INTERVIEW: Basil Valentine & Prof. Glenn Diesen – EU Childishly Boycotts Budapest
21Wire | July 26, 2024
TNT Radio guest host Basil Valentine speaks with Professor and political scientist Glenn Diesen, to discuss the EU’s unprecedented efforts to punish Hungary, one of its members, for entertaining diplomatic talks with the Russian Federation. They talk about Western diplomacy and how it is no longer about appeasement but about schooling peers and near-peer enemies on compliance. They touch upon the Prime Minister of Hungary, Viktor Orban’s strong relationship with former U.S. President Trump who if elected, will favour negotiation with the Russians to bring an end to the Russo-Ukrainian conflict to avoid WWIII and a possible nuclear holocaust.
Scholz’s views on Ukraine ‘simple-minded’ – Lavrov
RT | July 27, 2024
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz “is known for his simple-minded ideas,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said at a press conference in Vientiane, Laos.
He was commenting on a statement by Scholz earlier in the week about the possibility of abandoning the deployment of US missiles in Germany if Russia ends its military operation against Kiev.
Berlin and Washington announced earlier in July that US cruise missiles will be stationed in Germany from 2026. The deployment of these weapons had been banned under the Cold War-era Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, but Washington withdrew from the agreement in 2019. Russia abided by the treaty for several years after the US withdrawal. In June, President Vladimir Putin warned that Moscow might resume production of previously banned missile systems in response to the “hostile actions” of the US.
At a press conference in Berlin earlier this week, Scholz dismissed concerns that the plans could further escalate tensions with Russia. He argued that Moscow must first end its military operation against Kiev to prevent the deployment of US long-range missiles in Germany.
Lavrov said, “no one asked Scholz whether the Germans want this deployment or not.” “He again, simple-mindedly, when the news came out, said: ‘I welcome the US decision to deploy the missiles in Germany’… he did not hide the fact that the decision was American,” the minister stated.
Lavrov stressed that the problem is not the deployment of the missiles, explaining that Moscow’s military operation aims “to eliminate threats to Russia’s security that were created in Ukraine, [where] NATO military bases were planned to be deployed, including in the Sea of Azov.”
He went on to say that the operation also has the goal of protecting the population of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, which have since joined Russia following referendums in 2022.
Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov previously said that Moscow reserves the right to deploy missiles with nuclear warheads if the US goes ahead with plans to station longer-range missiles in Germany.
Pentagon reacts to Russia-China bomber patrols near Alaska
RT | July 26, 2024
Russian and Chinese bombers jointly operating in international airspace near the coast of Alaska is a sign of their expanding military cooperation, US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has said, adding that Washington is “concerned” by the development.
On Wednesday, two Russian Tupolev TU-95 long-range bombers and two Chinese H-6 bombers were tracked and intercepted by US and Canadian fighter jets. The aircrafts were carrying out joint air patrols over the waters of the Chukchi and Bering Seas, as well as the North Pacific.
According to the Pentagon chief, it was the first time that Chinese bomber aircraft have flown within the Alaskan Air Defense Identification Zone, and the first time Chinese and Russian jets have taken off from the same base in northeast Russia.
“This is the first time that we’ve seen these two countries fly together,” Austin told a press conference on Thursday. “This is a relationship that we have been concerned about throughout – mostly because we’re concerned about China providing support to Russia’s illegal and unnecessary war in Ukraine,” he stated.
Both Moscow and Beijing have rejected Western allegations that Beijing has been supplying Russia with dual-use components that can be utilized to produce weapons for the Ukraine conflict.
Austin said the flight on Wednesday was “not a surprise,” adding that Moscow and Beijing had likely planned it for some time.
The aircraft came only within about 200 miles (320km) of the US coast and did not enter either US or Canadian airspace, according to the Pentagon chief.
The Russian Defense Ministry reported on Thursday that the crews “worked out issues of interaction at all stages of air patrol in the new area of joint operations.” It stressed that the patrols, which lasted over five hours, were conducted in accordance with international law.
