Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Sanctions on Russia ‘irresponsible’, adviser to Brazil’s Lula says

Samizdat | August 6, 2022

Celso Amorim, Brazil’s former foreign minister and current foreign policy adviser to presidential frontrunner Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, has condemned the West’s sanctions on Russia and said that should Lula take office, Brazil would chart a different course.

In an interview with Bloomberg published on Friday, Amorim claimed that the West’s response to Russia’s military operation in Ukraine – sanctions on Russia and billions of dollars worth of weapons for Ukraine – have made nuclear war a real possibility.

“For the first time since the Cuban missile crisis we see articles about the risk of nuclear weapons published on a weekly basis,” he said, arguing that “it’s irresponsible not to seek peace.”

Amorim’s argument mirrors that of Lula himself. Back in May the former Brazilian leader told Time magazine that he sees Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky as equally responsible for the conflict in Ukraine, and condemned Washington for encouraging him to oppose Russia.

“The United States has a lot of political clout. And Biden could have avoided [the conflict], not incited it,” Lula argued at the time.

From the perspective of the US, Amorim questioned the logic of driving Russia into a deeper partnership with China, another economic and military rival of America.

“I have nothing against China,” he stated, adding that both are part of the BRICS group, but said that he “can’t understand the interest of the US in strengthening the China-Russia relationship.”

This relationship aside, Amorim told Bloomberg that an economy as large as Russia’s is “too big and strategic” to isolate, and that Lula’s administration would not pursue such policies if the two-term leftist president is elected in October. Speaking to Time in May, Lula said that “many different countries” are having to “foot the bill” for Washington’s hardline anti-Russia policies, and that if he is elected, “Brazil will again become a protagonist on the international stage and we will prove that it’s possible to have a better world.”

Lula is currently polling 11 points ahead of incumbent President Jair Bolsonaro, according to an aggregate compiled by the US-based Americas Society. Should he triumph in October, Amorim will likely be influential in setting his administration’s foreign policy, having served as Brazil’s foreign minister during Lula’s two terms in office from 2003 until 2010.

Bolsonaro has not followed the US’ lead on Ukraine either. Despite Brazil voting in the UN General Assembly to condemn Russia over the conflict, the president has refused to sanction Moscow and announced his intention to keep purchasing fertilizer from Russia and sign a new deal to import Russian diesel.

Like Lula, Bolsonaro also partly blamed Kiev for the conflict. Ukrainians, he said in February, had “trusted a comedian with the fate of a nation,” referring to Zelensky.

August 6, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , , , | Leave a comment

The Intricate Fight for Africa: the Legacy of the Soviet Union vs. Western Colonialism

By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | August 6, 2022

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s recent tour in Africa was meant to be a game changer, not only in terms of Russia’s relations with the continent, but in the global power struggle involving the US, Europe, China, India, Turkiye and others.

Many media reports and analyses placed Lavrov’s visit to Egypt, the Republic of Congo, Uganda and Ethiopia within the obvious political context of the Russia-Ukraine war. The British Guardian’s Jason Burka summed up Lavrov’s visit in these words: “Lavrov is seeking to convince African leaders and, to a much lesser extent, ordinary people that Moscow cannot be blamed either for the conflict or the food crisis.”

Though true, there is more at stake.

Africa’s importance to the geostrategic tug of war is not a new phenomenon. Western governments, think tanks and media reports have, for long, allocated much attention to Africa due to China’s and Russia’s successes in altering the foreign policy map of many African countries. For years, the West has been playing catch up, but with limited success.

The Economist discussed ‘the new scramble for Africa’ in a May 2019 article, which reported on “governments and businesses from all around the world” who are “rushing” to the continent in search of “vast opportunities” awaiting them there. Between 2010 and 2016, 320 foreign embassies were opened in Africa which, according to the magazine, is “probably the biggest embassy-building boom, anywhere, ever.”

Though China has often been portrayed as a country seeking economic opportunities only, the nature and evolution of Beijing’s relations with Africa prove otherwise. Beijing is reportedly the biggest supplier of arms to sub-Saharan Africa, and its defence technology permeates almost the entire continent. In 2017, China established its first military base in Djibouti in the Horn of Africa.

Russia’s military influence in Africa is also growing exponentially, and Moscow’s power is challenging that of France, the US and others in various strategic spaces, mainly in the East Africa regions.

But, unlike the US and other western states, countries like China, Russia and India have been cautious as they attempt to strike the perfect balance between military engagement, economic development and political language.

Quartz Africa reported that trade between Africa and China “rose to a record high” in 2021. The jump was massive: 35 per cent between 2020 and 2021, reaching a total of $254 billion.

Now that Covid-19 restrictions have been largely lifted, trade between Africa and China is likely to soar to astronomical levels in the coming years. Keeping in mind the economic slump and potential recession in the West, Beijing’s economic expansion is unlikely to slow down, despite the obvious frustration of Washington, London and Brussels. It ought to be said that China is already Africa’s largest trade partner, and by far.

