Iran Destroyed Israel’s Calculations

Israel vs. Iran – a Trigger towards Armageddon?

One might ask, was this “out-of-control” situation planned and prepared by the Zionist-dominated west?

Peter Koenig
17 April 2024

Israel’s Minister of War, Joav Galant, told his troops the Iranian attack was not successful; that of about hundred drones and rockets, Israel downed them all but four, thanks to our good preparation. This is a lie on many levels.

Both Netanyahu and Galant expressed their determination to retaliate, after a well-thought-out plan. Netanyahu qualified, it needs to be a “clever response”.

Likewise, army chief Halevi is crystal clear in his attempt of launching a response for Iran’s retaliation attack on Israel, but he does not want to cause a war.

The Israeli Cabinet is also “mulling” over what they call a “political offensive” – whatever that may mean.

Interesting though, is that both sides, Israel and Iran, do not seem to want war, or better a HOT WAR, where sable rattling could surreptitiously convert into a mushroom cloud. They know, when NATO gets involved, Russia and China may get involved – and then – the sky is open and Armageddon is on the table – or, rather, all over Mother Earth.

If indeed, Israel goes ahead with such a counter-attack, however benign or non-benign it may be, it is like giving Biden the finger. Because, according to the latest news, Biden backtracked from his earlier limitless commitment to support Israel and to always fight for Israel’s security. Biden’s “back-stoppers” must have told him otherwise: “America is not going to war with Iran for Israel.” – Israel – you are on your own, so to speak.

That was a smart decision. Will they stick to it? The US is divided. There are the Zionists, who so far have called the shots in Washington and in the Pentagon. But the balance is gradually shifting in favor of the more level-headed thinkers, those who do not want to risk WWIII which could become nuclear – and global.

Similar messages of “caution” seem to emanate from British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, a strong supporter of Zionism. He called Benjamin Netanyahu, suggesting prudence in any further action he may take. An escalation – that could spin out of control, is in nobody’s interest.

Nevertheless, PM Sunak assured Netanyahu of UK’s support to “guarantee Israel’s security”.

If this sounds like a game of words, probably it is a game of words. Maybe hiding a surprise – and perhaps during the days of “thinking about prudence”, something much bigger may be under preparation. Knowing the Israel-Zionist’s own supremacy concept, they will not let the Iranian attack, even if well justified, go unanswered.

Just to refresh memories, because they are systematically wiped out by the bought mainstream media: Iran launched a measured, but well calculated retaliation attack on Israeli military targets in the early morning hours of 14 April. The drone and ICBM missile assault of some 300 projectiles was a response for Israel’s unprovoked attack of 1 April on Iran’s Consulate in Damascus, leaving 7 people dead, including 2 high ranking Iranian military officers.

By the multitude of rockets Iran fired on Israel in sequence, first the drones than the missiles, Iran suppressed Israel’s and their allies air defense system that concentrated on intercepting drones and was unable to intercept the subsequently launched hypersonic missiles.

Tehran having entered a new stage of political and military stature beyond the Middle Eastern boundaries, had to react to Israel’s Damascus provocation of 1 April, in terms of a clear message, “Don’t mess with Iran – or else”.

Iran, now militarily speaking, one of the three key members of the newly ten BRICS nations, must assure the west that sanctions and threats and random unprovoked attacks will not cut it anymore.

The 14 April attack by Iran, was not just a retaliatory strike, but established a new order, depriving Israel of her absolute impunity, which until recently had been guaranteed by the US.

Important to note is, that Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Commander-in-Chief, Hossein Salami, said that from now on, if Israel attacks the interests of Iran and Iranian citizens, Tehran will strike it again (RT – 16 April 2024).

This means, that if Israel now hits back, Iran will not just swallow whatever Israel does to harm Iran. And there is the danger – a real risk of escalation out of control.

One might ask, was this “out-of-control” situation planned and prepared by the Zionist-dominated west?

Let us not forget, whatever Zionist-Israel does in pursuit of her ultimate goal, the establishment of Greater Israel, is to control the Middle East’s inexhaustible energy resources.

Achieving Greater Israel depends very much on Israel conquering Iran, not only because Iran is literally in “command” of the oil and gas rich Middle East, but also, a Greater Israel needs control over the Strait of Hormuz, now controlled by Iran.

Currently about 30% or more of the world’s total oil and gas consumption is shipped through the Strait of Hormuz. See this

With a Greater Israel, the bulk of Middle Eastern hydrocarbons would be under Zionist-Israeli control — and, with the Strait of Hormuz under Israeli control, shipments of the energy resources, how much and to whom, would be under Zionist command.

Not to forget, Zionist-Israel is already in the process of appropriating the enormous gas reserves off-shore of Gaza – conservatively estimated already some 20 years ago at about a trillion cubic-feet, worth between 2 and 3 billion dollars, depending on the market price. And as we know, he, who controls the resource, decides its “market” price.

An updated assessment of the Gaza off-shore reserves may be exponentially higher. Of course, kept secret, given the current war and expropriation scenario by Zionist-Israel.

The huge port that is rumored to be planned just outside Gaza – maybe construction has already begun, has little to do with food delivery to Gaza (certainly not), or “exporting” the remaining Gazans to unknown destinations.

Much more likely will this be the port for handling the Gaza off-shore hydrocarbons through a yet to be built (but planned since 1971) Ben-Gurion Canal, all the way to the Red Sea. The new canal, would probably bankrupt the Suez Canal, possession of Egypt, an Arab state.

The Suez Canal is already suffering due to lack of transshipments of at least 20 European countries, who are afraid the Yemeni-Houthi attacks on US and Israeli controlled merchandise vessels could also target their ships.

’Twas the night afore Armageddon

This Big Picture vision speaks for Israel not letting go. From their point of view, they MUST conquer Iran. The Zionists may be so blinded by their delusion of “grandeur”, that they may not see the Mushroom Cloud that may wipe them out along with much of the rest of the world.

The reality is that Iran is no longer alone. Iran wants to make sure that their power and presence is accounted for by Israel, the US, its European vassals, and the west at large – because they are now a member of the new BRICS which is not just an economic association.

Their membership of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) – a strategic and economic Chinese agency – protects them from outside attacks, the same way NATO members are protected. Attack one NATO member you attack them all.

Attack One BRICS state, you attack them all.

Retaliation in the case of an attack on Iran can come from all or selected members of the ten BRICS countries, especially from Russia and China; which would pretty much mean WWIII.

This may be the reason for Iran’s relatively benign retaliation against Israel. It was a warning.

Iran does not want war. They may follow the Tao philosophy, as expressed by Sun Tzu in ancient times, “To fight 100 battles and win 100 battles is not the height of skill. The best way to win is not to fight at all.” This is Iran’s strategy. Its strike against Israel was not so much a military response as a grandmaster’s move in a big chess game. And the game is not over yet (RT, 16 April 2024).

May President Putin’s words resonate and be taken seriously, “I hope WWIII can be avoided” – meaning that an Israeli assault on Iran would not remain unanswered by Russia – which would bring in NATO – and WWIII could explode overnight.

————

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and  co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020)

Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

The West begs Iran for a Face-saver

Israel is now vowing to respond to Iran’s retaliatory attack, and while the Biden regime claims to have told Netanyahoo that the U.S. won’t aid in any offensive action, they are still promising to provide air defense… just like they did when Tehran retaliated for Israel’s deadly attack on the Iranian consulate in Syria.

Journalist and Editor-in-Chief of The Cradle, Sharmine Narwani, reported that an Iranian military security official revealed exclusively to The Cradle that the U.S. reached out and asked Iran to allow Israel “a symbolic strike to save face,” which was “outright rejected” and met with warnings that any attack from Israel targeting Iran will be met with immediate action.

~~~~~

Choreographed retaliations impacting Iran proper, or its interests anywhere else, as during the mild and lawful Round One Iranian barrage, were rejected by Iran for Round Two.

Iran warned ANY support of Zion’s aggression by the deranged West (such as needed aerial refueling and air defense) will bring retaliation on their bases throughout the region, and closing Hormuz, perhaps selectively a la Houthis?!

Zion is committed to regaining permanently lost deterrence. F-UKUS is committed to Zion. The circle is about to be squared

Iran Strikes Israel

Garland Nixon interviews Laith Marouf — West Asia update — on a seismic week which changed our world. Le roi est mort, vive le roi!

Iran’s retaliation is historic for Palestine, the region, our world. Zio-USUK suffered a strategic defeat, on top of moral defeat of Gaza
the regional war has moved from non-state actors to state-on-state [with the implications of aligned alliances a la 1914]
Iran forced Anglo-Zionist-NATO alliance to reveal their air defenses (AD), including radars, locations, capabilities, occult allies (GCC), tactics, etc.  It made clear Franco-Brits are vassals; the combined West is a totalitarian Empire under a single diktat, for those oblivious the last six months of Genocide…
Iran has started bleeding both their budgets/treasure ($3+ BILLION cost in a few hours!) and air defense interceptors/warjets wear & tear/munitions through massive unprecedented swarm of cheap drones
Iran demonstrated, in addition to precision of its older drones/missiles (! Thx Comrades BeiDou & GLONASS), significant deterrence
Israel demonstrated its survival is dependent on combined West – demoted to abject vassal like Bahrain from its former optical strut
even this western defense is proven worthless, as in 404. US funded and part-built air defenses were thoroughly exposed.
as they proved they could take down western AD using older drones and Scuds, in real war they would rapidly degrade airbases and hardware required for the sole remaining advantage of Anglo-Zionists – air power; Hamas has exposed ground war inadequacy and Houthis the lost naval force projection.
Everything in Israel today exists by Grace of Iran (!!!). It can be leveled
Hezbollah today salted the wounded by blasting another “Iron” Dome AD complex in north occupied Palestine
during the Iranian aerial slap, Netanyahoo hid in the Jerusalem bunker of the messianic Jewish billionaire funding the Red Heifer sacrifice, destruction of Al Aqsa Masjid and building of the Third Temple on its ruins. The crazed want Armageddon. The Danger remains
A lesson learned by multipolar Global Majority during this measured & mild Iranian deterrence action: the US will need to bring all its forces for zionazi proxy to have a chance! Thus dominoes will quickly fall everywhere else, whether 404, Korea, etc.. [unfortunately, this INCREASES risk of total West Asian war.. all now have a vested interest in finishing off the Last Satanic Empire in such a distant and predictable weak theater, also given its tenuous logistics and abject emotional messianic devotion. iow, an emotional albatross]
As Houthis have same weaponry as Iran, they are shown to have pulled their punches in Red Sea.. more proof of imperial lunacy to keep fighting a lost war, merely for optics
if USUK persist, they will end up third world countries at the end of this mad devotion to Zion [AHH: actually, a best case scenario at this point]
Jordanian compradore regime will soon cease to exist; its fate is linked to zionism now
the Arab region now plans for the day after collapse of Zion, and eviction of USUK (provided we’re still alive); this is not merely Greater Syria but other natural agglomerations which used to exist prior to arrival of West or even Turks
Garland: the strike on Israel was an Exclamation Point of the [arrival] of the Multipolar World

Americans Panic-Search “World War III” And “Can I Be Drafted” As Iran Bombs Israel

By Tyler Durden Americans panic searched “World War III” and other related searches following Iran’s Saturday night attack on Israel with hundreds of missiles and drones. Using...

Americans Panic-Search “World War III” And “Can I Be Drafted” As Iran Bombs Israel

Iran’s Retaliatory Strikes

Last night, Iran carried out retaliatory strikes on Israel in response to the Israeli attack on the consulate in Damascus. We are joined by veteran war correspondents Hala Jaber and Elijah J. Magnier to discuss the significance of the strike, what it means for the conflict in Gaza, and its geopolitical implications.

Hala Jaber, a Lebanese-British journalist, was honored with the Amnesty International Journalist of the Year Award in 2003. She garnered the title of Foreign Correspondent of the Year at the British Press Awards in both 2005 and 2006 for her exceptional coverage of the Iraq War.

Elijah J. Magnier, a veteran war correspondent with over 37 years of experience covering West Asia. He has resided in Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Sudan, and Syria for extended periods, specializing in political assessments, strategic planning, terrorist organizations, and non-state actors.

Roots of Gaza Genocide

Prof. Hudson discusses his early career with Herman Kahn (the real Dr. Strangelove) alongside Mossad agents. 

The roots of current annihilation of Palestinians lies in alliance between Anglo-Americans and Zionists, an alliance of convenience.

An agreed Grand Strategy, developed from lessons of Vietnam, includes targeted assassination of journalists to minimize exposure of extermination; destruction of hospitals to expedite the same; targeting of aid workers, UNRWA, green houses, farms, stores warehouses, fishing boats, etc.. to ensure comprehensive civilian starvation — and so on.

A systematic planning designed decades ago, steadily implemented piecemeal, and waiting for the right opportunity to roll out en masse “to tip over” the captive Palestinian population into absolute collapse.

Key point: USUK is not a hostage to messianic Judaism. The Empire actively ensures and supports implementation of the Policy at all levels. The merciless de-arabization ethnic cleansing objective of the zionists is supported at all costs, both to ensure the hegemonic proxy survival of the settler state (“our aircraft carrier”) and to introduce Chaos into the entire world, rolling back the modern International Law derived from post-Westphalian Treaty norms. And there is no Plan B.

~~~~~

TRANSCRIPT

Gaza: The Strategic Imperative
By Michael Sunday, April 14, 2024

​PROF. MICHAEL HUDSON, THE TRUTH ABOUT THE DESTRUCTION OF GAZA. – Ania K

ANIA: Hello, everyone. Welcome back to my channel. Today I have with me for the fourth time, I’m still counting, a very, very special guest, one of the best professors in economics and financial analysts in the world. And I’m very glad we are reconnecting with Professor Hudson again.

I want to start this live stream with asking all of you to check all my links down below this live stream, because being on other platforms, especially nowadays, is very important. So you have my locals there, you have mailing lists, and every other link if you choose to support my work as well.

Also, Professor Hudson’s three links. You have the website (michael-hudson.com), Patreon (patreon.com/michaelhudson), and all the books that Professor Hudson has published so far, you can order. It’s all the way down below this live stream. I’m sure this video will bring you immense value, and I would like you to hit this like, because it helps other people to see it, since YouTube recommends videos with a lot of likes. Leave the comments and also share the video, because the knowledge that you will be hearing today, it’s priceless.

Welcome back, Professor Hudson. Thank you so much for joining me today for this conversation.

MICHAEL HUDSON: Thanks for having me back again.

ANIA: And I would like to say to the audience as well that this video is dedicated to what is taking place, especially in Gaza and Israel. Of course, we will address other countries related to this situation, but Professor Hudson has sent me a very in-depth email after our last live stream a week ago, also on Friday, and we actually decided after we ended that live stream to have this particular topic to be the main topic of this video. So, I give this to you, Professor Hudson, where would you like to start this conversation, please?

MICHAEL HUDSON: I think I should start with my own background, because 50 years ago, in 1974, I was working with the Hudson Institute, with Herman Kahn, and my colleagues there were a number of Mossad agents who were being trained. Uzi Arad was there, and he became the head of Mossad and is currently the main advisor to Benjamin Netanyahu.

So, all of what is happening today was discussed 50 years ago, not only with the Israelis, but with many of the U.S. defense people, because I was with the Hudson Institute, which was a national security agency, because I’d written Super Imperialism, and I was a balance of payments expert, and the Defense Department used my book Super Imperialism not as an expose, but a how-to-do-it book. And they brought me there as a specialist in the balance of payments. Herman brought me back and forth to the White House to meet with cabinet members and to discuss the balance of payments. He also brought me to the War College and to the Air Force think tanks.

So, all of what is happening now was described a long time ago, and Herman was known as a futurist. He was Dr. Strangelove in the movie. That was all based for him on his theories of atomic war, but he was also the main theorist behind Vietnam. And nobody seems to have noticed that what is happening in Gaza and the West Bank now is all based on what was the U.S. strategy during the Vietnam War. And it was based on the “strategic hamlets” idea, the fact that you could cut back, you could just divide all of Vietnam into little parts, having guards at all the transition points from one part to another. Everything that Israel is doing to the Palestinians in Gaza and elsewhere throughout Israel was all pioneered in Vietnam.

And Herman had me meet with some of the generals there to explain it. And I think I mentioned I flew to Asia twice with Uzi Arad. We had a chance to [get to] know each other very much. And I could see that the intention from the very beginning was to get rid of the Palestinians and indeed to use Israel as the basis for U.S. control of Near Eastern oil. That was the constant discussion of that from the American point of view. It was Israel as a part of the oil.

So, Herman’s analysis was on systems analysis. You define the overall aim and then you work backward. How do you do it? Well, you can see what the Israeli policy is today. First of all, you isolate the Palestinians and strategic hamlets. That’s what Gaza had already been turned into for the last 15 years. It’s been carved up into districts requiring electronic passes from one sector to another to go into Israel, to go to Jerusalem, or to go to Israel for jobs to work.

The aim all along has been to kill them. Or first of all, to make life so unpleasant for them that they’ll emigrate. That’s the easy way. Why would anyone want to stay in Gaza when what’s happening to them is what’s happening today? You’re going to leave. But if they don’t leave, you’re going to have to kill them, ideally by bombing because that minimizes the domestic casualties. Israel doesn’t want its soldiers to die any more than Americans do. So, the American form of war, as it was in Vietnam, is bombing them. You don’t want person-to-person contact because people fighting for their lives and liberty tend to be better fighters because for them it’s really essential. For the others, they’re just doing soldier’s work.

So, the genocide that you’re seeing today is an explicit policy, and that was a policy of the forefathers, the founders of Israel. The idea of a land without people was a land without Arabs in it, the land without non-Jewish people. That’s really what it meant. They were to be driven out starting even before the official funding of Israel, the first Nakba, the Arab Holocaust. And the two of the Israeli prime ministers were members of the Stern gang of terrorists. The terrorists became the rulers of Israel. They escaped from British jail and they joined to found Israel. So, what you’re seeing today is the final solution to this plan. And the founders of Israel were so obsessed with the Nazis, essentially, they wanted to do to them what they did to us, is how they explained it to people.

For the United States, what they wanted was the oil reserves in the Middle East. And again and again, I heard the phrase, ‘you’re our landed aircraft carrier in Israel’. Uzi Arad, the future Mossad head, would be very uncomfortable at this because he wanted Israel to be run by the Israelis. But they realized that for Israel to get by with the money that it needed for its balance of payments, it had to be in a partnership with the United States.

So, what you’re seeing today isn’t simply the work of one man, of Benjamin Netanyahu. It’s the work of the team that President Biden has put together. It’s the team of Jake Sullivan, the National Security Advisor, Lincoln, and the whole deep state, the whole neocon group behind them, Victoria Nuland, and everyone. They’re all self-proclaimed Zionists. And they’ve gone over this plan for essentially America’s domination of the Near East for decade after decade.

But as the United States learned in the Vietnam War, populations protest, and the U.S. population protested against the Vietnam War. What the Biden administration wants to avoid is the situation that President Johnson had in 1968. Any hotel, any building that he went to, to give a speech for his re-election campaign, there were crowds shouting, LBJ, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today? President Johnson had to take the servants entrance to get away from the press so that nobody would see what he was doing. And essentially, he went on television and resigned.

Well, to prevent this kind of embarrassment, and to prevent the embarrassment of journalists who were doing all this, Seymour Hersh described the [Mai Lai] massacre, and that helped inflame the opposition to Johnson. Well, President Biden, who’s approved Netanyahu’s plan, the first people you have to kill are the journalists. If you’re going to permit genocide, you have to realize that you don’t want the domestic U.S. population or the rest of the world to oppose the U.S. and Israel. You kill the journalists. And for the last, ever since the October 2nd Al-Aqsa event, you’ve had one journalist per week killed in Israel. That’s part of it.

The other people you don’t want, if you’re going to bomb them, you have to start by bombing the hospitals and all of the key centers. That also was part of the idea of the Vietnam War. How do you destroy a population? This was all worked out in the 1970s, when people were trying to use systems analysis to think, how do you work back and see what you need? And the idea, if you bomb a population, you can’t really hide that, even if you kill the journalists. How do you kill a population passively? So you minimize the visible bombing. Well, the line of least resistance is to starve them. And that’s been the Jewish, the Israeli policy since 2008.

You had a piece by Sarah Roy in the New York Review, citing a cable from 2008, from Tel Aviv to the embassy saying, as part of their overall embargo plan against Gaza, Israeli officials have confirmed to the embassy officials on multiple occasions that they intend to keep the Gaza economy on the brink of collapse without quite pushing it over the edge. Well, now they’re pushing it over the edge.

And so Israel has been especially focusing after the journalists, after the hospitals, you bomb the greenhouses, you bomb the trees, you sink the fishing boats that have supplied food to the population. And then you aim at fighting the United Nations relief people.

And you’ve read, obviously, the whole news of the last week has been the attack on the seven food providers that were not Arabs. And this was, again, from a systems analyst point, this is exactly what the textbook says to do strategically. If you can make a very conspicuous bombing of aid people, then you will have other aid suppliers afraid to go, because they think, well, if these people, aid suppliers, are just shot at, then we would be too.

Well, the United States is fully behind this. And to help starve the Gazan people, Biden immediately, right after the ICJ finding of plausible genocide, withdrew all funding from the United Nations relief agencies. The idea, again, the hope was to prevent the United Nations from having the money to supply food.

So when the United States is now trying to blame one person, and Biden goes on a television recorded call with Netanyahu saying, please be humane when you’re dropping your bombs, do it in a humane way. That’s purely for domestic consumption. It’s amazing how nakedly hypocritical all this.

And ever since the Al-Aqsa Mosque was raided by Israeli settlers on October 2, leading to Hamas’s Al-Aqsa Flood retaliation on October 7, it was closely coordinated with the Biden administration. All the bombs have been dropped day after day, week after week, with the whole of the US. And Biden has said on a number of occasions, the Palestinians are enemies.

So I think I want to make it clear that this is not simply an Israeli war against Hamas. It’s an American-backed Israeli war. Each of them have their own objectives. Israel’s objective is to have a land without non-Jewish population. And America’s aim is to have Israel acting as the local coordinator, as it has been coordinating the work with ISIS and the ISIS commanders to turn them against targets provided by the United States.

Basically, that’s the duopoly that’s been created.

And I think Alastair Crooke has cited Trita Parsi, one of the Israeli political leaders, saying the objective really in all this, of Israel’s conflict and Biden’s acquiescence to it, is that Israel is engaged in a deliberate and systematic effort to destroy existing laws and norms about warfare. And that’s really it.

You have people, you have reporters, such as Pepe Escobar, saying that the United States is a chaos agent. But there’s a logic in this. The United States is looking forward to what it’s going to be doing in the Near East, in Ukraine, and especially in the China Sea and Taiwan. Looking forward, the United States says, how do we prevent other nations moving against us in the international court or suing or somehow putting sanctions against us? Israel is the test case, not simply for what’s happening there in Israel and Palestine itself, but against anything that the United States will be doing through the rest of the world.

That’s why the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., echoed by Lincoln and other U.S. officials, said there’s no court of justice ruling against genocide, that it was a non-binding ruling. Well, of course it was binding, but it has no means of enforcement. And both Lincoln and yesterday, the head of the army said, there is no genocide taking place in Gaza. Well, what that means is you have to go to a court, and that’s going to take years and years. And by the time the court case is over and there’s any judgment of reparations due, then you’re going to, by then the Gazans will all be dead. So the U.S. aim is to end the rule of international law that is why the United Nations was founded in 1945.

And in fact, this international law goes way back to 1648 with the peace of Westphalia in Germany to end the 30 years war. All the European nations agreed not to interfere with the internal affairs of other countries. Well, that also was part of the United Nations principle.

And yet you have the United States explicitly advocating regime change in other countries, and most specifically in Russia and throughout the Middle East. So if you can end the whole kind of rule of law, then there’s really no alternative to the United States rules-based order, which means we can do whatever we want, chaos.

And if you look at what’s happening in Gaza is facilitating a transition from a orderly world of the United Nations to chaos, then you’re going to understand basically what the whole, the big picture, the long range picture that’s been put in place really over a series of decades. That’s why the United States, and the United States has no plan B. It only has the plan A to do this. It’s not taking into account the counter reactions and the feedback. Maybe we can discuss that a little later. I’d better leave the questions up to you.

ANIA: Thank you. You actually have already answered many of my questions in that intro, but I want to ask you this now. I will jump a little bit now. I have a question about something that you wrote to me in your email.

I believe looking at many, many situations that are taking place in the world, that sometimes all you really need to do is to follow the money and it will give you a lot of answers. So as you said in your email that, let me check, where is it? The Israeli developers already are planning to turn Gaza into luxury beachfront properties.

So let me ask you here, Professor Hudson, What is really the main goal for Israel’s existence? And in this case, is this really about their luxurious properties, oil? What else is this region really about? Why is it so crucial?

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, it’s not just about beach properties. It’s what’s off the beach, the gas, the natural gas that they’ve discovered right offshore the Mediterranean that belongs to Gaza. So the Israelis are after the gas.

But your basic question, you’d sent me a list of questions you were going to go through. And I think if you keep to that sequence, it’s good. What you’re really asking is, you know, what’s the main goal for Israel’s existence? And I think if people don’t really, their sense of justice is so strong that they can’t believe what the original goal was. And the initial goal in the 19th century was formed in a period where Europe was anti-Semitic. The most anti-Semitic part of all was Ukraine. If you read Leon Trotsky’s autobiography of growing up in Odessa, he described the pogroms there. And so the Zionists, the first wave of Zionists, were looking for how can the Jewish people escape from this anti-Semitism.

Here’s the problem. By 1947, when Israel was formed, anti-Semitism was passé. Most Jews in the United States, certainly who I grew up with, they were all assimilated. Of course, they had well wishes for Israel. There was very little talk of the Arabs. But you had two arms of Judaism.

The one arm were the people who remembered with a vengeance what was done for them against them in Ukraine and Russia, and especially by Hitler and the Holocaust. They wanted to be separate and to have just to be protected.

But most of the Jewish population in America and Europe was thoroughly assimilated. And the last thing they wanted was to be separate. They wanted just the opposite. They wanted anti-Semitism to end.

But the Zionists who were in charge of Israel, the Stern Gang leaders, were obsessed with the old antagonisms. And in a way, they were obsessed with Nazism and said, well, we want to do to them what they did to us.

And again, the idea of a land without a people meant a land— we intend to make Israel into a land without non-Jewish people. That’s what a land without people, their slogan, meant. And from the very beginning, they started by driving Arabs out of Palestine, destroying their olive trees, destroying their orchards, taking their houses, and just killing them. That’s why the English threw them in jail before turning around and said, well, it’s true that we’ve thrown all the leaders in jail, but let’s recognize Israel and make Israel a whole country to do what these leaders that we were before throwing in jail were doing.

ANIA: Thank you.

You said also in your email that ISIS is part of America’s foreign legion. Can you please elaborate on that?

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, ISIS was organized originally to fight in Afghanistan against the Russians. And al-Qaeda, which was the parent of ISIS, was simply the roster of people who were willing to fight under the U.S. command.

Well, part of al-Qaeda turned against America on 9-11, but most, especially the Sunni followers of Wahhabi theology, were very eager to fight against the Shiites. Islam is divided into two parts, the Sunni Islam of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Republics, and much of the Near East, and the Shiites from Iran and maybe half of Iraq and parts of Syria also.

So you had these two sectarian groups fighting each other, and the United States provided the funding and the organization to them and essentially delegated to Israel much of the organization of organizing ISIS to fight against Assad, to fight against whomever the United States designated as our enemies, meaning we want to take their oil lands. America has taken Iraqi oil and won’t leave, is taking Syrian oil and won’t leave.

So essentially, the U.S. has used ISIS to fight against all of the Shiites on the theory that the Shiite Islam is all controlled by Iran, and they want to essentially wipe out the Shiites as they’re doing in Gaza, even though I think the Palestinians are mainly Sunni, but you should think of the ISIS as America’s foreign legion. They’ve hired them, they pay them, and they recruit from them.

You’ve just seen in what happened in Russia from the Ukrainians, Oregon recruited Sunni terrorists from Tajikistan. You’ve seen the United States trying to use ISIS to recruit, to fight in Russia’s southern periphery in Central Asia and to fight in the Uyghur territories of Xinjiang in Western China. They’re using ISIS to try to essentially attack the integrity of China, Russia, and Syria and any other area where the United States wants a regime change to put in the usual client oligarchy.

ANIA: So interesting, and they sell it under the description that this is the enemy and terrorist, and they are founding it. And the public is still buying this, Professor Hudson. How is this possible?

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, this is hypocritical. Everybody throughout the world is appalled by the cruelty and the barbarism of ISIS. The United States is not going to come right out and say, hey, that’s us that they’re fighting. We’re directing ISIS from the presidential office. We love ISIS.

Well, Biden loves ISIS, and Blinken loves ISIS, and the entire neocons, the CIA loves ISIS because they’re all running it, but they can’t say it to the American public. They have to pretend just like they’re pretending with Netanyahu that, oh my heavens, look at [what] ISIS is doing. We’ve really got to fight against it.

And for instance, when it put in the white helmets in ISIS, these were the American supplied public relations unit to essentially do false propaganda, false images, make false flag attacks. All of these false flag attacks, all of the white helmets and the propaganda has all been coordinated by the United States.

ANIA: I want to ask you now a question that to some extent you actually answered already. Does Israel make any independent decisions that are not consulted with the United States in regards to bombing Gaza?

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, the question is, what is the United States or what do you mean by the United States? They don’t need official approval. There’s already a broad agreement in principle. Do whatever you have to do.

The United States has given them a free hand saying, we’re not going to interfere. You’re our managers on site. Just as you’re managing ISIS, you can manage certainly your own country. The U.S. has given blanket approval for Israel’s genocide. That’s why it says there’s no genocide there.

And it shares the aim of extending the war to fight Iran. Again and again, what Netanyahu is saying, we’re not going to be safe until we defeat Iran. Well, the United States has, that’s America, that’s the neocon plan outlined in the 1990s. It was spelled out, I think, by General Petraeus of first Afghanistan, then Iraq, then Syria, and then Iran. All of this was worked out from the beginning. The United States is trying to figure out, how do we do it?

Well, there’s a general expectation that one way to do it is to have Israel mount a false flag attack, something Iran does that is so bad that Israel retaliates and then, as it just bombed the Iranian embassy in Syria, that Iran is going to then do something to Israel and the United States will come to protect our Israeli brothers and world peace and prevent the genocide that the Gazans are trying to do against Israel and that Iran is trying to do against the rest of the world and bomb Iran.

Back in 1970s, there were discussions of what do you do? What will Iran do to fight back? Well, there’s one thing that Iran can do, that it doesn’t have to bomb American troops in Syria or Iraq. It doesn’t have to bomb Israel. All it has to do is sink a ship in the Strait of Hormuz. That’s the big strait. You’ve seen what happened, what the Houthis have done with the Red Sea. The big traffic is the Strait of Hormuz. That’s where Saudi Arabian oil and we could call it the oil gulf. It’s called the Persian Gulf, but it’s really the oil gulf. That’s where all the oil trade is. If you sink a ship or two in the oil gulf, that’s going to push oil prices way, way up because that’s going to cut most of the world off for as long as Iran wants from the Middle Eastern oil supply.

Well, that’s what really terrifies Biden because he’s pretending that there’s no inflation in the United States and that the economy is quite heavy. The inflation that would follow from Iran sinking a ship in Hormuz will essentially be crowning the American opposition to Biden, which is growing.

It’s one thing to be against genocide and killing people, but much more important is if your gas prices go up, the American people think that that’s really much more important than the fact of genocide and crimes against humanity. That’s really what is frightening the US.

The question is right now, how do they make the Israeli provocation against Iran— an excuse for the United States to come in with all of NATO’s and European support and somehow prevent Iran from having the power to close down the Straits of Hormuz. That’s what they’re trying to figure out now. I don’t know what they’re going to do, but when Blinken has said, Israel has not broken any rules. It’s all okay. What the United States really is [saying], if they can get away with this, they can say there are really no rules at all for the whole world. We can do whatever we want. Right now is coming to a peak. It’s the follow-up that was all thought in advance of the whole Israeli movement against Gaza.

ANIA: Thank you, Professor Hudson.

Next question that is about targeting civilians, journalists, and workers. Again, you’ve addressed this already, but I will ask you this. Why is the Israeli army targeting all those groups?

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, it’s targeting everyone. It’s targeting all civilians because it wants a land without Palestinian people. It’s targeting the most critical people necessary for a Gazan society to survive. It targets the journalists because it doesn’t want the world to see what it’s doing, because Israel has already lost its standing in the world. The United States tells them, especially, you’ve got to kill the journalists because if you don’t kill them, we, the Biden administration, are going to look bad. We already have the Americans turning against the war.