Chinese Defense Ministry spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang told reporters that the flight was the eighth “joint air strategic patrol” carried out by the two nations since 2019. The exercise was “not directed at any third party” and is “unrelated to the current international and regional situation,” it said.
Russia often conducts flights near US airspace and also monitors US and NATO flights near its own airspace too, and has sent its jets to escort American fighters and bombers away from its borders on numerous occasions in recent years.
UK Plans to Build New Missiles to Target Russia Linked to Pentagon’s Mad Conventional Strike Scheme
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 26.07.2024
Sources told UK media this week that Britain has partnered up with Germany to develop and deploy a new intermediate-range missile designed to target Russia’s nuclear arsenal. Veteran Russian military observer Alexei Leonkov says the plan is inextricably linked to the Pentagon’s highly dangerous Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) initiative.
UK Defense Secretary John Healey spoke to his German counterpart in Berlin on Wednesday about a plan to jointly develop a new strategic missile with a 3,200 km range, The Times reported on Thursday, citing sources said to be familiar with the idea.
Once developed and fielded, the new missiles would be deployed in Germany, according to the publication, replacing the American ground-based long-range fires that Washington recently announced would be stationed in the Central European country beginning in 2026.
Both the American missiles and the proposed new British-German missile would have been prohibited under the 1988 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, which banned the development, production and deployment of ground-based missiles in the 500-5,500 km range. Washington violated the treaty for years, according to Moscow, and unilaterally scrapped the agreement in 2019 and immediately began testing of new long-range weapons after falsely accusing Russia of possessing a ground-based missile system with a range beyond 500 km.
One of The Times’ sources said the US weapons expected to deploy in Europe in two years’ time are meant to “bridge” a gap in European NATO allies’ own capabilities. The source did not clarify what motivated the US to ask its allies to create an entirely new missile instead buying or agreeing to permanently field existing American ones.
A joint declaration from Healey’s talks with his German counterpart, Boris Pistorius, mentioned a commitment to “undertake a long-term, comprehensive cooperation in the field of long-range capabilities” to provide “deep precision strike” potential. The details are reportedly still being worked out, with no additional information made available, besides the new missile’s expected role as a conventional fire designed to destroy enemy tactical nuclear delivery systems.
The Storm Shadow is currently the furthest-reaching conventional missile in Britain’s arsenal. It has a range of about 240 km, and has been deployed extensively by Ukraine in the NATO-Russia proxy war. The Taurus KEPD 350 is Germany’s longest-range missile system, and has a range of up to 500 km. Berlin has refused to send the air-launched weapon to Ukraine, expressing concerns that doing so would make Germany a “party to the war” because German troops would be on the ground training Ukrainians to use the missiles.
A British Defense Ministry spokesperson told The Times that the deepening UK-German defense relationship is currently “in early stages” and that work on “any new programs” has “not yet commenced.”
Europe Joins US’s Dangerous Conventional Prompt Strike Scheme
“The deployment of these missiles, both American and British, is connected to two things,” Alexei Leonkov, editor of Russia’s Arsenal of the Fatherland military affairs and technology magazine, told Sputnik, commenting on The Times piece.
“The first is the global concept, the strategy under which NATO has been restructuring toward since 2002, which is the Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) concept, whose essence centers around the need to destroy the nuclear potentials of an adversary like Russia or China,” Leonkov said.
Thought up by the Bush administration, CPS envisions the mass deployment of thousands of conventional long-range missiles fired simultaneously in a massive surprise attack to destroy as much of an enemy’s strategic arsenal as possible, decapitate its leadership, and destroy remaining fired nuclear missiles using missile defenses.
The primary danger of the idea stems from the concern that it will make the prospect of a ‘limited’ nuclear war seem more palatable for Pentagon planners, and hence increasing the temptation to launch aggression.
The second reason for the British-German plan to develop a new missile centers around the fact that the Americans “are running late, or perhaps have lost the technologies used to create intercontinental missiles with a range beyond that of the Minuteman-3,” Leonkov argues.
“Why do the Americans want to switch up some of their missiles for European ones? I think that most likely, the missiles they have developed may not have proven entirely successful. Hence they’ve decided to attract a European consortium led by the UK.”