Russia-China-Africa’s strong ties are paying dividends on the international stage. Nearly half of the abstentions in the vote on United Nations Resolution ES-11/1 on 2 March, condemning Russia’s military action in Ukraine, came from Africa alone. Eritrea voted against it. This attests to Russia’s ability to foster new alliances on the continent. It also demonstrates the influence of China – Russia’s main ally in the current geopolitical tussle – as well.

Yet, there is more to Africa’s position than mere interest in military hardware and trade expansion. History is most critical.

In the first ‘scramble for Africa’, Europe sliced up and divided the continent into colonies and areas of influence. The exploitation and brutalisation that followed remain one of the most sordid chapters in modern human history.

What the Economist refers to as the ‘second scramble for Africa’ during the Cold War era was the Soviet Union’s attempt to demolish the existing colonial and neo-colonial paradigms established by western countries throughout the centuries.

The collapse of the Soviet Union over three decades ago changed this dynamic, resulting in an inevitable Russian retreat and the return to the uncontested western dominance. That status quo did not last for long, however, as China and, eventually, Russia, India, Turkiye, Arab countries and others began challenging western supremacy.

Lavrov and his African counterparts fully understand this context. Though Russia is no longer a Communist state, Lavrov was keen on referencing the Soviet era, thus the unique rapport Moscow has with Africa, in his speeches. For example, ahead of his visit to Congo, Lavrov said in an interview that Russia had “long-standing good relations with Africa since the days of the Soviet Union.”

Such language cannot be simply designated as opportunistic or merely compelled by political urgency. It is part of a complex discourse and rooted superstructure, indicating that Moscow – along with Beijing – is preparing for a long-term geopolitical confrontation in Africa.

Considering the West’s harrowing colonial past, and Russia’s historic association with various liberation movements on the continent, many African states, intelligentsias and ordinary people are eager to break free from the grip of western hegemony.

August 6, 2022 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

Russia reacts to Biden’s remarks on nuclear talks

Samizdat | August 6, 2022

Russia has not received any concrete proposals to resume talks on replacing the landmark New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty), despite recent remarks by US President Joe Biden on the matter, a senior Russian diplomat said on Friday. He also signaled that the negotiations should be held without any preconditions.

“Saying that you’re ready doesn’t mean you are,” the deputy head of Moscow’s delegation to the UN Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) review conference, Andrey Belousov, told reporters.

According to the diplomat, a real commitment to resume dialogue with Russia “should be supported by concrete proposals, concrete signals” that Moscow could view as a firm decision on the part of the US to “resume close cooperation with Russia on a wide range of issues of strategic stability.”

“At the moment, we are not receiving such signals, except for these declarative statements, including those coming from the highest level,” he added.

Belousov noted that the timing of the US statements on arms control should also be taken into account.

“It is clear that the timing was chosen on purpose. The statement by the US president was made before the Conference [on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons] intentionally to show that the US is still a state you can cooperate with and which is ready to engage in dialogue,” the Russian representative said.

According to Belousov, Moscow does not think that the US is ready for constructive talks on the New START treaty that would accommodate the interests of all parties, at least not at this stage. He also noted that Russia views the preliminary conditions for the dialogue set by Washington as “unacceptable.”

“The statement by the US president, which, as we believe, reflects a softening of the US stance on resuming dialogue with Russia on a wide range of issues of strategic stability, is linked to some sort of a preliminary condition,” Belousov said, adding that it has not been formulated in black and white, but rather looks like a hint.

The high-ranking diplomat recalled that previous statements on the matter were “more specific and understandable.”

“There were specific conditions under which the United States would agree to resume this dialogue with us,” he said. “But in any case, no matter how these preconditions are phrased, we deem them unacceptable.”

The diplomat echoed comments made by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who said on Wednesday that the US had not made any “requests on reopening this negotiating process.” The West, he said at the time, “has developed a habit of making announcements on the microphone and then forgetting about them.”

Earlier this month, Biden revealed that Washington was ready to negotiate “a new arms control framework” with Russia that could potentially replace the New START treaty when it expires in 2026. The landmark document, which entered into force in 2011 and was extended in 2021 after Biden’s inauguration, puts caps on the number of strategic nuclear missiles and warheads held by Russia and the US.

August 6, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

The US keeps reneging on arms control agreements, so why should Russia trust Joe Biden’s latest overtures?

By Scott Ritter | Samizdat | August 6, 2022

This week, in an address to the Tenth Review Conference for the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons – which had convened at the United Nations Headquarters in New York – US President Joe Biden made a forceful appeal to Russia regarding the need to resume arms control talks. “Today,” Biden said, “my Administration is ready to expeditiously negotiate a new arms control framework to replace New START when it expires in 2026.” But, he added, “negotiation requires a willing partner operating in good faith. And Russia’s brutal and unprovoked aggression in Ukraine has shattered peace in Europe and constitutes an attack on the fundamental tenets of international order. In this context, Russia should demonstrate that it is ready to resume work on nuclear arms control with the United States.”

