark could mean anything, but he did acknowledge that “Overseas, Putin of Russia is on the march…”
Importantly, Biden put in cast iron his past commitment not to send troops to participate in the war in Ukraine. And his focus was on the Bipartisan National Security Bill in the pipeline that would resume large-scale military aid to Ukraine whose future is now even more uncertain what with Donald Trump’s unstoppable surge as the candidate of the Republican Party.
The fear that the US is walking away from the war is gut-wrenching for Europeans. The French President Emmanuel Macron’s remark last week on Monday on the dispatch of Western ground troops to Ukraine was reflective of belligerence and bravado that often accompanies frustration. Earlier this week, Macron urged Ukraine’s allies not to be “cowardly” in supporting Kiev to fight Russian forces; on Thursday, he went further at a meeting with party leaders to advocate a “no limits” approach to counter Russia.
But there is a big picture, too. On Thursday, Macron met with Moldovan President Maia Sandu, pledging France’s “unwavering support” for her ex-Soviet country as tensions mount between Chisinau and pro-Russian separatists in the breakaway province of Transnistria. During the Macron-Sandu meeting, the two signed a bilateral defence deal, as well as an “economic roadmap,” although no details were provided.
The timing of France’s defence deal with Moldova, which follows a security pact with Ukraine last month, hints at geopolitical considerations to get a toehold in that vital region — where Dniester River rising on the north side of the Carpathian Mountains and flowing south and east for 1350 kms drains into the Black Sea near Odessa — to challenge the rise of Novorossiya, which is in the throes of renewal and regeneration.
For more than three decades, Transnistria has been considered a possible flash point for a conflict. The endgame in Ukraine has a domino effect on Moldavia, which, encouraged by the West, step by step, is strategically defying Russia to “erase” its influence, and move into the EU and NATO camp. Russia has been watching closely but patience is wearing thin.
Sandu is a semi-finished American product — an ethnic Romanian who got transformed as a graduate of John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard and had a stint in the World Bank and was pitchforked into the top rungs of Moldavian politics, eventually as the pro-European candidate in the Moldovian president election in 2016.
Sandu has the same genetic make-up as another colourful figure in the post-Soviet space whom the US groomed for “regime change” in Tbilisi — Mikheil Saakashvili who was the president of Georgia for two consecutive terms from 2004 to 2013 following a colour revolution stage-managed from Washington. The strategic calculus both in Georgia and Moldova basically aims at NATO’s expansion into the Black Sea which has been historically a Russian sphere of influence.
Therefore, Macron’s recent remarks on western combat deployment in Ukraine must be understood properly. He is by no means spiting the Biden Administration — nor is Germany differing from him — as he pushes the envelope and hopes to salvage victory out of the jaws of NATO’s defeat in Ukraine. The Biden administration will be quietly pleased with Macron’s tantrums against the Russian windmill in the regions of Novorossiya and the Black Sea.
The startling disclosure recently of the discussion between two German generals regarding the logistical complexity of lethally destroying the Crimean Bridge shows that Berlin is very much part of the Ukraine project despite the fault lines in the Franco-German axis.
France tasted blood in pushing a similar strategy in Armenia, which has virtually moved out of the Russian orbit and is jettisoning CSTO membership while seeking EU and NATO membership. Its focus will be to evict Russian military presence in Transnistria.
Reacting to the West’s thickening plot in Moldova, Transnistria has sought protection from Moscow. There is a big population of ethnic Russians in that region. The response from the Kremlin has been positive and swift. Shades of Donbass!
At Wednesday’s meeting in the Kremlin on the economic and infrastructure development in the new territories, Putin stressed the modernisation of the Azov-Black Sea road modernisation plans. He said, “we have big plans to develop roads in the Azov-Black Sea region.”
Of course, infrastructure development and strengthening of transportation networks will be an important template of Russia’s counter-strategy. Moscow is not waiting for a conclusive end to the conflict in Ukraine for the integration of the new territories into its economy from a long term perspective.