On top of that, as Washington’s strategic competition with China in the Asia-Pacific heats up, the number of missiles available for deployment in Europe may be limited, Leonkov believes.
The defense observer can’t rule out that the new British-German missile project may be focused on the creation of a maneuverable hypersonic vehicle, with Britain’s BAE Systems already working on a number of projects in this direction, and cooperating with US defense companies on their hypersonic projects.
In fact, these new European weapons may be the mystery “developmental hypersonic weapons” that the White House mentioned in its press statement earlier this month when it announced the deployment of new long-range strike systems to Germany from 2026 onward, Leonkov said.
Leonkov is confident that these new missiles’ mission will be to overwhelm Russian air and missile defense capabilities, and that if they are developed and fielded, Europe will become the first priority for a Russian strategic attack.
Recalling the European NATO missile threat which faced Moscow in the 1980s, Leonkov characterized the alliance’s present plans as an attempt to give rise to a Cold War 2.0, only this time far more dangerous.
“Russia today is not in a position where it has a vast security belt in the form of the Warsaw Pact countries that it did during the Cold War. Therefore, decisions will need to be changed radically. It’s clear that it will be necessary to strengthen the country’s anti-missile and anti-aircraft defense, but also take steps so that these missiles never appear on the European continent in the first place, while there is still an opportunity to do so,” the observer stressed.
Specifically, Russia will need to make clear in its nuclear doctrine that the deployment of such missiles in Europe will pose a direct threat, and give itself the right to launch a preemptive strike to eliminate this threat, Leonkov suggested.
Under its existing nuclear doctrine, Russia reserves itself the right to use nuclear weapons only in retaliation to an enemy attack using nuclear arms or other weapons of mass destruction, or in the event of conventional aggression so severe that it puts the existence of the Russian state in jeopardy. In June, President Putin hinted that Russia might revise its nuclear doctrine in response to existing threats.
What the US needs more than anything is “a quick solution that would close the issue for a while,” Leonkov said, referring to the constraints Washington will face in deploying vast numbers of long-range strike systems both to Europe and Asia. Russia’s main goal at this stage will be to “act proactively” to respond to this new threat, the analyst concluded.
War of Attrition & the Dishonest War Propaganda
Ukrainian FM Tells Beijing Kiev is Ready for Peace Talks, As Russian Troops Advance
By Glenn Diesen | July 26, 2024
In a war of attrition, the army of the adversary is destroyed before seizing territory. Storming well-fortified positions creates high levels of casualties, which undermines the main objective of favourable attrition rates vis-a-vis the adversary.
The narrative-driven media have called the conflict “stagnant” as the frontlines have moved very slowly, and pretended that Ukrainian casualties have been very low. This deception has been deliberate to sell the illusion that Ukraine can win as a requirement for maintaining public support in the West for keeping the war going.
Much like in Afghanistan, the obedient media committed themselves to the narrative. The unreported reality was that the Ukrainian army was being destroyed, while Russia built a powerful army. Now that Ukraine’s army is at breaking point, Russia has begun taking territory with much less resistance.
How can we end the war? There is overwhelming evidence that Russia considers NATO’s incursion into Ukraine to be an existential threat. As NATO refuses to negotiate about restoring Ukraine’s neutrality, which was lost in February 2014, territorial conquest is perceived by Moscow to be the only solution.
Yet, the media shames anyone who recognises this reality by denouncing them as carrying water for Putin as they are “legitimising” or “supporting” Russia’s invasion. Those calling for peace negotiations are smeared as traitors, while the war propagandists can claim to “stand with Ukraine” as their Ukrainian proxies fight and die in a war that cannot be won.
Calls for negotiations are dismissed as it is unacceptable to surrender Ukrainian territory, which would embolden Russia to pursue similar conquests. In reality, this only became a conflict about territory after negotiations about restoring Ukraine’s neutrality were rejected. NATO refused to accept a neutral Ukraine between 1991 and 2014 when approximately only 20% of Ukrainians wanted NATO membership, and they knew it was a red line for Russia. NATO undermined the Minsk agreement for 7 years despite announcing it was the only peaceful path to resolve the conflict. Negotiations with Russia were then rejected in 2021 even as the US and NATO acknowledged Russia would invade if NATO did not end its bid to expand. In the Istanbul peace agreement in April 2022, Russia agreed to withdraw all its troops from Donbas if Ukraine restored its neutrality, although the US and UK sabotaged the agreement. Yet, the political-media elites insist that the territorial dispute is the source rather than the consequence of the NATO-Russia conflict.