Biden has made arms control a central theme in his dealings with Russia. Indeed, one of his first major acts as president was to sign on to a five-year extension of the Obama-era New START treaty, which had been allowed to languish under the Trump administration. “Extending the New START Treaty,” Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, declared in a press release issued at the time, “ensures we have verifiable limits on Russian ICBMs, SLBMs, and heavy bombers until February 5, 2026. The New START Treaty’s verification regime,” Blinken noted, “enables us to monitor Russian compliance with the treaty and provides us with greater insight into Russia’s nuclear posture, including through data exchanges and onsite inspections that allow US inspectors to have eyes on Russian nuclear forces and facilities.”

Blinken then added a critical statement. “The United States,” he declared, “has assessed the Russian Federation to be in compliance with its New START Treaty obligations every year since the treaty entered into force in 2011.”

Unfortunately, Russia cannot say the same about the US. Since 2018, Russia has accused the United States of “converting a certain number of Trident II SLBM launchers and В-52Н heavy bombers, in the way that the Russian Federation cannot confirm that these strategic arms have been rendered incapable of employing SLBMs or nuclear armaments for heavy bombers.” The bottom line is that America accomplished its conversions in a manner which allowed them to be easily reversed, something Russia believed circumvented the intent of New START, which was the permanent reduction of each side’s nuclear arsenals.

The US rejected the Russian allegation, noting that New START does not explicitly require the conversions on either the Trident II SLBM launchers or the B-52H bombers to be irreversible. As long as the treaty was in force, the US contended, Russia could use its inspection provisions to verify that the goal of “rendering incapable” was still in place. The Russians, with reason, believe that the US position violated both the spirit and intent of treaty, a position which carried over into the extension of New START.

But Russia’s problems with America’s compliance are just one of the issues when it comes to judging whether to trust Washington’s good faith on arms control overall. The US has walked away from three foundational treaties in the past two decades – the anti-ballistic missile (ABM) treaty in 2002, the intermediate-range nuclear forces (INF) treaty in 2019, and the Open Skies Treaty in 2020. Likewise, America’s intransigence over fairly adapting the conventional forces in Europe (CFE) treaty to reflect post-Cold War realities led to its demise. New START is the last man standing when it comes to arms control accords between Russia and the US.

Biden tried to further strategic arms control with Russia, discussing the matter with President Vladimir Putin during their Geneva Summit in June 2021. The two leaders agreed to pursue “an integrated bilateral Strategic Stability Dialogue” that would “seek to lay the groundwork for future arms control and risk reduction measures.” Indeed, two such meetings were on July 28 and September 30, 2021. Following the conclusion of the second round of talks, the negotiators agreed to “form two interagency expert working groups” covering the “Principles and Objectives for Future Arms Control” and the “Capabilities and Actions with Strategic Effects.”

But then came the crisis in Ukraine, and the talks gave way to the issue of security guarantees demanded by Russia in the face of NATO expansion, which threatened to bring Ukraine into the fold of the trans-Atlantic military bloc. In direct talks with the US, NATO and the OSCE in January 2022, Russia was repeatedly rebuffed in its efforts to negotiate a new European security framework that considered its national security interests, setting in motion the conditions that resulted in Russia initiating its Special Military Operation in Ukraine, prompting President Biden to terminate the strategic stability dialogue, an action which essentially froze US-Russian relations, at least in the arms control field.

Biden’s announcement on restarting talks with Moscow took the Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, by surprise. “No requests on reopening this negotiating process have been made,” Lavrov announced during a press conference in Myanmar, adding that the West “has developed a habit of making announcements on the microphone and then forgetting about them.”

Regardless of the lack of any prior notice on the part of the US, Russia announced that it was ready to engage in arms control talks at any time, the sooner the better. Kremlin spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, during a conference call with the media, declared that “Moscow has repeatedly spoken about the necessity to start such talks as soon as possible as there is little time left.” If the New START treaty expired without a replacement, Peskov said, “it will negatively impact global security and stability, primarily in the area of arms control.” For this reason, Peskov noted, “We [Russia] have called for an early launch of talks, but until that moment it has been the US that has shown no interest in substantive contacts on the issue.”

Peskov further emphasized that negotiations on a new arms control pact can only be held “on the basis of mutual respect and taking into account mutual concerns.”

Washington’s push for talks with Moscow, however, appear to be little more than an effort to get Russia to negotiate away the advantage in strategic nuclear weapons delivery systems that it has accrued in recent years through the development of weapons such as the Sarmat heavy intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) and the Avangard hypersonic re-entry vehicle. In this way, the US would have Russia walk away from new systems which cost billions of dollars to develop and field, while the US would only be called upon to give up a handful which have not yet been fully tested and deployed (the US is poised to spend hundreds of billions of dollars in the coming years to replace the Minuteman III ICBM, B-2 bomber, and Ohio-class submarine with a new missile (the “Sentinel”), a new bomber (the B-21), and a new submarine (the “Columbia” class). The high cost of these new weapons is likely to become an issue in a tightening economic environment, which may explain Biden’s push for fresh negotiations.