There’s only one anti-war candidate running in the presidential elections for this November. That’s Jill Stein. Every other candidate is completely backing Israel in the war, but the American people, the majority of Americans look at what’s happening in Israel as genocide and as a crime against humanity. They’re not going to vote for Biden. Biden is going to lose the election or certainly not win it. It may go into the House of Representatives if nobody wins it.

In order to drive the rest of the Gazan populations out, you have to, number one, get rid of the journalists. Number two, you want to get rid of the hospitals. As you’re bombing the people, a lot of them are going to get injured. You want all the injured people from the bombs to die. For that, you have to bomb the hospitals. You especially have to target the doctors for killing. Not only will there not be doctors to heal the wounded people, but other doctors, doctors without borders from other countries, will be afraid to go into Gaza because if you go there, you know that if you’re a food worker bringing aid or a doctor or an aid worker, you’re going to get shot because you’re at the top of the target list.

ANIA: It’s horrible. Just listening to this, you know, it’s very hard to…

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, imagine how I used to feel sitting in meetings and all of this was just said as if this is part of a game and this is how we’re planning it all out. All of this was what was discussed. How do we do evil? I mean, this…

ANIA: Yeah, but those are not humans to me. They are not humans to me.

MICHAEL HUDSON: That’s right.

ANIA: Soulless beings that are not humans. That’s all I say here.

Professor Hudson, next question is about those Israeli developers who, as you said in your email, are already planning to turn Gaza into luxury beachfront properties. So what do you really know about this? They are already planning this? Like they have plans for those properties?

MICHAEL HUDSON: The Americans made a start. They began by building docks. You not only want beachfront property, you want docks for the buyers to have a place to tie up their yachts or their sailboats.

And so the United States is building these piers. One reason it’s doing it is it can pretend that it can say, we’re not building the piers for Israeli property owners to have yachts, we’re going to deliver food. But by the time we finish building the piers, there’ll be no more Gazans. I mean, that’s the whole point. By building the piers, they’ve enabled Israel to prevent the food trucks from coming in from the south. So building the piers is a means of pretending to help without doing anything at all to help actually [deliver] food to Israel.

So yes, all throughout the news, there have been statements by the Israeli real estate companies saying, Gaza could have been a nice place to live if there weren’t Arabs in it. And now if we can clear the land of Arabs, make it a land without those people, then this is a wonderful property. And it has natural gas to help the Israeli balance of payments. So the whole idea is to make this a center of Israel luxury development.

ANIA: Again, absolutely disgusting to me, just listening to this. I want to ask you now about, were Gaza [to cease] to exist completely, what will happen to all the Palestinians who survived?

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, the land is going to be there, and it’ll be beachfront property. Alastair Crooke has been, I think, the clearest writer. He was one of the negotiators between Israel and the Palestinians. He’s explained that there cannot be a two-state solution anymore.

The Israelis say, we are going to kill all of the Palestinians. The Palestinians say, well, we can’t exist with the Israelis, and we have to defend ourselves. If we don’t kill them, they’re going to kill us. So Israel has to be either Palestinian or Israeli. It can’t be both. That is ended forever. So anyone who talks of a two-state solution, they’re just not looking it up.

So the question is, how is Gaza going to exist? Either it’s going to be all Israeli, and the Gazans will be forced to flee. The Israelis want them to flee by boats and to be sunk, most of them will be sunk in the Mediterranean, just like after America and France destroyed Libya. The Libyans tried to flee in boats, and they were sunk.

So either they will drown, or they will somehow work their way into a prison camp that Egypt and its leader is setting up for Gazan refugees. And then the Gazans will somehow try to gain entry into Europe or other countries. So you can expect a huge influx of Gazans into Europe.

Some people have suggested, well, now that Ukraine is turning into a land without a people, maybe either the Gazans can turn Ukraine over to the Palestinians, or we could give it to the Israelis, saying, well, this is your ancestral land, this is where all of the pogroms that started Zionism began. Now you can go back and there are no more Ukrainians. They have programs against you. Maybe the Israelis should go to Ukraine. One population or the other has to emigrate.

Well, Israelis already have been losing a huge chunk of their population, especially their working age population, especially those who have jobs in information technology or highly paying jobs. So, you’re already seeing a population outflow.

So, Gaza will exist geographically, but we have no idea about what is going to be the demographic composition.

And I think the Israeli Defense Forces Chief, Herzi Halevi, said just last Sunday that Israel, he announced Israel knows how to handle Iran, just as they’re handling Gaza, that they’ve prepared for this. They have good defensive systems. And he said, we are operating and cooperating with the USA and strategic problems partners in this region. So, the US is going to be putting pressure on Egypt to expand the concentration camps that it’s setting up and to pressure the Europeans. Maybe so many Germans are leaving their country now that there’s no more work for them. Maybe the Palestinians will go to Germany and other European countries, and wherever they can find some kind of refuge.

America was willing to give the Jewish population refuge as long as the Jewish population served European imperialist aims of controlling the Near Eastern oil. But what can Palestine offer to be protected? If the Palestinians don’t have anything to offer the Europeans or the Americans, their governments simply do not care. They’ve done absolutely nothing to protect the Palestinians because they don’t care if there’s no money in it for them. And the Arab countries with money, the Saudi Arabians, the United Arab Republics have not really lifted a hand to help this. Even though a large labor force in Saudi Arabia is already Palestinian, they don’t need more Palestinians there. So, that’s basically what’s happening.

ANIA: Thank you, Professor Hudson. You know, before I ask you my last question, you know, people’s beliefs that the governments care about them. This is the most… I don’t understand how people can still believe that any government really cares about them in the world, looking at the situation like this. It’s heartbreaking. Just listening to what you said is a lot for me to take in.

The last question is when the bombing will stop and who is going to rebuild Gaza Strip?

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, the bombing will stop when there are no more Palestinians to bomb. Israel doesn’t have the money to rebuild it or the intention of rebuilding. And even if Israel wants to rebuild it with nice homes all the way to the beachfront, who is going to do the building?

Well, already Israel has made a deal with India to get a lot of Indian construction workers from the poorest provinces of India coming over there. But again, who’s going to pay them? You can give them work permits, but the answer is who will pay them will be the contractors who are given the contracts to rebuild homes and offices and the new Israeli compound in Gaza, unless the world works and says, no, the Israelis have to give back all the land and it’s Israel that will be a minority under a Palestinian government.

You cannot have an Israeli government that is over the whole region because its policy is to kill the Palestinians. So I don’t see that, again, you can’t have a two-state solution. It doesn’t look like anyone’s supporting the Palestinians right now.

Who would help rebuild it? Well, the Turkish builders might come in and build it. Other Middle Easterners would rebuild it. Saudi Arabia could finance huge developments there. The United Arab Republics could buy land. American investors, maybe Blackstone could help develop there, but it’ll be foreign investment.

And if you look at the fact that the foreign investors of all these countries are looking for what they can get out of the genocide against Palestinians, you realize why there’s no real opposition to the genocide that’s taking place.

And the great benefit to the U.S. of all this is that as a result of this absence of any kind of the moral feeling that you’ve just expressed, no claims can be brought against the United States for any of the warfare, any of the regime change, interference that it’s planning for Iran, China, Russia, and as it’s been doing in Africa and Latin America. So Israel and Gaza and the West Bank should be seen, I think, as an opening of the new Cold War. And whatever you see happening in Gaza after the Gazans are driven out, you see this is really the plan for what the United States wants to do in China, in Russia, in Africa, in the whole rest of the world. You’re seeing a plan for basically how to financialize and make money out of genocide and the destruction of society. And in order to do that, you have to prevent anything like the United Nations of having any authority at all.

And the irony in all this is that the United States is creating just the opposite of what it wanted to do. I mean, obviously, while this is happening in Gaza, most of the global majority that we’ve spoken before, the world outside of NATO, America and Europe, are appalled. And the only way of stopping what’s happening in Gaza happening in the rest of the world is to create an alternative to the United Nations, an alternative to the World Bank, to the IMF, an alternative to all the organizations that the United States has controlled to turn the whole rest of the world into Gaza, if it can.

ANIA: Dr. Hudson, Professor Hudson, I want to thank you for coming back. I want to thank you for telling me after our last live stream to address this, because you shared it with me and with the audience. And I really hope that you will spread this video, guys, you will share it.

So I personally believe that we are fighting evil. And the way that I feel I am in a small way contributing to this is to trying to seek the truth and bring people who have knowledge and understanding and can share the facts and the truth with the world. Because if you don’t know what you’re fighting against, what you’re fighting with, then you’re like Don Quixote. You have to know what is the problem. And I am immensely grateful for guests like yourself to be on my channel and to share your knowledge with the audience. I can only imagine knowing all of this, what you shared with us today, living with this for so many years and watching the [unfolding] of those events in the world. For someone who has feelings and emotions, it’s very hard to bear. I can only imagine. So thank you for your contribution.

MICHAEL HUDSON: I’m on your show, Ania, because you see that this is evil, and it is evil.

ANIA: Yes. Thank you so much. I know you have to go. And I want to invite you again, of course, in the near future. Hopefully, you find time for our next conversation. To everyone who’s watching, make sure to check all the links to Professor Hudson that are already attached down below this live stream. And like I said, please share the video. Hit this like. It’s free of charge, and it helps the channel also. And more people can hear this information in the world. Thank you, everyone. And until next time.

Iran on the Rise

Peter Koenig
14 April 2024

The warning was on the wall. Ever since Israel attacked “out of the blue” on 1 April 2024 the Iranian Consulate in Damascus, Syria, killing 7, including two generals, an Iranian retaliation was to be expected.

The New York Times (NYT) reports “Iran mounted an immense aerial attack on Israel on Saturday night, launching more than 200 drones [other sources talk about 300 drones] and missiles in retaliation for a deadly Israeli airstrike in Syria two weeks ago, and marking a significant escalation in hostilities between the two regional foes.”

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) say there were over 300 aerial threats, including some 200 drones, 100 ballistic missiles, and 30 cruise missiles. See this.

Israel and her western friends claim that many of the drones were intercepted by IDF and the help from allied military support. The latter apparently include the UK, France, and Jordan – and most likely also US-NATO forces that have long been stationed in the region.

Nevertheless, according to several RT reports, a large-scale missile and drone attack against Israel has been a success, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has said in a statement published by IRNA news agency. The Islamic Republic’s military managed to “hit and destroy” some “important military targets,” it added, without providing any further details.

Short video clips published by Iranian media on social networks, viewing Islamic Republic’s missiles hitting their targets in Israel. Several missiles appeared to have been striking targets in a settlement, RT reports, however without being able to confirm the veracity of the clips.

The Guardian informs, that it was the Islamic Republic’s first-ever direct attack on the Jewish State, a development that brings the two countries to the brink of all-out conflict after more than a decade of shadow war and soaring stress six months into Israel’s war in Gaza, following the Hamas attack last October.

It was reported on Israeli television that Iran had launched more than 100 drones as well as cruise missiles towards Israel, and Iran later said it had fired a “first wave” of ballistic missiles. See this.

This latest war theatre is in full development. At this point it is unclear what exactly happened and to what level the conflict may escalate. A regional war – that could expand to a WW-scenario is a real danger. It depends largely to what extent foreign – non regional – players, will get involved. Arab states have already warned against any “foreign”, meaning non-regional, intervention. Specifically, that means the US / NATO. The latter would include of course almost all of the spineless European nations.

—–

Iran has many reasons for retaliation. Other than the Syrian Consulate event, the killing of General Qasem Soleimani with a targeted US drone attack on 3 January 2020 in Baghdad. This assassination was still carried out under President Trump, but the question remains, did he act on behalf of Israel – as many analysts suspect?

After a public mourning of Major General Soleimani, Iran launched missiles against US military bases in Iraq wounding at least 110 troops. Deaths were not officially reported.

Over the past several decades Israeli provocations on Iran abounded no end. Israel’s intent is to wipe out Iran as part of its “master plan” towards “Greater Israel”, and control of the Gulf of Hormuz with access to the Arabian Sea – and ultimately Asia. And in the north, where Israel is currently attempting to brutally genociding Palestinians – evicting them from their homeland, an atrocious slaughter supported by most western un-human leaders (sic).

This is not only Apartheid “social cleansing” – it is also taking possession – stealing – of tens or hundreds of billions worth of Gazan off-shore gas reserves.

To be sure, Israel is an illegal state, on Palestinian land stolen through the 1917 UK-sponsored Zionist-initiated Balfour Declaration, with the support in 1948 of the then 52-member young US-dominated United Nations. See this.

——–

For the past 100 years or so, Washington was – and still is – tacitly as well as openly manipulated by a strong worldwide Zionist movement. Zionists control the world’s – at least the western world’s – financial system, Big Finance, Wall Street, and not least the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), in Basle Switzerland, also called the Central Bank of all central banks, controlling about 90% of the worldwide monetary flow. All in Zionists command.

There is a strong symbiotic relationship, an interdependence between the Zionists, today’s Israel, and the US. The Zionists, the self-declared Chosen People, wield the scepter of Big Finance, aspiring for world domination through Greater Israel (see provisional map, below), with the might of military power by the United States.

Iran is the major stumbling block for Israel’s Zionists to achieve their goal. Once Iran is conquered, they dream, Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf States will fall in place.

Zionist-Israel has been allowed by the discreet influence of the US and UK secret services to become a “clandestine” nuclear power. They know they can count not only on the US tax-payers financial support, but more importantly, also with the Pentagon’s military might. By the way, US tax-payers have been footing a considerable portion of Israel’s budget for its 75-year existence.

Sounds controversial, doesn’t it – with the Zionists in control of worldwide Big Finance.

Israel’s provocations on Iran are openly or tacitly supported or even encouraged by Washington. The Washington war-mongers would love to go to war with Iran, a military and economic heavy weight, way beyond the Middle East.

And now, as a new BRICS member (BRICS-plus 5 [the sixth nation, Argentina, dropped out]), Iran’s strength has expanded almost exponentially, with such heavy-weight allies like China and Russia.

——

Israel’s assault on the Iranian Consulate in Damascus, may have been the spark that lit the fire. The extent of the “fire” cannot be assessed yet, as it will depend on clear-thinking and levelheadedness – or not – of western decision makers – specifically NATO countries.

President Biden has been clear, so western media: “Our support for Israel’s security is ironclad. The United States will stand with the people of Israel and support their defense against these threats from Iran.”

How serious is this American promise? – There is more at stake than words, especially considering Israel’s ever deeper falling within the world’s sympathy for her non-stop onslaught against Gaza and Palestine in general – having killed more than 35,000 Palestinians, about 70% of whom are women and children.

Strategically speaking, can the US afford this “unwavering” support for an outright genocide nation? And secondly, Washington knows that Iran has full support from Russia and China, Iran’s BRICS allies. BRICS association has similar meaning to that of NATO’s: Attack one country means you attack them all – and retaliation may be massive.

Are there still a few clear-thinking western political human strategists left, not to risk total destruction of civilization as we know it? – As President Putin has warned on several occasions, A Third World War, turning nuclear has no winner.

Let us hope reason and the sense for Peace will prevail.

————

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and  co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020)

Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

 

Five Nations Attack Zion

Forgive the young man, radiant and exuding like the Sun. We were all firebreathers once. He doesn’t realize this is round one. Last night, the messianic midgets received the biggest gift of their foreshortened lives; they will run with it now, fully suiciding USUK and the demented Old Order….

Eurasia versus NATOstan

In this interview, we are joined by the renowned geopolitical expert Pepe Escobar, who delves into the pages of his latest book “Eurasia v. NATOstan”. Brace yourself for an insightful exploration of the imminent collision between the Western Empire of Chaos and the emerging multipolar world order led by Eurasia. @SyrianaAnalysis

The Comprehensive Strategic Partnership of Coordination for a New Era

Impossible not to see the writing on the wall – not to mention the painting…

Iranian Retaliation: the First Domino

---

Israel is provoking an expanded regional war that it cannot win

By Abdel Bari Atwan at Rai Al Youm.

When and how will Iran retaliate?

Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is a man of few words. When he publicly threatens a harsh response to Israel’s attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus — which killed seven people including senior Revolutionary Guard (IRGC) commanders — that means retaliation is impending.

The question is whether it will be immediate or postponed for few days; and, also, if it will be carried out directly by the IRGC or by its paramilitary allies in South Lebanon, Iraq, and Yemen, or both.

If there’s a war, there is no need for the element of surprise, and it may be militarily or politically unwise to defer it. The decision to retaliate was already taken by Iran’s Supreme National Security Council at an emergency meeting convened immediately after news broke of the airstrike on the consulate, according to a source close to the council. This could entail launching hundreds or thousands of missiles at Israeli targets, and even striking Israeli diplomatic missions in the Gulf region or elsewhere.

The demonstrations held by thousands of Iranians in Tehran to condemn the Israeli attack were different to previous rallies held in support of Gaza. This time, demonstrators criticised their own political leaders for their failure to respond firmly and directly to a succession of earlier Israeli assassinations and attacks, and demanded they retaliate decisively this time. Iranian leaders are bound to take account of this growing frustration with their policy of ‘strategic patience’.

Allied resistance groups are likely to play a role in this retaliation. Lebanese Hezbollah leader Hasan Nasrallah has said retaliation is certainly coming. Abu Ali al-Askari of Iraq’s Kataeb Hezbollah spoke of thousands of armed fighters prepared to cross from Jordan into occupied Palestinian to join the struggle there. As for the Yemenis, they have no need for a call-to-arms. They began their battle against Israeli-linked shipping — and then the US navy — in support of Gaza months ago.

The reference to Jordan was significant. Some weeks ago, tens of thousands of Iraqi Hashd ash-Shaabi (Popular Mobilisation) members rallied at the Iraqi-Jordanian border and chanted calls for it to be opened so they could reach Palestine and fight in defence of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

In the event of an expanded war, US military bases in Iraq, Syria, Jordan, and the Gulf region could also be targeted. Washington had reached secret understandings with Tehran not to expand the Gaza war into a regional one. But it did not live up to its side and failed to restrain its Israeli ally. By carrying out a succession of deliberately provocative attacks against Iranian targets, and further escalating the genocidal war against civilians in Gaza, Netanyahu belittled and humiliated Biden, and demonstrated that it is he who calls the shots in the White House.

If the Iranian state join the prospective war directly alongside its Lebanese, Iraqi, and Yemeni allies, I expect that the Syrian army will do to. Shortly after the al-Aqsa Flood operation, the Iranian foreign minister visited Damascus to sound the Syrian president out about the need to join the war on all fronts in support of the Palestinian resistance. According to high-level Syrian sources, President Bashar al-Asad replied: “Syria is a state, not a front. If the Iranian state enters into this war, we will be by its side, without hesitation.”

Iran is a regional superpower with a huge arsenal of missiles, drones, and submarines. It has been a nuclear breakout state for three years and may have already manufactured nuclear weapons. If it enters a war that Israel forced on it by attacking its consulate — a blatant violation of its sovereignty — it may prove to be the region’s last war, and the beginning of the end of the Zionist occupation state in its current form.

It would probably be a rolling conflict, starting with a limited retaliation and escalating into all-out war. The occupation state has been reopening public shelters. Its settlers have been stocking up on food and cash. The military has been placed on alert, air defence reservists have been called up, and home leave for combat units cancelled. Its current leaders want a war and are preparing for one.

But it is a war it cannot win. It failed, despite the full backing of the US, to overcome the resistance fighters of the miniscule and vulnerable Gaza Strip after six months of merciless bombardment. Can it withstand a war against the Axis of Resistance led by Iran?

Descent into Savagery

‘Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more;
Or close the wall up with our English dead.’
King Henry V, 1415, the Hundred Years War.

By Pepe Escobar at Strategic Culture Foundation.

The Mechanism: how the “order” based on made-up rules is descending into savagery

As the de facto North Atlantic Terror Organization celebrates its 75th birthday, taking Lord Ismay’s motto to ever soaring heights (“keep the Americans in, the Russians out, and the Germans down”), that thick slab of Norwegian wood posing as Secretary-General came up with a merry “initiative” to create a 100 billion euro fund to weaponize Ukraine for the next five years.

Translation, regarding the crucial money front in the NATO-Russia clash: partial exit of the Hegemon – already obsessing with The Next Forever War, against China; enter the motley crew of ragged, de-industrialized European chihuahuas, all in deep debt and most mired in recession.

A few IQs over average room temperature at NATO’s HQ in Haren, in Brussels, had the temerity to wonder how to come up with such a fortune, as NATO has zero leverage to raise money among member states.

After all, the Europeans will never be able to replicate the time-tested Hegemon money laundering machine. For instance, assuming the White House-proposed $60 billion package to Ukraine would be approved by the U.S. Congress – and it won’t – no less than 64% of the total will never reach Kiev: it will be laundered within the industrial-military complex.

Yet it gets even more dystopic: Norwegian Wood, robotic stare, arms flailing, actually believes his proposed move will not imply a direct NATO military presence in Ukraine – or country 404; something that is already a fact on the ground for quite a while, irrespective of the warmongering hissy fits by Le Petit Roi in Paris (Peskov: “Russia-NATO relations have descended into direct confrontation”).

Now couple the Lethal Looney Tunes spectacle along the NATOstan front with the Hegemon’s aircraft carrier performance in West Asia, consistently taking its industrial-scale slaughter/starvation Genocide Project in Gaza to indescribable heights – the meticulously documented holocaust watched in contorted silence by the “leaders” of the Global North.

UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese correctly summed it all up: the biblical psychopathology entity “intentionally killed the WCK workers so that donors would pull out and civilians in Gaza could continue to be starved quietly. Israel knows Western countries and most Arab countries won’t move a finger for the Palestinians.”

The “logic” behind the deliberate three tap strike on the clearly signed humanitarian convoy of famine-alleviating workers in Gaza was to eviscerate from the news an even more horrendous episode: the genocide-within-a-genocide of al-Shifa hospital, responsible for at least 30% of all health services in Gaza. Al-Shifa was bombed, incinerated and had over 400 civilians killed in cold blood, in several cases literally smashed by bulldozers, including medical doctors, patients and dozens of children.

Nearly simultaneously, the biblical psychopathology gang completely eviscerated the Vienna convention – something that even the historical Nazis never did – striking Iran’s consular mission/ambassador’s residence in Damascus.

This was a missile attack on a diplomatic mission, enjoying immunity, on the territory of a third country, against which the gang is not at war. And on top of it, killing General Mohammad Reza Zahedi, commander of the IRGC’s Quds Force in Syria and Lebanon, his deputy Mohammad Hadi Hajizadeh, another five officers, and a total of 10 people.

Translation: an act of terror, against two sovereign states, Syria and Iran. Equivalent to the recent terror attack on Crocus City Hall in Moscow.

The inevitable question rings around all corners of the lands of the Global Majority: how can these de facto terrorists possibly get away with all this, over and over again?

The sinews of Liberal Totalitarianism

Four years ago, at the start of what I later qualified as the Raging Twenties, we were beginning to watch the consolidation of an intertwined series of concepts defining a new paradigm. We were becoming familiar with notions such as circuit breaker; negative feedback loop; state of exception; necropolitics; and hybrid neofascism.

As the decade marches on, our plight may at least have been alleviated by a twin glimmer of hope: the drive towards multipolarity, led by the Russia-China strategic partnership, with Iran playing a key part, and all that coupled with the total breakdown, live, of the “rules-based international order”.

Yet to affirm there will be a long and winding road ahead is the Mother of All Euphemisms.

So, to quote Bowie, the ultimate late, great aesthete: Where Are We Now? Let’s take this very sharp analysis by the always engaging Fabio Vighi at Cardiff University and tweak it a little further.

Anyone applying critical thinking to the world around us can feel the collapse of the system. It’s a closed system alright, easily definable as Liberal Totalitarianism. Cui bono? The 0.0001%.

Nothing ideological about that. Follow the money. The defining negative feedback loop is actually the debt loop. A criminally anti-social mechanism kept in place by – what else – a psychopathology, as acute as the one exhibited by the biblical genocidals in West Asia.

The Mechanism is enforced by a triad.

1. The transnational financial elite, the superstars of the 0.0001%.

2. Right beneath it, the politico-institutional layer, from the U.S. Congress to the European Commission (EC) in Brussels, as well as comprador elite “leaders” across the Global North and South.

3. The former “intelligentsia”, now essentially hacks for hire from media to academia.

This institutionalized hyper-mediatization of reality is (italics mine), in fact, The Mechanism.

It’s this mechanism that controlled the merging of the pre-fabricated “pandemic” – complete with hardcore social engineering sold as “humanitarian lockdowns” – into, once again, Forever Wars, from Project Genocide in Gaza to the Russophobia/cancel culture obsession inbuilt in Project Proxy War in Ukraine.

That’s the essence of Totalitarian Normality: the Project for Humanity by the appallingly mediocre, self-appointed Great Reset “elites” of the collective West.

Killing them softly with AI

A key vector of the whole mechanism is the direct, vicious interconnection between a tecno-military euphoria and the hyper-inflationary financial sector, now in thrall with AI.

Enter, for instance, AI models such as ‘Lavender’, tested on the ground in the Gaza killing field lab. Literally: artificial intelligence programming the extermination of humans. And it’s happening, in real time. Call it Project AI Genocide.   — Sidebar:  [01] [02] [03] [04] [background]

Another vector, already experimented, is inbuilt in the indirect assertion by toxic EC Medusa Ursula von der Lügen: essentially, the need to produce weapons as Covid vaccines.

That’s at the core of a plan to use funding of the EU by European taxpayers to “increase financing” of “joint contracts for weapons”. That’s an offspring of von der Lügen’s push to roll out Covid vaccines – a gigantic Pfizer-linked scam for which she is about to be investigated and arguably exposed by the EU’s Public Prosecutor Office. In her own words, addressing the proposed weapons scam: “We did this for vaccines and gas.”

Call it Weaponization of Social Engineering 2.0.

Amidst all the action in this vast corruption swamp, the Hegemon agenda remains quite blatant: to keep its – dwindling – predominantly thalassocratic, military hegemony, no matter what, as the basis for its financial hegemony; protect the U.S. dollar; and protect those unmeasurable, unpayable debts in U.S. dollars.

And that brings us to the tawdry economic model of turbo-capitalism, as sold by collective West media hacks: the debt loop, virtual money, borrowed non-stop to deal with “autocrat” Putin and “Russian aggression”. That’s a key by-product of Michael Hudson’s searing analysis of the FIRE (Finance-Insurance-Real Estate) syndrome.

Ouroboros intervenes: the serpent bites its own tail. Now the inherent folly of The Mechanism is inevitably leading casino capitalism to resort to barbarism. Undiluted savagery – of the Crocus City Hall kind and of the Project Gaza Genocide kind.

And that’s how The Mechanism engenders institutions – from Washington to Brussels to hubs across the Global North to genocidal Tel Aviv – stripped down to the status of psychotic killers, at the mercy of Big Finance/FIRE (oh, such fabulous seafront real estate opportunities available in “vacant” Gaza.)

How can we possibly escape such folly? Will we have the will and the discipline to follow Shelley’s vision and, in “this dim vast vale of tears”, summon the transcending Spirit of Beauty – and harmony, equanimity and justice?

Echolalia in Western Echochambers

A sweet & succinct debunking of perennial Anglo-Zionist wetdream meme of the “irreplaceability of Russian/Iranian generals” — as rationale for engaging in self-defeating terrorism against potent civilizational-states. Meanwhile, the latter remain focused and busy burying the sinking Legion.

by Julian Macfarlane at News Forensics

Ritter? Wrong?
When experience and training trip you up

I read Scott Ritter a lot and regard him as an intelligent and well-informed reporter of events. On occasion, however, his analyses are somewhat lacking – not that my own aren’t also.

Most recently, he was interviewed by Danny Haiphong about the Israel strike on the Iranian embassy— as well as the WCK humanitarian convoy atrocity.

The American military is an authoritarian top-down system with great emphasis on seniority rather than competence. If Lloyd Austin were assassinated, things might actually improve with the US military! But he will be protected at all costs. And keep on doing stupid stuff.

In other countries, military leadership is different. Russia has lost a lot of generals who are expected to lead from the front, exposing themselves to risk – something that does not happen with Western militaries.

When a Russian general is killed, he is replaced by either his second-in-command which is often an improvement because these people are used to handling the details of command rather than executing policy as it’s handed down from above—or a younger commander who may not have years but has demonstrated real ability. The leadership in either case often turns out to be pragmatic, practicable, and innovative.

Ritter is wrong about the Iranian generals being “irreplaceable”.

Command will shift to capable leaders who may not have been drinking tea with Hezbollah leaders for 20 years—but are knowledgeable, flexible and motivated— and can cooperate tactically and think strategically. That’s what the Quds Force is all about.

The Americans may be sending the Israelis long-range F-15 fighters to threaten Iran —but these aircraft cannot change the military balance in a conventional war between Iran and Israel, given Iran’s rapidly developing air defense system and its strategic position.

It’s a bit like sending F-16s to Ukraine. Good for the US defense industry – but nothing else.

In a worst-case scenario, the Iranians will close down Persian Gulf—which could precipitate an economic crisis that would sink the American economy already dog paddling frantically.

As I said before, Israel is surrounded. Its economy is already tanking and it’s managing its two-front war with Hamas and Hezbollah very badly.

So far, the Russians do not use their air defense systems – such as the S 400 – in Syria except to protect their own bases. But their attitudes towards the Israelis are hardening— as we can see with the new treaty between Russia and Iran. The Russians can use proxies, too.

Sorry Scott – this aint 1995.

As for the attack on the humanitarian convoy, Larry Johnson has the best take on that! It’s obvious that Israeli commanders knew what they were doing. It is also unlikely that they shared this information with the US – any more than they would share information on other atrocities.

As I and many others have pointed out, the faux mea culpa of Israel rings quite hollow because this kind of criminal behavior has been a Standard Operating Procedure of Israel since the start of hostilities on October 7. The following video is quite good. Looks like some key Brits are now pissed off enough that they will pressure the Rishi Sunak’s Government to cut off aid to Israel.

The US will keep on doing what it’s doing – or rather what is not doing. Because it really doesn’t allow itself any options. The Israelis will keep on doubling down on stupid.

The Axis of Resistance will continue doing what it’s doing. But with an up side.

Yes, a lot of Palestinians are dying and things may get worse before they get better. But Palestinians have been dying since 1948. They have nothing to lose – and everything to gain through resistance. At some point, the international community will step in and there will be elections in Palestine – which will confirm the will of the Palestinian people 20 years ago – that Hamas is the rightful government.

Israel is by definition a rogue state—determined not to abide by the UN’s 1967 resolutions. But, by the time Palestine achieves statehood – which appears inevitable – it will also be a failed state.

Maybe the US will give Israel Rhode Island.

World War III Is Now Inevitable – Here’s Why It Can’t Be Avoided

Op-Ed by Brandon Smith If you’re getting the feeling like the globalists are really pushing hard for WWIII these days, you’re not alone. In the...

World War III Is Now Inevitable – Here’s Why It Can’t Be Avoided

Ticking Anglo-Zionist Timebombs

O Mockers, ‘Ask not for whom the Bell tolls, it tolls for thee!’

Pepe begins ~38th min; Prof Marandi at ~1:19 min.

The entire is worthwhile, especially the introduction putting Gaza’s Al Shifa Hospital barbarity into perspective.

Rubicons were crossed on one-way paths…. The absolutely shocking events of last week harken and were last seen during the open Drang of the Third Reich against mankind; Pax Judaica presented its calling card back-to-back-to-back with the annihilation of historic Al Shifa Hospital, the missiling of the sacrosanct Iranian Embassy of Damascus, immediately followed by the measured triple-tap droning of the caravan of the western aid workers. Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi? Urbi et Orbi on Pax Judaica? We are all guilty of lèse-majesté, or are we? We shall see. The Fat Lady hasn’t sung.

Regardless, it is the End of the Line for the Old Order — in every way on every theater of confrontation, internal and external. Note Pepe’s sense of indignities suffered by all BRICS and the SCO through the savage attack on the Iranian Embassy in Syria. Responses are now due from the Axes of Civilization of this joined Global-SMO.