The result? Ukraine loses territory and a horrific amount of men every single day. The war is also entering a new stage as casualties increase dramatically when frontlines collapse and an army must pull back. Russia is now breaking through all the frontlines and Ukraine is about to be hit by a powerful Russian fist. Yet, the political-media elites who purportedly “support Ukraine” have criminalised diplomacy and negotiations. Hungary, who holds the rotating presidency of the EU Council, is even punished by the EU for simply engaging in diplomacy with Ukraine, Russia, and China to end the war.
In every war, the call for peace is denounced as support for the adversary while in-group loyalty and patriotism must be expressed as war enthusiasm. After every war, we also acknowledge that the war narrative was full of falsehood and we believe that we have learned an important lesson for the next war.
Pompeo offers Trump an escalatory ‘peace plan’ for Ukraine
RT | July 26, 2024
Former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has claimed that Donald Trump would be open to dramatically ramping up US support for Ukraine if elected president. Pompeo’s plan, however, contradicts almost everything Trump has said about the conflict to date.
In a Wall Street Journal op-ed published on Thursday, Pompeo and co-author Mark Urban, a neoconservative strategist, argued there is “much evidence” that Trump would give Ukraine enough aid to dictate peace terms to Russia.
The two policy hawks claimed that Trump’s supply of Javelin missiles to Ukraine in 2017 and his decision not to lobby against the passage of a $61 billion military aid package for Kiev this spring prove that he would be willing to embrace a hawkish plan to tilt the balance of power in Kiev’s favor.
Such a plan would involve ramping up sanctions on Moscow, expanding US energy production to drive down Russia’s oil and gas revenues, forcing NATO members to spend more on defense, and offering Ukraine a $500 billion “lend-lease” fund to purchase arms.
Ukraine would also be given permission to use any kind of weapons to strike targets anywhere in Russia, Pompeo and Urban wrote, claiming that this gloves-off approach would force Moscow to the negotiating table, where it would accept Ukraine joining NATO and the EU, and agree to the “demilitarization” of Crimea, where Russia’s Black Sea fleet is based.
Pompeo’s plan has not been endorsed by Trump, and the former president has repeatedly promised to deliver a more peaceful end to the conflict. Speaking to Fox News after naming Ukraine critic J.D. Vance as his running mate last week, Trump described Russia as “a war machine” that cannot be defeated by the Ukrainian military.
After a phone call with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky last Friday, Trump announced that “both sides will be able to come together and negotiate a deal that ends the violence and paves a path forward to prosperity.”
Trump has never revealed how he would force both sides to the table, telling NBC News last year that “if I tell you exactly, I lose all my bargaining chips.” According to a Bloomberg report earlier this year, Trump would consider cutting off military aid to Kiev unless Zelensky accepted the loss of some of Ukraine’s pre-conflict territory and made peace with Moscow.
However, Trump has expressed support for lending Ukraine money at a preferential rate, and for pressing NATO’s European member states to up their defense spending.
Pompeo, who served as Trump’s CIA director and then secretary of state, is one of numerous Republican figures attempting to shape the policies of a potential second Trump presidency. Last month, a group of Trump’s key advisers handed the former president a dramatically different proposal for Ukraine, which stipulated that Kiev would only get more American weapons if it agreed to a ceasefire based on current battle lines and peace talks with Moscow.
FBI accusing Russia to ‘divert attention’ from its failures – Moscow
RT | July 25, 2024
The FBI is using a supposed ‘threat’ to American democracy from Russia as a diversion to draw public attention away from the bureau’s own failures, Russian Ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov claimed on Thursday.