The current US approach to arms control negotiations appears to be one-sided in nature, premised on sacrificing existing Russian capacity for future American systems which are currently under development. In addition to this, the US has a poor track record when it comes to either treaty compliance (the ongoing controversy over New START verification of Trident and B-52 conversions comes to mind), or treaty adherence (the US withdrawals from the ABM treaty, the INF treaty, and the Open Skies treaty serve as an historical precedent).

The US approach ignores the fundamental approach taken by Russia when it comes to arms control – that any such negotiations must take place as part of a comprehensive restructuring of existing security frameworks that fully integrate Moscow’s legitimate national security concerns. This includes issues pertaining to missile defense (including the two US facilities in Poland and Romania), intermediate nuclear forces (a ban on the deployment of such systems on European soil), and non-strategic nuclear weapons (the US stockpile of B-61 bombs currently stored in Europe, and releasable to non-nuclear NATO members during any potential conflict.)

The White House has flipped the script when it comes to advancing the cause of arms control. Former US President Ronald Reagan appropriated a Russian saying– “Trust but Verify”– when discussing his approach to implementing the groundbreaking INF treaty back in 1987. At that time, the “trust” was assumed, and the focus was on constructing appropriate verification regimes to ensure treaty compliance.

Today, there is no trust between Russia and the US, primarily because of the dismissive manner which the Biden administration has treated the issue of Moscow’s concerns over European security that has been inexorably linked to aggressive NATO expansion. But the abysmal track record of the US under existing and past arms control agreements must also be considered. Even if Biden were willing to consider Russia’s concerns, the question that must be answered for Russia is whether the Americans can be fully trusted as a partner in disarmament.

As things stand today, the answer to this question is, sadly, ‘No.’

August 6, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

US is Willing to Sell Weapons to Turkey Only with Strings Attached

By Vladimir Platov – New Eastern Outlook – 05.08.2022

Turkish National Defense Minister Hulusi Akar, while answering questions from Anadolu agency journalists, announced negotiations with the United States on the purchase of F-16s to be held on August 15. As the readers may recall, earlier Ankara requested from Washington 40 F-16 fighters of the Block-70 version and 80 modernization kits for the F-16 aircraft of previous modifications already in service with the Turkish Air Force. The desire to purchase additional F-16s was voiced by Ankara after Turkey was excluded from the American program for the production of fifth-generation F-35 fighters due to the rapprochement between Turkey and Russia.

Washington has, for a number of years now, been putting on the back burner this issue of Turkey’s modernization of its Air Force by purchasing new models of American combat aircraft, under the pretext that five years ago Ankara acquired the Russian S-400 air defense system, instead of the American Patriot missile system, despite the United States’ imperative demands not to do so and the threat of sanctions.

However, note that Turkey’s position on the procurement of the S-400 was not hasty and had a clear justification from Ankara.

Initially, Turkey actually intended to acquire the American Patriots, but the deal was disrupted twice (in 2013 and 2017) because Washington refused to provide Ankara with secret technologies related to the production of this system. In addition, the United States burdened this deal with a number of restrictions and demands, in particular, on provision of full information about each shot and the tasks of the complexes. Furthermore, the service life of Patriot systems was also limited by Turkey’s obligation to return them to the US army after its expiration and purchase new ones. Turkey deemed these demands to be non-starters. Besides, the Russian S-400s were almost twice as cheap as the American Patriots, and more advanced.

But there was another reason, namely, Erdoğan’s lack of confidence in the truth of Washington’s “friendly attitude towards him.” The validity of such suspicions was confirmed, in particular, by the events of the summer of 2016, when a coup was attempted in Turkey. The helicopters attacking Erdoğan’s presidential palace in Ankara belonged to the NATO command and took off from the Incirlik air base in Turkey controlled by the United States and NATO. At the same time, Turkey’s air defense could not protect Erdoğan using Patriot systems, which the United States had withdrawn from this country shortly before. No less suspicious is the fact that no NATO country came to the aid of the Turkish president, and that in a series of many attempts at military coups in Turkey’s history, the United States has always been behind them clearly pursuing its goals and objectives with regard to Turkey.

As a result, Erdoğan preferred the Russian S-400 air defense system to the American Patriots, thus gravely complicating relations with Washington. The anti-Turkish sentiments in the United States manifested themselves, in particular, in the freezing in 2020 by four key members of the US Congress of all major sales of American weapons to Turkey, in an attempt to strengthen the American pressure on Erdoğan.

This pressure continues to this day. For example, last month, the House of Representatives of the US Congress approved the amendment proposed by Democrat Chris Pappas (representing the state of New Hampshire) prohibiting the US administration from selling to Turkey or issuing an export permit for new F-16 aircraft or components until the US President provides Congress with confirmation that such a transfer of equipment meets the national interests of the United States. In addition, taking into account Washington’s recent reorientation towards supporting Greece in the Eastern Mediterranean instead of Turkey, the White House, according to this amendment, must provide confirmation that F-16s will not be used by Turkey to the detriment of Greece.