Anglo-Zionists attack Iran

Garland Nixon interviews Laith Marouf — West Asia update: ISRAEL ATTACKS IRANIAN CONSULATE – RUSSIA FURIOUS

wide ranging talk includes:
Anglo-Zionist terrorism on sovereign diplomatic territory of Iran in Damascus
— use of F-35 and weaponry just delivered by the US to attack Iran [a double provocation, carrying imprimatur of Anglo-Americans]
— the calculated savagery in holy time, at time of breaking fast, among top military cadre of Iran in a protected establishment [the banner photo on right is of the martyred General Mohammad Reza Zahedi, assassinated yesterday in Damascus, with future Leader Ayatollah Khamenei during Iran-Iraq war frontline in the 1980s. This was the highest ranking general killed since Soleimani, and a personal friend of Khamenei]
— Iran directly blames the USA
— Israel admitted they obtained permission from USA for the terrorism (!!)
— Likely retaliation at either Israeli embassy in Azerbaijan or Jordan [this is debatable. I disagree. If so, Jordan, to speed along the fall of its odious regime, would be more likely. No need to stir up the gung-ho Azeris tied at the hip to the Sultan in the fragile Transcaucasia as well]

Jordan is tottering and not for long in current condition and regime; Iraq is mobilizing Jordanian Resistance with arms for initial 12,000 cadre as well as severing the “Abraham Accords” land bridge running through the kept GCC concubines
Israel has lost the battles in both Gaza and Lebanon; all this is a provocation to draw in USA, directly against Iran. They are losing the attrition war and are on precipice of Collapse. Lunatics count on dramatic war expansion to the entire region, involving the equally sinking USUK, to save them
Zionism will be conclusively defeated, having already morally defeated itself. A global civilizational siege is on
The occupied Golan height is a front that has been shaped by Hezbollah, Iraqis and Syrian resistances. They degraded much of the installations and hardened military sites. In major upcoming war expansion, these critical height will be an objective, and to deny Israel its tremendous water resources.
Iraqis, like Yemenis, have upgraded missiles and drones which now overcome Jordanian, US, and Israeli air defenses, hitting the most sensitive sites in occupied Palestine with pinpoint precision! The building of the naval commander in Eilat was struck a night ago..
Zionists appear to hit targets in civilian areas within Lebanon due to lack of up-to-date knowledge. Some are Hezbollah offices abandoned since 2006! They just lash out for the optical value, and to harm civilians, focusing on first responders and civil defense teams, due to the usual viciousness
ISIS, Zionists, UkroNazis — rabid imperial tools, are thoroughly exposed, and condemn their USUK patron
ISIS in Syria is on last legs — why Idleb largely ignored, to focus on Damascus and major population centers; and for depleted Syria to regain strength. Russia is also busy on so many other fronts, chiefly 404 but also Sahel, Transcaucasia, Asia-Pacific, etc..
Erdogan: punished at local elections due to anger over his two-faced Palestine policy, which no longer fools Turks…
the sheer satanism of Al Shifa Hospital
the purposeful targeting of medical and humanitarian aid (food delivery) workers in Gaza
the shelf life of the Zionist project: sayonara! Put a fork in the bastards
the future consolidation of region around Greater Syria — with the end of the zionist project, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Palestine (and northern KSA) will disappear to return into the historic Greater Syria of the Holy Land, connectivity center of the Afro-Asian World Island.
the moral midget Little Blinkie returns to Saudi today to push them to normalize with the Zionists (!) And zionazi-controlled western media also is pushing Saudi normalization with Zionists. Unbelievable. You can’t fix Stupid
The West is fatally sucked into West Asia — as its last gasp and energy is fully devoted to zionism– other regions such as the Sahel, 404, slip through the dripping claws…
the contraction of Empire began at Syria, with the loss of that war during [official] Obama days
the loss of Israel will mean the loss of this Empire’s crown jewels, as with the Brits losing India.. a retreat across the Pond..
China is an active member of the Axes of Resistance — backstopping Russia, Iran, the Sahel, and others through its hefty wallets and protecting them from vicious imperial sanctions tool. There is a Global-Resistance. The two major civilizational states built up Iran, Yemen, other middlings to serve as firebreaks of Armageddon. The delusional Empire will exhaust and shatter itself long before it can get to a direct contest..
within the next two weeks, the messianic madmen will try to engineer Armageddon through ritual sacrificing of a Texan GMO red heifer, demolishing the Al Aqsa Mosque and turbo-charging a contrived civilizational war
mankind will come to appreciate and thank the 1.5+ century anti-imperialist sacrifice of the Palestinian nation. Being part of Greater Syria, they were simply the rock that could not be budged from the middle of the road

Anglo-Zionists bombed Iran’s Damascus EMBASSY!

Crocus Terror: USUK points back at itself!

Terror Attack on Moscow & Why the US Stands as the Prime Suspect

US use of terrorism to advance foreign policy objectives is based on decades of evidence and includes support for militants in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union, Chechen separatists inside Russia in the 1990s and 2000s, and Al Qaeda and ISIS in Syria against Syrian, Iranian, and Russian forces;

More recently, US foreign policymakers have laid out plans to use listed terrorist organizations as proxies to carry out attacks in targeted nations like Iran and Pakistan;

Ukraine has already carried out an extensive terror campaign aimed at Russian civilians deep within Russian territory including in Belgorod, St. Petersburg, and Moscow;

US media admits collaboration between US intelligence and Ukrainian intelligence from 2014 onward while also admitting Ukraine has carried out a number of attacks on civilians inside Russia including Darya Dugina and Vladen Tatarsky;

US media also admits that despite the US claiming to have warned Russia of an impending terrorist attack, information was withheld due to the “adversarial relationship” between the US and Russia;

Leading up to the deadly Moscow attack, US foreign policymakers had repeatedly stated the need to make ordinary Russians “feel the pinch” of the conflict;

References:
NYT – Why Russia’s Vast Security Services Fell Short on Deadly Attack (March 28, 2024)
RAND Corporation – Extending Russia (2019)
The New Yorker – The Redirection, by Seymour Hersh (2007)
NYT – C.I.A. Said to Aid in Steering Arms to Syrian Opposition (2012)
NYT – Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With Aid From C.I.A. (March 2013)
Washington Post – ‘Al-Qaeda is eating us’: Syrian rebels are losing out to extremists (2017)
BBC – Islamic State and the crisis in Iraq and Syria in maps (2018)
Brookings Institution – Which Path to Persia? (2009)
BBC – US removes Iran group MEK from terror list (2012)
Foreign Policy – Two Cheers for Syrian Islamists (2012)
Russia Matters – Claim (in 2004, 2015 and 2017): The U.S. government supported Chechen separatism
RFE/RL – Chechen Separatist Fighters Defend Ukraine Against ‘Common Enemy’ Russia (November 2022)
NY Times – Why Russia’s Vast Security Services Fell Short on Deadly Attack (March 28, 2024)
NYT – U.S. Believes Ukrainians Were Behind an Assassination in Russia (October 2022)
NYT – The Spy War: How the C.I.A. Secretly Helps Ukraine Fight Putin (February 2024)

Where to Find My Work:

• Website: https://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/
• Telegram: https://t.me/brianlovethailand
• Twitter: https://twitter.com/BrianJBerletic

Sitting US Congressman: Nuke Gaza and Russia

First the local zionists last Fall, who knew the daunting and impossible guerrilla war confronting them, and now the Big Daddy in the Land of the Free and Brave… these are no mere slips of the tongue. Intent is openly declared. Little good it will do those guaranteed of defeat at this point.

Timothy Lee Walberg (born April 12, 1951) is an American serving as the U.S. representative from Michigan’s 5th congressional district since 2023. A member of the Republican Party, he previously represented the 7th district from 2007 to 2009 and from 2011 to 2023. As the longest tenured member from Michigan, Walberg is the current Dean of its delegation to the U.S. House of Representatives.

Early life, education, and early career
Walberg was born and raised in Chicago, Illinois, the son of Alice Ann and John A. Walberg. His paternal grandparents were Swedish. In 1964, Walberg served the Barry Goldwater 1964 presidential campaign as a volunteer. Walberg graduated from Thornton Fractional North High School in 1969 and briefly served the U.S. Forest Service. From 1973 to 1977, Walberg served as pastor at Grace Fellowship Church in New Haven, Indiana.

Foreign Policy
In March 2024, responding to a question about “why are we spending our money to build a port for them,” referring to the Biden Administration’s plan to build a temporary port off the coast of Gaza to facilitate delivery of humanitarian aid in the Israel-Hamas War, Walberg told the crowd the U.S. “shouldn’t be spending a dime on humanitarian aid” and instead “should be like Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Get it over quick.” The Council on American-Islamic Relations, a U.S.-based Muslim civil rights group, condemned Walberg’s comments as a “clear call to genocide.” In response, Walberg denied advocating the use of nuclear weapons, claiming that he was merely referring to the need for Israel to win “as swiftly as possible.”

Walberg also opposes humanitarian aid to Ukraine in the Russo-Ukrainian War. “Instead [of] 80 percent in Ukraine being used for humanitarian purposes, it should be 80 to 100 percent to wipe out Russia — if that’s what we want to do.” Walberg also voted against aid to Ukraine in 2022.

March 31, 1814: Paris was Conquered

The Patriotic War of 1812 ended with the expulsion of the invaders from Russia (Napoleon’s army apart from its French troops also included units from all across continental Europe) and served as a prologue to the so-called Big European War of 1812-1815 with the capture of Paris by the Russian army on March 31, 1814, as one of its major highlights.

This campaign came to be known among Russian historians as the Foreign Campaigns of the Russian Army. Together with its allied armies, namely Prussia, Austria, Sweden, and Great Britain, Russia liberated European countries from the French oppression.

When the Russian Army entered France in December 1813, Emperor Alexander I issued an order. Here’s a quote from it:

“Warriors! You have already saved your Motherland and brought it glory, and enabled Europe to recover its liberty and independence. Crowning this feat with the much-desired peace is all that remains.”

With Paris seized by the Russians, Napoleon abdicated in Fontainebleau on April 6 under pressure from his marshals, and was exiled to the Island of Elba off the Italian coast.

Russia played an instrumental role in France’s remaining within its pre-war borders, and took French cities under its protection by preventing Prussian and Austrian troops from pillaging them. Following Alexander I’s orders, the Russian troops also ensured that the collections of the Louvre and other French museums, as well as historical monuments, remained intact.

On June 9, 1815, a new European security architecture was established a the Vienna Congress, which became one of the main outcomes of Russia’s Foreign Campaigns.

“We honour the memory of our heroic ancestors, finding strength and inspiration in their valorous deeds. We’d like to advise the contemporary Western leaders and the emerging “Napoleons” who once again harbour intentions of sending troops eastward to remember the lessons of history”

From Maria Zakharova’s briefing:

“These days we mark the 210th anniversary of the triumphant conclusion of the Foreign Campaign of the Russian Army of 1813-1814. Following the defeat of Napoleon’s Grande Armée during the Patriotic War of 1812, Russian forces, bearing the banner of freedom for the nations and peoples of Europe from Napoleonic tyranny, embarked on a journey of thousands of kilometres from the scorched walls of Moscow. After intense battles, they reached the French capital, which capitulated to the mercy of the victors on March 31, 1814. We suggest honouring this event with well-researched historical narratives.

The Paris Peace Treaties and the Congress of Vienna delineated the political and diplomatic trajectory following a quarter-century of incessant wars that ravaged Europe. Thus, less than two years after the grandiose announcement of the campaign against Russia by French propaganda, France was defeated. Shortly thereafter, Emperor Napoleon abdicated the throne.

As we revisit this illustrious chapter in Russian history, juxtaposed with the ignominious one in French history, we honour the memory of our heroic ancestors, finding strength and inspiration in their valorous deeds. We’d like to advise the contemporary Western leaders and the emerging “Napoleons” who once again harbour intentions of sending troops eastward to remember the lessons of history and not to forget how the aspirations of their predecessors to inflict a strategic defeat on our country always ended.”

Terror in Moscow: what went down

Ukraine, ISIS, and the Moscow Concert Attack: What really happened? Pepe Escobar joins us to examine the complicated spider web of connections between Ukrainian intelligence, jihadist groups, and Western governments.

hosted by Dimitri Simes Jr. at the New Rules.

Ukraine, ISIS, and the Moscow Concert Attack: What really happened?

Pepe Escobar joins us to examine the complicated spider web of connections between Ukrainian intelligence, jihadist groups, and Western governments.
#NewRulesPodcast @RealPepeEscobar pic.twitter.com/oiNQgd7eLP

— NewRulesGeopolitics (@NewRulesGeo) March 28, 2024

#NewRulesPodcast

 

To Rafah, or not to Rafah, that is the question

All eyes are on Rafah as Israel prepares to mount an invasion to expel Palestinians or decimate them. It is this pivotal battle that will either force Israel into a ceasefire or thrust the region into an all-out, multi-front war.

By Tawfik Chouman at The Cradle.

The Battle of Rafah: a short step to regional war

The temporary truce struck on 24 November between the Hamas resistance movement and the Israeli government could have paved the way toward successive truces and potentially a sustainable ceasefire in the Gaza Strip.

But the opportunity was squandered by Tel Aviv, who viewed the continuation of its genocidal war as a means to reshape Gaza’s political and security landscape under the guise of ‘restoring deterrence’ and mitigating domestic fallout from Hamas’ 7 October Al-Aqsa Flood Operation.

Now, nearly six months since the commencement of what Israel calls a ‘war of survival and existence’ against Gaza, it has become clear that the occupation state’s military aggression cannot unseat Hamas from either the Strip or the broader Palestinian political arena.

The recent flurry of indirect Hamas–Israel negotiations held in Paris, Cairo, and Doha have revealed a stark political reality: Hamas is the primary Palestinian negotiating party where Gaza is concerned. This tacit acknowledgment by Tel Aviv marks the strategic failure of one of Israel’s dual objectives set forth last October, aimed at eradicating Hamas and its allied resistance factions in the Strip.

Bibi’s political interests v domestic backlash

This reality raises questions about the potential pathways available to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as he struggles with immense international pressure to stop the carnage. Will he persist with the war on Gaza and risk global pariah status, or will he be compelled to pursue a politically costly settlement? The latter option, it should be noted, will not be an easy fix. It could potentially unleash a storm of domestic backlash within Israel, with various political factions eager to hold him accountable from multiple angles.

Since Netanyahu abandoned the truce in November, prominent Israeli political commentators and even former prime ministers have been surprisingly unanimous in their assessment. They argue that Netanyahu’s decision to prolong the war serves mainly his personal political interests, allowing him to project an illusion of victory while evading political, security, and judicial scrutiny.

Accordingly, Netanyahu’s stance remains firmly opposed to a war settlement. He has instead doubled down on the necessity of eliminating the military capabilities of Hamas and its allies, and is ostensibly pursuing an ‘absolute victory’ through total war.

The prime minister’s roadmap hinges on continuing the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. In this scenario, he envisions the Battle of Rafah as the decisive climax that will definitively render the already terminal ‘two-state solution’ obsolete and permanently sever any ties between Gaza and the occupied West Bank.

The Battle of Rafah thus emerges as a pivotal juncture, delineating two competing trajectories: one driven by regional and international efforts towards a negotiated settlement, and the other dictated solely by Netanyahu’s ambitions.

Regional ramifications and Egypt’s dilemma

This raises complex questions about whether Netanyahu can prolong the war and influence regional and international actors – to buy time, if you will – all while factoring in the delicate balance of power involving Egypt and the wider regional war against other members of the Axis of Resistance.

Indeed, the Battle of Rafah presents a multi-level challenge for Egypt, encompassing political, security, and popular dimensions. Should the Israeli army invade Rafah, it will have significant implications for Cairo’s relations with Tel Aviv, in addition to severely impacting Egypt’s domestic security landscape.

A recent poll by the Washington Institute for Near East Studies revealed that three-quarters of Egyptians view Hamas positively. This popular sentiment influences Egyptian policy regarding potential Israeli actions in Rafah.

On 10 March, The New York Times and Wall Street Journal reported warnings from Egyptian officials on the potential suspension of the Camp David Accords if Israel were to attack Rafah.

Diaa Rashwan, head of the Egyptian Information Service, emphasized the seriousness of Israel’s occupation of the Philadelphi Corridor – a buffer zone on the Sinai–Gaza border designated by the Camp David agreement – stating it poses a grave threat to Cairo–Tel Aviv relations.

Dealing with the potential mass influxes of Gazan civilians seeking refuge and Palestinian fighters crossing into Egyptian territory also poses significant logistical and security challenges. This scenario also raises questions about the Israeli army’s potential incursions into Egyptian territory and how the Egyptian military would respond.

Moreover, any intensification of pressure on Rafah or a full-scale Israeli invasion will lead to widespread regional ramifications, potentially including the unraveling of the Abraham Accords. The Axis of Resistance has made it clear that the elimination of Hamas is unacceptable and, if threatened, may trigger a regional war.

Complicating matters further is the lack of substantive US pressure on Israel to halt its actions in Gaza. While the Biden White House seeks a ‘credible operational plan,’ it has not unequivocally opposed an attack on Rafah. This ambivalence enables and even emboldens Netanyahu to continue his military operations.

Rafah could reshape the region 

Regardless of the outcome of the Battle of Rafah, both Israeli and US perspectives interpret it as a campaign directed against Hamas, which they view as an extension of Iranian influence in the region. This narrative aligns with what Thomas Friedman, writing for the New York Times, referred to as the new “Biden Doctrine,” which emphasizes confronting Iran and its allies in West Asia. This marks a significant shift in US strategy since 1979.

The convergence of US and Israeli interests casts suspicion on ongoing efforts to bring about a long-term ceasefire, with all eyes focused on the current round of talks in Doha. Amos Harel, writing for Haaretz, frames the discussions as a race toward either a negotiated ceasefire or a potentially expansive regional conflict involving multiple fronts.

Yemen’s Ansarallah movement, which last week expanded its naval operations into the Indian Ocean, has issued a stark warning against a Rafah invasion, threatening a sharp escalation in both sea and air operations, including the closure of the Bab al-Mandab Strait.

Similarly, the Lebanese front remains sensitive to developments in Rafah. Despite the northern front’s expansion since the onset of 2024, recent Israeli attacks targeting Baalbek, over 100 kilometers from the southern border, suggest Tel Aviv’s misguided willingness to escalate.

This possibility could spill over into reality if Israel invades Rafah, as the occupation army may resort to preemptive actions to mitigate perceived threats from Lebanese resistance forces.

Overall, the Battle of Rafah will likely reshape the regional conflict, adding new layers to existing pressure fronts. Importantly, it challenges the notion that Hamas stands alone, abandoned in Rafah, as various regional actors, including Iran and its allies, are closely watching and prepared to intervene.

Geoengineering – Weapon of Mass Destruction

Solving the ‘Climate Crisis’ is Bad for Business and Worse for Politics

For GlobalSouth.co by Peter Koenig
25 March 202

The article “Harvard Shuts Geoengineering Project” by Cauf Skiviers, explains Bill Gates, funder of the project, stopping Harvard from carrying out the study to Preserve the Climate Narrative.

How is this relevant?

That Bill Gates calls the shots on what should and should not go forward, is nothing new. Surprising is that he was willing to finance such a study in the first place. – Why?

The honest results of the research would have shown the outright “climate change” fraud humanity has been exposed to for more than three decades.

The study’s outcome would have gone in the complete opposite direction of the current western globalist plan, the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Great Reset and the UN Agenda 2030, One World Order, One World Government. Their success being largely based on the ”climate” lie.

Geoengineering serves two purposes, falsely demonstrating the Green Agenda’s fake CO2 emissions-based climate change, and – of equal importance – making weather and climate into Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD).

The outcome of the study would have been against those who want to destroy the world’s economy and social structure as we know it – to rebuild it afresh, according to the elites’ desire. See Club of Rome’s “First Global Revolution” (1991); and this.

The revelation of the now canceled Harvard research, would have allowed just about anyone marginally aware of what is happening to Mother Earth’s climate, to see through the scam. It would have been difficult to avoid leaking the study’s outcome of such a hyped-up topic, like “climate change”, to the public.

Imagine! – Harvard research would destroy a political agenda, as well as Big Business. It would reveal that the climate narrative of the “Green Agenda”, is a lie, and that the weather almost everywhere on the globe is manipulated – or to use the scientific term “geoengineered”.

More than three decades of intense “fake science” and media manipulation about humans’ CO2, methane, and similar greenhouse gas emissions, is the culprit for “climate change”, have left most people, even non-active, often “bought”, so-called scientists, under the impression that doomsday is just around the corner, if we keep using hydrocarbons (oil and gas) to fuel our economy and keep using agriculture to feed humanity.

These alarm bells are constant calls to decarbonize civilization. Yet, the use of hydrocarbons (mostly oil and gas) to run the world’s economies has hardly changed in the last three decades. In the early 1990s about 87% of all energy used worldwide came from oil and gas. The figure is almost the same today.

It is a big lie. The climate is NOT changing, at least not more than it has always changed over the past 4 billion years – normally by small increments, so that life on earth can adapt and adjust.

According to Spain’s State Meteorological Agency (Spanish Acronym – AEMET), there are currently more than 50 countries which have at least some technologies to change the weather and climate. See this.

Those with the most sophisticated knowledge are the United States, Russia, and China.

It is fair to assume that the 50-plus nations are “modifying” the weather or climate according to what benefits them most. It is also fair to assume that today there is worldwide almost no weather completely natural, but influenced either directly, or indirectly, through modified weather patterns elsewhere in the world, the collateral effect of geoengineering.

In olden times, it was called “the butterfly effect” – meaning the butterfly flaps its wings and will have an effect somewhere in the world. You do not know where and what. With geoengineering that can be very dangerous.

Obviously, weather modifications, so far, serve primarily the fake climate change agenda. When a super hurricane hits the Caribbean, or a prolonged Monsoon floods and destroys two thirds of Pakistan, including her economy, it exponentially exceeds the “normal”. Blame it on “climate change”.

But most often there is an economic and / or political agenda behind it. Take Hurricane Katrina that hit New Orleans on 29 August 2005. Some 1,800 people died. With 230 km / hour, Katrina made landfall in Southeast Louisiana and destroyed New Orleans.

While the State of Louisiana evacuated about 1.5 million people before the hurricane hit, 150,000 to 200,000 stayed behind, mostly black people in “old” New Orleans, often run-down, but potential prime real estate for developers; was to be razed for luxury-style rebuilding.

The original owners were later force-evacuated to FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) provided “emergency” camps (shacks), all over the country. So, the force-refugees could not organize. The properties were taken over by the state and city. – This served both, an economic and political agenda.

In June through August and into September 2022, Pakistan received about three times as much rain as normal. The deadly disaster was blamed on “climate change”. See this.

In reality, the catastrophe is suspected of having been geoengineered, and had a political agenda. On 10 April 2022, the popular, democratically and by a landslide elected President, Imram Khan, was ousted through a parliamentary non-confidence vote, instigated and “influenced” by the US, because Mr. Khan refused to follow orders from Washington, but instead intended to be President for an independent Pakistan and for the People of Pakistan.

For weeks people took to the streets by the millions, creating national unrest, wanting their President Imram Khan back. Creating or geoengineering the destructive Monsoon floods was a means to stop the social upheaval, so that the country could follow the western / Washington imposed political agenda, which meant foremost no political or business relations with China.

This is weaponized geoengineering.

When geoengineering serves as a weapon for Super-Powers, the dangers may be equivalent or worse than from nuclear weapons. Because most people have no clue that these weather “disturbances” and climate disasters are manmade and targeted for specific purposes at an “enemy”.

To get this right, geoengineering is NOT manmade in terms of what the Green Agenda interprets manmade “climate change”, as in CO2 emissions, greenhouse gases and more of the like. Geoengineering is dangerous. The Green Agenda climate change claims are sheer bullsh*t.

Geoengineering has been developed since the early 1940s. It started out with simple cloud-seeding, to prompt rainfall, mostly for agricultural purposes. It then moved to more sophisticated weather and climate manipulations, using the infamous chemtrails, white “vapor” stripes emanating from airplanes, crisscrossing the blue skies, disseminating poisonous chemicals and microscopic heavy metal particles, to influence the climate – but also, and possibly more important, to affect people’s health in very negative ways.

There are hundreds if not thousands of patents out there for these chemicals and heavy metals coming down from the planes into the ground, into the water, into plants and vegetables and finally into our bodies, killing our Pineal Gland and gradually weakening our bodies.

Geoengineering also includes the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) and similarly sophisticated technologies. HAARP, created by the Pentagon-linked thinktank, DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), is controlled by the US Airforce. HAARP is possibly the world’s most capable high-power, high-frequency electromagnetic waves transmitter, acting on the ionosphere.

HAARP technologies often applied from satellites, can emit electromagnetic waves piercing deep into the earth, creating earthquakes. It is suspected that HAARP technologies were used to cause the 6 February 2023 Turkey – Syria earthquake of 7.8 Richter scale strength, killing more than 60,000 people.

The seism happened shortly before Recep Tayyip Erdogan was reelected in May 2023 as President of Turkey. The earthquake’s epicenter was in Turkey’s Kahramanmaras province, with seismic movement taking place along the Conjugated Tectonic Faults. Strangely and remarkably, however, the tremors defied the natural patterns and do not fit into the usual mainshock–aftershocks sequence.

This was also the time when President Erdogan refused to approve Sweden and Finland into NATO, despite the tremendous pressure of all 29 other NATO countries – to put NATO even closer to Russia, the western-made non-conform enemy that needed to be “subdued.”

This would be weaponized political geoengineering, with an economic side effect.

The 12 January 2010 Haiti earthquake of 7.0 magnitude, left the capital city, Port-au-Prince, devastated and killed about 220,000 people. Sizable off-shore oil and gas deposits are all over the Caribbean, and also off-shore of Port-au-Prince.

These petrol reserves, are so deep that it is uneconomical to exploit them at current depths. A seismic event will break the tectonic plates, so that the earth’s core pressure pushes the oil to higher levels, where exploitation is easier and more economical.

Haiti has been in chaos ever since. The Clinton Foundation set up allegedly to help rebuild Haiti, has been a disaster, causing more harm than good, and making the Clintons richer. Destabilizing the country is a good reason for the US to maintain steady control.

Haiti is the world’s first and only country inhabited by black slaves that fought for and obtained independence 220 years ago (January 1, 1804). Washington pretends, Haiti could become a national security threat – like Cuba! – and must be controlled. See this.

The giant Haiti tremor also served two interests: Economics, as in oil; and politics, as in control.

Geoengineering is a convenient and highly effective weapon to dominate or coerce countries into submission. The geo-weapon’s potential could explode exponentially during the coming years, decades, if people remain ignorant about its menace for humanity.

A Harvard study divulging what geoengineering does and can do would not only derail the entire fake “climate change” narrative, but might also risk taking steam out of the growing geo-weapons industry.

Therefore, “Solving the ‘Climate Crisis’ is indeed Bad for Business- and bad for Politics”, and even worse for strategic warfare planning. So, Bill Gates was right in stopping the Harvard Geoengineering Project. Geoengineering may, therefore, prosper, bringing rain, shine and – war.

—-

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and  co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020)

Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

Guys, We’re a Terrorist Nation

“We have met the enemy and it is us”

The Nuland – Budanov – Tajik – Crocus connection

The Russian population has handed to the Kremlin total carte blanche to exercise brutal, maximum punishment – whatever and wherever it takes.

By Pepe Escobar at Strategic Culture Foundation.

Let’s start with the possible chain of events that may have led to the Crocus terror attack. This is as explosive as it gets. Intel sources in Moscow discreetly confirm this is one of the FSB’s prime lines of investigation.

December 4, 2023. Former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen Mark Milley, only 3 months after his retirement, tells CIA mouthpiece The Washington Post: “There should be no Russian who goes to sleep without wondering if they’re going to get their throat slit in the middle of the night (…) You gotta get back there and create a campaign behind the lines.”

January 4, 2024: In an interview with ABC News, “spy chief” Kyrylo Budanov lays down the road map: strikes “deeper and deeper” into Russia.

January 31: Victoria Nuland travels to Kiev and meets Budanov. Then, in a dodgy press conference at night in the middle of an empty street, she promises “nasty surprises” to Putin: code for asymmetric war.

February 22: Nuland shows up at a Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) event and doubles down on the “nasty surprises” and asymmetric war. That may be interpreted as the definitive signal for Budanov to start deploying dirty ops.

February 25: The New York Times publishes a story about CIA cells in Ukraine: nothing that Russian intel does not already know.

Then, a lull until March 5 – when crucial shadow play may have been in effect. Privileged scenario: Nuland was a key dirty ops plotter alongside the CIA and the Ukrainian GUR (Budanov). Rival Deep State factions got hold of it and maneuvered to “terminate” her one way or another – because Russian intel would have inevitably connected the dots.

Yet Nuland, in fact, is not “retired” yet; she’s still presented as Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs and showed up recently in Rome for a G7-related meeting, although her new job, in theory, seems to be at Columbia University (a Hillary Clinton maneuver).

Meanwhile, the assets for a major “nasty surprise” are already in place, in the dark, and totally off radar. The op cannot be called off.

March 5: Little Blinken formally announces Nuland’s “retirement”.

March 7: At least one Tajik among the four-member terror commando visits the Crocus venue and has his photo taken.

March 7-8 at night: U.S. and British embassies simultaneously announce a possible terror attack on Moscow, telling their nationals to avoid “concerts” and gatherings within the next two days.

March 9: Massively popular Russian patriotic singer Shaman performs at Crocus. That may have been the carefully chosen occasion targeted for the “nasty surprise” – as it falls only a few days before the presidential elections, from March 15 to 17. But security at Crocus was massive, so the op is postponed.

March 22: The Crocus City Hall terror attack.

ISIS-K: the ultimate can of worms

The Budanov connection is betrayed by the modus operandi– similar to previous Ukraine intel terror attacks against Daria Dugina and Vladimir Tatarsky: close reconnaissance for days, even weeks; the hit; and then a dash for the border.

And that brings us to the Tajik connection.

There seem to be holes aplenty in the narrative concocted by the ragged bunch turned mass killers: following an Islamist preacher on Telegram; offered what was later established as a puny 500 thousand rubles (roughly $4,500) for the four of them to shoot random people in a concert hall; sent half of the funds via Telegram; directed to a weapons cache where they find AK-12s and hand grenades.

The videos show that they used the machine guns like pros; shots were accurate, short bursts or single fire; no panic whatsoever; effective use of hand grenades; fleeing the scene in a flash, just melting away, almost in time to catch the “window” that would take them across the border to Ukraine.

All that takes training. And that also applies to facing nasty counter-interrogation. Still, the FSB seems to have broken them all – quite literally.

A potential handler has surfaced, named Abdullo Buriyev. Turkish intel had earlier identified him as a handler for ISIS-K, or Wilayat Khorasan in Afghanistan. One of the members of the Crocus commando told the FSB their “acquaintance” Abdullo helped them to buy the car for the op.

And that leads us to the massive can of worms to end them all: ISIS-K.

The alleged emir of ISIS-K, since 2020, is an Afghan Tajik, Sanaullah Ghafari. He was not killed in Afghanistan in June 2023, as the Americans were spinning: he may be currently holed up in Balochistan in Pakistan.

Yet the real person of interest here is not Tajik Ghafari but Chechen Abdul Hakim al-Shishani, the former leader of the jihadi outfit Ajnad al-Kavkaz (“Soldiers of the Caucasus”), who was fighting against the government in Damascus in Idlib and then escaped to Ukraine because of a crackdown by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) – in another one of those classic inter-jihadi squabbles.

Shishani was spotted on the border near Belgorod during the recent attack concocted by Ukrainian intel inside Russia. Call it another vector of the “nasty surprises”.

Shishani had been in Ukraine for over two years and has acquired citizenship. He is in fact the sterling connection between the nasty motley crue Idlib gangs in Syria and GUR in Kiev – as his Chechens worked closely with Jabhat al-Nusra, which was virtually indistinguishable from ISIS.

Shishani, fiercely anti-Assad, anti-Putin and anti-Kadyrov, is the classic “moderate rebel” advertised for years as a “freedom fighter” by the CIA and the Pentagon.

Some of the four hapless Tajiks seem to have followed ideological/religious indoctrination on the internet dispensed by Wilayat Khorasan, or ISIS-K, in a chat room called Rahnamo ba Khuroson.

The indoctrination game happened to be supervised by a Tajik, Salmon Khurosoni. He’s the guy who made the first move to recruit the commando. Khurosoni is arguably a messenger between ISIS-K and the CIA.

The problem is the ISIS-K modus operandi for any attack never features a fistful of dollars: the promise is Paradise via martyrdom. Yet in this case it seems it’s Khurosoni himself who has approved the 500 thousand ruble reward.

After handler Buriyev relayed the instructions, the commando sent the bayat – the ISIS pledge of allegiance – to Khurosoni. Ukraine may not have been their final destination. Another foreign intel connection – not identified by FSB sources – would have sent them to Turkey, and then Afghanistan.