He was responding to allegations made by FBI Director Christopher Wray, who claimed before Congress on Wednesday that Moscow had been attempting to interfere in the US “election cycle after election cycle,” in particular, during the current race for the White House.
“We assess that the Russian government continues to want to influence and in various ways interfere with our democracy, with our electoral process,” Wray told lawmakers, claiming that investigators had recently uncovered a “significant disruption of a generative AI-enhanced social media” of Russian origin, which was “designed to be an influence operation.”
Antonov dismissed Wray’s allegations, describing them as “yet another unsuccessful example of blame-shifting.” He said this was a policy that is often utilized by both the FBI director and other American officials.
“These are obviously yet more attempts to play the ‘Russian card’ to justify their own failures,” he stated, adding that “it is understandable” that representatives of the US administration “want to divert the attention of ordinary citizens from their mistakes and the numerous internal contradictions in America.”
“We flatly reject insinuations against Russia. Our country has never interfered in democratic processes. Moscow has always respected and will always respect the choice of the American people.”
Antonov suggested that, in order to find those responsible for the problems within the US, Wray and other Washington officials “should look at their reflection in the mirror.”
Wray’s testimony on Wednesday was largely focused on the investigation into the assassination attempt on former US President and Republican nominee for this year’s election, Donald Trump. The attempt on Trump’s life during a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania on July 13 caused public outcry, with Republicans lambasting the US Secret Service for failing to protect the presidential nominee. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle was forced to resign earlier this week, having admitted that Trump’s attempted assassination was “the most significant operational failure at the Secret Service in decades.”
Wray is not the first Washington official to make allegations of Russian interference in the US electoral process. During the 2016 and 2020 elections, US intelligence agencies repeatedly claimed that Moscow had deployed hackers and used disinformation to affect the vote in favor of Trump. Earlier this month, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) alleged that Russia had launched a “whole-of-government” effort “to shape electoral outcomes” in this year’s election to turn public opinion against President Joe Biden. None of the claims made in previous years have been substantiated.
US Creating Logistic Centers in Black Sea to Speed Up Arms Supplies to Ukraine – Kremlin Aide
Sputnik – 25.07.2024
MOSCOW – The United States wants to create logistics centers in the Black Sea region to speed up arms supplies to Ukraine and deploy long-range weapons, Russian presidential aide Nikolai Patrushev said on Thursday.
“In the countries of the Black Sea region, the United States intends to create logistics centers to accelerate the supply of weapons to Ukraine, as well as to deploy modern long-range weapons,” Patrushev said.
At the Washington summit, NATO demonstrated plans to increase its military presence and intensify confrontation in the Black Sea, the official added.
There can be no talk of unhindered passage to the ports of the Sea of Azov by ships of Western countries supporting Kiev, the aide noted.
“Given the aggressive nature of Western countries that directly support the Kiev regime in conducting military and terrorist actions against Russia, currently any unhindered passage of their ships to the ports of Azov is out of the question,” he emphasized.
Last month, the countries that signed a joint communique following the Swiss-hosted summit on Ukraine have called for providing access to sea ports in the Black and Azov seas to ensure global food security.
The number of joint exercises between the Japanese navy and NATO countries and other military allies of Washington in 2024 has already increased 30 times compared to last year, Patrushev added.
UK chief of staff says West should be ready for war in three years
Al Mayadeen | July 23, 2024
The new chief of the British Army General Staff has warned that Britain must be ready to fight a war in three years and double the army’s lethality as threats from Russia, China, Iran, and the DPRK escalate.
General Sir Roly Walker, the head of the general staff, told reporters that the West was facing “an axis of upheaval” with rising military ambitions, warning that a conflict with one nation may lead to another detonation elsewhere.
He argued that the UK and its allies must prepare “to deter or fight a war in three years,” emphasizing the seriousness due to China’s “threat” to Taiwan, Iran’s nuclear goals, and Russia’s military buildup evidenced by the war in Ukraine.
Walker cited US reports claiming that China’s President Xi Jinping had directed military readiness for a potential Taiwan “invasion” by 2027, alongside concerns about Iran potentially violating nuclear agreements and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine.