The same month, the Chairman of the US Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, Robert Menendez, went even further in setting conditions for Ankara, by demanding that Turkey sever relations with Russia for the purchase of F-16 fighter jets, since Washington intends to sell its military equipment only to those countries that “share the values of the United States.”

This pressure from Washington was met in Ankara very critically and the prevailing mood among the Turks on this issue was fully reflected by the Turkish television TRT Haber, which stressed that Ankara does not accept any conditions when purchasing F-16s from the United States. At the same time, it was clarified that at the upcoming negotiations with the United States on August 15, issues of strategic partnership between the two countries will be discussed, “Turkey’s theses will be clarified, and it will be emphasized that sales under conditions are unacceptable.”

At the same time, Turkish National Defense Minister Hulusi Akar announced the possibility of new alternatives and solutions in the event of a failure of negotiations with the United States on the purchase of F-16 fighters. He clearly hinted that Turkey’s multifaceted relations with Russia, which have recently been developing quite favorably, also include joint work on the creation of a new generation military aircraft common to the two countries on the basis of the Russian Su-57 jet.

Ankara’s harsh reaction to Washington’s preliminary demands for the development of US-Turkish military cooperation can also be explained by the fact that the latest US anti-Turkish sanctions also affected Ismail Demir, one of the main Turkish functionaries in the field of national security. He was put on the sanctions list because of his participation in purchasing Russian S-400s, and now it was he who very harshly warned Washington that if the United States refuse to sell the F-16s, Turkey would turn to Russia again, this time to buy advanced aircraft. In particular, Ismail Demir, who heads the country’s Defense Industry Department, earlier announced on Turkish Kanal 7 that Turkey can buy Su-35 and Su-57 fighter jets from Russia if the United States refuses to sell F-16 aircraft to Ankara.

August 5, 2022 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

‘US-led effort to isolate Russia failed’

Samizdat – August 5, 2022

The US-led drive to isolate Russia through sanctions has not succeeded, as half the countries in the Group of Twenty leading global economies refused to sign on, Bloomberg reported on Friday.

According to the publication, senior officials from leading Western nations are surprised by the lack of support within the wider G20, despite their efforts to make the case for restrictions against Russia.

Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, and Turkey have not joined the sanctions that were adopted by the US, UK, EU, and their allies Australia, Canada, Japan, and South Korea. Some nations, like China and South Africa, have openly criticized the restrictions. The G20 nations account for around 85% of global economic output.

According to Bloomberg, the reasons for the lack of support include strong trade ties, historical affinities to Moscow, and a distrust of former colonial powers.

August 5, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Russia calls for reform of UN Security Council

Samizdat | August 3, 2022

The United Nations is in dire need of reform and the Security council must be “democratized” by expanding its representation, Russian foreign ministry official Alexey Drobinin has written in a keynote article published on Wednesday.

Drobinin, the Director of the Department of Foreign Policy Planning, commented on the current state of international relations and came to the conclusion that “more conscious effort and imagination is needed” to reform the UN.

He pointed out that the organization’s current agenda, which is primarily fueled by the West, is not necessarily in line with the interests of the majority of its international members.

Drobinin suggested that for most UN members the most important issues are things like access to cheap energy sources rather than the transition to “green” technologies, socio-economic development rather than human rights “in an ultra-liberal interpretation,” and security and sovereign equality rather than the artificial imposition of electoral democracy according to Western patterns.

He added that another topic that has once-again become relevant is the process of decolonization and ending the neo-colonial practices by transnational corporations in regards to the development of natural resources in developing countries.

However, international organizations such as the UN have essentially been “privatized” by the West, Drobinin points out. He suggests that the UN Secretariat and the offices of special envoys and special representatives of the Secretary General have all been saturated with the West’s own “tested” personnel, and that this also extended to non-UN organizations as well, such as the OPCW.

“The saddest thing is that this rust is eating away at the ‘holy of holies’ of the UN system – the Security Council,” Drobinin writes. “It devalues the meaning of the right of veto, which the founding fathers endowed to the permanent members of the Security Council with one single purpose: to prevent the interests of any of the great powers from being infringed, and thus save the world from a direct clash between them, which in the nuclear age is fraught with catastrophic consequences.”

While there are no “clear and simple recipes for correcting the situation here,” the diplomat continues, “clearly more conscious effort and imagination is needed when it comes to UN reform.” He goes on to suggest that the Security Council needs to be “democratized,” first of all by expanding the representation of African, Asian and Latin American countries.

Drobinin suggests that whatever the fate of international organizations such as the UN, WTO, IMF, World Bank or G20 is, the divisive policies of the West makes it “an absolute imperative for the coming years to form a new infrastructure of international relations.”