The crux of the matter, in geopolitical terms, is that Novorossiya is rising from the ashes like the phoenix and becoming, as Catherine the Great envisaged, Russia’s most important all-weather gateway to the world market connecting its vast untold mineral resources and huge agricultural potential. George Soros knows it; Wall Street knows it; Biden knows it. For France and Germany too, it is invaluable as a resource base if it is to ever regain its economic dynamism.
But in immediate terms, the challenge lies in the politico-military sphere — that “Russia cannot be allowed to win in Ukraine,” as Russia’s First Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations Dmitry Polyansky summed up. Russia has requested a Security Council meeting on Ukraine for March 22. Polyansky said Russia will expose the diabolical plots of France, Germany and the US.
‘Novorossiya’: The alternate reality of Ukraine
Featured Video
“IT’S JUST A VITAMIN” (VITAMIN K)
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
8 Top Leaders in Field of Medicine Say Don’t Trust Science
By Fred Burks | WantToKnow
Throughout the pandemic, we were told by the powers that be to trust the science. But science is a process, not a person in whom we can place our faith. This process always produces meaningful data about how the world works, yet correctly interpreting that data isn’t always easy or possible. And for a variety of reasons, official interpretations of scientific data appear broadly untrustworthy. When science is used by powerful interests to support questionable policies, it ceases to be a tool for the betterment of all mankind.
Why do these eight top leaders in the field of medicine say that the science is not to be trusted? … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Canada’s Military Punished Whistleblowers Who Flagged Illegal COVID Speech Monitoring
- Iran blasts CENTCOM’s ‘shameless distortion’ on Minab school massacre
- The San Diego Shooting and the Effort to Silence Criticism of Zionism
- IRGC Navy says more ships transiting Strait of Hormuz under its coordination
- Wrong, Sky News, Human-Caused Climate Change Isn’t to Blame for the Alaskan Megatsunami
- In the UK, the classroom has become ground zero for woke ideology
- Six Russians Jailed in Armenia on Flimsy Espionage Allegations
- Europe’s Irrationality & Inability to Discuss War
- Russia once again denounces Kiev’s crimes against the Orthodox Church
- If Thomas Massie Was President…
- If Americans Knew
- Israel lobby takes out Thomas Massie in grueling primary
- Israel brutalizes flotilla humanitarian activists; US sanctions them – Daily Update
- ‘Don’t Be Bothered by Their Screams’ Ben-Gvir Posts Video of Police Dragging Detained Gaza Flotilla Activists
- Who on Earth Feels Threatened by a Nun?
- Antisemitism? Really? The 33 Most Absurd Examples Listed in the ADL’s New Database
- Gaza’s water crisis: Families survive on less than 10 liters a day amid Israel’s ongoing genocide
- Why the Zionist Establishment Wants Progressives Talking About ICE Instead of Gaza
- The Media’s Double Standards on Rape in Palestine and Israel
- Leaked Documents Show Cisco Systems’ Deep Relationship with Israeli Security State
- Israel Can Sue New York Times Over Sexual Abuse Allegations, But Can’t Erase the Truth
- No Tricks Zone
- Researchers Find Rapid Global Warming Phase At End Of Last Ice Age (Ca.18,000 Years Ago)
- Even The DNA Of Single-Celled Plankton Can Upend Alarmist Arctic Sea Ice Melt Claims
- Scandal: Although Climate Panic Is Canceled By IPCC, Europe’s Policymakers Continue With Their Crushing Policies
- How Once Hardcore Climate Alarmist Lucy Biggers Realized It Was All A Scam, Brainwashing
- German Expert: “No Climate Crisis” …”Warming Generally Better For Humanity”
- New Paleo Research: Modern ‘Climate Change’ Has Had No Apparent Impact On Precipitation Patterns
- 90% Subsidized… Bielefeld Germany’s €7 Million Hydrogen Garbage Truck Fleet Sits Idle
- New Study: Declining Trends In 1980-2023 Tropical Cyclone Frequency, Accumulated Energy
- 46 IPCC Scientists Break Rank, Publicly Challenge Long-Standing Dogmatic Climate Claims
- Another Study Links Warming To Cloud Forcing, Shortwave Radiation, Natural Atmospheric Circulation
Aletho News 