In a subsequent speech, Walker stated that he had “a bold ambition” for the army to “double our fighting power in three years and triple by the end of the decade,” not with additional resources but by utilizing technology and techniques developed on Ukrainian battlefields, such as drones and AI.
He argued that Russia, China, Iran, and DPRK‘s independence was growing, citing that they are becoming more supportive of each other with weapons and intelligence.
Walker predicted that it would take “five years to grind their way through” to re-capture the eastern Donbass, costing 1.5 million fatalities, arguing that Russia could recover despite this and may emerge with “a sense of wanting retribution for the support that was given to Ukraine,” thus constituting a higher medium-term threat than previously thought.
As the Labour administration has only recently begun a strategic military review following the election, Walker asserted that Britain has an “absolute urgency to restore credible hard power in order to underwrite deterrence.”
Russia responds to Zelensky proposal for talks
RT | July 24, 2024
Vladimir Zelensky’s signal that Ukraine is ready to resume peace talks with Moscow is not credible, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said.
In recent weeks, Zelensky has said that Kiev wants to end the conflict “as soon as possible,” preferably “by the end of this year.” He has also insisted on holding a second ‘peace summit’ to achieve that goal.
The previous such event, hosted by Switzerland last month, focused on several points of Kiev’s ‘peace formula’ – which demands that Russia withdraw its troops from all territory claimed by Ukraine. Moscow has dismissed the plan as detached from reality.
Commenting on the possibility of peace with Ukraine, Zakharova told reporters on Wednesday that “nobody trusts [Zelensky].”
“Everyone knows perfectly well that this is a man who can twist anything, who can lie, who can refuse everything,” she said.
She recalled that Ukraine and its Western backers have done nothing to rescind Zelensky’s presidential decree barring Kiev from any talks with the current leadership in Moscow. The Ukrainian leader approved the document in the fall of 2022 after four former Ukrainian regions voted overwhelmingly to join Russia.
Last week, however, Zelensky suggested that he saw “no difference” in whether he had to engage with Russian President Vladimir Putin, or someone else, to end the conflict.
“We hear a lot of words, but we don’t see actions at all,” Zakharova noted, suggesting that Zelensky’s statements are no more than another attempt to promote Kiev’s ‘peace formula’ and dupe countries around the world into supporting the initiative.
The spokeswoman also opined that Zelensky’s unexpected “flexibility” on peace talks could be linked to recent major shifts in the US political landscape. She was referring to a recent assassination attempt on Republican presential nominee Donald Trump and incumbent Joe Biden’s decision to drop out of the race.
The GOP candidate has repeatedly vowed to end the conflict within 24 hours if elected and has criticized US support for Kiev.
Zakharova’s comments come after Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba told his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi that Kiev “is willing to engage in dialogue and negotiations with Russia,” which he said must be “rational” and aimed at achieving a just and lasting peace.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov described Kuleba’s words as being “in unison” with Russia’s stance. “The Russian side has never refused negotiations, [but] the details that we do not know yet are important here,” he added.
What does the Pentagon really say about Russian air defenses?
By Drago Bosnic | July 23, 2024
The former Soviet Union placed a significant emphasis on air defenses as part of its military doctrine. Moscow’s top brass never counted on fighting a war with absolute air superiority, as is the case in the political West, particularly the United States. Thus, the USSR and later Russia designed and produced the best air defense systems in history. They are one of the key modern military capabilities that provide adequate protection for both ground units and stationary strategic assets. In recent decades, air defenses have become increasingly networked and multilayered, giving the defenders a plethora of options to shoot down hostile jets, missiles, drones, space-based assets, etc.
In our age, modern militaries have started relying on swarms of well-coordinated drones designed to saturate an area and overwhelm existing air defenses. Only a handful of countries have developed and battle-tested systems against these new offensive weapons. For well over half a century, Russia has been at the forefront of the development of various SAM (surface-to-air missile) systems and other types of air defenses. What started out as an effort to nullify Western long-range bomber advantage in the aftermath of the Second World War soon turned into a key area of defense strategy, to the point that it’s effectively impossible to imagine modern warfare without advanced SAM systems.