“After their frankly perfidious decisions and actions against Russia, its citizens and tangible assets, we simply cannot afford the luxury of not thinking about alternatives. Especially since many of our friends who have lost faith in Western benevolence and decency are thinking about the same thing,” the diplomat surmised.

August 3, 2022 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Former German chancellor says Russia wants a ‘negotiatated solution’

Free West Media | August 3, 2022

Former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder has expressed confidence that Russia would seek a negotiated solution to the Ukraine war. During his recent trip to Moscow, he also met with the Russian President. According to him, the Kremlin would like to negotiate.

“The good news is that the Kremlin wants a negotiated solution.”

In an interview with Stern magazine and RTL/ntv broadcaster, he said that the recently reached agreement on grain exports from Ukraine was an “initial success” that could perhaps “slowly be expanded into a ceasefire”.

In addition, the SPD politician again defended his contacts with Russia stating that it was not illegal.

In view of the gas crisis, the former chancellor also recommended commissioning the Nord Stream 2 pipeline from Russia and described this as the “simplest solution” in view of possible gas bottlenecks.

“It’s over. When things get really tight, there is this pipeline, and with the two Nord Stream pipelines there would be no supply problem for German industry and German households.”

“If you don’t want to use Nord Stream 2, you have to bear the consequences. And they will also be huge in Germany,” said Schröder. Anyone who heats with gas is already feeling the effects: that is half of the country’s 40 million households. Compared to the prices ​​of December 31, 2022, gas will quadruple after further increases for consumers have been announced.

August 3, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

US Should Withdraw All Nuclear Weapons From Europe: China’s UN Envoy

Samizdat – 02.08.2022

“The US should withdraw all its nuclear weapons from Europe and refrain from deploying nuclear weapons in any other region,” the director-general of the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s arms control department, Fu Cong, said during the 10th Review Conference on the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons at the United Nations.

He went on to say China is ready to cooperate with all countries to strengthen the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

“This April President Xi Jinping proposed a global security initiative … Guided by the initiative, China is ready to join hands with all countries to continuously strengthen the universality, authority and effectiveness of the NPT to inject stability and certainty into this era of turbulence and transformation and make a new contribution to world peace, stability and prosperity,” Fu said.

Notably, Fu further stressed that Beijing does not compete with other states in the quantity of nuclear weapons and is committed to the principle of no first use.

“China will under no circumstances be the first to use nuclear weapons,” he said.

The envoy added that China keeps its nuclear stockpile at a minimum level to ensure the protection of national security and does not compete with other countries in numbers and capabilities in this area.

Earlier, Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a greeting to the conference that Moscow always abides by the wording and spirit of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, noting that there could never be winners in a nuclear war and that it should never be started.

For his part, US President Joe Biden emphasized that Washington is now prepared to collaborate with Russia on talks to forge a new nuclear arms limitation agreement that would take the place of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (also dubbed “New START”), which is scheduled to end in 2026.

However, the proposal was met with skepticism by Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council. The former president wondered in a Telegram post whether Russia “even need it,” since the world “has changed.”

Then, he claimed that although things are far worse now than they were during the Cold War, Russia is not to blame.

August 3, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Western experts urge US to start talks with Russia before “it’s too late”

By Ahmed Adel | August 2, 2022

With the war in Ukraine waging since February 24 and no immediate end in sight, Western commentators and experts have begun urging the US and its allies to start talks with Russia over the situation in Ukraine before its “too late.”

Samuel Charap, senior political scientist at the RAND Corporation, and Jeremy Shapiro, research director at the European Council on Foreign Relations, urged in an opinion piece published in the New York Times for the West to continue providing material support for the Ukrainian military, but in close consultation with Kiev to “begin opening channels of communication with Russia” as “an eventual cease-fire should be the goal, even as the path to it remains uncertain.”

With the US having pledged about $24 billion in military aid to Ukraine, more than four times Ukraine’s 2021 defence budget, in addition to other countries pledging another $12 billion, the authors claim that although the West are committed to helping Ukraine, they do not want to escalate the conflict into a major power war.

“For as long as both Russia and the West are determined to prevail over the other in Ukraine and prepared to devote their deep reserves of weapons to achieve that goal, further escalation seems almost preordained,” the experts wrote.

They stress that discussions are absolutely necessary, despite being politically risky, as the war in Ukraine has the potential to bring Russia and NATO into direct conflict. An argument can be made that Russia and NATO are already in direct conflict as the Atlantic bloc already provides weapons and training to the Ukrainian military and encourages former soldiers and volunteers to fight against Russian forces. This is in addition to espionage and surveillance assistance, diplomatic and political support, and medical aid.

According to the authors, Russia has red lines, which although are not exactly known in their entirety, they can be assumed. The experts give the example that if the Ukrainians are given particular systems or capabilities that could directly target Russian territory, it is likely that Moscow will consider that as a red line being crossed. It is for this reason that when US President Joe Biden recently announced that Ukraine would be supplied with multiple-launch rocket systems, the longest-range munitions that could strike Russia were withheld.