That’s exactly where Khurosoni is to be found. Khurosoni may have been the ideological mastermind of Crocus. But, crucially, he’s not the client.

The Ukrainian love affair with terror gangs

Ukrainian intel, SBU and GUR, have been using the “Islamic” terror galaxy as they please since the first Chechnya war in the mid-1990s. Milley and Nuland of course knew it, as there were serious rifts in the past, for instance, between GUR and the CIA.

Following the symbiosis of any Ukrainian government post-1991 with assorted terror/jihadi outfits, Kiev post-Maidan turbo-charged these connections especially with Idlib gangs, as well as north Caucasus outfits, from the Chechen Shishani to ISIS in Syria and then ISIS-K. GUR routinely aims to recruit ISIS and ISIS-K denizens via online chat rooms. Exactly the modus operandi that led to Crocus.

One “Azan” association, founded in 2017 by Anvar Derkach, a member of the Hizb ut-Tahrir, actually facilitates terrorist life in Ukraine, Tatars from Crimea included – from lodging to juridical assistance.

The FSB investigation is establishing a trail: Crocus was planned by pros – and certainly not by a bunch of low-IQ Tajik dregs. Not by ISIS-K, but by GUR. A classic false flag, with the clueless Tajiks under the impression that they were working for ISIS-K.

The FSB investigation is also unveiling the standard modus operandi of online terror, everywhere. A recruiter focuses on a specific profile; adapts himself to the candidate, especially his – low – IQ; provides him with the minimum necessary for a job; then the candidate/executor become disposable.

Everyone in Russia remembers that during the first attack on the Crimea bridge, the driver of the kamikaze truck was blissfully unaware of what he was carrying,

As for ISIS, everyone seriously following West Asia knows that’s a gigantic diversionist scam, complete with the Americans transferring ISIS operatives from the Al-Tanf base to the eastern Euphrates, and then to Afghanistan after the Hegemon’s humiliating “withdrawal”. Project ISIS-K actually started in 2021, after it became pointless to use ISIS goons imported from Syria to block the relentless progress of the Taliban.

Ace Russian war correspondent Marat Khairullin has added another juicy morsel to this funky salad: he convincingly unveils the MI6 angle in the Crocus City Hall terror attack (in English here, in two parts, posted by “S”).

The FSB is right in the middle of the painstaking process of cracking most, if not all ISIS-K-CIA/MI6 connections. Once it’s all established, there will be hell to pay.

But that won’t be the end of the story. Countless terror networks are not controlled by Western intel – although they will work with Western intel via middlemen, usually Salafist “preachers” who deal with Saudi/Gulf intel agencies.

The case of the CIA flying “black” helicopters to extract jihadists from Syria and drop them in Afghanistan is more like an exception – in terms of direct contact – than the norm. So the FSB and the Kremlin will be very careful when it comes to directly accusing the CIA and MI6 of managing these networks.

But even with plausible deniability, the Crocus investigation seems to be leading exactly to where Moscow wants it: uncovering the crucial middleman. And everything seems to be pointing to Budanov and his goons.

Ramzan Kadyrov dropped an extra clue. He said the Crocus “curators” chose on purpose to instrumentalize elements of an ethnic minority – Tajiks – who barely speak Russian to open up new wounds in a multinational nation where dozens of ethnicities live side by side for centuries.

In the end, it didn’t work. The Russian population has handed to the Kremlin total carte blanche to exercise brutal, maximum punishment – whatever and wherever it takes.

Double Crossing of the Red Line

Moscow’s Terror Explosion – Macron’s NATO Troops to Ukraine

Peter Koenig
23 March 2024

Automatic gun-shooting by 5 men in black took place Friday evening 22 March in the Crocus City Concert Hall, attached to a shopping mall, at the outskirts of Moscow. The terror attack preceded a concert. The hall was therefore crowded with people, panicking for leaving it. The assault was followed by a massive explosion.

The official fatality as of 23 March stands at 133. Dozens of people were injured.

The Islamic State (IS) – a CIA creation – claimed credit for the attack.

However, the political end of this attack is more complex.
On March 7, 2024, the US Embassy in Russia warned Moscow that a terror attack may take place in Moscow within the next few weeks. No further details.

Is it one of the now fashionable “predictive planning” stunts?

On the same day, the same US Embassy in Moscow warned US citizens in Moscow not to visit shopping malls. How much did the US know?

Speculations abound. Was this an empty warning to destabilize Russia and Russian elections? Or was it one more provocation to pull Russia into a larger conflict?

On the day of the attack, John Kirby, spokesman for National Security at the White House said in a Press Conference that there were no indications that Ukraine had anything to do with the attack. In early March Washington just had some indications that a terror assault may hit Moscow.

“Some indications”? – Why then the warning on the same 7 March to US citizens in Moscow not to visit any shopping malls?

It could not be more obvious that a hidden agenda is being played by Washington – and, may be added, by NATO and Europe?

Whether the Islamic State, Al Qaeda or another CIA / MI6 terror creation – or even Kiev directly, was involved in this mass-killing is irrelevant, because whoever acted, did so on behalf of US / NATO and the collective West.

It is no coincidence that French President Macron practically simultaneously sends officially 2,000 French NATO troops to Ukraine. “Officially”, because western / NATO military advisers, trainers and coaches for Kiev’s Nazi-military have been in Kiev for quite a while.

Polish Foreign Minister, Radoslaw Sikorski has called it an open secret that Western soldiers are in Ukraine. German Chancellor, Olaf Scholz said, “there are already some troops from big countries in Ukraine.” (See this)

This is clearly the crossing of President Putin’s Red Line. Mr. Macron knows it, those who mandate the crossing of the Red Line, like the WEF and those dark Deep State Cult forces behind the WEF, know it – and Moscow knows that they know it.

Is it a provocation to pull Moscow into a hot war?
And the Moscow Concert Hall assault being a doubling-up of the Red-Line crossing?

This happening in the Ides of March, and just after the confirmed landslide re-election of President Putin on 17 March 2024.

Ides of March, is the day in the ancient Roman calendar that falls approximately on Mid-March and is associated with misfortune and doom. The date is also known as the date on which Julius Caesar was assassinated in 44 BC. Most US wars were initiated in March. Is it a symbolic cult ritual of the west?

It would perfectly fit into the Death Cult of the Great Reset (WEF) and the UN Agenda 2030, which are currently plaguing humanity – worldwide.

There are other non-coincidences. The 24 March 2024 is the 25th anniversary of the 1999 US-NATO assault on Yugoslavia (Ides of March) – currently being commemorated by a three-day Conference 22-24 March 2024, in Belgrade.

The destruction and dismembering of Yugoslavia were also planned by a long hand. After Josip Tito’s death in May 1980 (he served in several leadership positions of Yugoslavia from 1943 – 1980) – there were some lesser communist successors, who were vulnerable to western / NATO “pressures”, and let what was a solid Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) deteriorate, western-style.

In 1990 Slobodan Milošević, President of Serbia became de facto President of the SFR Yugoslavia attempting to hold the federation together – which in the ten years after President Tito’s departure was financially destabilized by the west. In the 1990s the SFR Yugoslavia was one of the first “cases” where the World Bank, IMF Washington Consensus was applied full-scale – indebting to destabilize, create internal unrest – and divide.

Mr. Milošević was captured, detained at the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) prison in The Hague. He was poisoned on March 11, 2006 in his prison cell – shortly before his scheduled appearance at the International Criminal Tribunal on Yugoslavia (ICTY).

Once divided with constant civil unrest, there was “justification” for western rescue, i.e., bombing Yugoslavia literally into bits and pieces – leaving what we have today, numerous so-called independent former Yugoslavian Federal States – being economically and with “sanctions” controlled by the west.

This is the strategy Washington wants to apply to the Russian Federation – destabilizing it, fracturing it, Regime Change, and then taking it over.

Imagine! – The world’s biggest riches in the world’s largest country, absorbed or subdued by the (still) wannabe US Empire – and its European vassals.

It looks like the west wants a hot war with Russia, come hell or high water. Yes, it would be hell for Europe – for the third time in just over 100 years, and three-times for the same purpose – taking control of Russia, WWI, WWII and now WWIII?

A war – possibly nuclear – of which nobody can predict the outcome. As President Putin repeatedly said – there will be no winners, just absolute destruction.

Under no circumstances will Russia allow a take-over by an arrogant, criminal west. With Russian military’s far-superiority over US and NATO forces, this will not happen.

In the current Middle-East scenario, western leaders are supporting and funding the Israeli-Zionists, literally destroying and mass-killing – wiping out – Palestine, depicting an arrogance blinded by the zest for unlimited might, possibly driving humanity into a bottomless abyss.

A cleansing of this genocidal western “superiority” may bring birth of a new civilization – an evolution to a more spiritual and less material humanity.

—-

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and  co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020)

Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

Fallout from Moscow’s Crocus City Hall

Was the US behind the Moscow terror attack? The US and Ukraine will pay a high price. And that, I have been reliably informed, will extend to our Arab world.

By Abdel Bari Atwan at Rai Al Youm.

The Ukraine war could be poised to take a dramatic new turn

The terrorist operation in Moscow’s Crocus City Hall centre, which killed 143 people and injured hundreds of others, mostly concertgoers, was clearly carried out by a group that had been given serious military training. It could mark a paradigm shift in the Ukraine war presaging a strategic escalation and NATO’s official entry into the war.

Two weeks earlier, the US embassy in Moscow had warned its citizens that extremists were planning imminent attacks on large gatherings, including concerts, in the Russian capital, and warned them to stay away. That foreknowledge of the planning and execution of the operation raised suspicions about a degree of complicity. Washington’s denunciation of the atrocity, and swift disavowal of involvement, cannot be taken at face value.

When the initial warning was made, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova remarked that if the US had information about terrorist actions of such enormity, it should have shared it with Russia. That was the first official hint from Moscow of suspected American complicity.

Two years into the Ukraine war, the US has begun to sense defeat. Russia has made a succession of gains, taking control of the Donbas region and annexing it after holding referendums.

Large-scale US and NATO intervention — on the material, military, and intelligence fronts — failed to achieve any major success. Russia did not collapse under the weight of draconian sanctions. Its economy remains strong. The predicted colour revolution never happened, nor the anticipated military coup to depose Putin.

The opposite occurred, with the Russian president getting re-elected with an 87% majority on a 74% turnout.

The resort to terrorist attacks in Moscow could be a mark of the US’ frustration and a response aimed at expanding the scope of the war. But that would not only be a losing bet. It could bring the prospect of a catastrophic nuclear war closer.

Putin announced on Saturday night that the eleven people involved in the attack, including four direct participants, had been apprehended.
Meanwhile, the editor-in-chief of the Russia Today broadcast network, Margarita Simonyan, published video excerpts of the interrogation of one of the suspects. He identified himself as Feredoun Shamsedin, born in 1988, who arrived in Russia from Turkey on 4 March. He said he had been recruited via Telegram after following an extremist preacher, by someone who offered him 5 million roubles ($5,000) to conduct a mass killing in Moscow. Half of the money was transferred to him in advance.

I met Ms. Simonyan when I visited Moscow recently. She was constantly accompanied by a security detail because she had been subjected to death threats. She said she believed the Crocus atrocity was masterminded by the Ukrainian regime, rather than by ISIS as the US media were claiming. Putin’s subsequent assertion that the perpetrators were arrested while heading towards the Ukrainian border reinforced that accusation.

Russia’s fingers of blame pointed at Ukraine were a portent of fierce retaliation. It seems to have already begun. Former president and current deputy national security chief Dmitri Medvedev warned immediately after the massacre that Russia would hunt down any Ukrainian leaders proven to have been involved.

Reading between the lines, that may imply that Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky could be top of the target list.

Two days before the Crocus attack, Putin threatened Ukraine with ”war’—abandoning the term special military operation’ — in response to French President Emanual Macron’s hint that NATO could send 90,000 fully equipped troops to Ukraine. Under Russian military doctrine, a declaration of war authorises the use of all available means, including nuclear weapons.

The US administration, disoriented and defeated in Ukraine and (so far) the Middle East, is fueling this escalation against Russia. It is the primary beneficiary of the Crocus attack. Not just to destabilise Russia by stoking ethnic tensions, but also to divert international attention away from its collusion in Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza and the failure of its cynical attempt at the UN Security Council to sustain it under the guise of favouring (but not actually calling for) a cease-fire.

Putin won’t forgive this assault on his capital while it was celebrating the renewal of his presidential term. He is likely to make the US and Ukraine pay a high price. And that, I have been reliably informed, will extend to our Arab world.

VVP’s Announced Telephone Conversations in Last Two Days

Per Newton’s third law, Hell cometh to the demented Anglo-Zionist satanists in Greater Syria….

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin had a telephone conversation with President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko.

The President of the Republic of Belarus expressed his heartfelt condolences on the monstrous terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall, conveyed words of sympathy and support to the victims’ families and wishes for a speedy recovery to the injured, emphasising that the people of Belarus stand together with the people of Russia in this time of sorrow.

Alexander Lukashenko offered any assistance that may be needed, and expressed his confidence that the organisers and perpetrators of this heinous crime will face inevitable punishment.

For his part, Vladimir Putin informed his counterpart about the detention of the terrorists directly involved in the attack, as well as about the ongoing investigation.

Both leaders expressed mutual readiness to continue close cooperation in the fight against terrorism.

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin had a telephone conversation with President of Kazakhstan Kassym-Jomart Tokayev.

During his telephone conversation with Vladimir Putin, President of the Republic of Kazakhstan Kassym-Jomart Tokayev expressed his deep condolences over numerous victims of the terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall, stressing that he resolutely condemns this barbaric crime, and asked to convey words of sympathy and support to the victims’ families and wishes for a speedy recovery to the injured.

Both Leaders reaffirmed their intention to step up anti-terror cooperation.

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin had a telephone conversation with President of the Republic of Uzbekistan Shavkat Mirziyoyev

Shavkat Mirziyoyev strongly condemned the heinous terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall, expressed his sincere condolences in connection with the tragedy, and asked to convey words of support to the victims’ families and wishes for a speedy recovery to the injured.

Both Sides reaffirmed their intention to continue close cooperation to counter terrorism.

On March 23, President of Russia Vladimir Putin and President of Türkiye Recep Tayyip Erdogan held a telephone conversation.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan offered his deep and heartfelt condolences to the families and friends of the victims of the heinous terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall. He noted that the Republic of Türkiye stands with the people of Russia in this dark hour.

Vladimir Putin emphasised that Russia appreciates the support of the Turkish people and informed his Turkish counterpart on the status of the investigation into the terrorist attack.

During the conversation, the Turkish Leader stressed the urgent need for closer bilateral cooperation in the fight against the terrorist threat.

President Putin expressed gratitude for the condolences and supported the idea of stepping up cooperation in countering terrorism.

On March 23, President of Russia Vladimir Putin and President of the Syrian Arab Republic Bashar al-Assad held a telephone conversation.

The President of Syria strongly condemned the terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall, stressing that Syrian citizens share the pain and grief of the Russian people. He wished fortitude to the victims’ families and friends and a speedy recovery to the injured.

Vladimir Putin and Bashar al-Assad discussed the ongoing crisis in the Middle East and the current situation in Syria, which is directly facing the terrorist threat.

The Leaders agreed to intensify contacts both in addressing counterterrorism and in all other areas of bilateral cooperation.

ADDENDUM:

President of the Republic of Tajikistan Emomali Rahmon telephoned Vladimir Putin to express deep condolences and solidarity with the Russian people over the death of innocent civilians in the terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall. The President of Tajikistan emphasised that there was no nor could not be any justification for that crime.

During the conversation, Vladimir Putin and Emomali Rahmon noted that the security services of Russia and Tajikistan were working closely together to counter terrorism and that they would build up their cooperation.

Tajikistan’s President Rahmon during phone conversation with Russia’s Putin condemns terrorist attack in Russia, says terrorists have neither nationality nor religion

During the conversation, President of the Republic of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev strongly condemned the terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall, which claimed the lives of over 100 innocent civilians, expressed deep condolences to their families and friends, and wished a speedy recovery to the injured.

Ilham Aliyev stressed that the people of Azerbaijan stand together with the Russian people on this day of national mourning and expressed confidence that the severe punishment of the criminals and those who masterminded that crime was unavoidable.

Vladimir Putin thanked the President of Azerbaijan for his words of support and expressed readiness to further strengthen practical interaction in the spirit of strategic partnership and alliance between Russia and Azerbaijan.

The Day the combined West committed Suicide

Twenty-five years ago, NATO started bombing Yugoslavia

On March 24, 1999, Western countries launched a series of devastating airstrikes on Belgrade, the capital of the sovereign nation of Yugoslavia, which had been already suffering from a political crisis. The US and its allies declared that the Noble Anvil military op was motivated by “humanitarian” reasons and targeted only the military – but in reality, NATO airstrikes killed at least 2,500 people, ruined national infrastructure and sped up the disintegration of Yugoslavia.
@geopolitics_live

Sergey Lavrov at the UNSC

Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations Sergey Lavrov’s address to the President of the Security Council (March 24, 1999)

The Russian Federation is profoundly outraged at the use by the NATO of military force against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

Those who are involved in this unilateral use of force against the sovereign Federal Republic of Yugoslavia — carried out in violation of the Charter of the United Nations and without the authorization of the Security Council — must realize the heavy responsibility they bear for subverting the Charter and other norms of international law and for attempting to establish in the world, de facto, the primacy of force and unilateral diktat.

The members of NATO are not entitled to decide the fate of other sovereign and independent States. They must not forget that they are not only members of their alliance, but also Members of the United Nations.

Attempts to justify the NATO strikes with arguments about preventing a humanitarian catastrophe in Kosovo are completely untenable.

<…>

Attempts to apply a different standard to international law and to disregard its basic norms and principles create a dangerous precedent that could cause acute destabilization and chaos on the regional and global level.

The fact that NATO has opted to use force in Kosovo raises very serious questions about the sincerity of the repeated assurances that that alliance was not claiming the role of the world’s policeman and was prepared to cooperate in the interests of common European security.

The Russian Federation vehemently demands the immediate cessation of this illegal military action against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

Read in full

Nuremberg and the Crime of Wars of Aggression

“To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”

Primakov’s ‘U-Turn over Atlantic’

How Russian PM Primakov showed Moscow won’t be US satellite

On March 24, 1999, Yevgeny Primakov’s plane was en route to the US where the then-Russian prime minister was due to discuss an IMF loan to the tune of $5 billion for his country. But after then-US Vice President Al Gore told Primakov about NATO starting to bomb Yugoslavia, he decided to turn his plane around and go back to Moscow.

Despite Gore’s desperate attempts to persuade Primakov to backtrack on his decision and come to Washington, the Russian prime minister was undeterred.

“If I had accepted Gore’s terms, I would have been a real traitor,” Primakov later said.

Dr. Samuel Hoff, a professor of history and political science at Delaware State University, points to the significant expansion of NATO after the March 1999 incident.

“It is a fact that in 1999, NATO had 16 countries. And as we sit here in 2024, there are 32 members,” Hoff notes in an interview with Sputnik.

Peter Kuznick, a professor of history at the American University, tells Sputnik that Primakov’s U-turn over the Atlantic added significantly to tarnishing the already “strained” US-Russian relations at the time.

Referring to current “terrible” ties between Moscow and Washington, “the lack of trust” and a bilateral “polarization,” the professor says that one is “beginning to see signs of that certainly with Primakov’s mission in 1999.”

“So it certainly can be seen as an important turning point in terms of the deterioration of potential friendship between the US and Russia and creating a much more positive kind of multipolar world,” he concludes.

Hit the link to learn more

NATO’s bombing of Yugoslavia: A ‘culmination of negligence’ that opened Pandora’s box

Twenty-five years ago, NATO kicked off its 78-day bombing campaign against Yugoslavia. According to various sources, up to 2,500 people were killed and over 6,000 more injured during the bombing, which was not approved by the UN.

In an interview with Sputnik, Dr. Stevan Gajic, a Balkans expert and research associate at the Belgrade-based Institute of European Studies, says that the beginning of NATO’s “illegal attack” against Yugoslavia on March 24, 1999, was “a precedent that opened Pandora’s box.”

“It was a culmination of negligence of the international law that started since the end of the Cold War. Absolutely, [the] 1999 [NATO campaign] was a precedent. We can even say that the international law was in a way abolished at that moment and, of course, after that chaos was introduced into the system of international relations,” Gacic points out.

The expert also didn’t rule out launching a “real investigation against NATO crimes” in Yugoslavia, which he says can only happen after the serious geopolitical changes following the collapse of NATO in one way or the other. He was echoed by Dr. Srdjan Sljukic, a professor of sociology at the University of Novi Sad, Serbia, who tells Sputnik that “NATO aggression against Yugoslavia” reflected “two sorts of crimes,” such as “breaking the international law” and “bombing civilian objects and killing many civilians.”

Sljukic also warns that “as long as the key Western countries are ruled by the current liberal elites, NATO countries will not be put on fair trial because of their crimes in Yugoslavia and all over the world.”

Russia’s Foreign Ministry Statement in connection with the 25th anniversary of NATO aggression against Yugoslavia

History knows many events which, by virtue of their profound impact on the international order, marked a change of eras.

The NATO attack on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia on March 24, 1999 is certainly one such event. It went beyond being a tragic milestone in the life of the Serbian people with thousands of ruined lives and desecrated national dignity, and included a devastating blow to international law and European security foundations that had been laid after World War II. The United States and the EU got finally convinced in their own impunity and moral superiority which was bad news for those who prefer to choose their own path rather than become someone’s tool in their efforts to realise their own interests. The strategic balance of power collapsed, and a drawn-out crisis of international relations ensued which continues to worsen.

The US and its allies who assaulted a peaceful European country trampled on the UN Charter and the CSCE/OSCE principles, and desecrated the very notion of sovereignty. They have thus made it clear that they will stoop to anything, including radioactive contamination of vast swathes of land, to achieve global dominance. The widespread use of depleted uranium munitions by NATO has led to a multifold increase in cancer cases in that region, contaminated the environment where millions of people had lived for many years, and went down in history as a separate dark chapter on the list of NATO crimes.

During the 78 days of military aggression 14,000 bombs were dropped on Yugoslavia and over 2,000 missiles were fired, including cluster and demolition shells. Under the mocking front of a “humanitarian intervention,” mostly civilian targets were hit, including residential districts, hospitals, schools, bridges, mass transit vehicles, and refugee convoys. Thousands of civilians were killed, including 89 children, whom the Western coalition cynically referred to as “collateral damage.” No one has ever been held accountable for these atrocities, and international justice turned a deaf ear to the suffering of the Serbs and let NATO atrocities go unnoticed.

Not only the bombed-out buildings of the Yugoslav General Staff and Defence Ministry in central Belgrade which irritate the US officials to this day remind us of those terrible days. Serbia has many other unhealed wounds. A portion of the country’s ancestral territory, Kosovo and Metohija, has been forcibly taken away. The West has taken under its wing terrorists from the Kosovo Liberation Army, gave the province the status of a pseudo-state, and encourages the expulsion of the indigenous Serbian population.

This inevitably begs the question: was the “Kosovo project” worth the sacrifice and destruction that the alliance brought upon Yugoslavia? Has the self-proclaimed “republic” added stability or prosperity to the Balkan region?

There is no doubt that the United States’ concern for the rights of Kosovo Albanians is a fake claim from the get-go. It is nothing but a false pretext for the crackdown on Serbs.

The West’s goal was to turn the provisional self-governing bodies in Pristina into a tool for anti-Serb ethnic cleansing and a festering trouble spot to put pressure on Belgrade. At the end of the day, the Kosovo settlement is in a deadlock, and the situation on the ground threatens to escalate into an armed conflict.

This is what the Western “peacemaking” is all about. Its disastrous ramifications can now be seen in Ukraine, where a neo-Nazi regime has been nurtured on the basis of Washington and its supporters’ rejection of the principles of equality and mutual respect in international affairs, a regime that committed genocide against the Russian population and plunged the country into a military face-off.

We can hear the US and the EU increasingly call on Serbs to “turn the page” and forgive NATO for the invasion that took place 25 years ago. On top of that, they lay the bulk of the blame on the Serbs for the dramatic events during the breakup of Yugoslavia, including the 1999 bombing attacks. I’d be hard pressed to find proper words to describe the extent of Western shamelessness and lack of self-criticism.

The Alliance will never be able to wash off the shame of war crimes. No one believes its demagoguery about defending freedom and democracy anymore. The United States and the rest of NATO have no right whatsoever to talk about implementing an obscure new “rules-based order.” Their every effort to put together some kind of “global security architecture” is by definition malevolent and toxic, and aimed solely at perpetrating the neocolonial hegemony of the West.

Russia and its partners in Belgrade will continue to oppose the attempts to distort the history of the Yugoslav crisis and to shift the emphasis to demonising Serbs and justifying the 1999 aggression. The attempts to insult the memory of the innocent victims of NATO hangmen are unacceptable.

Turkey takes its Seat in Rules-based Terrorism Inc.

Turkey starts to drift into view, as NATO becomes officially activated in Europe.. Turkish elites, in spite of antipathy of its working peoples for post-modern western values, remain at the heart of NATO.

To woo Washington, Erdogan will sell out Palestine

After Ankara and Washington successfully swapped Sweden’s NATO accession for an F-16 fighter jet deal, Turkiye is focused on accelerating that rapprochement and is willing to sweep divisive issues – like genocide in Gaza – under the rug.

By Mohamad Hasan Sweidan at The Cradle.

On 7–8 March, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan and Intelligence Chief Ibrahim Kalin visited Washington. The trip garnered attention as it marked Turkiye’s first official visit to the US following the conclusion of the ‘Sweden for F-16’ deal, whereby Ankara accepted Stockholm’s accession to NATO in exchange for US Congressional approval of the sale of 40 F-16s to Turkiye.

During the visit, the two Turkish officials met with their US counterparts Antony Blinken and William Burns, along with National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, and their respective foreign ministers chaired the seventh meeting of the US–Turkiye Strategic Mechanism.

US–Turkish rapprochement

The thaw in US–Turkish relations has been palpable, as noted by Jeff Flake, the US Ambassador to Ankara, during a televised interview: “Especially in recent months, the two countries have developed shared areas. We observe improvements in defense, trade, and interpersonal relations.”

A closer examination of the joint statement released following the meeting illustrates the transition of Turkish–American relations into a more favorable and cooperative phase.

Established in 2021 and inaugurated on 4 April 2021 amidst escalating discord between Turkiye and the US, the strategic mechanism was conceived to address and improve the strained bilateral relations.

The joint statement issued by the Strategic Mechanism this month included several crucial points, each carrying significant implications:

Both parties addressed the ongoing war in Ukraine, condemning Russia’s actions as ‘unacceptable’ while emphasizing the importance of upholding Ukraine’s unity and sovereignty. However, it is worth noting that Ankara’s endorsement of the statement’s rhetoric aligns more closely with Kiev’s perspective, a deviation from Turkiye’s previous neutral stance. This marked shift will undermine President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s aspirations to mediate the conflict impartially.

Playing to the audience

On Israel’s brutal military assault in Gaza, the statement merely referred to an “ongoing crisis” and “underlined the importance of finding a path towards ending the conflict and addressing the humanitarian crisis immediately.” This is a war that Erdogan has, on the record, framed as a “genocide” and called its aggressors in Tel Aviv “war criminals.”

While both parties expressed support for the “two-state solution” as an end goal to the war, the statement’s release coincided with a fiery speech by Erdogan in Istanbul in which he attacked Israel, calling it “the Nazis of our time.” The contrast between the two statements is a real-time reflection of how Turkiye addresses its different target audiences.

On the issue of combating terrorism, the statement endorses joint US–Turkish efforts against organizations like the PKK, ISIS, and Al-Qaeda across regions spanning from Africa to Central Asia. They also recommitted to counterterrorism consultations and discussions on the Syria file, including the adherence to UN Resolution 2254 and supporting a “Syrian-led, Syrian-owned political process.”

The two parties addressed a multitude of regional issues in West Asia and Africa in alignment with the broader US strategy outlined by National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, which focuses on partnership-building, deterrence, diplomacy, regional integration, and “democracy promotion” in these geographies.

This includes cooperation in military industry, energy, and trade development, reflecting the existing $30 billion trade volume between Washington and Ankara.

Significantly, the parties discussed leveraging financing opportunities under the Global Infrastructure and Investment Partnership – a western initiative intended to rival China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). This partnership includes the controversial India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), aimed at enhancing regional connectivity and economic development very much to the benefit of Israel.

New Turkish military action in Syria and Iraq?

As the municipal elections in Turkiye draw near – with Erdogan seeking to reclaim his Justice and Development Party’s (AKP) control of Istanbul and Ankara after notable previous losses – there’s a tangible resurgence in Turkish rhetoric advocating for military action in northern Syria and Iraq.

According to reports from the Turkish news agency T24, the Turkish armed forces are gearing up for an operation against the People’s Protection Units (YPG) and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) inside its neighboring states following local elections on 31 March.

After a 4 March cabinet meeting, Erdogan spoke of Turkiye’s readiness for a comprehensive operation against the Kurdish separatist groups and reiterated Ankara’s objective of establishing a security corridor spanning 30 to 40 kilometers along the Turkish–Syrian border.

Although the military rhetoric is undoubtedly influenced by Erdogan’s bid to attract nationalist voters in the upcoming elections, it is also connected to the recent Turkish–Iraqi diplomatic breakthrough following a high-level Turkish delegation’s visit to Baghdad.

The meeting in the Iraqi capital led to a security deal in which both countries committed to take action against the PKK. A joint statement read:

Both sides stressed that the PKK organization represents a security threat to both Turkiye and Iraq, and it is certain that the presence of the organization on Iraqi territory represents a violation of the Iraqi constitution … Turkiye welcomed the decision taken by the Iraqi National Security Council to list the PKK as a banned organization in Iraq. The two sides consulted on the measures that must be taken against the organization and its banned extensions [PKK’s alleged offshoots] that target Turkiye from within Iraq’s territory.

Fidan’s senior adviser, Nuh Yilmaz, praised the move, saying, “Turkiye and Iraq decided for the first time to fight jointly against PKK terrorism.” In a post on platform X, he added: “A decision that will mark a turning point! We will see results gradually!”

Strategic interests come first 

According to a well-informed Turkish source:

Turkey’s main purpose is very clear. The presence of the PKK in Metina and Gara [in northern Iraq] has the potential to seriously threaten the Iraq Development Road Project … We both would like to remove PKK from these two areas as well as secure the area for the construction of the project, reaching both objectives in one step.

Ankara and Baghdad seek to counter any threat to this development road project, a land corridor linking the port of Faw in Basra to the Turkish border and from there to Europe.

In this context, Erdogan is expected to visit Baghdad for the first time since 2012, where, some speculate, he will try to conclude a border control security agreement with the Iraqi government and seek to convince Baghdad to support future Turkish military operations against the PKK.

Despite Turkiye and Erdogan’s vocal criticism of Israeli atrocities in Gaza, recent interactions between Ankara and Washington indicate a pragmatic approach in their dealings, through which Turkiye hopes to be reinstated as an important US strategic partner.

While the Turkish president is stepping up anti-Zionist rhetoric on his domestic front, his administration maintains substantial economic ties with Israel, exporting various vital goods and services to the occupation state.

Although a Washington–Ankara rapprochement is still in its nascent stage, recent developments reveal the old allies are on a positive trajectory to repair bilateral relations after a period of strained diplomatic ties.

Erdogan’s foreign policy approach – as exemplified by his rhetorical Gaza stance and material support for Israel – makes clear Turkiye’s shift toward prioritizing strategic interests over ideological ones.

≈≈≈

Nuclear Threat, World War III and Turkey: Balance Policy or a Game?

Is Turkey’s rhetorical stance of “balancing” a genuine attempt at strategic equilibrium, or merely an endeavor to occupy multiple positions simultaneously?

By Erkin Öncan at Strategic Culture Foundation.

Alexander Stubb, the newly elected president of Finland, has made several noteworthy statements regarding the current geopolitical climate. He emphasized the escalating tensions amidst discussions of a World War III. Stubb, representing the center-right National Coalition Party, expressed openness to the possibility of allowing the transportation and storage of U.S. nuclear weapons in Finnish territory, branding them as a “guarantee of peace.” This stance remained consistent throughout his election campaign and was reiterated upon assuming office. Stubb underscored the necessity for Finland to possess a tangible nuclear deterrent force, citing NATO membership as pivotal in providing multiple layers of deterrence, including military, munitions, and nuclear deterrence from the USA. He further asserted that Finland’s alignment with NATO signifies a definitive step towards embracing Western values, a sentiment echoed by the inclusion of Turkey as an enthusiastic participant in the anticipated third major conflict.