By the 1970s, air defenses were no longer only focused on enemy fighter jets or bombers, but also on ballistic missiles and even space assets, both civilian and military (although this divide seems to be blurring by the day, especially when taking into account projects such as the SpaceX’s “Starlink”). Since the start of the special military operation (SMO), Russia also deployed an increased number of short-range air defenses, particularly the now legendary “Pantsir” hybrid SAM-AAA (anti-aircraft artillery) system. These have the task of protecting crucial areas in major cities and industrial regions, particularly the capital city of Moscow, which is the very heartland of Russia and its statehood.
Russia’s capital is protected by one of the most extensive air defense networks in the world and it also includes systems capable of shooting down ICBMs (intercontinental ballistic missiles), incoming MIRV (multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle) warheads, satellites and other space-based assets used by its adversaries. However, these are strategic air and missile defense systems that don’t make Moscow immune to sabotage attacks involving drones and drone swarms. This is precisely why short-range systems are crucial, as they provide affordable and easily deployable air defense assets that can cover the most important sections of any airspace.
A great example of this is the “Pantsir” SAM-AAA system, which has proven itself against a plethora of targets, shooting down thousands of drones, missiles, rockets and other weapons in the Middle East and Ukraine, where it was able to neutralize entire barrages of rockets and missiles fired by the overhyped HIMARS and M270/MARS systems, including the infamous ATACMS. By protecting and supporting longer-range assets, such as the “Buk” (particularly the latest M3 “Viking” variant with autonomous capabilities) and S-300/S-400 series of SAM systems, the “Pantsir” effectively saved hundreds of people during a recent NATO-orchestrated terrorist attack on Sevastopol.
Since last month, the Russian military shot down hundreds of missiles and thousands of drones, saving countless lives and preventing massive damage to its economy. Just over the weekend (July 20 and 21), at least eight kamikaze drones were intercepted, three of which over the Belgorod oblast (region), and five over the Black Sea. In addition, at least two US-made ATACMS were intercepted over Kherson. A week before (July 10 and 11), at least five drones were shot down over the Bryansk, Moscow, Tambov and Tula oblasts. In the last two days of June, Russian air defenses intercepted a large-scale drone attack that targeted six oblasts, neutralizing 36 drones in the process.
Approximately 10 days earlier, the Russian military intercepted over a dozen kamikaze drones that were flying toward several regions in western and southern Russia. However, less than a week before that, a massive drone strike involving at least 87 kamikaze drones was intercepted. Earlier that month, another large-scale drone attack was repelled after nearly 30 drones were shot down. This is only including the drones that are targeting civilian infrastructure, as the Russian military is intercepting many times closer to the frontline, as well as numerous NATO-sourced rockets and missiles that the Kiev regime forces are firing at Russian troops and assets.
All the while, the mainstream propaganda machine is claiming that around 60% of Russian missiles allegedly “fail”. However, the Pentagon is giving starkly different assessments. Namely, the US military privately gives completely opposite numbers, stressing that the Russian military’s air defenses have a staggering success rate of 97%. Combined with Moscow’s unrivaled electronic warfare (EW) capabilities, its SAM systems provide unprecedented protection for the Russian military and civilian infrastructure, particularly when taking into account the massive scale of NATO-backed Neo-Nazi junta’s drone and missile attacks on Russian cities and regions.
These world-class air defenses are enabling the Kremlin to cover its troops, which then use advanced long-range strike systems to hunt for various NATO-sourced rocket and missile launch platforms. And unlike the Kiev regime, which regularly lies about its air defense “successes”, including against hypersonic weapons, the Russian military regularly publishes verifiable data (including video footage) of the interceptions of various types of hostile precision-guided munitions (PGMs). This is precisely why even some NATO countries refuse to let go of their Russian-made SAM systems, including both Greece and Turkey, with the latter even sacrificing the troubled F-35 acquisition.
NATO States Embrace Conscription, Eyeing Future War with Russia
By Connor Freeman | The Libertarian Institute | July 22, 2024
As NATO escalates its proxy war in Ukraine and inches closer to fighting directly with Russia, the Washington-led bloc is embracing mandatory military service. Many European members of NATO have expanded or reintroduced conscription as part of large-scale preparations for such a war, CNN reports.