“The premise of the decision was that Moscow will escalate — i.e. launch an attack against NATO — only if certain types of weapons are provided or if they are used to target Russian territory,” they claimed. “The goal is to be careful to stop short of that line while giving the Ukrainians what they need to ‘defend their territory from Russian advances,’ as Mr. Biden said in a statement in June.”

To the experts, this creates a conundrum as for now the West is unwilling to send their military forces directly to Ukraine, but a Russian victory is unacceptable. At the same time, if Ukraine somehow succeeded in halting Russia’s advance thanks to the help of Western weapons, that would constitute an unacceptable defeat for Moscow, which could compel the Russian military to “double down” in its operation.

Charap and Shapiro stress that “The determination of both the West and Russia to do whatever it takes to prevail in Ukraine is the main driver of escalation” and that only through talks can a de-escalation begin. As they say, “The best way to prevent that dynamic from getting out of control is to start talking before it’s too late.”

Although the pair are undoubtedly correct in their analysis that talks are the best way to resolve the conflict, what they do omit is the complete unwillingness from the Ukrainian side since 2014 to discuss issues, as well as the encouragement Kiev receives from Washington and London to not engage in negotiations with Moscow. The very crisis in Ukraine today is because of Kiev’s refusal to negotiate and discuss, whilst committing towards a path of ultra-nationalism, militarisation and even nuclearization.

The two analysts in this way do not necessarily say anything profound as discussions were always the way to resolve the issues between Moscow and Kiev, even before the events of 2014. The problem is that they do not highlight that Kiev, with encouragement from Washington, is completely unwilling to engage in discussions despite Moscow’s willingness.

There may be some gaps in their analysis, but more importantly, having experts from RAND and the European Council on Foreign Relations urging in the New York Times for discussions to begin to end the war in Ukraine is a major narrative shift from the encouragement for prolonged fighting usually found in influential Western think tanks and media outlets, including by these three aforementioned institutions.

With the special military operation continuing for half a year and with no end in sight, Western analysts grossly underestimated Russia’s determination, overestimated Ukraine’s capabilities and miscalculated the effectiveness of sanctions. Now there is a growing acceptance in the academic and media sphere that Russia is in full control of the situation in Ukraine and it alone decides when its military operation will conclude. Because of this reality, it may be in the best interest of the West to open serious negotiations as it could be the only way to have any influence over the outcome of the conflict. The political classes of the West are yet to accept this reality though.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

August 2, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Russia Invites UN, Red Cross to Probe Shelling of Elenovka Pre-Trial Detention Center

Samizdat – 30.07.2022

MOSCOW – Russia has invited experts from the United Nations and the Red Cross to participate in the investigation into the deadly shelling of the pre-trial detention center in the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) town of Elenovka, the Russian Defense Ministry said.

“In order to conduct an objective investigation of the attack on the pre-trial detention center in Elenovka, which led to the death of a large number of Ukrainian prisoners of war, the Russian Federation has officially invited experts from the UN and the International Committee of the Red Cross,” the defense ministry said on Sunday.

The Elenovka detention center, hosting Ukrainian prisoners of war, was shelled by Ukrainian troops with US-supplied High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) on Friday morning. According to the DPR territorial defense, the death toll from the strike has reached 53, and the number of wounded has surpassed 130.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) offered its support in the evacuation of the wounded on Friday. UN spokesman Farhan Haq said on Saturday that the United Nations was ready to conduct an investigation into the Elenovka shelling.

DPR head Denis Pushilin said on Friday that the shelling of the detention facility was premeditated and launched because the militants imprisoned there, particularly those from the nationalist Azov battalion, had started to give testimonies implicating the Kiev regime.

July 30, 2022 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

Shouldn’t Biden be talking directly to Putin?

BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | JULY 30, 2022 

No sooner than Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov returned to Moscow after the SCO ministerial in Tashkent, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s pending request for a conversation was scheduled late Friday evening. This has been their first conversation since the war began in Ukraine in February. 

The Russian readout touches on Russia’s special military operations. Lavrov emphasised the inevitability that the “goals and tasks will be fully achieved.” Second, Lavrov told Blinken that the US’ continued arming of Ukraine with weapons “is only prolonging the agony of the Kiev regime by dragging out the conflict and increasing the number of victims.” 

Lavrov also said Russia will continue its “consistent efforts to restore peaceful life on the territories that it is liberating.” It implies that the integration of Kherson, Zoporozhia, Kharkiv, etc. is an inexorable process. 

Fourth, Lavrov focused on global food security issues and the grain deal and regretted that US is yet to deliver on “promises to make exemptions for Russian food shipments,” and the West is “exploiting the problem to advance its geopolitical interests, which is unacceptable.” 

Finally, on prisoner exchange, Lavrov “strongly advised” Blinken that this is not an amateurish issue and “dubious media leaks” should be avoided.  