However, Finland’s enthusiasm for NATO membership has not gone unnoticed by Russia, which shares a significant border with the country. In response to Finland and Sweden’s accession to NATO, Russian President Putin announced plans to bolster military presence along the Western borders to counteract perceived threats stemming from NATO’s eastward expansion. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov conveyed Moscow’s acknowledgment of the democratic choice made by the Finnish people but indicated pessimism regarding potential improvements in Russo-Finnish relations.

The most explicit reaction to Stubb’s nuclear policy came from Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mariya Zakharova. Addressing the issue during a weekly press conference at the World Youth Festival in Sochi, Zakharova outlined Russia’s stance on the placement of U.S. nuclear weapons in Northern Europe. She asserted that such deployments would be considered a direct threat and would consequently be designated as legitimate targets in the event of a direct military conflict between Russia and NATO. Zakharova underscored Russia’s awareness of the desires of the United States and its allies in this regard.

The primary source of concern regarding nuclear capabilities is now widely recognized to stem from the potential for World War III to be nuclear in nature. When discussing nuclear power, the focus often turns to Russia, acknowledged as the “world’s largest nuclear power”.

Western media consistently highlights the perceived “nuclear threat emanating from the authoritarian Kremlin”. However, to truly address the concept of a “nuclear danger”, it is essential to consider the United States, which has transformed Europe into a depot for nuclear weapons, rather than Russia, which does not maintain nuclear forces beyond its borders, apart from the neighboring Belarus.

The United States and its NATO allies do not disclose precise figures regarding the stockpiles deployed in Europe. Nevertheless, estimates from the U.S.-based Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation in 2021 suggest that around 100 U.S. nuclear weapons are stored across six bases in five NATO member countries.

These weapons are kept in inactive states within underground vaults at national air bases. Notably, the “permissive action link” (PAL) codes required to activate these weapons are under American control. In the event of their use, the weapons would be loaded onto warplanes designated by NATO.

This situation is intricately tied to the “modernization” efforts undertaken by nations operating F-35A, F-18 Super Hornet, or Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft.

U.S. nuclear weapons have been stationed in Europe since the mid-1950s, authorized by President Dwight D. Eisenhower for storage at NATO bases on the continent as a deterrent against the Soviet Union.

Stored in warehouses across Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and other countries, these weapons are maintained for potential deployment when required. Additionally, countries such as Czechia, Denmark, Greece, Hungary, Norway, Poland, and Romania participate in SNOWCAT operations, facilitating NATO partner involvement in nuclear missions.

Meanwhile, Finland, under the leadership of Stubb, is positioning itself as a significant player in the ongoing ’nuclear preparedness’ measures originally aimed at countering the USSR and persisting in response to Russia.

This dynamic persists alongside ongoing military actions initiated by NATO against Russia. Notably, the commencement of Steadfast Defender-24, hailed as NATO’s largest military exercise since the Cold War, marks a significant development. This exercise aims to test the transfer of military forces to Eastern Europe and beyond, encompassing regions where Russia’s influence is perceived as encroaching.

This exercise constitutes a series of 15 maneuvers rather than a singular major military operation.

Steadfast Defender encompasses various other exercises conducted at national or regional levels, including Joint Warrior, Solid Approach, Arctic Dolphin, Northern Response, Immediate Response, Brilliant Jump, Movable Defender, Slovak Shield, Saber Strike, Trojan Trail-24, and Spring Storm.

Turkey actively participates in these exercises, with the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) playing a pivotal role in Brilliant Jump, Nordic Response, Saber Strike, and Immediate Response exercises.

Turkey’s involvement extends beyond military participation; it also hosts one of NATO’s most crucial commands. The permanent headquarters of NATO Land Forces, known as Allied Land Command (LANDCOM), is situated in Izmir.

Decisions regarding NATO’s land maneuvers are made at the command post within the General Vecihi Akın Barracks in Buca, Izmir. Given its historical significance, Izmir, where the first shot was fired against invaders a century ago, could potentially be remembered as the site where the decision to initiate the first shot of a world-engulfing war was made if a new global conflict were to erupt on Russia’s borders.

This prompts consideration of Turkey’s rhetorical stance of “balancing”. Is it a genuine attempt at strategic equilibrium, or merely an endeavor to occupy multiple positions simultaneously?

How could Russia respond to NATO invasion?

Will France/NATO invade Ukraine? How will Russia respond?

Will France invade Ukraine? How will Russia respond?

Scott Ritter goes nuclear on French President Emmanuel Macron, Poland, and the Baltic States (“over-fed chihuahuas”). Don’t watch this episode if you’re a NATO fanboy! #NewRulesPodcast pic.twitter.com/Zb3s90VxES

— NewRulesGeopolitics (@NewRulesGeo) March 21, 2024

In this week’s episode of the New Rules podcast, we’re discussing the potential of a French/NATO military intervention in Ukraine. Longtime friend of the program, former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter goes NUCLEAR on French President Emmanuel Macron, Poland, and the Baltic States.

“France is the equivalent of an overfed Chihuahua, and you don’t want to get in the ring with the really beefed up Rottweilers, especially when they’ve been trained to eat overfed Chihuahuas their entire life,” he told the New Rules podcast.

 

A Travelogue of Electoral Donbass

Donetsk, Avdeyevka, Mariupol – on the Road in Electoral Donbass

By Pepe Escobar at Sputnik.

They have waited 10 long, suffering years to vote in this election. And vote they did, in massive numbers, certifying a landslide reelection for the political leader who brought them back to Mother Russia. VVP may now be widely referred to as Mr. 87%. In Donetsk, turnout was even higher: 88,17%. And no less than 95% voted for him.

To follow the Russian electoral process at work in Donbass was a humbling – and illuminating – experience. Graphically, in front of us, the full weight of the collective West’s relentless denigration campaign was instantly gobbled up by the rich black soil of Novorossiya. The impeccable organization, the full transparency of the voting, the enthusiasm by polling station workers and voters alike punctuated the historical gravity of the political moment: at the same time everything was enveloped in an impalpable feeling of silent jubilation.

This was of course a referendum. Donbass represents a microcosm of the solid internal cohesion of Russian citizens around the policies of Team Putin – while at the same time sharing a feeling experienced by the overwhelming majority of the Global South. VVP’s victory was a victory of the Global Majority.

And that’s what’s making the puny Global Minority even more apoplectic. With their highest turnout since 1991, Russian voters inflicted a massive strategic defeat to the intellectual pigmies who pass for Western “leadership” – arguably the most mediocre political class of the past 100 years. They voted for a fairer, stable system of international relations; for multipolarity; and for true leadership by civilization-states such as Russia.

VVP’s 87% score was followed, by a long shot, by the Communists, with 3.9%. That is quite significant, because these 91% represent a total rejection of the globalist Davos/Great Reset plutocratic “future” envisioned by the 0.001%.

Avdeyevka: Voting Under Total Devastation

On Election Day Two, at section 198 in downtown Donetsk, not far from Government House, it was possible to fully measure the fluidity and transparency of the system – even as Donetsk was not spared from shelling, in the late afternoon and early evening in the final day of voting.

Afterwards, a strategic pit stop in a neighborhood mini-market. Yuri, an activist, was buying a full load of fresh eggs to be transported to the nearly starving civilians who still remain in Avdeyevka. Ten eggs cost the equivalent of a dollar and forty cents.

At Yasinovata, very close to Avdeyevka, we visit the MBOU, or school number 7, impeccably rebuilt after non-stop shelling. The director, Ludmilla Leonova, an extraordinary strong woman, takes me on a guide tour of the school and its brand new classrooms for chemistry and biology, a quaint Soviet alphabet decorating the classroom for Russian language. Classes, hopefully, will resume in the Fall.

Close to the school a refugee center for those who have been brought from Avdeyevka has been set up. Everything is spotlessly clean. People are processed, entered into the system, then wait for proper papers. Everyone wants to obtain a Russian passport as soon as possible.

For the moment, they stay in dormitories, around 10 people in each room. Some came from Avdeyevka, miraculously, in their own cars: there are a few Ukrainian license plates around. Invariably, the overall expectation is to return to Avdeyevka, when reconstruction starts, to rebuild their lives in their own town.

Then, it’s on the road to Avdeyevka. Nothing, absolutely nothing prepares us to confront total devastation. In my nearly 40 years as a foreign correspondent, I’ve never seen anything like it – even Iraq. At the unofficial entry to Avdeyevka, beside the skeleton of a bombed building and the remains of a tank turret, the flags of all military batallions which took part in the liberation flutter in the wind.

Each building in every street is at least partially destroyed. A few remaining residents congregate in a flat to organize the distribution of essential supplies. I find a miraculously preserved icon behind the window of a bombed-out ground floor apartment.

FPVs loiter overheard – detected by a handheld device, and our military escort is on full alert. We find out that as we enter a ground floor apartment which is being kept as a sort of mini food depot – housing donations from Yasinovata or from the military – that very same room, in the morning, had been converted into a polling station. That’s where the very few remaining Avdeyevka residents actually voted.

A nearly blind man with his dog explains why he can’t leave: he lives in the same street, and his apartment is still functional – even though he has no water or electricity. He explains how the Ukrainians were occupying each apartment block – with residents turned into refugees or hostages in the basements – and then, pressed by the Russians, relocated to nearby schools and hospitals until finally fleeing.

The basements are a nightmare. Virtually no light. The temperature is at least 10 degrees Celsius lower than at street level. It’s impossible to imagine how they survived. Another resident nonchalantly strolls by in his bicycle, surrounded by derelict concrete skeletons. The loud booms – mostly outgoing – are incessant.

Then, standing amidst total devastation, a vision: the elegant silhouette of the Church of Mary Magdalen, immaculately preserved. Dmitry, the caretaker, takes me around; it’s a beautiful church, the paintings on the roof still gleaming under the pale sunlight, a gorgeous chandelier and the inner chamber virtually intact.

The Mariupol Renaissance

The final election day is spent in Mariupol – which is being rebuilt at nearly breakneck speed: the new railway station has just been finished. Voting is seamless at school number 53, housing district 711. A beautiful mural behind the ballot box depicts the sister cities St. Petersburg and Mariupol, with the legendary Scarlet Sails from the Alexander Green story right in the middle.

I revisit the port: international cargo is still not moving, only ships coming from the Russian mainland. But the first deal has been reached with Cameroon – fruits in exchange with metals and manufactured products. Several other deals with African nations are on the horizon.

The Pakrovska church, a Mariupol landmark, is being carefully restored. We are welcomed by Father Viktor, who hosts lunch for a group of people from the parish, and a fine conversation ensues ranging from Christian Orthodoxy to the Decline of the West and the LGBT agenda.

We go to the roof and walk around a balustrade offering a spectacular 360-degree view of Mariupol, with the port, the destroyed Azovstal iron works and the Russian Sea of Azov in the deep background. The massive church bells ring – as in a metaphor for the resurrection of a beautiful city which has the potential to become a sort of Nice in the Sea of Azov.

Back in Donetsk, going to a “secret” school/museum only 2 km away from the line of fire – which I first visited last month – has to be canceled: Donetsk continues to be shelled.

With Avdeyevka in mind, as well as the shelling that refuses to go away, a few questions on numbers pop up on the long 20-hour drive back to Moscow.

In Chechnya, led by uber-patriot Kadyrov, turnout was 97%. And no less than 99% voted for VVP. So, unlike in the past, forget about any ulterior attempt at a color revolution in Chechnya.

Same pattern in the Caucasus, in the region of Kabardino: turnout was 96%. No less than 94% voted for VVP.

Between Kazakhstan and Mongolia, in Tuva, turnout was 96%. And 95% voted for VVP. In the autonomous Yamal-Nenets, turnout was 94%. But VVP got “only” 79% of the votes. In lake Baikal, Buryatia had 74% turnout and 88% of votes for VVP.

The key, once again, remains Moscow. Turnout, compared to other regions, was relatively low: 67%. Well, Moscow is still largely Westernized and in several aspects ideologically globalist – thus more critical than other parts of Russia when it comes to the patriotic emphasis.

And that brings us to the clincher. Even with the resounding success of Mr. 87%, they will never give up. If there ever is a minor chance of a successful Hybrid War strategy provoking a color revolution, the stage will be Moscow. Quite pathetic, actually, when compared to the images of Mr. 87% saluted by a packed Red Square on Sunday like the ultimate rock star.

The Kremlin is taking no chances. Putin addressed the FSB and went straight to the point: attempts to sow interethnic trouble – as a prelude to color revolutions – must be strictly suppressed. The FSB will go for the next level: traitors will be identified by name and targeted without a statute of limitations.

After the electoral euphoria, no one really knows what happens next. It has to be something hugely significant, honoring the historical VVP electoral landslide. He has carte blanche now to do anything. Priority number one: to finish once and for all with the Hegemon-built terror mongrel that has been attacking Novorossiya for 10 long years.

WHAT?! Yemen Just Closed the Indian Ocean to USUK Ships too

“… and all linked to zionists…”

Richard connects a terrible dot on the back of my mind! Yemen didn’t merely extend the Gauntlet to the Indian Ocean for the zionists, but to the same western parties they currently fight in the Red Sea. They closed the South Africa route to USUK and those of the combined West that partake of the aggression against Palestine and/or themselves in the Red Sea or hinder the Gauntlet in the Red Sea! They emphasized this on day one by droning or missiling two US ships in the Indian Ocean………..

Let’s see if they can carry it off. Assuming they will be as resourceful as only motivated Yemenis can be.. and that several civilizational-states work to ensure they get accurate targeting and manifests of cargo ships to be targetted, what would be the consequences for severing the India/China sea trade to Europe and to the eastern US seaboard?? The US has the Pacific coast option, but Europe.. would be reduced to railroads, mostly through.. Russia as they helped torch West Asia, the Ukraine, and currently stoke Transcaucasia. This is unliveable

The Perfect Tripwire for War Against China

US Troops as close as 2.5 miles from China Mainland and key city Xiamen.

By Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com

Taiwan Confirms Presence Of US Green Berets On Islands Very Close To China’s Coast

Taiwanese Defense Minister Chiu Kuo-cheng confirmed on Thursday the presence of US Army Special Forces soldiers in Kinmen, a group of islands that are controlled by Taiwan but located just off the coast of mainland China.

Some parts of the Kinmen islands are just 2.5 miles away from the mainland Chinese city of Xiamen. The presence of US troops on the islands was first reported by Taiwanese media last month.

Chiu confirmed the highly provocative deployment when asked about a new report from the US outlet SOFREP that said US Green Berets have taken up “permanent positions” as military advisors in Kinmen. The US soldiers are also deployed in Penghu, a Taiwanese-controlled archipelago about 30 miles west of the main island of Taiwan and 70 miles east of mainland China.

The SOFREP report said the US Green Berets were stationed at the Taiwanese Army’s amphibious command centers. The deployment was carried out under provisions in the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act, which called for the US to create a comprehensive training program for the Taiwanese military.

The new collaboration includes the US troops training Taiwanese forces on the Black Hornet Nano, a compact military drone. Chiu said the presence of the US Green Berets was a “learning opportunity” for Taiwan’s military.

The US has significantly increased its military and diplomatic support for Taiwan in recent years, ratcheting up tensions with China. Last year, the US deployed around 200 troops to Taiwan, marking the largest known US military presence on the island since the US pulled its troops out after Washington severed diplomatic relations with Taipei in 1979.

The US also recently began providing Taiwan with unprecedented military aid. Since 1979, the US has always sold weapons to Taiwan but never financed the purchases or provided arms free of charge until last year.

The Terms of Surrender

Putin presented the West with a bill of exchange that it is not able to repay

By Irina Alksnis, RIA Novosti columnist.

“In an interview with Dmitry Kiselyov, Vladimir Putin stressed that the West will not just have to offer Russia guarantees of compliance with the agreements, but these guarantees: a) must be spelled out; b) suit Moscow; and c) the Russian leadership must actually believe in them.”

In an interview with Dmitry Kiselyov, Vladimir Putin paid great attention to the issue of potential negotiations with the West over Ukraine. At first glance, this might even seem somewhat unexpected, but the topic is really becoming more and more relevant and is increasingly heard in the public field, which means that it is time to clarify Russia’s position as clearly as possible. Which the president did.

The reality of the situation on the Ukrainian front, which is unpleasant for the West, is reaching more and more people on the other side. This entails quite natural consequences: the voices demanding to negotiate with Moscow are getting louder and louder. And if initially they were mostly marginal figures, on whom it was very convenient to hang the label “Russian agent” or “useful idiot of the Kremlin”, now the most mainstream and very influential forces – the media, think tanks, politicians and statesmen – up to the Pope are saying the same thing.

This point of view has not yet become dominant there and still meets impressive resistance, but it can no longer be called marginal. And judging by the way events are developing in Ukraine, the moment when it will become dominant on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean is not very long away.

However, these changes worry the politically active patriotic part of Russian society. The reason is obvious: people fear that in the course of negotiations, Russia will lose the achievements for which our soldiers pay with their blood and lives. Either the West will simply deceive us, as it has done so many times in the past, or a part of the Russian elite that remains pro-Western will be inclined to make concessions, surrendering our military victory. But no one is immune from mistakes and failures in the negotiation process – even the most ardent patriot of his country.

This is probably why the president gave a detailed and detailed commentary on this issue, touching on very different aspects that affect Russia’s position. And this is the answer primarily for us-the citizens of the country. But it can also be very useful for the West, if there are still smart enough and qualified people there who are able to hear and understand what is said, and not invent their own version of Putin’s answer in accordance with the agenda and personal beliefs (and with this there are more and more problems lately). Well, for the insufficiently nationalized representatives of the domestic establishment, who are hoping to turn the stuffing back, the president’s answer is also very useful – and makes them understand that you should not dream of the impossible.

The West, in the form of Ukraine as anti-Russia, prepared a very powerful weapon against our country, but when it did not work as expected, it had to openly enter the war itself – and this became its huge, downright fatal mistake, because it turned on the patriotic war regime in our people. Putin said that “deep Russian society”, ordinary citizens, had long been waiting for their demand for the country and the state, and the war of the West against us was exactly the situation that turned on the mechanism of national consolidation.

This means that the state has a free hand in relying on powerful and active (literally combative) popular support. He is not under pressure from public opinion, which insists on ending the fighting at any cost and as soon as possible – on the contrary, citizens consider it right to solve the issue radically, eliminating the threat to Russia in the south-western direction once and for all. This means that the SVO can continue for as long as it takes, until the West is not just ripe for negotiations (this will happen soon), but reaches the point where it hears Moscow’s position and accepts its conditions (but this may take much longer).

By the way, the president’s words made it clear why Russian officials are so actively pedaling the topic of deception on the part of the West, which Moscow has encountered many times in recent decades. You can often hear criticism of this position – saying that it exposes Russia as weak and stupid. However, it has now provided the state with an extremely comfortable and strong negotiating position: what are your guarantees, gentlemen? Because the old and, alas, unkind principle of “gentlemen take their word for it” has finally broken down.

Putin stressed that the West should not just offer Russia guarantees of compliance with the agreements, but these guarantees should: a) be spelled out; b) suit Moscow; and c) the Russian leadership should actually believe in them.

In fact, in the sphere of reputation and moral authority, the West finds itself in exactly the same situation as with the American debt, which is storming to astronomical heights and whose mere maintenance is increasingly shaking the financial system. Everyone has already realized that this is just a pyramid scheme, but it still holds, and the world is watching with curiosity (although not without concern about the consequences) what will become the “pebble” that will start the crash.

Well, by demanding guarantees at the talks, Putin swung the “pebble” of another tower – the tower of Babel of Western hypocrisy and lies.

Perhaps this is understood by American and European hawks, who are now actively rocking the topic of the need to introduce a Western contingent to Ukraine. Realizing that Moscow will not be able to push through or deceive in negotiations, they see direct participation in the conflict as the only remaining option to try to reduce the conflict to a more or less acceptable outcome for NATO countries.

However, Putin also had words for these hotheads – in particular, the word “interventionists”. Moreover, the president explicitly stated that it is precisely as an intervention on the territory of Russia that we will regard the entry of Western troops into Ukraine. And he reminded that our country has a rich experience of successfully solving this problem, which everyone in the West should remember.

In essence, Ukraine has become a conflict in which the bankruptcy of Europe and the United States – military, moral, economic – threatens to turn from expected to actual. And in his interview, Putin presented the West with a bill of exchange, which in principle it is not able to repay.

The German-American Strategic Stooges Clown Show

The saga of Bundeswehr officers plotting to blow up the Kerch bridge with Taurus missiles and getting away with it is a gift that keeps on giving.

By Pepe Escobar at Strategic Culture.

The Four Stooges saga of Bundeswehr officers plotting to blow up the Kerch bridge in Crimea with Taurus missiles and getting away with it is a gift that keeps on giving.

President Putin, in his comprehensive interview to Dmitry Kiselev for Russia 1/RIA Novosti, did not fail to address it:

“They are fantasizing, encouraging themselves, first of all. Secondly, they are trying to intimidate us. As for the Federal Republic of Germany, there are constitutional problems there. They correctly say: if these Taurus hit that part of the Crimean Bridge, which, of course, even according to their concepts, is Russian territory, this is a violation of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany.”

Yet it gets curioser and curioser.

When the transcript of the Taurus leak  was published by RT, everyone was able to hear Brigadier General Frank Gräfe – head of operations of the German Air Force – speaking with Lieutenant Colonel Fenske from the German Space Command Air Operations on the plan to deploy Taurus systems in Ukraine.

A key point is that during the plotting, these two mention that plans were already discussed “four months ago” with “Schneider”, the successor of “Wilsbach”.

Well, these are German names, of course. Thus it did not dawn on anyone that (Kevin) Schneider and (Kenneth) Wilsbach could instead be… Americans.

Yet that did raise the eyebrows of German investigative journalist Dirk Pohlmann – who I had the pleasure to meet in Berlin years ago – and his fellow researcher Tobias Augenbraun.

They found out that the German-sounding names did identify Americans. Not only that: none less than the former and the current Commanders of the U.S. Pacific Air Forces.

The Four (actually Six) Stooges element gets an extra boost when it is established that Liver Sausage Chancellor Scholz and his Totalenkrieg Minister Pistorius learned about the Taurus plan no less than four months later.

So here apparently we have a clear cut case of top German military officers taking direct orders regarding an attack on Crimea – part of the Russian Federation – directly from American officers in the Pacific Air Forces.

That in itself opens the dossier to a large spectrum ranging from national treason (against Germany) to casus belli (from the point of view of Russia).

Of course none of that is being discussed on German mainstream media.

After all, the only thing that seems to disturb Brigadier General Gräfe is that German media may start seriously prying on the Bundeswehr’s Multiple Stooges methods.

The only ones who actually did proper investigation were Pohlmann and Augenbaun.

It would be too much to expect from German media of the “Bild” type to analyze what would be the Russian response to the Multiple Stooge shenanigans against Crimea: a devastating retaliation against Berlin assets.

It’s so cold in Alaska

During the jolly Bundeswehr conversation yet another “plan” is mentioned:

“Nee, nee. Ich mein wegen der anderen Sache.” (“No, no. I mean the other matter.”) Then: “Ähm … meinst du Alaska jetzt?” (“Ahm, you mean Alaska now?”)

It all gets juicier when it is known that German Space Command Air Operations Centre officer Florstedt will meet none other than Schneider next Tuesday, March 19, in Alaska.

And Gräfe will also “have to go back to Alaska” to explain everything all over again to Schneider as he is “new” in the post.

So the question is: Why Alaska?

Enter American shadowplay on a lot of “activities” in Alaska – which happen to concern none other than China.

And there’s more: during the conversation still another “plan” (“Auftrag”, meaning “mission”) also surfaces, bearing a not clearly understandable code name sounding like “Kumalatra”.

What all of that tells us is that the Crash Test Dummy administration in the White House, the CIA and the Pentagon seem to betting, in desperation, on Total War in the black soil of Novorossiya.

And now they are sayin’ it out loud, with no shadow play, and coming directly from the head of the CIA, William Burns, who obviously sucks at secrecy.

This is what Burns told the members of the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee earlier this week:

“I think without supplemental assistance in 2024, you’re going to see more Avdeevkas, and that – it seems to me – would be a massive and historic mistake for the United States.”

That spells out how much the Avdeevka trauma is impressed on the psyche of the U.S. intel apparatus.

Yet there’s more: “With supplemental assistance, Ukraine can hold its own on the front lines through 2024 and into early 2025. Ukraine can continue to exact costs against Russia, not only with deep penetration strikes in Crimea, but also against Russia’s Black Sea Fleet.”

Here we go: Crimea all over again.

Burns actually believes that the humongous $60 billion new “aid” package which must be approved by the U.S. Congress will enable Kiev to launch an “offensive” by the end of 2024.

The only thing he gets right is that if there’s no new package, there will be “significant territorial losses for Ukraine this year.”

Burns may not be the brightest bulb in the – intel – room. A long time ago he was a diplomat/CIA asset in Moscow, and seems to have learned nothing.

Apart from letting cats and kitties galore out of the bag. It’s not only about attacking Crimea. This one is being read with surpreme delight in Beijing:

“The U.S. is providing assistance to Ukraine in part because such activities help curb China.”

Burns nailed his Cat Out of the Bag Oscar win when he said “if we’re seen to be walking away from support for Ukraine, not only is that going to feed doubts amongst our allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific; it’s going to stoke the ambitions of the Chinese leadership in contingencies ranging from Taiwan to the South China Sea”.

The inestimable Andrei Martyanov perfectly summed up the astonishing incompetence, peppered with tawdry exceptionalism, that permeates this performance by Burns.

There are things “they cannot grasp due to low level of education and culture. This is a new paradigm for them – all of them are ‘graduates’ of the school of ‘beating the crap from defenseless nations’ strategic ‘studies’, and with the level of economic ‘science’ in the West they cannot grasp how this all unfolds.”

So what is left is panic, as expressed by Burns in the Senate, mixed with the impotence in understanding a “different warrior culture” such as Russia’s: “They simply have no reference points.”

And still they choose war, as masterfully analyzed by Rostislav Ishchenko.

Even as the acronym fest of the CIA and 17 other U.S. intel agencies have concluded, in a report shown to Congress earlier this week, that Russia is “almost certainly” seeking to avoid a direct military conflict with NATO and will calibrate its policies to steer clear of a global war.

After all the Empire of Chaos is all about Forever Wars. And we are all in the middle of a do or die affair. The Empire simply cannot afford the cosmic humiliation of NATO in Novorossiya.

Still every “plan” – Taurus on Crimea-style – is a bluff. Russia is aware of bluff after bluff. The Western cards are now all on the table. The only question is when, and how fast will Russia call the bluff.

The Angst in the French Mind

The endless ennui and envy of those incapable of abandoning phantom pains. Most useful putty in the hands of Empire

By Ambassador MK Bhadrakumar at the Indian Punchline.

Ever since its ignominious defeat in the Napoleonic wars, France is entrapped in the predicament of countries that get sandwiched between great powers. Following World War II, France addressed this predicament by forging an axis with Germany in Europe.

Caught up in a similar predicament, Britain adapted itself to a subaltern role tapping into the American power globally but France never gave up its quest to regain glory as a global power. And it continues to be a work in progress.

The angst in the French mind is understandable as the five centuries of western dominance of the world order is drawing to a close. This predicament condemns France to a diplomacy that is constantly in a state of suspended animation interspersed with sudden bouts of activism.

But, for activism to be result-oriented, there are prerequisites needed such as the profiling of like-minded activist groups, leadership and associates and supporters and sympathisers — and, most important, sustainment and logistics. Or else, activism comes to resemble epileptic fits, an incurable affliction of the nervous system.

The French President Emmanuel Macron’s halcyon days in international diplomacy ended with the recent  dissolution of the Franco-German axis in Europe, which dated back to the Treaties of Rome in 1957. As Berlin sharply swerved to trans-atlanticism as its foreign-policy dogma, France’s clout diminished in European affairs. 

The stakes are high in the reconciliation meeting on Friday as Macron travels to Berlin to meet Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who not only snubbed him by ruling out the use of ground troops from European countries in the Ukraine war, but also digging in on Taurus missile issue arguing that it would entail assigning German staff in support to Ukraine, which, he announced on Wednesday in the Bundestag, is simply “out of the question” while he remained the chancellor. 

Of course, this is not to decry Macron’s formidable intellect — such as when he declared in a blunt interview in late 2019 with the Economist magazine that Europe stood on “the edge of a precipice” and needed to start thinking of itself strategically as a geopolitical power lest it will “no longer be in control of our destiny.” Macron’s prescient remark preceded the war in Ukraine by 3 years.

According to the newspaper Marianne, which interviewed several French soldiers, the military reportedly estimates that the Ukraine war is irretrievably lost already. Marianne quoted a senior French officer saying derisively, “We must make no mistake facing the Russians; we are an army of cheerleaders” and sending French troops to the Ukrainian front would simply be “not reasonable” . At the Élysée, an unnamed advisor argued that Macron “wanted to send a strong signal… (in) milli-metered and calibrated words”.

Marianne’s editor Natacha Polony wrote: “It is no longer about Emmanuel Macron or his postures as a virile little leader. It is no longer even about France or its weakening by blind and irresponsible elites. It is a question of whether we will collectively agree to sleepwalk into war. A war that no one can claim will be controlled or contained. It’s a question of whether we agree to send our children to die because the United States insisted on setting up bases on Russia’s borders.”

The big question is why Macron is doing this nonetheless — going to the extent of cobbling together a ‘coalition of the willing’ in Europe. A range of explanations is possible starting with Macron posturing and trying to earn political points at minimal cost, motivated by personal ambitions and intra-European friction with Berlin.

But then, until fairly recently, Macron was a supporter of dialogue with Moscow. The perception in most European capitals, including Moscow, is that Macron is making an attempt to bring the Ukrainian crisis to a new level by announcing western combat deployment against Russia  publicly as an obvious political manipulation.

The geopolitical salience is that Macron who once not too long ago called for dialogue with Moscow and offered his mediation in it, who made the famous declaration of a “Greater Europe” in 2019 and maintained contacts with Russian President Vladimir Putin thereof; who as of February last year, while speaking about Russia’s “certain defeat” in Ukraine, called for avoiding Moscow’s “humiliation”; who repeatedly underscored his commitment to the matrix of diplomacy attributed to Charles de Gaulle, which assigned France the role of a “bridge between East and West” — has now swung to the other extreme of harsh Euro-Atlantic rhetoric.

This appalling inconsistency can only be seen as stemming out of the unfavourable development of events in the scenario of the Ukrainian crisis with the prospect of a Russian defeat in the war no longer in the cards even remotely and replaced by the growing possibility that peace will ultimately be attainable only on Russia’s terms. Put differently, the power dynamic in Europe is shifting dramatically, which, of course, impacts Macron’s own ambitions to “lead Europe.”

Meanwhile, Russian-French relations have also been undergoing a stage of fierce competition and rivalry — even confrontation — in a number of areas. For a start,  French Foreign Minister Stephane Sejournet said in an interview with Le Parisien in January that Russia’s victory in Ukraine would lead to 30% of world wheat exports being controlled by Moscow. For Paris, this is a question of the sustainability of one of the key sectors of French national economy.

French agriculture is marked by its history that had its beginning with the Gaulois in 2000 BC. It needs to be understood that In modern history, French Revolution of 1789, which altered every part of the French social order and led to the abolition of privileges for upper classes, was also an Agricultural Revolution, which allowed a broad land redistribution. Suffice to say, the bond of French people to their agriculture is very strong.

As it is, African states are changing the structure of grain imports due to the technical regulations introduced by the European Union as part of its green agenda and French farmers consequently face rising costs, and over and above that, there is now also the looming loss of regional market share to Russia.

This is on top of the inroads Russia is making in arms exports to the African continent lately. In politico-military terms too, France has lost ground to Russia in the resource-rich Sahel region, its ex-colonies and playpen traditionally. The fact of the matter is that the birds are coming to roost over France’s neo-colonial strategies in Africa, but Paris prefers to put the blame on Russia’s Wagner group which has moved in to fill the security vacuum in Sahel region, as anti-French forces have come to power in several countries at once — Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso, Chad, CAR.

In the best traditions of geopolitics, France has begun retaliating in regions sensitive to Russian interests — Armenia, Moldova and Ukraine where Russian military presence is in French crosshairs. Unsurprisingly, Ukraine is the most strategic turf where Macron hopes to achieve a bigger French presence.

Through that, Macron hopes to advance his leadership ambitions in Europe as the navigator of the EU’s foreign policy strategy in a wide arc from the African continent across the Mediterranean to Transcaucasia — and potentially all the way to Afghanistan.

All this is unfolding against the historic backdrop of an inevitable US retrenchment in Europe as Indo-Pacific hots up and the simmering rivalry with China becomes an all-consuming passion for Washington. Indeed, alongside, the towering presence of Russia across Europe is beginning to be felt intensely as it surges as the number one military and economic power in the strategic space between Vancouver and Vladivostok.

Today, the paradox is, then Russian president Dmitry Medvedev had proposed way back in 2008 a legally binding pan-European security treaty, which would develop a new security architecture in Europe, involving the reshaping of existing, and creating new institutions and norms regulating security relations in Europe in a wider geopolitical space stretching east “from Vancouver to Vladivostok.” But, alas, the US encouraged the Europeans to see the so-called ‘Medvedev Initiative’ as a trap to enfeeble NATO, the OSCE, the EU and other European bodies,  and reject that wonderful idea which would have anchored the post-cold war era firmly on a binding security architecture.

Nuclear Forces

Vladimir Putin on Russia’s Path Ahead

On the Cusp of Reelection and SMO Victory, Putin’s Interview with Rossiya Segodnya’s General Director Dmitry Kiselev

with thanks to Karl at karlof1’s Geopolitical Gymnasium.

With snippets all over Russian media as well as the 1:45 long video, the job fell to Dmitry Kiselev, the director general of Rossiya Segodnya, Sputnik’s parent media group. We get to read the translated transcript where all emphasis is mine:

Dmitry Kiselyov: Mr Putin, in your Address to the [Federal Assembly], you have, figuratively speaking, taken trillion after trillion out of your sleeve. Thus, we have proposed an absolutely amazing plan for the country’s development – absolutely amazing. This is a different Russia, with a different infrastructure, a different social system – just a dream country.

I just want to ask you, ask your favorite question from Vysotsky: “Where is the money, Zin?”

Vladimir Putin: Yes, of course.

What’s more, first of all, it’s all made up as a result of the painstaking work of the expert community, government specialists, and the Administration. Everything fully fits into the budget rules and, in fact, is quite conservative in nature, because some experts believe that there should be and will be more revenues. This means that it would be necessary to plan for more spending, because this should directly affect the prospects for economic development.

In general, it is correct, but we also planned to spend an additional $ 8 trillion on the development of the economy and social sphere in 2018, and then we increased these expenditures. I think that it is quite likely that if everything turns out as the optimists from this expert community, which I mentioned, say, then we can – and should, and will be able-to increase these costs in various areas.

Dmitry Kiselyov: So we are talking about a six-year period?

Vladimir Putin: Exactly so. We are talking about a six-year period. We are currently drawing up a budget for the “three-year” – a three-year, as we say, planning period. But, of course, when we were preparing for the Message – I say, “we were preparing for the Message”, because the whole team is working-we assumed that we would calculate our income and expenses in those areas that we consider key, priority areas for six years.

Dmitry Kiselyov: But still, there are literally stunning projects. For example, the Sochi-Dzhubga highway: 130 kilometers, of which 90 kilometers are tunnels, and the rest is probably bridges, judging by the landscape. One and a half billion in the first three years only, and the track should ideally be ready in 2030. How necessary is this and will it be enough to win?

Vladimir Putin: People need this route. After all, families with children can’t get to Sochi by car. Everyone stops somewhere in the area of Gelendzhik, Novorossiysk, because the track is very heavy – serpentine.

There are several construction options available. We will be discussing this in the next few days: either do it to Dzhubga, or first do it from Dzhubga to Sochi. Some members of the Government suggest doing this in stages. Others believe that you need to do everything at once, because otherwise there will be a narrow neck from Dzhubga to Sochi.

The first part, if you look from Novorossiysk, is more or less decent, and the coverage is not bad, but very narrow. If we do it before Sochi, as the first part, then there may be traffic jams in this small space, which is still enough there.

In general, we will determine this with our specialists – how, in what stages, but you need to do it. It is necessary to determine, of course, the final cost of the project, to ensure that everyone remains within the framework of financial plans.

First of all-the interests of people, but also the economy. The development of territories in the south of the country is very important.

Dmitry Kiselyov: If we can afford such large-scale investments, it means that the country is rapidly getting richer, especially in the conditions of free trade, in the conditions of almost 15 thousand sanctions-absolutely wild. Moreover, we also set ourselves the task of reducing poverty, including in large families. Isn’t that a little cheeky?

Vladimir Putin: No. See if you go back to this road. When I discussed it with members of the Government, as you know, the Finance Ministry is always such a miser, in a good way, and it is always very conservative about spending, even the Finance Minister [Anton Siluanov] he told me-almost verbatim: “The construction of this road is opposed by those who have never driven on it today.”

Dmitry Kiselyov: In other words, the entire Government should be moved.

Vladimir Putin: And he is right, because this is especially important for families with children.

As for whether we get rich or not. The economy is growing – this is a fact, and a fact that is recorded not by us, but by international economic and financial organizations. We have indeed overtaken the Federal Republic of Germany in terms of purchasing power parity, taking its place – the fifth place – among the world’s largest economies.

The German economy contracted, in my opinion, by 0.3 percent last year, while we grew by 3.6 percent. Japan grew by a small percentage. But if everything develops at the same pace as today, then we have every chance to take the place of Japan and become the fourth economy in the world, and in the near future.

But? – here we must be honest and objective – there is a difference between the quality of our economies. In terms of purchasing power parity, that is, in terms of volume, we are indeed now fifth, and there is every chance to take the place of Japan. But the structure of these countries ‘ economies, of course, differs favorably from ours.

We still have a lot to do to ensure that we have a decent position not only in terms of purchasing power parity, but also [in terms of GDP] per capita – the first. And the second thing is to change the structure itself, to make it much more efficient, more modern, and more innovative. That’s what we’ll be working on.

As for income, purchasing power parity is a very important indicator. This is the volume, the size of the economy. This means that the state receives funds for solving strategic tasks through the tax system at all levels. This gives us the opportunity to develop in the way we consider necessary for our country.

Dmitry Kiselyov:By the way, you are talking about the structure and the need for structural changes in our economy. After all, this is exactly what your Message said, and this is how the task is set: to ensure that innovative industries grow faster than the average economy.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, of course.

I have already said this: the structure is what we need to work on. The future of our economy, the future of our workforce, efficiency and productivity depend on this.

One of the main tasks today is to increase labor productivity. Because in the face of a shortage of workers and labor resources, we have only one way to develop effectively – to increase labor productivity. This, in turn, means that we must increase the innovative start of the economy, for example, increase the density of robotization. Today we have ten robots, in my opinion, for 10 thousand working people, but we need at least a thousand robots for 10 thousand working people. This is the case in Japan, in my opinion.

And in order for people to work on such new equipment – not only to use robotics, but also other modern means of production-they need to be trained. Another problem arises – training of personnel.

For this purpose, we have designated entire areas, including engineering training. You probably noticed that we have already launched 30 modern engineering schools across the country. This year we are launching 20 more-there will be 50. And we plan to add 50 more in the coming years.

Therefore, these areas are the future of our country. We will move forward and develop in these areas.

Dmitry Kiselyov: In order to “finish” the sanctions. Many people express the idea of creating a special body that would deal with sanctions, their reflection, in general, defense against sanctions. Is something like this supposed to happen, or does it make no sense?

Vladimir Putin: There is no need simply. We analyze-the Government, the Central Bank, the Security Council-everything that our enemies do. A lot of things are being done not even for political or military reasons, although they are argued for this, but simply for reasons of competition…

Dmitry Kiselyov: Unscrupulous and unfair competition.

Vladimir Putin: Unfair competition – under the guise of some political or military considerations. This was the case in the aircraft industry, and it is happening in so many other industries.

Well, we live in the world that exists, and we have adapted to it. We understand who we are dealing with. And so far, as can be seen from the results of our work, we are acting quite effectively.

Dmitry Kiselyov: But the West’s treachery is not limited to sanctions. Here is a quote from your address [to the Federal Assembly]: “The West is trying to drag us into a new arms race in order to exhaust and repeat the trick that they managed in the 80s with the USSR.” How big is our safety margin here in the face of an arms race, in fact?

Vladimir Putin: We need to get the maximum return on every ruble invested in the defense industry. Indeed, during the Soviet era, no one considered these costs, and no one, unfortunately, chased after efficiency in our country. Defense spending accounted for about 13 percent of the country’s GDP – the Soviet Union.

I will not refer to our statistics – we will refer to the Stockholm Institute: last year our defense spending was four percent, and this year-6.8, that is, we have grown by 2.8 percent. In principle, this is a noticeable increase, but absolutely uncritical. In the Soviet Union, it was 13 percent, and now we have 6.8 percent.

I must say that defense spending accelerates the economy, it makes it more energetic. But, of course, there are some limitations here, and we understand that. The age-old question: which is more profitable – guns or oil? We have this in mind.

Although, I repeat, the modern defense industry in our country is good because it not only indirectly affects civilian industries, but also uses the innovations needed for defense and uses these innovations to produce civilian products. This is an extremely important thing.

Our expenses, of course, are not comparable. How many in the United States are they? 800…

Dmitry Kiselyov: Under 900 already.

Vladimir Putin: Under 900 – 860 or 870 billion [dollars]. They are absolutely not comparable to our expenses.

Dmitry Kiselyov: It seems to me that they are sawing there, because they have no hypersound, nothing… What’s it?

Vladimir Putin: I’ll explain what’s going on. The fact is that they spend a lot of money on maintenance – and not only on salaries, but also on maintaining bases around the world. And there, as in a black hole, everything goes away – nothing can be counted. This is where the main cut is made. Although in the production of weapons of destruction, weapons in general are also spent such money that it is difficult to estimate.

If you calculate how much they cost, say, a missile defense system, and one of the main components of overcoming missile defense on our part-the Avangard, an intercontinental missile, and an intercontinental-range planning unit-then these are simply incomparable values. And we, in fact, nullified everything that they did, everything that they invested in this missile defense system. This is how you need to act.

And of course, without any doubt, the very economy of our Armed Forces must meet today’s requirements.

Dmitry Kiselyov: The word “justice” [справедливость] is a magic word for the Russian language. You use it very carefully, but still, one day you uttered this word in your Message – and it sounded like lightning. You said that the distribution of the tax burden should become more equitable in Russia, and suggested that the Government think about it. In what direction do you think?

Vladimir Putin: You know, indeed, the distribution of the tax burden should be fair in the sense that corporations, legal entities and individuals who earn more, in simple terms, should allocate more to the general treasury for solving national problems, primarily for solving problems related to combating poverty.

Dmitry Kiselyov: A progressive tax?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, in fact, a progressive tax.

I don’t want to go into details right now, but we need to work on it. And in this way, we need to build this system so that it really gives a great return on solving, first of all, social issues and tasks facing the state in this area.

We plan to reduce the tax burden, for example, for large families, and take a number of other steps in this direction. It seems to me that society will accept this absolutely normally. First.

Second. What does business itself ask of us? It asks us to decide on the tax system, but not to touch it again, so that it is stable. This is the most important request and requirement on the part of the business.

The Government should address this issue in the very near future and submit proposals together with the deputies of the State Duma.

Dmitry Kiselyov: A progressive tax – we won’t scare anyone off? We used to be always afraid of scaring someone off with this progressive tax.

Vladimir Putin: No, I don’t think so. In principle, we have established this system. Even those who were ardent supporters of the flat scale, the authors of the flat scale, now believe that in general we are ripe for acting much more selectively.

Dmitry Kiselyov: In the course of your address, you thanked your “colleagues from the Government” – this was the wording. Does this mean that Mishustin’s government – in the event of your victory-will be preserved?

Vladimir Putin: We still need to talk about this after the elections, after the votes are counted. It seems to me that this is simply incorrect right now. But in general, the Government is working – as we can see, the results are obvious, these are objective data-and it is working quite satisfactorily.

Dmitry Kiselyov: You mentioned reducing the tax burden for large families. Children and demographics – these topics were very extensive in your message. Indeed, the issue is quite painful, because demographically Russia is melting. Last year was an anti-record birth rate.

Vladimir Putin: I think the birth rate is 1.31 or 1.39…

Dmitry Kiselyov: 1.39 children per woman capable of giving birth.

Vladimir Putin: Childbearing age.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Ideally, we would probably need to double it to three. Because it is literally a disaster for society.

You have proposed a fairly large-scale program of maternity support and demographic incentives. Are you confident that these measures will reverse the downward-to-upward trajectory?

Vladimir Putin: In general, if we take into account all the measures to support families with children, we plan to spend up to 14 trillion rubles through various channels over the next six years. That’s a lot of money.

There are a lot of areas of support for families with children: starting from general social ones – construction or renovation of kindergartens, construction of new schools, repair of old schools, putting them in order in accordance with the requirements of today-to support women from pregnancy to the age of 18. After all, we have almost 400 thousand women now receiving benefits. This is almost every third woman who is expecting a child. And more than ten million children receive benefits. This is a serious thing.

We have continued the system of providing maternity capital. We have continued payments – these decisions are currently being made – in the amount of 450 thousand rubles per family, if there is a third child, to pay off the mortgage loan. We have retained mortgage benefits for families with children. In general, a whole set in very different areas in order to support families.

Of course, as you have already mentioned, this is also the fight against poverty, because, of course, it is much more difficult for families with children than for those with no children. This is understandable, the costs are high. Nevertheless, we have managed to do a lot in this area.

Look, 20 years ago we had, in my opinion, 29 percent of the population below the poverty line – that’s 42 million people. Now 9.3 percent, according to the latest data, but this is also 13 and a half million people. Of course, a lot. Of course, we need to do everything possible to reduce it to at least seven percent. And for large families-there is a more modest figure, but it should also be increased.

What do we assume when we talk about problems with the birth rate? I have already said it many times, and experts say it, these are objective things, namely: we had two very large declines in the birth rate. During the Great Patriotic War-1943-1944. A comparable decline occurred immediately after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Just one to one, the same decline in the birth rate.

It is clear why: the social support system has collapsed. No matter how weak it was in the USSR, if you can talk about it, but still it was, and after the collapse of the Soviet Union, it disappeared almost completely, and poverty began to be complete. There’s no need to say anything right now. In any case, the family planning horizon declined during these years, and the birth rate fell before the war years. Then we had a climb. And now we have quite a large number of children, young people who will enter adulthood and childbearing age in a few years, and we assume that our indicators will also increase.

What you said is a global trend. There are only a few countries with developed economies that show positive demographic dynamics, while in all other countries everything goes into negative territory. This is a complex problem related to the economy and women’s life priorities. Now it is better not to go there, but let the demographers try, tell us and suggest a solution.

But do you know what sets you up for a positive mood? The mood in society. In our country, 70% of men and 72% of women want to have two or more children, and the state should support them. This is a whole large set of support measures that we are planning – We will definitely implement them, and we will do it.

Dmitry Kiselyov: But we are still not sure that these measures will turn the tide.

In the late 90’s-this is a well-known story, you told us about it yourself-you saved your children from a fire: you entered a burning house, on the second floor. And then they remembered that there was still money somewhere. Money in the fire and burned. This indicates your priorities: first-children, then-money.

Maybe now it’s the same across the country? Not 14 [trillions], but directly on everything, and create such a program to guarantee a reversal of this situation?

Vladimir Putin: You know, you need to watch this in the course of events, as they say. In the early 2000s, we took a number of steps in the field of demography, including the introduction of maternity capital and a number of other measures that gave an obvious positive result. This means that we can achieve the goals we need.

Dmitry Kiselyov: So there is such an experience?

Vladimir Putin: There is experience, of course, there is experience. And, using this experience and other modern developments, we should still count on achieving the goals that we set for ourselves. And as events unfold, we will adjust those measures or add something else to the measures that we will apply.

For example, we have just announced the Year of the Family. We have a new national project – “Family”. There are some elements that we have never used before. For example, 75 billion [rubles] will be allocated to those regions where the birth rate is lower than the national average. These are mainly the central regions of Russia and the North-West. 75 billion is a decent amount of money. You just need to use them correctly.

There is also such a component as caring for the elderly. There are other support measures. We need to raise the birth rate and increase life expectancy – then we will stabilize the country’s population. This is the most important integral indicator of our success or, perhaps, work that requires additional attention from all administrative levels and authorities.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Yes, but everywhere in the world there is also a third tool for solving demographic problems – immigration. What figures can we talk about in this six-year period, and what does consistency mean in this work?

Vladimir Putin: If we talk about migrant workers, we don’t have so many immigrants compared to other countries – they make up 3.7 percent of the total number of employees. But they are concentrated in those regions where economic life is most active, and there, of course, they are much more numerous. These are the Moscow region, Moscow, the North-Western region and some regions of the North where the level of wages is decent. But, without any doubt, this is an issue that requires special attention from the authorities-both local, regional, and federal.

What would you like to say here? A very important thing. After all, when they attract labor migrants, they always talk about the need to do this due to a shortage of workers. Our entrepreneurs should understand that the situation for them in terms of the availability of workers will not change for the better in the coming years – they will face a shortage of labor.

This means that in order to solve this problem radically – and now I will return to what we have already said – we need to increase labor productivity and reduce the number of employees in those areas where it is possible to do this, achieving even better results by introducing modern equipment. To do this, we need to invest in this area and train personnel – we have also already discussed this. This is the most important thing we need to think about.

In general, of course, migration policy is an important tool in the economy. Here it is not a sin to look at the experience of other countries. First of all, of course, we need to talk about the repatriation of our compatriots. What is repatriation and what is compatriots-we have already reflected in the regulatory framework, there is no need to repeat here.

We need to talk about attracting people who may not be going to move to the Russian Federation, but because of their qualifications, because of their talents in various fields, they can make a significant contribution to the development of our state, to the development of Russia. We will also be happy to attract such people.

As for traditional labor migrants, we also need to think about how to prepare them for coming to Russia, including with our partners in the countries where they live. This is the study of the Russian language, our traditions, culture, and so on. We need them to be taken care of and treated like a human being. So that they integrate naturally into our society. All this together should give a corresponding, I hope, positive effect.

Yes, and, of course, everyone should observe our traditions and the laws of the Russian Federation. And of course, compliance with sanitary standards and so on is very much in demand. Ensuring the safety of citizens of the Russian Federation should be the first priority.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Russians are probably the biggest divided nation in the world. You had a conversation with the “Leaders of Russia”, and one of your interlocutors said that in the Zaporozhye region we found that they are as Russian as we are. And for them-there was such an impression – it sounded like a revelation. In general, this is true, and we are now growing with new regions, and Odessa is a Russian city. Probably, there is great hope here, in this direction, too?

Vladimir Putin: Of course. The population density in these regions has always been quite high, and the climate is wonderful.

As for the Donbass, it is an industrially developed region-back in the days of the Soviet Union. How much the Soviet Union has invested in this region, in its coal mining industry, in the metallurgical industry! Yes, of course, investments are required to ensure that all production is modern, and that people’s living and working conditions are completely different from what they were a couple of decades ago.

As for Novorossiya, it is a region with a pronounced developed agriculture. Here we will do everything possible to support both traditional areas of activity and new ones that fit seamlessly into these regions and people’s desire to develop them. And there, you know, people are very talented.

Moreover, as I have already said, even taxes go to the federal budget from there. Yes, they need to be helped, supported, and brought to the national and federal Russian level at this stage. They will work, and very quickly.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Historically, it is quite obvious that the Nazi regimes themselves do not dissolve, but disappear as a result of military defeat. So it was in Germany, in Italy, in Japan. The same thing will obviously happen with Bandera’s Nazi regime. We are now moving along the entire front line, according to reports from both the Ministry of Defense and our war correspondents.

Still, did we manage to find a way to fight when our losses are less in the offensive than in the defense? This task is quite non-trivial for the art of war, but it always holds back the offensive. This is a frugality that is absolutely justified in relation to our hero warriors. But this question arises: how to move forward with minimal losses?

Vladimir Putin: The question is clear and fair. But the answer is also simple: we need to increase the means of destruction – the number and power of means of destruction, and increase the effectiveness of the forces and means used. Aviation – both tactical, and army, and the same strategic. I mean, of course, in those components that are acceptable for armed conflicts of this kind. These are ground-based weapons, including high-precision weapons. These are artillery and armored vehicles. We are developing, without any exaggeration, by leaps and bounds.

Dmitry Kiselyov: In this direction?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, it does. This is the answer to your question: the more powerful and more weapons-the less losses.

Dmitry Kiselyov: But the question still arises, what price are we willing to pay – perhaps the word “project” is not appropriate – for all this challenge that we have been forced to face historically?

Vladimir Putin: Look, every human life is priceless. And the loss of a loved one for a family, for any family, is a huge grief.

But the question is what? The question is to determine the very fact of what we are doing. What are we doing? We met today, and you have just noticed that one of the participants in the conversation said: we were surprised to find that there were Russians just like us. We came to the aid of these people. This is basically the answer to your question.

If we abandon these people today, then tomorrow our losses may increase many times, and our children will have no future, because we will feel insecure, we will be a third-or fourth-class country, no one will take us into account if we cannot protect ourselves. And the consequences can be disastrous for Russian statehood. That’s the answer.

Dmitry Kiselyov: The Americans seem to be talking about negotiations and strategic stability, but at the same time they are saying that it is necessary to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia. Our position sounds like: “We are open to negotiations, but the time for good gestures has passed, they are over.” So, there will be no negotiations?

Vladimir Putin: We have never refused to negotiate.

Dmitry Kiselyov: But how does it mean that without good gestures, there is no compromise? How then?

Vladimir Putin: I’ll try to explain. When we were negotiating in Turkey, in Istanbul (I have already said this many times, I must repeat it again, I will do it again), with the negotiators from that side, we came up with a thick folio, a document, in fact, a contract, a draft contract. An excerpt from this agreement is available, it was initialed by the head of the negotiation group from Ukraine, Mr. Arakhamiya. He did it, there is his signature (we have it in the Administration). But then, as you know, Mr. Arakhamia himself told the world publicly, also at a meeting, in my opinion, with journalists, with foreign partners: the former Prime Minister of Great Britain, Mr. Johnson, came and dissuaded them from finally signing and, accordingly, fulfilling this agreement. And the topic that you have just mentioned is that Russia needs to be defeated on the battlefield.

Are we ready to negotiate? Yes, we are ready. But only we are ready for negotiations that are not based on some “wishlist” after the use of psychotropic drugs, but based on the realities that have developed, as they say in such cases, on earth. This is the first one.

Second. After all, we have already been promised many things many times. They promised not to expand NATO to the East, and then we see them at our borders. They promised, if we don’t go deep into history, that the internal conflict in Ukraine will be resolved by peaceful means, by political means. As we recall, three foreign ministers arrived in Kiev, Poland, Germany and France, promised that they would be the guarantors of these agreements, and a day later a coup d’etat took place. They promised to fulfill the Minsk agreements, and then publicly stated that they were not going to fulfill these promises, but only took a pause to arm the Bandera regime in Ukraine. We were promised a lot of things, so promises alone are not enough here.

Right now, to negotiate just because they are running out of ammunition is somehow ridiculous on our part. Nevertheless, we are ready for a serious conversation, and we want to resolve all conflicts, and especially this conflict, by peaceful means. But we must clearly understand for ourselves that this is not a pause that the enemy wants to take for rearmament, but a serious conversation with the security guarantees of the Russian Federation.

We know the various options in question, we know the “carrots” that are going to be shown to us in order to convince us that the moment has come. We want, I repeat once again, to resolve all disputes and this dispute, this conflict, by peaceful means. And we are ready for it, we want it. But this should be a serious conversation with ensuring security for the opposing side, and in this case we are primarily interested in the security of the Russian Federation. We will proceed from this.

Dmitry Kiselyov:Mr President, I think we look a little too noble. Can’t we conclude something with them, and they will once again deceive us, and we will console ourselves with the fact that we are honest, and they deceived us? Is it our fate, after all, to remain a fool all the time?

Americans minted their own medals in the 1990s for winning the Cold War, and since then, all those decades have been decades of big lies. How can we even hope that they will go and finally conclude a fair contract with us, which they will fulfill, and even with guarantees for us? I do not know what to do with them at all? Do you really believe this is possible?

Vladimir Putin: ****I hate to say this, but I don’t believe anyone.****

Dmitry Kiselyov: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: But we need guarantees. Guarantees must be written down, they must be such that we would be satisfied, in which we will believe. That’s what we’re talking about.

Now, it is probably premature to publicly talk about what it could have been. But we certainly won’t buy into any empty promises.

Dmitry Kiselyov: I am afraid that you will be quoted in an extended way. Do you not trust anyone at all, or do you mean your Western partners in this case when you say that you don’t trust anyone?

Vladimir Putin: I prefer to be guided by facts, rather than good wishes and talk about trusting everyone. After all, you know, when decisions are made at this level, the degree of responsibility for the consequences of the decisions made is very high. Therefore, we will not do anything that does not meet the interests of our country.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Mr President, what happened to Macron? Has he lost his mind at all? He is going to send the French troops to fight with our army, he looks like a Gallic fighting rooster, thereby scaring all the Europeans. Still, how to respond to this?

Vladimir Putin: The fact is that the military of Western countries has been present in Ukraine for a long time, even before the coup, they were present, and after the coup, their number increased many times. Now they are also present directly in the form of advisers, they are present in the form of foreign mercenaries and suffer losses. But if we are talking about official military contingents of foreign countries, I am sure that this will not change the situation on the battlefield – this is the most important thing, just as the supply of weapons does not change anything.

Second, it can lead to serious geopolitical consequences. Because if, say, Polish troops enter the territory of Ukraine, as it sounds, to cover the Ukrainian-Belarusian border, for example, or in some other places, to free up Ukrainian military contingents to participate in combat operations on the contact line, then I think that Polish troops will never leave there again. I think so. They sleep and see, they want to return those lands that they consider historically their own and that were taken from them by the “father of nations” Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin and transferred to Ukraine. They want them back, of course. And if official Polish units enter there, they are unlikely to leave.

But then their example can be followed by other countries that lost part of their territories as a result of the Second World War. I think that the geopolitical consequences for Ukraine, even from the point of view of preserving its statehood in its modern form, will certainly stand up in all its glory and in full growth.

Dmitry Kiselyov: If we return to Macron, maybe he decided to take revenge on Russia in this way because we “stepped on his tail” in Africa, and we had to “stand there, be afraid”? He probably didn’t expect us to be so active there.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I think there is some resentment, but when we maintained direct contacts, we spoke quite frankly about this topic.

We didn’t go into Africa and squeeze France out. The problem is different. The well-known Wagner group first carried out a number of economic projects in Syria, then moved to other African countries. The Ministry of Defense provides support, but only on the basis of the fact that this is a Russian group, nothing more. We didn’t squeeze anyone out. It’s just that the African leaders of some countries agreed with Russian economic operators, wanted to work with them, and did not want to work with the French in any way. It wasn’t even our initiative, it was an initiative on the part of our African friends.

If an independent state wants to develop relations with its partners from other countries, including Russia, and wants to develop relations with Russia, it is not clear why it should take offense at us in this regard. We didn’t touch them, the former French colonialists, in these countries. I even say this without irony, because in many countries where France has historically been a metropolis, they don’t really want to deal with them. We have nothing to do with it. It’s probably more convenient to take offense at someone without seeing your own problems. Perhaps such a sharp, rather emotional reaction on the part of the French President is also related to what is happening in some African states.

Although I know other countries in Africa, where they are calm about the French stay and say that ” yes, we are satisfied, we are ready to work with them.” But in some countries they don’t want to. We have nothing to do with it. We don’t incite anyone there, we don’t incite anyone against France.

We do not set ourselves such tasks. To be honest, we do not have such nationwide tasks at the level of the Russian state. We’re just friends with them, that’s all. They want to develop relations with us – for God’s sake, and we meet them halfway. There’s nothing to be offended about.

Dmitry Kiselyov: But now they are saying in France that there are no “red lines” left in relation to Russia, and nothing is impossible, and everything is possible. In general, they want to somehow talk to us on the basis of a balance of power. What we just do not hear from France, from the West, and from Lithuania. In general, some such choir is not harmonious, but hostile.

Maybe we should also make unconventional decisions and at some point turn to the two-million-strong North Korean army for help? For example, in exchange for our “nuclear umbrella” over half of the Korean Peninsula? Why not then?

Vladimir Putin: First, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has its own “nuclear umbrella”. They didn’t ask us for anything. This is the first one.

Second. In principle, as we can see today from the results of what is happening on the battlefield, we are coping with the tasks that we set for ourselves.

As for those states that say that they have no “red lines” in relation to Russia, they should understand that there will be no “red lines”in relation to these states in Russia either.

As for the small states of Europe, first of all, we treat everyone with respect, no matter what. Secondly, when they, these small states, call for a tougher policy towards Russia and take some extreme measures, including, for example, to send troops and so on, these are still those states, and they understand this, that will not feel the consequences of their provocative statements. And those who can feel it, they behave much more restrained. And correctly.

Dmitry Kiselyov: And all those German dances with Taurus? Scholz says “we do not supply”, but there are forces that insist on delivering Taurus to Ukraine, the British take their own initiative: let’s, they say, transit through England, we are ready to send. The target is the Crimean Bridge, German generals are already planning operations, as we have heard, not only the Crimean Bridge, but also military bases, as they say, in the depths of Russian territory. Some are already saying that these missiles can hit the Kremlin. Don’t they really bury themselves in their dreams?

Vladimir Putin: They fantasize, encourage themselves, first of all. Secondly, they are trying to intimidate us.

As for Germany, there are also constitutional problems there. They are right to say that if the Taurus gets into that part of the Crimean Bridge, which, of course, even according to their concepts is Russian territory, this is a violation of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany.

The fact is that the opposition in Germany is behaving even more aggressively. Let’s see what they agree on. We are following this closely. They use the same British, American missiles. It doesn’t change the situation on the battlefield. Yes, they are causing us, of course, damage, this is obvious. But, in fact, this does not change the course of hostilities and the consequences that inevitably come for the opposite side.

We now hear that in the same Germany, both your channels, and foreign channels, German channels show how much they have, how much is in a faulty state, how much needs to be improved, upgraded, and so on. Let them work. As you correctly said, there are some things they need to think about. Who is smarter, he thinks.

Dmitry Kiselyov: But the new members of NATO – Finland and Sweden, in general, what did they exchange for? Swedish Foreign Minister Tobias Billstrom suddenly told the Turks that Sweden is against having NATO bases on Swedish territory. What, they didn’t understand where they were going at all? What happened to them?

Vladimir Putin: You should ask them, I do not know. We have had quite good relations, stable relations with these countries, and I think that they have benefited more from the fact that they are neutral, because this gives certain advantages, at least as a negotiating platform to reduce tensions in Europe.

In general, we had perfect relations with Finland, just perfect. We did not have a single claim to each other, especially territorial, not to mention other areas. We didn’t even have any troops, we removed all the troops from there, from the Russian-Finnish border. Why did they do this? Based, in my opinion, on purely political considerations. I probably really wanted to be members of a Western club, under some kind of “umbrella”. Frankly, I don’t understand why they need it. This is an absolutely senseless step from the point of view of ensuring our own national interests. Nevertheless, it is up to them to decide, they have decided so.

We didn’t have any troops there, now we will. There were no defense systems there, now they will appear. What for? Our economic relations were very good. They used our market, and we bought a lot from them. What’s wrong with that? But now the situation will change. With their many products in other markets, they are not really needed, and ours do not receive enough. I don’t understand.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Meanwhile, in the United States, the war is raging.…

Vladimir Putin: You know, this is a household item, but nevertheless. In recent years, both Helsinki and the border regions of Finland have accepted Russian rubles. Including in Helsinki, in large supermarkets, you could buy whatever goods you wanted for rubles. There are all the ads around in Russian.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Now the border region is simply going bankrupt.

Vladimir Putin: Yes. What am I talking about? On the other hand, from the point of view of the economy, it is very good – real estate prices were kept at a fairly good level. From the point of view of the economy, it is good, but there were, apparently, forces that were completely right-wing conservative, nationalist, who did not really like it – such a rapprochement with Russia. Some even considered it redundant: “What are Russian houses and apartments being bought for? Everything here is in Russian…”

I don’t even think so, I know that such Russophobia has started to grow up at the everyday level. Maybe some political forces inside the country decided to take advantage of this domestic roll, maybe. The whole combination of these factors led to this decision. I think so, but I can’t be 100 percent sure. In any case, this certainly does not improve the security situation in any way – both in bilateral relations and in Europe as a whole.

Dmitry Kiselyov: But in the meantime, the United States is actively running for president. It can’t do without you. You invisibly participate in it, because you are mentioned by each of the candidates from the Republican and Democratic parties in their speeches and arguments. In general, it seems that you do not leave the pages of newspapers and TV news headlines there and are an argument in the election campaign of everyone. And you’re adding fuel to the fire.

Vladimir Putin: How is that?

Dmitry Kiselyov: Saying that one of the candidates is preferable for us. But if a foreign president generally says that one of the candidates in another country is preferable, then this is a classic interference in the election. In general, to what extent do you interfere in the American elections in this way, saying that Biden is preferable to us? And in general, how much is it so? Is this trolling or even what is it?

Vladimir Putin: No, you know, I will tell you one thing that will show you that nothing changes in my preferences here. First.

Second. We do not interfere in any elections and, as I have said many times, we will work with any leader who has the confidence of the American people, the American electorate.

But here’s what’s interesting. Even in the last year of his term as President, Mr. Trump, today’s presidential candidate, reproached me just because I sympathize with Biden. That was more than four years ago. He told me so in one of the conversations. Excuse me, I’ll say it like him, it’s just a direct speech: “You want sleeping Joe to win.

He told me so when he was still President. And then, to my surprise, he was harassed for allegedly supporting him as a candidate. Well, some complete nonsense.

As for the current pre-election situation, it is becoming increasingly uncivilized. I don’t want to make any comments on that.

But I think it is obvious to everyone that the American political system cannot claim to be democratic in every sense of the word.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Actually, to be honest, your preference for Biden sounds rather strange to me personally. After all, Biden came to Moscow in 2011 and tried to persuade you not to run for president.

Do you remember this story? Then he told about it, meeting with the Russian opposition in Spaso House. And Garry Kasparov wrote about this, that Biden told this story, that he came to the Russian White House to Prime Minister Putin and tried in every possible way to dissuade him from running for President and began to build an “Arab spring” in our country. So Biden didn’t seem to like you very much back then. You have such a historic duel with him. Or did it just go away?

Vladimir Putin: To be honest, I didn’t pay much attention to this.

Dmitry Kiselyov: It’s over, isn’t it? You didn’t even pay much attention to it.

Vladimir Putin: Some kind of duel…

Dmitry Kiselyov: So it was serious for him, but not for you.

Vladimir Putin: This is just a sign of interference…

Dmitry Kiselyov: Yes, this is a 100 percent outright intervention.

Vladimir Putin: … in our domestic political processes. We have already spoken many times, and I have spoken many times: “We will not allow anyone to do this.”

Dmitry Kiselyov: All right.

If we avoid interference, pre-election battles, in fact, the escalation continues. It seems that both superpowers-Russia and the United States – are playing what in America is called the chicken game: this is when chickens jump on each other, and there it is a game when guys in cars fly into each other’s heads, and who will turn first. It seems that no one is going to turn off first. So, a collision is inevitable?

Vladimir Putin: Why not? Here in the United States, they announced that they are not going to send troops. We know what American troops are like on Russian territory. These are the interventionists. We will treat it this way, even if they appear on the territory of Ukraine, they understand this. I said that Biden is a representative of the traditional political school, and this is confirmed. But in addition to Biden and others, there are enough specialists in the field of Russian-American relations and in the field of strategic deterrence.

So I don’t think it’s all so head-on here. But we are ready for this. I have said many times that this is a matter of life and death for us, but for them it is a matter of improving their tactical position in general in the situation in the world, but also in Europe in particular, preserving their status among their allies. This is also important, but not as important as it is for us.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Interestingly, you said that we are ready for this. The philosopher Alexander Dugin, a specialist in geopolitics, calls directly and practically to prepare for a nuclear war. “And the better we are prepared for it, the less likely such a war is,” says Alexander Dugin. How can you even be prepared for this? Are we really ready for nuclear war?

Vladimir Putin: From a military-technical point of view, we are certainly ready. They [the troops] are constantly in a state of combat readiness. This is the first one.

Second. This is also a generally accepted thing – our nuclear triad is more modern than any other triad, and only we and the Americans really have such a triad.

We have made much more progress here. We have it more modern, all the nuclear component. In general, we have approximate parity in terms of carriers and charges, but we have a more modern one.

Everyone knows this, all the experts know it. But this does not mean that we should measure the number of carriers and warheads, but we need to know about this. And I repeat, those who need it – experts, specialists, and the military-are well aware of this.

They are now setting a task to increase this modernity, novelty, and they have corresponding plans. We know that too. They develop all their components, and so do we. But this does not mean that, in my opinion, they are ready to unleash this nuclear war tomorrow. If they want to, what should I do? We are ready.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Perhaps we should conduct nuclear tests at some point to be more convincing. After all, we have no international restrictions for this.

Vladimir Putin: There is a treaty banning such tests, but unfortunately the United States has not ratified it. Therefore, in order to maintain parity, we have withdrawn this ratification. Since the treaty has not been ratified by the United States, and it has not entered into final force, because it has not received the necessary number of ratifications, nevertheless, we adhere to these agreements.

We know that the United States is considering conducting such tests. This is due to the fact that when new warheads appear, as some experts believe, it is not enough to test them only on a computer, which means that they need to be tested in their natural form. Such ideas are floating around in certain circles in the United States, they have a place to be, we know about it.

And we’re watching, too. If they conduct such tests, I don’t rule it out, not necessarily, we need it or not, we still need to think about it, but it is possible that we can do the same.

Dmitry Kiselyov: But are we technically ready for this?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, we are always ready. I want to make it clear that these are not ordinary types of weapons, this is the type, branch of the armed forces that is in constant combat readiness.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Mr President, did you ever think about tactical nuclear weapons during the difficult times of last year, I do not know, at the front in connection with Kharkiv or Kherson?

Vladimir Putin: And why? It was also at the suggestion of the then command of the group that we decided to withdraw our troops from Kherson. But this did not mean that the front was falling apart there. Nothing like this has ever happened before. It was simply done in order not to incur unnecessary losses among the personnel. That’s all. This was the most important motive, because in the conditions of combat operations, when it was impossible to fully supply the group located on the right bank, we would simply suffer unjustified losses of personnel. Because of this, it was decided to relocate to the left bank.

The correctness of this choice was confirmed by what the Ukrainian command tried to do in certain areas of the left bank, in the same village of Krynki: just like in a meat grinder, they threw their people there, and that’s all. They’ve been running around barefoot lately, in the truest sense of the word. They tried to throw ammunition to them there by high-speed boats and drones. What is it? Just to be slaughtered, sent to be slaughtered.

I once asked the Chief of the General Staff, there is nothing secret here, I said: “Listen, who do you think makes such decisions from the other side? After all, the one who makes the decision understands that he sends people to their deaths?” He says, ” They understand.” I say, ” Who makes the decision, why do they do it? It’s pointless.” “Meaningless from a military point of view.” I say, ” Which one?” “I don’t know,” he says, ” probably the top political leadership, based on political considerations, that they have some chance to break through our defenses, there is some chance to get additional money, referring to the fact that they have some kind of foothold on the left bank, there is some kind of base, this is a chance to present your position beautifully at international meetings.” The command has passed, all lower-level bosses automatically issue further instructions.

But, by the way, the prisoners who were captured there surrendered, they show that they did not even know what situation they were in. Let’s say that new units are being deployed there and they say: “There is a stable defense there, come on, continue, help.” They couldn’t even get to the left bank anymore.

Dmitry Kiselyov: A tragedy.

Vladimir Putin: It’s natural. From a human point of view, absolutely.

So why do we need to use weapons of mass destruction? There has never been such a need.

Dmitry Kiselyov: So this idea never occurred to you?

Vladimir Putin: No. And why? Weapons exist to be used. We have our own principles, what are they talking about? That we are ready to use weapons, including any weapon, including the one you mentioned, if we are talking about the existence of the Russian state, about harming our sovereignty and independence. We have everything spelled out in our Strategy. We didn’t change it.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Mr Putin, when outgoing President Yeltsin suggested that you run for president, your first reaction was: “I’m not ready.”

Vladimir Putin: That’s right, it’s a direct speech.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Of course, you have evolved a lot since then. If you had to write a telegram to yourself at that time, what text would it contain?

Vladimir Putin: You know, it’s like “Yankees at King Arthur’s Court” or something like that. It is impossible to answer this question, because the question was asked at that time, in the context of the historical and economic situation in which the country was located, in the internal political situation from the point of view of internal security. And all of this together led me to the answer I gave: “I’m not ready for this.” Not because I was afraid of something, but because the scale of the tasks was huge, and the number of problems increased every day like a snowball. So I said it sincerely and not because, I repeat, I was afraid of something, but because I thought that I was not ready to solve all these problems, God forbid, I would do something even worse. That’s what it was all about. So I said it absolutely sincerely, and if I came back, I would repeat the same thing.

Dmitry Kiselyov: What was the decisive factor then? You went after all.

Vladimir Putin: I think I’ve had some conversations with Boris Nikolayevich.

Most importantly, in the end, what did he say to me back then: “Okay, okay, I understand, we’ll get to that later.” And we’ve come back to this several times.

In the end, he said that I was an experienced person, I knew what I was doing, what I was offering, and he said some other things to me. Probably, it is inconvenient to praise yourself, but I said such positive words. Later, he confirmed this again, this time in a completely positive way, I will not talk about it now.

And when the work started, everything was completely different there. You know, when you work, you think: this, this, this is what you need right now, this is now, this is tomorrow – and it went, and it went. When you get involved in a job, it’s a completely different story.

Dmitry Kiselyov: There is no time to be afraid already.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, it’s not about fears, but about understanding, about being able to solve these problems. Remember for yourself what the year 1999 is like in the economy, security, finance, and everything else.

Dmitry Kiselyov: You once said that preparing for admission to Leningrad University was a turning point for you. It was a situation where you had to go all-in, knowing: either I will do it now and I will manage, and then I will carry out the plans that I want (and you were already going to work in the KGB), or I lost, and then everything is different and there are no chances. Is Russia now also in a position where it is necessary to play all-in?

Vladimir Putin: First of all, I didn’t have such a position then. Yes, I wanted to work in the state security agencies.

Dmitry Kiselyov: It was the admission, it was such a turning point, it’s a feeling, isn’t it? Either this or that?

Vladimir Putin: Not quite. I just came to the waiting room and said: “I would like to work. What is needed for this?”

The alternative was simple: I was told that I either need to get a higher education, and preferably a law degree, or serve in the army, or have at least three years of work experience, but it is better to serve in the army. If I hadn’t gone to university, I would have joined the army.

Yes, it might have been a longer way to reach the goal that I set for myself, but it was still there. There is always an alternative.

Dmitry Kiselyov: But you did it with tension.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, of course, because I was still studying at a school with a chemical and mathematical bias, and here I had to take humanities subjects. I had to leave one thing and do another.

Yes, of course, there was tension. It was necessary to learn a foreign language independently, German in this case, it was necessary to study history, literature, and so on.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Russia is also at a crossroads right now: either it turns out, or…

Vladimir Putin: ***Russia is not at a crossroads. It is on the strategic path of its development and will not deviate from its path.***

Dmitry Kiselyov: To what extent do you feel the support of the Russian society in this new capacity? After all, a new quality of Russian society has emerged.

Vladimir Putin: It was there, it just showed up. And it is very good that we have given this deep Russian society an opportunity to express itself. I have a feeling that people have been waiting for this for a long time, that an ordinary person will be in demand by the country and the state, and the fate of the country depends on him. It is this sense of inner connection with the Motherland, with the Fatherland, its importance in solving key tasks, in this case in the field of security, that has brought to the surface the strength of the Russian and other peoples of Russia.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Do you feed off of it?

Vladimir Putin: Always. The point is not even that someone feeds, the point is that I see the requests of society. This is the most important thing – to meet the needs of society.

Dmitry Kiselyov: But it is time to recognize that you play a key role not only in Russia, but also in the world, because billions of people associate you with the hope for international justice, for the protection of human dignity, and for the protection of traditional values. How does it feel to feel so much responsibility?

Vladimir Putin: To tell you the truth, I don’t feel it at all. I just work in the interests of Russia, in the interests of our people. Yes, I understand what you are talking about now, and I am ready to comment on it. But so that I feel like some kind of arbiter of the world’s destinies, there is no such thing. Believe me, not even close. I’m just doing my duty to Russia and to our people, who consider Russia their homeland.

As for other countries of the world, this is very closely related to how we are treated around the world. That’s interesting. It’s a phenomenon, that’s for sure.

What I would like to draw your attention to. Here you are absolutely right, many people in the world look at us, at what is happening in our country and in our struggle for our interests.

That, in my opinion, is what is important. And why is this happening? Not because we are formally members of BRICS or have any traditional relations with Africa. This is also important, but the point, in my opinion, is completely different. It lies in the fact that this so-called golden billion for centuries, 500 years, practically parasitized other peoples. They tore apart the unfortunate peoples of Africa, they exploited Latin America, they exploited the countries of Asia, and of course no one has forgotten it. I have a feeling that it is not even a matter of the leadership of these countries, although this is very important, and ordinary citizens of these countries feel in their hearts what is happening.

They associate our struggle for our independence and true sovereignty with their aspirations for their own sovereignty and independent development. But this is compounded by the fact that there is a very strong desire among Western elites to freeze the existing unfair state of affairs in international affairs. They have been used to stuffing their bellies with human flesh and their pockets with money for centuries. But they must understand that the vampire ball is ending.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Are you alluding to their, as you put it in your address, colonial ways? You’re talking about it.

Vladimir Putin: That’s what happens.

Dmitry Kiselyov: But now you have drawn a completely fair picture when people see some hope in Russia. How did it happen that Western propaganda, with all its power, its enormous resources and tools, could not pupate Russia, isolate it and create a false image of it, even though it was trying in the minds of billions of people? How did this happen?

Vladimir Putin: Because what I just said is more important to people. People all over the world feel this in their hearts. They don’t even need any pragmatic explanations for what is happening.

Dmitry Kiselyov: That is, despite the amount of dirt?

Vladimir Putin: Yes. In their own countries, they also fool people, and this has an effect. They – in many countries-believe that this is in their interests, because they do not want to have such a huge country as Russia on their borders. The largest in the world in terms of territory, the largest in Europe in terms of population – not such a large population in the global dimension, not comparable to either China or India, but the largest in Europe – and now the fifth largest economy in the world. Why do we need such a competitor? They think: no, it is better, as some American experts suggested, to divide it into three, four, or five parts – this will be better for everyone. They proceed from this.

And some, at least, of the Western elites, blinded by their Russophobia, were happy when they brought us to the line after which our attempts to end the war unleashed by the West in Ukraine in 2014 by force began, when we moved to conduct a special military operation. They were even happy, I think. Because they thought that now they would finish us off, and now under this barrage of sanctions, practically a sanctions war declared on us, with the help of Western weapons and a war by the hands of Ukrainian nationalists, they would finish Russia off. Hence the slogan: “Inflict a strategic defeat on Russia on the battlefield.”

But later came the realization that this was unlikely, and even later that it was impossible. And the realization came that instead of strategic defeat, they were facing impotence, and impotence, despite the fact that they relied on the power of the all-powerful United States. They are faced with impotence before the unity of the Russian people, before the fundamental foundations of the Russian financial and economic system, its stability, and before the growing capabilities of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.

And that’s when they started thinking – those who are smarter, began to think – that it would be necessary to change some kind of strategy in relation to the Russian Federation. Then there was the idea of resuming the negotiation process, finding some ways to end this conflict, and finding out where Russia’s real interests are here. These are dangerous people, by the way, because it is easier to fight people who are guided by such base principles.

Do you remember what they used to say in Russia? What was the happiness of some people at the household level? Full, drunk, and snuffed out. Yes? Here with such people it is easier when you are full, drunk, that is, full, drunk. Nose in tobacco, because snuff was used. Now the nose is covered in cocaine. It doesn’t matter if it’s easier with such people, but it’s more difficult with smart ones – they are more dangerous, because they affect the consciousness of society, including ours, and they will throw out all sorts of their “wishlist” under the guise of “carrots” for us.

You already noticed this when you asked about the possibility of a negotiation process. But still. Hence the contradictions within the Western community. This is an obvious thing, we can see it.

We are not going to engage in splits there – they will do it brilliantly themselves. But we will certainly seek to protect our interests.

Dmitry Kiselyov: I can’t help but ask. These attacks on the Belgorod and Kursk regions are military actions that are taking place in our regions. They behave more brazenly – do they feel something? What causes this?

Vladimir Putin: The explanation is very simple. All this is happening against the backdrop of failures on the contact line, on the front line. They didn’t achieve any of the goals they set for themselves last year. Moreover, the initiative has now completely passed to our Armed Forces. Everyone knows this, everyone recognizes it. I don’t think I’ll say anything new here. Against the background of those failures, they need at least something to show, and, mainly, attention should be focused on the information side of the matter.

On the state border line, the enemy tried to attack primarily with sabotage groups. The latest report of the General Staff: somewhere up to 300 people, including with the participation of foreign mercenaries. The enemy’s losses amounted to more than 200 people – about 230. Of the eight tanks used, the enemy lost seven, of the nine armored vehicles-nine, of which seven were American-made, Bradley. Other armored vehicles were also used, but mainly for transporting personnel: they pick you up, drop you off, and leave right away. This is on the Belgorod section of the border. A little further south, in my opinion, in one place-there are much smaller forces. Nevertheless, the main goal, I have no doubt, is to prevent, if not disrupt the presidential elections in Russia, then at least somehow interfere with the normal process of expressing the will of citizens. First.

Second. This is an informational effect, which I have already mentioned.

The third. If at least something happens, get some chance, some argument, some trump card in the possible future negotiation process: we’ll give it back to you, and you’ll give it back to us.

But as I said, with people who are guided by principles: well-fed, drunk, and interested in well-known material-it’s easier to talk to them, because you can calculate what they’re going to do. They will also try in some other areas, but we can see that.

Dmitry Kiselyov: We mentioned the episode when you saved your children from a fire, but you already have grandchildren. What country would you like to leave to your grandchildren?

Vladimir Putin: You know, at the first stage, we need to fulfill everything that was stated in the Message to the Federal Assembly a few days ago. We have big plans. They are quite specific in the sphere of economic development, social sphere, support for motherhood, childhood, families with children, support for pensioners. We haven’t talked much about this lately, or haven’t talked much about it, but we also have the appropriate resources laid down here. This applies to the indexation of pensions, various benefits, and long-term care for people who need it.

I would like to say that the people of the older generation are the ones who make us have a fairly strong and stable statehood and economy today. Because, despite all the twists and turns and the most difficult tests for the economy in the 90s, it survived thanks to their heroic work after the Great Patriotic War and during the economic recovery. Therefore, we should never forget about this-about the merits of the older generation. We should always keep this in mind, ensuring their proper well-being. The future belongs to children, so I have already talked about programs in the field of motherhood and childhood.

All this is done only on the basis of the economy. I hope that it will be more technologically advanced, more modern, and based on modern achievements in science and technology, information technology, artificial intelligence, robotics, genetics, and so on. How our agriculture is developing! And modern technologies are also needed there. They are actively used and will continue to be used.

Of course, the country will be self-sufficient in ensuring its security and defense. All this together we will have to multiply many times – and the future will be assured.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Thank you, Mr President. Your confidence is contagious. I wish you success in your noble deeds.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you.

Dmitry Kiselyov: Thank you.

Several segments were super-emphasized: First regarding the trustworthiness of those from the Empire of Lies—”I hate to say this, but I don’t believe anyone.” And second and most importantly regarding its development, “Russia is not at a crossroads. It is on the strategic path of its development and will not deviate from its path.” Readers may have more than those, and there’re passages I’ve emphasized when they were first produced during previous events that I chose to leave alone. Putin reminds me of numerous US Presidents from the first 80 years of the 19th Century who deemed it unbecoming for them to promote themselves during their Presidential campaigns. Putin was also gracious and correct to note that Russia’s development plans and their implementation is a team effort spanning Russia. Putin’s observation that today’s Russian society isn’t new, that it’s always been there and is experiencing a resurrection, was very important as it connects past efforts and great deeds with the present. Putin’s pause to talk about pensions and pensioners—points that haven’t got much illumination recently—was also important as it emphasized that healthier demographics includes lengthening lifespan and reassuring his peers that their security will also continue and improve. The approach to the migrant workers issue was also well thought as was his directness about the lack of labor lasting a decade or more. I expect robots to appear in Russia’s retail sector very soon and in the transport sector freeing people to advance well beyond being a clerk or driver.

In the opening, there was the discussion about the construction of a very difficult Sochi-Dzhubga highway traversing geography very similar to that of the Northern California Coastline that Highway 1 snakes through but has no real shoreline since it’s the leading edge of the North American Plate and thus nothing to develop. The map that’s below is the best I could find depicting the region, although there are many that do a very good job of showing the immediate Sochi region;

The terrain along the coast continues another 40 K to the North—a significant engineering challenge. That challenge can serve as a metaphor for the trials Russia will face in its development over the next 6 years. There’s plenty of work to be done, and then as Putin continually says, there’ll be more work to be done.

The General Staff brings the Cure

On the healing power of the Holy Russian General Staff

By Marat Khairullin

What Europe is doing today is literally incomprehensible to the mind. I emphasize: the mind of a modern, civilized, well-informed person, brought up on humanitarian values. Today we all have the opportunity, as they say, online, live to watch as Europe once again slides into the era of savagery and primitive cruelty. The worst thing is that today we can clearly see how huge chunks of modern Europe are peeling off the veneer of civilization that our neighbors have been so proud of in recent decades. And, probably, even more frightening here is that you can clearly see how thin this raid was.

Decades of peace after the Great Patriotic War allowed all of humanity to forget that for centuries Europe was a source of threat to all of humanity. There is no abomination that European civilization does not invent and embody in relation to Man – any form of oppression, genocide, mass burning of women, concentration camps, slavery and the destruction of entire peoples by starvation, colonialism and neocolonialism, the mass introduction of homosexuality as a form of “soft genocide” against the entire human race, etc. so on and so forth…

And the pinnacle of all this: Europe has unleashed two world wars and is now rapidly unleashing a third… That is, some satanic gene that seeks to destroy humanity is embedded in the very structure of European civilization.

Two world wars and tens of millions of innocent victims did not cure Europe of this monstrous genetic disease, and now, before the eyes of the whole world, it is trying to ignite a Third World War, which threatens to destroy this time everyone on the planet, including the planet itself…

Probably, now many of my readers will ask the question-why this philosophical speech from a reporter working exclusively on earth. And the fact is that here on earth, and specifically in the trenches, I discovered that the cure for this satanic European gene has long been developed by our country in the form of fundamental concepts on which domestic military science is built.

Of course, I draw conditional parallels, but the point is that our strategic planners assume that sooner or later Europe will once again attack us. And based on this, they make their own plans. Moreover, as I understand it, based on historical experience, a clear gradation of signs of the coming European invasion has been developed. They fit into a fairly simple formula: as soon as Europe starts moving its borders towards Russia, expect an attack. It’s always been like this. And, as I understand it, the entire current foreign and domestic policy of Russia is based on the fact that a future war with Europe is inevitable.

I have repeatedly written about the profound signs that indirectly indicate this assessment of the situation by our authorities. For example, the country’s defense sector has been sent a clear signal from the highest level that the current rate of financing for the industry will continue for at least a decade. So that production workers are not afraid to deploy additional capacities, realizing that they will always find sales.

However, today, against the background of the fact that Europe has already openly announced another campaign to the East, it makes sense to talk about what cards we are playing in this escalation. Especially in comparison with the situation on the eve of the first two World Wars.

So, the main difference, from my point of view, is that both the first and Second World Wars were not only inevitable for us, but, obviously, we entered them with a much smaller set of trump cards than our opponents. Roughly speaking, the actions of our opponents dictated our moves. For example, the enemy not only deployed its military capabilities before us, but also tested them much earlier.

The German Army in ‘ 41 already had considerable combat experience. This was its main difference from the Red Army. A very important factor is that at the beginning of the war, we were inferior not in terms of the number or quality of armored vehicles, but in terms of the number of experienced, shelled crews.

The same applies to aviation, infantry, artillery, and so on.

Today, the situation is just the opposite, and our moves are already imposing behavior on the enemy. Our army has not just accumulated combat experience, which determines its effectiveness. A powerful single grouping of under a million people has been created, which is unfolding in ever-increasing directions. This is evidenced, for example, by yesterday’s events in the Belgorod-Kharkiv direction.

The enemy tried to simply move in our direction and immediately received losses of one hundred people, not counting equipment – this is comparable, for example, to the daily losses of Ukrov in such a hot direction as Kherson.

In other words, Russia has managed to deploy a full-fledged military group with real combat experience in this area in just six months. This is, by the way, to the question of rumors about the breakthrough of our troops in the Kharkiv direction. Obviously, the declared operation Ukrov had primarily intelligence purposes. Well, we’ve scouted it.

Russia today has not only real combat experience, we have well-trained and war-tested specialists at all levels. For example, our command did not just let most of the officers through the front line. Our army, which is much more important, in two years managed to grow from scratch a whole generation of front-line middle-level officers (or, probably, tactical-dear readers, tell me) – this is clearly seen in the example of my native “Slavyanka”. I won’t talk about the mechanism in detail, but anyone who closely follows my publications can see what serious combat work is going on in terms of raising future great commanders from young combat soldiers.

This is a very difficult, sometimes frankly difficult and cruel process, but it is going very fast. I, for example, see how a conditional thirty-year-old battalion commander came to the brigade three months ago-a boy, yesterday’s platoon and company commander, and how he becomes after running in continuous battles in the experienced, well-coordinated Slavyanka brigade.

You probably shouldn’t write about this in live reports, but you, my dear readers, can watch this process in an artistic presentation in essays and stories.

And now I look at this cohort of “Slavyanka” battalion commanders and imagine what they will do from the European army. Do not forget that each battalion commander of the “Slavyanka”, which I write about, is already a ready-made squadron – you can appoint it right now.

What is also important here is that these young people, in general, are also well trained and educated. And” Slavyanka ” is not the only one at the front. Today, only the potential of such (let’s call them “super-experienced”) units as my “Slavyanka”, which have an excellent officer backbone, capable of fighting in any conditions, is estimated at 100 thousand bayonets.

The peculiarity of such units is that they are assigned to newly formed units (usually three or four), which, in conjunction with an experienced unit, adopt combat experience in practice.

And today, thanks to such a system, I see that once raw units are being transformed into strong combat regiments and brigades. And in addition, there are also special shock-assault units, also constantly fighting since the beginning of the SVO and having a huge accumulated combat experience. These are mostly our paratroopers and Marines. The potential of these forces is estimated at 150 bayonets.

That is, we have only in the first line “super-experienced” pure infantry troops numbering about 250 thousand. But there are also exactly the same “super-efficient” and experienced purely artillery, rocket, engineering, aviation, etc. units. What are the Europeans going to do with all this?

Moreover, it is necessary to emphasize once again what constitutes the “super-efficiency” of these teams. On the example of Slavyanka, I have already written more than once how in the summer, just to keep the front in our direction, the Ukry kept the number of troops in the ratio of one to three in front of our position in a defense zone about 10 kilometers deep. That is, for one of our three dill just sat in the trenches. The calculation was that when we go on the offensive (even with a total advantage in aviation and art), our losses in personnel will exceed Ukrop. And we will simply drown in our own blood (who counts dill-no one cared about them, the main thing is our losses).

It’s like a classic: the attackers always suffer heavy losses. Simply due to the fact that the Ukry diligently dug into the ground. In the end, everything turned out exactly the opposite – the Nazis suffered enormous losses.

And if in Bakhmut, according to Prigozhin’s estimates, the losses were one to three in our favor. Even during the counteroffensive in Zaporizhia, dill losses were, according to official estimates, one in eight. And now clearly more. According to my feelings, somewhere one in ten, at least, if not more-there are also a number of indirect signs that are clearly visible to a person who is inside the process.

And this actually put the entire military science of NATO in a stupor – how are they going to fight with such soldiers and with such an army vehicle?

Let’s imagine what the NATO countries can put up against us. For example, the same France, which, through the mouth of Macron, announced the first readiness to march to the East.

France has two divisions of constant combat readiness. The conditional number of real combat bayonets (without real combat experience) is about 7 thousand. At the same time, an extreme check revealed that the combat kit in tanks and armored vehicles is half of what it should be. This is, I emphasize, in the troops of constant combat readiness.

And for this unprecedented power, the whole of France has several dozen artillery barrels and less than a dozen MLRS barrels.

For comparison, according to some estimates, the density of our barrel artillery near Avdiivka was about 60 barrels per kilometer (including self-propelled guns), plus twenty MLRS installations. Plus tanks, UAVs and aircraft.

An even more interesting picture emerges if you know that about 20 percent of French men are homosexuals. Among young people, this percentage exceeds 30 and confidently tends to 40.

You can imagine how homosexuals are fighting – dill, which is strongly moving towards European values, has not been able to gather a single blue battalion.

Few people know, but one of the problems of the Israeli army is a very high percentage of homosexuals (the second problem is religious people who do not want to take up arms). Therefore, the IDF that is destroying Gaza today is not doing it as effectively as the one that fought for the freedom and survival of Israel. Homosexuals make good executioners, but warriors are not so-so.

And what kind of advertising would it be, imagine, in the case of dill: gay fighters tear up the defense of the totalitarian army of Russia and plant a rainbow flag in Donetsk. But it didn’t work out, although they tried repeatedly – the perverts don’t want to fight, and that’s it.

And if so, who will the French send to die on the Eastern Front – the very Arabs who regularly burn their suburbs?

I imagined it: a French Arab immigrant in the winter, but with a bare bottom in a cold puddle in the same trench on the Eastern Front. Such a gay Verdun with an Arabic accent. Very funny.

Or let’s imagine how England will send its Sasu to the Eastern Front, which it is so proud of (that’s all it has). Which will fall, for example, into the clutches of my “Slavyanka”, where there is such a gambling social competition between bats – drive the special forces to the grave. Oh, how much fun it will be – English special forces, with English toilet paper in English backpacks, guys will line up to fight with them. You know, in an aggressive queue like this.

This is not a joke, I told you how the 36th marine brigade of Ukropia lost a battalion of the same special forces trained by the same British sasa in Opytne. As if it wasn’t there, they pretended it wasn’t.

Or how we ate a special forces company of the 3rd assault brigade with diplomas of the American Delta Force near Avdiivka for an afternoon snack. No matter how you look at it, special forces in the southern Russian steppes are not fighting against Russian infantry.

Of course, you can also talk about the Poles, imagine how they will sit in the trenches – these are the very farmers who are now blocking the border with dill. Oh, sorry, but they’ve been here before. Bold ones, flags were openly hung here last summer. We hung there for exactly two weeks, then we went on the attack once – I’m not lying-exactly once, at night, we lost five people to our only position. The next morning, the flags were quickly removed and we did not see them again. No flags, no Poles. In short, Poles, ay, come, we are waiting. You haven’t answered us yet for Susanin.

Speaking in general, the third campaign of the Europeans themselves, who decided not to hide behind dill like a fig leaf anymore, against Russia is still starting so-so. Let’s see what happens next.

As for our side, our Supreme Leader once said [not] in vain that he preferred the prevention of disease to doctors and pills.

We thought that the GDP was talking about human health, but it turns out that it is about our General Staff, which at the moment, like some medieval saint, is preventing Europeans from the Third World War by applying healing bombs and shells to dill.

It will not help, well, then that very gambling and fun Russian infantry will go directly to the treatment. The only thing I would personally wish for here, this time to make Europe healthier for good, is to cut out the damn gene once and for all, with all their gonorrhea, genocide and homosexuality, so that it will never be customary to interfere with the life of normal humanity again.

Marat Khairullin

West in 404: Nuke or Kneel

And both options lead to same defeat.. Brian Berletic breaks down the Ukraine’s Manpower Crisis: No Amount of Money or Aid Can Solve It

He uses the US Army’s own [admittedly inadequate] doctrine to explain why the Ukraine is finished in terms of manpower, even if further financing and weapons resupply were possible. They lack the time, especially seasoning top cadre, in order to be combat effective. And the ideal environment in which to train within the Ukraine, already involved and enveloped in the hellscape of war. No place on the Ukraine is safe from Russian stand-off weaponry.

The options confronting the sinking West are bitter indeed: double down into nuclear war, as NATO itself lacks the tools and manpower to halt much less defeat the Russian Armed Forces. Or accept defeat and the end of their centuries-old Hegemony.

More detail from The New Atlas:
Ukraine is suffering from a growing military manpower crisis in addition to a lack of arms and ammunition;
Trained military manpower takes up to half a year to produce, new brigade-sized units can take up to 30 months to stand up;
Ukraine and its Western sponsors simply cannot produce trained military manpower faster than Russia is removing it from the battlefield;
This leaves the collective West with the choice of either accepting it has lost its proxy war with Russia, or attempting to intervene more directly;

References:
NEO – Ukraine’s Manpower Crisis: No Amount of Money or Aid Can Solve It (March 5, 2024):
The Kyiv Independent – Ukraine struggles to ramp up mobilization as Russia’s war enters 3rd year (March 3, 2024):
The Washington Post – Front-line Ukrainian infantry units report acute shortage of soldiers (February 8, 2024):
US Department of Defense – The National Defense Industrial Strategy (NDIS) (2023-2024):
NEO – Fatal Flaws Undermine America’s Defense Industrial Base (February 15, 2024):
US Department of Defense – Press Release: Evaluation of Sustainment Strategies for the Patriot Air Defense Systems Transferred to the Ukrainian Armed Forces (DODIG-2024-056) and Evaluation of the DoD’s Sustainment Plan for Bradley, Stryker, and Abrams Armored Weapon Systems (February 20, 2024):
Reuters – Ukraine considers proposal by army to mobilise another 500,000 for war (December 2023):
Reuters – Who are the forces involved in Ukraine’s counteroffensive? (June 2023):
US DoD – Defense Officials Hold Media Brief on the Training of Ukrainian Military (March 2022):
The US Army War College Quarterly – Expanding Brigade Combat Teams: IS the Training Base Adequate? (2017):

Where to Find My Work:
Website: https://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/
Telegram: https://t.me/brianlovethailand
Twitter: https://twitter.com/BrianJBerletic

Digital ID Part of Social Contract Between Govt, Citizens: World Bank, Verizon Chiefs

By Ayang Macdonald The President of the World Bank Group, Ajay Banga, and the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Verizon, Hans Vestberg, have emphasized...

Digital ID Part of Social Contract Between Govt, Citizens: World Bank, Verizon Chiefs

Russia and The Holy Land

A continuation of the thought of “Zionism, Arrogance & World War III” — why a rising Orthodox Russia is fated to bury both Messianic Judaism and the hired western muscle in the Holy Land — from the perspective of geopolitics and geoeconomics. The eschatological consequences of lose-lose predicaments are profound

By Jamal Wakim at Al Mayadeen.

Gamal Abdel Nasser announced in 1969 that the battle on the banks of the Suez Canal would decide the fate of the world. This piece explains how.

Russia’s victory in struggle with collective West will be achieved in Middle East, not Eastern Europe

This article discusses the importance of what is happening in the Middle East and the battle taking place there specifically in the region extending from Egypt in the west to Iraq in the east to determine the fate of the world. When we talk about this region, there is a connection between the battle taking place in the Middle East and the battle that has always been taking place in the heart of Eurasia, specifically against Russia.

In the past two centuries, Russia was the one facing the so-called collective West, and it was the spearhead in confronting this collective West. In the early nineteenth century, this collective West was represented by Napoleon, and after that, during World War II, the collective West was represented by Nazi Germany, and after World War II, the collective West was represented by the United States of America.

Experience facing Napoleon

In the face of Napoleon’s invasion, we must understand that there was a project for this collective West, represented by global hegemony, and this collective West began its attack in Egypt and the occupation of Egypt in the year 1799. France’s failure in Egypt two years later was what determined Napoleon’s fate, and therefore his defeat was a matter of time in the confrontation against Russia. After that, Napoleon did not succeed in isolating Russia after the Battle of Austerlitz in December 1805, despite his victory in this battle. After that, Napoleon had to invade Russia in an attempt to subjugate it, and in this way, he recruited an army from various parts of Europe to begin his invasion of Russia.

On June 24, 1812, and the following days, the first wave of the multinational French Grande Armée crossed the Niemen River, beginning the French invasion of Russia. Despite the great advance of the French forces inside Russian territory, and despite their tactical victory over the Russian army in the Battle of Borodino, and then Napoleon’s occupation of Moscow itself, he was unable to achieve victory over Russia and began his withdrawal five weeks after his entry into Moscow, only to be defeated tactically in the battle. Bonaparte began his retreat before the Russian forces, which pursued him until Paris, where he was forced to abdicate and accept exile to the island of Elba, off the coast of Corsica. Despite his desperate attempt to return to power in early 1815, Napoleon was actually defeated by Russia, but his strategic defeat had begun with his failure in Egypt a decade and a half before that date.

World War II experience

Then, during World War II, Nazi Germany launched a military campaign in North Africa as part of its larger strategic goals. This campaign, led by General Erwin Rommel, was known as the North African Campaign. However, Nazi Germany’s primary focus in Eastern Europe was not initially directed toward the Russian heartland. Instead, it invaded Poland in 1939, which led to the outbreak of the war in Europe. Later, in June 1941, Germany launched Operation Barbarossa, a massive invasion of the Soviet Union, with the intention of capturing key cities like Moscow and Leningrad.

At the time, the advance of Erwin Rommel’s forces in North Africa constituted an attempt to isolate it and reach the Suez Canal and cut off British access to the Middle East. In parallel, Nazi forces had begun to invade the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941. They advanced toward major cities like Leningrad, Moscow, and Stalingrad; where they faced tough resistance from the Soviet military and encountered numerous logistical challenges due to the vastness of the territory and the harsh conditions. But it was Erwin Rommel’s failure in the Middle East that sealed the final failure for Nazi Germany, and it was only a matter of time before Nazi Germany was defeated.

Rommel’s defeat at the Battle of El Alamein in the fall of 1942 represented a colossal failure. Therefore, this defeat in the Middle East was followed by the Soviet victory in the Battle of Stalingrad in February 1943. The Battle of Stalingrad weakened the German army and boosted Soviet morale, contributing to the eventual Soviet counteroffensive. Then, the Battle of Kursk occurred in July 1943 and was a major offensive launched by Nazi Germany against the Soviet Union. The battle ended in a decisive Soviet victory and marked the beginning of a series of successful Soviet offensives that pushed German forces back toward Eastern Europe. The defeat of Nazi Germany was announced in May 1945.

Brezhnev’s geopolitical shortsightedness

The Soviet Union emerged victorious in the war against Nazi Germany, only to find itself facing the United States, which would take the banner of leadership of the collective West from Nazi Germany. According to the divisions of the Yalta Conference, the Soviets expanded their influence into Eastern and Central Europe, securing a defensive depth in the heart of Russia. But Soviet leader Joseph Stalin did not have the opportunity to reach the eastern Mediterranean after the defeat of the communists in Greece in the civil war in 1947, nor did he have the opportunity to reach the Adriatic Sea after a dispute broke out with Yugoslav leader Josip Broz Tito, who accepted generous offers from the West to stay away.

About the bloc of socialist countries

Here, the United States began to encircle the bloc of socialist countries by establishing NATO in 1949, which was supposed to besiege the communist bloc and contain the communist influence in Southeast Asia. The Baghdad Pact, also known as the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO), was established in 1955 among Iraq, Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, and the United Kingdom. It aimed to foster cooperation and mutual defense among its member states, particularly in the face of perceived Soviet expansionism and influence in the Middle East. However, the main target of the United States was to attack the Soviet interior. What hindered this plan was the coup led by Gamal Abdel Nasser in Egypt, which brought him to power. Abdel Nasser declared his blatant opposition to the policy of Western alliances and declared his own policy of non-alignment in the Cold War, and, at the same time, he began to take rapprochement initiatives toward the Soviet Union and the bloc of socialist countries in order to balance Western support for “Israel”. After his victory against Britain, France, and “Israel” during the tripartite aggression, Abdel Nasser was able to overthrow the Baghdad Pact in 1958 after the coup that he supported against the Hashemite monarchy in Iraq in the summer of 1958.

The Soviet rapprochement with Abdel Nasser contributed to opening the African arena to the growth of African-Russian relations and led to the liberation of African countries from Western colonialism.

But after the year 1965 and the coup against Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev in the Soviet Union, the arrival of a bureaucratic class with a “Eurocentrism” orientation in the Soviet Union that gave priority to Moscow’s relations with Europe led to the neglect of Soviet-Arab relations and pushed them to second place in terms of importance. What made matters worse was the communist dogmatism of short-sighted Soviet leaders, which made them neglect the geopolitical dimension. Unfortunately, during the Cold War, the Soviet Union, and specifically the leadership that took power after 1965, did not realize the importance of what was happening in the Middle East as a result of its European-centric vision. Therefore, they were content and happy with what was happening with their share of influence in Eastern and Central Europe, and they neglected their influence in the Middle East.

After 1965, the United States took advantage of the short-sightedness of the new Soviet leadership to resolve the battle in the Middle East. The defeat of the Arab countries in 1967 was not against “Israel”, but it was in fact against the collective West, primarily the United States of America, which supports “Israel”. It also constituted the first major defeat for the Soviet Union. Then, the American attack began in Eastern Europe via the destabilization of Czechoslovakia and Poland. And when the Soviet Union left the region, and after Egypt turned toward the United States under Anwar Sadat, the issue of defeating the Soviet Union was only a matter of time. This brings us back to what the late Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser said in 1969 when he announced that the battle on the banks of the Suez Canal would decide the fate of the world. Therefore, the defeat of the progressive Arab countries, led by Egypt, constituted a defeat for the Soviet Union as a whole, making it lose strategic superiority in favor of the United States, which began achieving one victory after another, leading to victory in the Cold War.

In summary

Now what is happening in the Middle East is also a renewed attempt launched by the collective West, led by the United States, to win global hegemony. They began this attack by occupying Afghanistan in 2002, then Iraq in 2003, before heading to the Russian heartland. They began their attack in Afghanistan, occupying Afghanistan, and then invading Iraq, only to begin shortly after the process of the so-called “Arab Spring” aimed at changing regimes through the use of soft power. After the outbreak of the “Arab Spring”, an indirect war was launched against Russia in the year 2014. Therefore, what is happening in the Middle East, in my estimation, is that any victory in Eastern Europe will not be decisive until the Middle East is done, and, therefore, the Eurasian powers led by Russia must focus their attention on the battle currently taking place in the Middle East because this is the one that could end American influence.

If the Americans win this battle, all the victories that Russia could achieve in Ukraine or Eastern Europe will have no strategic benefit, because the main battle would have been lost, as it happened during the Cold War. Therefore, in the year 1969, during a visit by the late Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser to the Suez Canal, when Sinai was occupied and the Israeli enemy was on the other side of the canal, he said that on the banks of the Suez Canal the fate of the world was decided, and unfortunately the fate of the world was decided not in our favor, but in their favor. What he meant was the American hegemony with the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Now, the focus must be on this battle. What is happening in the Middle East is a major battle centered on the main axis: Palestine. What is happening in Palestine is something mentioned in religious books. I may have my own interpretation. Hence, we find that some of the signs mentioned in the Bible are being witnessed now: the killing of children at the hands of Rhodes two thousand years ago is being repeated at the hands of Netanyahu in Gaza. The attempt to deport the Palestinians to Egypt is similar to the story of the Virgin Mary and her son Jesus taking refuge in the land of Egypt. It is worth mentioning that the Resistance in Palestine receives assistance from Iran, similar to the gifts that the Three Magi gave to the child Jesus in the cave. Note that what led the three wise men to the cave was mainly the North Star seen in the Middle East as Russia. Could it be a sign that guides the current Russian leadership toward the region to achieve a decisive victory in the contemporary battle of Armageddon?

 

Zionism, Arrogance & World War III

The eschatological consequences of lose-lose predicaments

This eschatological presentation was filmed before the zionists commenced the land invasion of Gaza. It aged really well. It helps us understand why Zionism CANNOT retreat, and must ever escalate. This has nothing to do with the risible front of Netanyahoo’s political career. Even if he is deposed today, far worse will succeed him, as also appears with his dear cousin “Toria” Nuland..

A cogent argument, having significant agreement with merely observed ongoing geopolitics. In the next phase, the two key battleground regions of 404 and Palestine will coalesce into a single front CENTERED AROUND SYRIA. Palestine is itself a subsidiary of Greater Syria, slyly cut up by the British Empire into the five extant pieces. In other words, Turkey will come off its fence; it was prudent of the Sultan to just say that he will soon retire! Turkey is ‘No Country for Old Men’..

Damascus is ground zero of Armageddon. Why the Axes of Resistance have been so careful not to involve Syria so far — it is for the last phases, when both the Jews and Russians drop their masks and wage open war on each other. The West has become irrelevant already!

The time is ripening now, with Russia having been given all the time it needs to exhaust a fair arrangement with the West. All such were sabotaged by zionist technocrats fronting all major western countries..

The two central actors in our strange End Times are Orthodox Russia and Jewish Israel. The Israelites split into two irreconcilable groups at the time of the First Coming — into Christianity and Jewry.. The West serves as adjunct to the messianic-satanic Jewish side; in the other camp, the key civilizational-states function the same for Russia..

Both sides know the real Messiah’s Second Coming will be in Damascus and prepare for the contest..

You can see how the Jews started the softening up phase of Syria already — focusing on relentless aggression, attriting Iranian advisers, as well as the medieval starvation-economic siege and PsyWar against Syria to keep her down. They stopped deconfliction channels with Russians inside Syria, are sending more dangerous weapons to 404 to help defeat Russia, and various of their UN diplomats and parliamentarians openly threatened Russia.

Russia started its moves via deeper Iranian defense interpenetration, coordinating the economic siege and pauperization of the combined West via Yemen’s Red Sea, preparing for interdicting Gibraltar and the West’s soft underbelly as well as energy-starvation via General Armageddon’s work in Algeria and the Sahel, and Kadyrov’s armies prepositioned inside Syria.. How much of their world-leading air-defense has spread by now via Iran to Hezbollah, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and others??

Everything’s about prepositioning for these imminent next moments. This informs why Europe MUST wage nuclear war on Russia, to try to not only consume her, but to take Russia out of the Holy Land (Greater Syria) and deny the Rest of humanity the world best Russian armory. That is even more important than reclaiming Khazaria on the north coast of the Black Sea. This is crucial too, for rising Unholy Israel overtly seeks to control one of the main breadbaskets of mankind, as already leveraged by BlackRock, Monsanto, Cargill and Big Ag into owning most of the Ukraine. Many narrations foretell the AntiChrist will use food and weather as weapons to control or humiliate nations. Witness Gaza, the fate of us all if they succeed.

War is chosen

About the new plans of the West in Ukraine

By Rotislav Ishchenko

(machine translation)

It all started with the announced resignation of Victoria Nuland. Given the age of the lagged, this may be the end of the successfully developed career of the granddaughter of the local emigrants and the daughter of Yale professor, who made his way to the highest echelon of American politics, moreover, in its most closed and corporate part – under the auspices of the State Department.

The political analyst and columnist of the MIA “Russia Today” Rostislav Ishchenko expressed his opinion about the new plans of the West in Ukraine.

Until recently, Nuland was seen as a potential candidate for the post of First Deputy Secretary of State and a candidate for the Secretary of State in the event of the unlikely victory of the Democrats in the upcoming presidential election. Given that it was Nuland who was the “engineering” that pulled out American politics in the Russian direction, overcoming all possible difficulties (from reformatting the 2014 Maidan under the USA in its final phase, before the sabotage and breakdown of the Minsk agreements, which would have been impossible without the stubborn but flexible tactics of Nuland at the same time), its further career growth would not only be a fair reward for efforts, but also corresponded to the interests of the Biden administration’s policies.

It can be assumed that Nuland went around at the turn of majors from more decent families. Nevertheless, the hereditary American aristocracy, whose ancestors arrived at the Mayflower, never finally accepts middle-class immigrants. No matter how rich and successful they are, unless their grandchildren can claim relative equality. But Victoria has a very difficult husband, and the time is difficult – at such times, qualified personnel are not scattered, and majors from “good families” are not in a hurry to take responsibility.

Nuland could get tired, get sick, even just want to jump from the ship of the Democratic Party, which is in full swing to the reefs. But all her previous activities are contrary to such assumptions. She looks more like a man who dies at a combat post for the sake of realizing his idea, who will fight for a doomed ship even if the captain and most of the team have already left him. She is one of the people living under the motto “Win or die”.

And suddenly, on the eve of the most difficult elections, the Democrats, without any reflection, refuse such a valuable frame. One could have guessed the reasons for a long time, but the next event happened here.

Zaluzhny, who allegedly stubbornly refused the post of ambassador to Britain, suddenly joyfully accepted this appointment. By the way, hello to those who for a year and a half said that the Zelensky creation of the British (they showed him the MI-6 headquarters and put his special forces to guard him), and the Hollow – Americans (they overlaid it with advisers). And all that happened in Kiev as part of Zelensky’s alleged conflict with the Hollow – is the struggle of the Americans with the British for control over the remnants of the Ukrainian garbage, in which Zaluzhny allegedly represented the Americans, and Zelensky English. It is harmful for some people to watch Western political blockbusters, they begin to perceive life as a movie. Now the same figures say that the English Hall Creativity turns out to be and they “saved” it by taking the ambassador – will be taught there to work as president.

In general, the simplicity, optimism and flight of the imagination of some people are unlimited. But the fact remains – Zaluzhny was offered to leave as ambassador to London somewhere since the end of December 2023. He was in no hurry to accept this offer even after his formal resignation. And suddenly agreed.

Finally, as a cherry on the cake, it just as suddenly became clear that Zelensky was allegedly dissatisfied with his absolutely obedient Kuleba, who zealously defended the position of the Presidential Office in the international arena. Kuleba begins to quickly resolve his team in new positions (it’s hard to find suitable embassies right away, so while Kuleba’s employees leaving office do not announce their plans, simply making it clear, that remain in the diplomatic service). Allegedly in a couple of weeks (may be a little faster or a little later) should also resign Kuleba himself.

What do we see?

Against the background of sharply increased militaristic rhetoric of the West, openly threatening a direct military clash with Russia in the event of a military defeat of Ukraine (most recently, the West has completely denied such an opportunity) people resign in Ukraine and the United States, whose task (and in the case of Nuland and the idea) was to ensure a proxy war with Russia are being dismissed in Ukraine and the United States in the framework of which the West finances supplies and politically supports all those who fight against Russia, but itself remains outside the battlefield. The main task of these people was to achieve the defeat of Russia and its consent to peace on the terms of the West, without dragging the West itself into a direct military conflict with Moscow.

It is clear that Kuleba, in principle, was not aware of what role he plays – he was only one of the cogs in the political mechanism created by Nuland, diplomatic and quasi-military ( including through the organization of putsch and the threat of putsch ) pressure on Russia. But each leader selects a team of people most suitable for a specific function. Kuleba, like Nuland, was a proxy war diplomat.

Masks are dropped, the West is preparing in the near future to do without a proxy prefix. Therefore, Zaluzhny suddenly decided to become a diplomat. Perhaps in London (by tradition and by agreement with Washington, where the Democrats are not confident in their future due to the likely victory of Trump) they are preparing to establish the Ukrainian government in exile on British soil, and, as long as possible, candidates are collected for future “ministers” and “presidents”. But the root cause of Zaluzhny’s departure is also the choice of the United States and its NATO allies in favor of the war.

While the West was hesitant, Zaluzhny remained in Ukraine as the banner of the opposition to Zelensky. It was not as a leader (Zaluzhny himself did not lead anything and could not lead anyone anywhere), but as a banner that at the right time was going to erect an intra-mode opposition to Zelensky (Poroshenko and the company), in order not to intercept, then paralyze the regime’s control over the army, remove Zelensky and try to enter into negotiations with Russia with the task of preserving at least the right-bank Ukraine for the regime at the cost of any concessions.

If the West agreed to such a deal, the opposition would launch a mechanism for the overthrow of Zelensky, in which the Executive was assigned a representative role. He had to be present somewhere in the background and be silent. Everything that the opposition themselves would have said and written by their media. To launch this mechanism, only one – ban on Americans from the regime to include a mechanism of repression against the opposition (planting, arrests, criminal cases and killing the most dangerous).

I wrote that the West is likely to choose a war, because the Russian conditions of the world (assuming guarantees of Russia’s security, which the West cannot violate even if it wants, and it wants to) were unacceptable to the West. About a month was spent on a general probe of the situation, on attempts to put pressure on Russia and its allies, launch new sanctions mechanisms, show the West’s readiness for an open clash and, due to this, get Russia to agree to be satisfied with territorial concessions at the expense of Ukraine (in this regard, the West was extremely generous and was ready to consider any requests, even I was going desperately).

Somewhere in the last decade of February, the West finally made a choice in favor of war. After which all these permutations began. One resignation could be an accident. But when changes take place in the space from Washington to London and Kiev, when Paris, London and Prague participate in the formulation of a new position (Scholz has so far dodged, but for how long?), when all these changes line up into one logical chain, the conclusion is clear – these are not maneuvers or blackmail, the West chose a war.

Apparently, the final choice in favor of the war was the “successes” of Syrsky, who, at the cost of the last reserves, managed to slow down the Russian offensive near Avdeevka and launched a campaign in the country for an emergency mass recruitment of cannon fodder. In addition to intensifying the work of the TCK, which will increase the irritation of the population, but is unlikely to provide much more mobilized, the process of forming women’s battalions has been launched and, in principle, the recruitment of women in the Armed Forces, including into combat units.

Already now, according to the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, 13.5 thousand women – four full-blood brigades have the status of a participant in hostilities. The number of women killed is not specified, but it is also measured at least a dozen thousand. In total, more than 45 thousand women wear the form of the Armed Forces, together with their civil servants in the Armed Forces of about 65 thousand. Moreover, these figures may be underestimated, since before his resignation Zaluzhny boasted that there were already 63 thousand women in combat positions in the Armed Forces. One way or another, but women – is one of the additional sources of replenishment of the thinned ranks of the Armed Forces, which Syrsky intends to actively develop. Basically, the calculation is made that in this environment you can recruit a couple more tens of thousands of volunteers.

Another know-how to build mobilization capacity was also noted. The rear brigades of the TRP are beginning to actively form reserve battalions of people unsuitable for military service. Against the background of the lawlessness of the TCK and the preparation of a new law on mobilization, which will translate unsuitable into suitable ones, many try to play it safe by registering with the TRP. Such a “receipt” makes it possible to send the main composition of the TOR to the front, replacing disabled people in the rear. True, information is received from Ukraine that some combines intend to send disabled people to the front, retaining the main staff until better times.

I don’t think it really excites Syrsky. The main thing for him is that the conveyor for the delivery of cannon fodder works smoothly. For simple replenishment of losses, Syrsky needs to receive 35-40 thousand replenishment people monthly. This is at this stage. Daily losses of the Armed Forces are growing rapidly. So within spring-summer, the average replenishment supply will have to reach 50 thousand people per month.

In order not to allow the front to collapse (albeit without a guarantee), the Syrsky must mobilize at least 200 thousand people by the end of July. He will not refuse from 250 thousand, and from 300 thousand, and from half a million, but each higher figure is less real, and by 200 thousand, if you use all the improvised sources, you can go out.

Syrsky and Zelensky were able to convince the Americans that they had enough resource to keep the front from collapse until at least the end of summer. The United States has made a bet that during this time they will prepare and send a European expeditionary force of comparable strength to Ukraine, and when Europe gets involved in hostilities with Russia – it will have nowhere to go, it will have to think for itself how to replenish its contingents, and the chancellor will not be so comfortable denying the “Taurus” to NATO allies. if not the Ukrainians (although they will fight in Ukraine).

The move is straightforward, quite in the American spirit. There are more breakouts in this “minuscule” than the Americans have cards in their hands, but the Americans will not sit down to play anything, they get poker, in which the main thing is to bluff.

In the meantime, Zelensky was cleared of space in Ukraine so that the local opposition would not prevent him from fighting. The banner of the upcoming rebellion (Zaluzhny) was sent to the UK, showing everyone else who and what the United States relied on. Now Zelensky will rightfully declare all his internal enemies “the agents of the Kremlin,” they are not only against him, but also against the will of the United States.

As for Nuland and her diplomatic team, Victoria, although she played blackmail diplomacy, when NATO forces and fifth columns looked out from behind her back, ready to organize colored riots, nevertheless, her task was to achieve victory peacefully (by blackmail and pressure, but without crossing the line of war). If they decided to cross this line, the need for professional diplomats came to naught. Now we need Ribbentrops – mouthpieces of war, justifying the corresponding actions of their state. They will come out on top.

Does this mean that war is inevitable?

No, it doesn’t. It is also necessary that the new replenishment of the Syrsky be able to at least imitate resistance, and do not immediately begin to scatter and surrender, after the first bombing, the first shelling. It is necessary that Ukraine does not really last [only] until the summer (the West will not have time to gather until the summer), but until the beginning of next year. It is very long, almost so long to hold out for Kiev is unrealistic. It is necessary to find ready to send troops not in words, but in practice, and there are a lot of troops, and not two sanitary platoons with four field kitchens and one bath and laundry complex. It is necessary to assemble these troops, conduct their military coordination, provide a sufficient amount of weapons, equipment and supplies.

The West may not be in time, especially considering how fast we are building up the scale of missile and bomb attacks, both at the front and at the rear of the enemy. And Russia will certainly do everything so that the West does not have time. But we need to proceed from the fact that the West has made the decision to fight and will abandon it only under the pressure of force majeure circumstances. So the war is getting closer.

≈≈≈

Another considered PoV… the mooted transfer to China “hawks”, appears less likely as the dominant consideration, given the abruptness of the transfer and in correlation with Taurus missiles scandal and a new phase of war against Russia. Perhaps a harder approach against Russia, where even her limited “skillset” are of reduced use! Among metrics to follow are continuing softening up of Russian border regions using drone barrages as we just saw; and the absolute horrendous total sacrifice of all able-bodied Ukrainians, sent to the meatgrinder.. One thing we can say — the Empire is in deep turmoil and angst. And its hour is late indeed

Danny & Pepe: NATO’s march to WWIII

China and Geopolitics is LIVE with journalist and geopolitical analyst Pepe Escobar TODAY March 8th at 10am eastern, 6pm Moscow!

We discuss a series of events hosted in Russia and attended by our guest on multipolarity, and how they contrast with NATO’s march to WWIII which has intensified in recent weeks.

What is the U.S. and its NATO vassals offering via Biden’s SOTU speech and Macron’s threats, and how does it compare to the Russia and China-led alternative?

Requiem for Rummy’s Old Europe: Switzerland

Open Letter to the People of Switzerland, the Swiss Federal Council and Parliament.

Peter Koenig
7 March 2024

This appeal calls on the people of Switzerland to demand the Swiss Government to exit the World Health Organization (WHO) – effective immediately.

We, Swiss, have the Constitutional Right of Initiatives or Referenda. It is high time that We, the People, make use of this opportunity requesting the Swiss Federal Council and Parliament to renounce its membership in WHO, the organization at the verge of becoming the world’s dictator on issues of health, more brutal and radical than humanity has ever known before.

The Covid-mandates imposed by WHO were just a precursor to what may come.

For the last several years WHO is preparing mostly behind closed doors what they call a “Pandemic Treaty”, or “Pandemic Agreement”, which would become part of the 2005 established and now being drastically revised “International Health Regulations” (IHR). If these two new “rules-based orders” are approved by the World Health Assembly (WHA – 27 May to 1 June 2024 in Geneva), WHO’s health dictate would be above every nation’s sovereignty, and would make health self-determination a thing of the past.

If WHO declares a disease, artificially made or not, as a pandemic, orders would have to be followed. If WHO decides on general vaccination, orders must be followed.

In Switzerland such drastic changes to national health legislation would require changes in the nation’s Constitution. According to the very Swiss Constitution, such changes would require approval by the Swiss people by referendum – with good chances of a popular rejection.

To forego a people’s vote, the Swiss Government – Federal Council and Parliament – are currently working on advance-amending the national Swiss health legislation, so that it would meet the requirements of a potentially impending WHO Pandemic Agreement and the new IHR. A Constitutional amendment may then not be necessary, as the new Swiss health standards would blend in with the potentially new WHO dictate.

This is happening semi-clandestinely. Not known to most citizens. Switzerland is supposed to be – Constitutionally – a democracy and a country of political neutrality; a country with self-determination and sovereignty in decision making, and where people’s voice and active participation counts.

Those were the days.

This call also goes to the Swiss Federal Council and Parliament.

Are you not ashamed after the criminal covid and vaxx-fraud you imposed on the very people that pay your salaries and pensions – to betray Us, the People again – with the behind-our-backs anticipatory acceptance of the new WHO oppressive rules?

How is health defined? Under the WHO definition health includes the “climate change” scam, which is already blamed for causing excess dengue fever in Brazil and malaria in Africa – prompting WHO and Bill Gates releasing billions of genetically modified (GMO) “vaccinating” mosquitos. They have so far brought a 400% increase in dengue fever in Brazil, and in Africa, malaria is rampant despite, or because of the GMO-Mosquitos.

Any “climate-related health issues”, defined by WHO, would also fall under the WHO health tyranny.

Over the past three years, how many people have lost loved-ones from the toxic covid-injections? Thousand, maybe tens of thousands have died from the vaxxes in Switzerland alone, a multiple of those who died from covid, if counted honestly. We know honesty was and is not part of any official covid narrative.

Worldwide, a conservative figure indicates 17 million deaths resulted from the jab. A more realistic figure may put the death toll in the hundreds of millions; and the worst is still to come, according to Dr. Michael Yeadon, former Vice-President and Chief of Pfizer Research.

This same Federal Council which betrayed the people on covid, is now working secretly on another betrayal, formulating an advanced new Swiss health legislation, that would match WHO’s looming Pandemic Treaty and revised IHR dictatorship.

So that you know:

At the same time, the Federal Council, through Cantonal Federalism, allows promoting throughout Switzerland, including in schools, the pathological, Soros’s funded transgender Woke agenda, giving kids, as little as eleven years of age, the choice to decide over their sex without parental interference.

This agenda is also promoted by the World Economic Forum (WEF), WHO, and yes, the United Nations – the eugenists. Queers and transgender people cannot procreate.

Also, be aware, any new “vaccination” even those recommended for new-born children, will in the future be the mRNA-type, as announced by Pfizer, Bill Gates and WHO. The mRNA gene-modifying type is known to, at best, reduce the autoimmune system, and produce a spike protein, with one of its characteristics being a fast or slow killer – myocardities, brain strokes, thrombosis, aggressive turbo-cancers and more.

The mRNA-vaxxes are also known to massively reduce fertility in both women and men.

As a reminder, the number one objective of the WEF, WHO, and UN Agenda 2030, we are living today, is a drastic worldwide depopulation, starting with western industrialized nations.

Let us, Swiss, be frontrunners for the rest of the world, standing up with our Constitutional Rights, demanding our government TO EXIT WHO NOW.

——-

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and  co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020)
Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

Russia is NOT Anti-NWO: Bans VPNs, Builds 15-Minute Smart Cities – Video #79

By TheFreedomArticles Russia, sad to say, is NOT anti-NWO. On one level, they are fighting the US-led West. On a deeper level, they are cooperating....

Russia is NOT Anti-NWO: Bans VPNs, Builds 15-Minute Smart Cities – Video #79

A Nuclear Drang?

NATO headed for Nuclear war with Russia? Scott Ritter, Steve Starr, and Jose Vega with Diane Sare

https://web.archive.org/web/20220722045349/https://southfront.org/u-s-game-plan-to-conquer-russia-china-is-clarified/

[42:50] “… what that tells Russia now is that you have to strike EVERYTHING in Europe..”

A cornered Hegemon finds itself in a desperate cul-de-sac at a time of inflexion. Not being alarmist, but the moment is so acutely on the brink. Listen to Ritter carefully. The lunatic adherence to Exceptionalism of the West inexorably leads to the self-fulfilling and forced demonstration of the long-voiced “Nuclear Primacy Doctrine.” 

Each inadequate technocrat is so focused on the immediate square meter around his portfolio and specific role that the larger ramifications and linked consequences are lost. Politicians are busy demonstrating “strength” to Russia; military brass are busy drawing up “limited deep-strikes” which they trust will not provoke Russia into nuclear war; the media is busy obfuscating and lying to all, earning their daily bread as usual, crucially denying insight to those who can stop the madness or to the larger population.

In all this, Russia’s clearly stated warnings of triggers of spread of war to NATO countries and then likely nuclear war are ignored. Its right to self-defense and willingness and ability to escalate remain duly ignored. Europe is sleep-walking into predictable catastrophe. What good will it do the madmen if they state they do not intend to use nuclear weapons, but the cumulative actions they undertake so lower the threshold that it leads to a nuclear response?