Already outpaced in terms of military industrial capacity by Russia, the alliance’s new battleplans will see an attempt to beef up weapons production and form 35-50 brigades of 3,000-7,000 battle ready troops.
Outgoing NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has insisted, “Today, we have 500,000 troops on high readiness, combat-ready battlegroups in the eastern part of the Alliance for the first time.” But the bloc is struggling to meet its goals of assembling 300,000 soldiers prepared to be activated within a month and another half a million in six months. There is also a question of whether the bloc can filed a military fit for a protracted war akin to the Ukraine conflict.
Following the end of the Cold War, several European states ceased conscripting their citizens. Although increasing numbers of NATO member countries have resorted to the draconian practice during recent years, especially in the Baltics and Scandinavia. Roughly a third of the NATO alliance practices some form of compulsory military service.
This year, for the first time since it was abolished in 2006, Latvia reimplemented its draft. Male citizens are subject to conscription within a year of turning 18 years old. Additionally, Norway has unveiled a long-term plan to increase its ranks of mandatorily conscripted troops, employees, and reservists by 20,000 as well as double the military budget. In 2015, Oslo became the first NATO government to establish a gender-neutral draft.
Lithuania brought back mandatory military service in 2015, each year drafting 3,500 to 4,000 men between the ages of 18-26 for a nine-month period. Although the Finnish Defense Forces employ only 13,000 people during peacetime, Helsinki claims it has the ability to activate over 900,000 reservists with 280,000 combat-ready troops. Sweden conscripts both men and women, Stockholm drafted 7,000 its citizens and the military expects to conscript 8,000 next year. The Swedes have had conscription since 1901.
Citing the supposed Russian threat to Europe, Robert Hamilton, the head of Eurasia Research at the Foreign Policy Research Institute, said “It is tragically true that here we are, in 2024, and we are grappling with the questions of how to mobilize millions of people to be thrown into a meatgrinder of a war potentially.” For 30 years, Hamiliton served as a US Army officer. “Meatgrinder” is a term often used by frontline troops in Ukraine, particularly during the battle of Bakhmut where the average life span of such a soldier was only a few hours.
In the United Kingdom, conscription is currently being pushed by Conservative MPs. The 2025 National Defense Authorization Act, the annual military spending bill, may include provisions which inter alia will seek to automatically register all eligible men and women for Selective Service, a form of conscripted labor, which could inevitably include military service.
Former Supreme Allied Commander of Europe General Wesley Clark echoed Hamilton’s hawkish sentiments, emphasizing “whether this is a new Cold War or an emerging hot war is unclear.” He added that NATO “must rebuild our defenses,” including with mandatory military drafts.
“I think young people in Europe and the US will come to realize that this generation, like the generation that fought WWII, it didn’t ask to be the ‘Greatest Generation’ but the circumstances thrust that burden on them,” Clark added.
The risk of direct war with Russia is growing by the day amidst the Ukraine proxy war, as the alliance has largely approved NATO missiles to be used for attacks against the Russian mainland. The bloc will soon provide Kiev with F-16s and an explicit green light for the warplanes to carry out direct strikes against Russian territory as well. Without irony, Stoltenberg claimed this should not be viewed by Russia as an escalation.
As NATO considers increasing its nuclear weapons deployments, the US is also planning to deploy previously banned, medium-range, nuclear capable missiles in Germany which has caused Russia to hint it could similarly retaliate. Pointing to the massive US-led buildup for war with China, President Vladimir Putin accused NATO of creating major security threats for Russia in Asia.
NATO set its sights on China four years ago, identifying Beijing as a military threat to European security. China maintains a “no limits” partnership with Russia. “NATO is already ‘moving’ there (to Asia) as if to a permanent place of residence. This, of course, creates a threat to all countries in the region, including the Russian Federation. We are obliged to respond to this and will do it,” Putin vowed earlier this year. That same month, Stoltenberg cited China as a reason the bloc is considering an “adaptation” of its nuclear arsenal.