For a conversation after several months, it was icy. Blinken is taking his time to issue a readout. But he was evasive on the issue of prisoner exchange, adding, “I’m not going to characterise his (Lavrov’s) response, and I can’t give you an assessment of whether I think things are any more or less likely.”  

Equally, on the grain deal, Blinken made no reference to the reciprocal lifting of restrictions on Russia’s export of grains and fertiliser. His interest was only on Russia making good on loosening its naval blockade and allowing grain shipments to leave Ukraine’s Black Sea ports. 

There is a hump appearing here, for sure. Zelensky’s trip to the Black Sea port of Chernomorsk near Odessa accompanied by G7 ambassadors suggests that Washington is switching back to the propaganda mode that Russia is impeding Ukraine’s exports. 

The New York Times has noted, “Even if grain ships do get underway, danger, uncertainty and deep mistrust will hang over the effort, and major obstacles to carrying out the agreement remain.”   

Such conversations as yesterday’s suffer from being totally opaque. Blinken can’t even articulate the substantive issues bothering Biden —the cracks in the western unity. 

Curiously, the Biden faces two crisis situations with explosive potential at the moment — in Ukraine and over Taiwan. Indeed, it is crystal clear that both have been precipitated by Washington. Yet, the manner in which Biden is handling them couldn’t be anymore dissimilar. 

In the case of Taiwan, Biden didn’t hesitate to call up Chinese President Xi Jinping to calm the tensions. But he has chosen a different path to communicate with President Vladimir Putin. 

For sure, into the sixth month of the conflict in Ukraine, Biden has finally decided to bite the bullet and resume high-level contact with Moscow. But he opted to get through to Putin through his state secretary! 

The problem here is, although US-China relations are tense, Biden never took it to a personal level. He never used derogatory language to spite Xi Jinping, as he did to Putin repeatedly.

But Blinken too faces a similar predicament. On July 7-8, he avoided shaking hands with Lavrov at the G20 ministerial at Bali and skipped the official banquet because Lavrov was there. But after such churlish behaviour, here he was yesterday seeking out Lavrov! 

The State Department reportedly sent out a circular recently to American embassies directing diplomats to dissuade foreign leaders from being photographed with Lavrov, so that Washington’s project to “isolate” Russia gained traction! Lavrov apparently learnt about it from his hosts! 

Unsurprisngly, Blinken had to first call a press conference to rationalise publicly his need to talk with someone whom he treated as a “pariah” only 3 weeks ago. Blinken is an intelligent man and senses that Biden is desperate to open a communication channel to the Kremlin. (Whether a Biden-Putin conversation figured in yesterday’s discussion we do not know.)

The point is, after five months of conflict in Ukraine, the Russian economy has not collapsed but is adjusting to a “new normal” in the geopolitical conditions. The Russian currency is doing splendidly well. And there has been no insurrection in Russia. Above all, Russia is winning the war in Ukraine and is gearing up to dictate the terms of peace. 

Lavrov must be well aware of the real reasons behind Blinken’s call. First, there is a catastrophic situation that may crack western unity, as the spectre of cutoff in Russian gas supplies threatens European countries. Four European governments have fallen so far. 

Everyone understands that it is much more than an energy crisis. As economies start crashing, social and political unrest will follow. There is pervasive disquiet in European capitals. The blame game has begun. 

Washington may not be able to salvage the job of European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen much longer. The  European leaders realise that Ursula played them with her personal crusade to punish Russia. 

There is a lot of pent-up resentment about Germany, too. Europeans don’t shed tears over Germany’s plight. Berlin’s imposition of harsh austerity programme on its southern neighbours is still painful memory. 

Therefore, Ursula’s latest hare-brained scheme to impose a 15% reduction in gas consumption on all EU countries (to bail out Berlin) faces resistance. Truly, there is no alternative to Russian gas and Washington has forgotten its promise to find replacement. 

Biden only brought this calamity down on the Europeans. Barack Obama’s private doubt is now public wisdom for Europeans — “Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to f… things up.” 

Lavrov also knows the second reason why Blinken wants to re-engage. The Russian special military operations are making good progress and all indications are that the Zelensky regime is crumbling. Thus, preparations have begun for holding referendums in Kherson and Zoporozhia regions to ascertain the wishes of the people. 

Russia has invited applications for citizenship from the residents of Kharkov as well, and ruble currency is being introduced. Putin just approved a 3-year master plan to rebuild Mariupol. The ancient city will soon have bridges, roads and schools that put Washington to shame. 

Most important, Biden must be worrying that even if he multiplies by a hundred times Washington’s carve-up of Kosovo as a nation state in 2008, it still wouldn’t match what is steadily unfolding in Ukraine. And Europeans are watching all this — speechless, in disbelief — as territorial boundaries get redrawn in their manicured continent. 

There are new facts on the ground since March when Russia and Kiev reached an agreement in Istanbul (which the hawkish Biden team promptly torpedoed by promising the moon to Zelensky.) So much water has flown down the Dnieper since then. Watch the video, below, of Biden’s landmark April 28 war speech

July 30, 2022 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »